MJ's 1988 DPOY is now being "Questioned". HOME vs ROAD Steals has twice as much Gap

[QUOTE=theman93;14924532]If 2 randoms 40 years from now claim they have footage nobody else has and say Lebron’s stats are fake to discredit an award from him, then yes. Lmao.[/QUOTE]

Nah don't play dumb, Lebron has been the most reported on most criticized and sometimes most credited player for a long time. You run with any crumbs they give you, without data and take it as gospel. Keep that energy.

I don't know why this needs to go back and forth like this :lol

Home scorekeepers are going to be biased, particularly when it comes to star players on the team. Whether it's subconscious or not varies but this is the case in every sport that has any subjective aspect of scorekeeping. It's not some inconceivable thing.

You can take several hits or average points off of every superstar baseball player when you see how many times the home scorekeeper called something a hit that should have been an error. Yet no one gets up in arms about that. Well..other than pitchers who get charged earned runs that shouldn't be.

Point is, based on the history of American sports and how things have always operated, we can be almost certain that players at the time received preferential scorekeeping when playing at home. And being the biggest superstar in the game..Jordan almost certainly benefited more than pretty much anyone else on this one.

It is what it is, and it doesn't actually affect his legacy at all. But trying to deny that things like this happened as if Jordan was different than every other mega sporting figure ever is weird.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14924538]Nah don't play dumb, Lebron has been the most reported on most criticized and sometimes most credited player for a long time. You run with any crumbs they give you, without data and take it as gospel. Keep that energy.[/QUOTE]

Nice strawman, again. Go ahead and quote me. I'll wait :lol.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14924539]I don't know why this needs to go back and forth like this :lol

Home scorekeepers are going to be biased, particularly when it comes to star players on the team. Whether it's subconscious or not varies but this is the case in every sport that has any subjective aspect of scorekeeping. It's not some inconceivable thing.

You can take several hits or average points off of every superstar baseball player when you see how many times the home scorekeeper called something a hit that should have been an error. Yet no one gets up in arms about that. Well..other than pitchers who get charged earned runs that shouldn't be.

Point is, based on the history of American sports and how things have always operated, we can be almost certain that players at the time received preferential scorekeeping when playing at home. And being the biggest superstar in the game..Jordan almost certainly benefited more than pretty much anyone else on this one.

It is what it is, and it doesn't actually affect his legacy at all. But trying to deny that things like this happened as if Jordan was different than every other mega sporting figure ever is weird.[/QUOTE]

Exactly this.

[QUOTE=theman93;14924540]Nice strawman, again. Go ahead and quote me. I'll wait :lol.[/QUOTE]

Don't need to quote anyone I've clashed with enough times here bud. Everything youve posted just doesn't pass the smell test. That's all.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14924543]Don't need to quote anyone I've clashed with enough times here bud. Everything youve posted just doesn't pass the smell test. That's all.[/QUOTE]

In other words you can't quote one thing I've "ran" with. Stop making stuff up. It's getting weird.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14924477]This gets thrown at the window when the 90s Grizzlies scorekeeper has already been exposed to padding stats. Even the Lakers scorekeeper around that same time frame gave Van Exel fraud 23 assists in a game[/QUOTE]

Shake my head, I didn't think the cheating was this rampant in that era.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14924539]I don't know why this needs to go back and forth like this :lol

Home scorekeepers are going to be biased, particularly when it comes to star players on the team. Whether it's subconscious or not varies but this is the case in every sport that has any subjective aspect of scorekeeping. It's not some inconceivable thing.

You can take several hits or average points off of every superstar baseball player when you see how many times the home scorekeeper called something a hit that should have been an error. Yet no one gets up in arms about that. Well..other than pitchers who get charged earned runs that shouldn't be.

Point is, based on the history of American sports and how things have always operated, we can be almost certain that players at the time received preferential scorekeeping when playing at home. And being the biggest superstar in the game..Jordan almost certainly benefited more than pretty much anyone else on this one.

It is what it is, and it doesn't actually affect his legacy at all. But trying to deny that things like this happened as if Jordan was different than every other mega sporting figure ever is weird.[/QUOTE]

Scorekeepers aren't bias in this day and age, everything is tracked by NBA HQ as well all the teams getting footage on everyone.


However, when we compare today's players like LeBron vs Jordan, Bron is literally fighting an uphill battle against score keeper fraudulent padding the stats as well.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14924539]I don't know why this needs to go back and forth like this :lol

Home scorekeepers are going to be biased, particularly when it comes to star players on the team. Whether it's subconscious or not varies but this is the case in every sport that has any subjective aspect of scorekeeping. It's not some inconceivable thing.

You can take several hits or average points off of every superstar baseball player when you see how many times the home scorekeeper called something a hit that should have been an error. Yet no one gets up in arms about that. Well..other than pitchers who get charged earned runs that shouldn't be.

Point is, based on the history of American sports and how things have always operated, we can be almost certain that players at the time received preferential scorekeeping when playing at home. And being the biggest superstar in the game..Jordan almost certainly benefited more than pretty much anyone else on this one.

It is what it is, and it doesn't actually affect his legacy at all. But trying to deny that things like this happened as if Jordan was different than every other mega sporting figure ever is weird.[/QUOTE]

Thats only a 50% of the argument........There are some loopholes.

Once in a while comes a "freak athlete" that defies norms of the game. Wilt was that. MJ was that. MJs reflexes were lightening quick. atleast, the non-bulked, non-weight lifting version of MJ. The Pre-1991 MJ.

What HOME "stocks" scorekeepers eye-sight got eventually accustomed to. MJ's cat-light reflexes hence the nick name "black cat." He gambled on defense because he literally can and still get back on defense. Head coaches always talked about MJs defense, how "deceptively" quick he was. both with his body and particularly with hands. deflecting balls, stripping balls, creating chaos, jeopardizing the opponents flow of the game. Also, the lateral quickness, MJ was 2nd only to Rodman. In practice, Dough Collins literally saw how longer, taller Pippen's known lateral quickness was matched by shorter MJs loose, flexible hip, knee, shoulder joints. Both were neck and neck in lateral quickness trailing only Rodman (rodman was another freak athlete with light feet).

ROAD "stock" keepers or even refs might never get use to MJs Defensive game ever in terms of reflexes and quickness. They only saw him "once" or "twice" the whole season. What is an "unclean" solid strip of ball steal to MJ is now called "foul" on MJ. ref thinking MJ must have gotten some part of wrist as well as ball came loose. Whenever you see a "freak athlete" this was always a problem with refs and "stocks" score keepers.

Nobody suffered more than Shaq. Shaq was another freakish athlete. I literally counted watching live NBC game back in the days, Shaq was fouled 15 times atleast. clean, physical enough fouls. Because Shaq never cheated the game and "flopped" like LBJ, he got to the foul line 6-7 times, cant remember exactly. It is not Shaq's fault for being "freakishly strong", it is just pathetic refereeing. Shaq blocks. scoring player falls because of Shaq's strength. Shaq still blocked ball mostly maybe little hand. But remember, Hand and fingers are considered part of the scoring player's ball. shaq still got PF. Why? because scorer fell to the ground because of shaq's strength.

[QUOTE=theman93;14924544]In other words you can't quote one thing I've "ran" with. Stop making stuff up. It's getting weird.[/QUOTE]

TFOH with that, you're the most cookie cutter Mj stan on the board, not the weirdest but easily the most paint by the numbers. I don't care enough about your posting habits to sink any amount of time into digging up any quote for the obvious. Nice try to sidetrack away from proving the article wrong though, I applaud you but you've exhausted the entire denial playbook and haven't disproven a single thing stated.

It's impossible to watch old games and know which plays that Jordan was credited an assist, steal, or block because it normally isn't announced during the game and we don't have the play-by-play information - this matters in close calls where you don't know who the steal was credited to, or if the scorekeeper credited an assist on a certain play... For this reason, reviewing subjective plays like steals, blocks, assists or even rebounds cannot be done before play-by-play information began in 1997.

Nick Wright and Haberstroh quickly realized this when they reviewed the first close call and assumed it was awarded to Jordan before realizing "wait a minute... do we know that Jordan was awarded that steal?.. What if the scorekeeper awarded it to the other guy like we think it should be?"... This is why they invented the live-ball turnover method - it's never been reported before, so they hoped Jordan's steals from the boxscore were more than the live-ball turnovers they counted, thus proving fraudulent steals awarded to Jordan... However, reporting new things like live-ball turnovers requires showing your work - you can't provide a summary video of the turnovers because that isn't verification - the games must be posted otherwise it's invalid altogether.. Choosing games that can't be verified is clever and fraud.

Ultimately, the 6-game sample is meant to prove that the home inflation is due to cheating by record-keepers instead of normal for all players - every player across the league had one-offs of massive inflation at some point in their careers.. This includes modern players because AD's stocks were 55% higher in 2022, or Jaren Jackson's were 50% higher in 23', or Lebron's blocks were 120% higher during his rookie year and 73% higher in his 2nd year - and MJ had 80% inflation in 88'... These were all one-offs that occur for any number of reasons, while every other year these guys had "normal" inflation that has been decreasing over time as road conditions and records have improved., [I]The point is that Jordan's inflation, and everyone else's inflation isn't due to league-wide cheating by record-keepers[/I].

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14924625]TFOH with that, you're the most cookie cutter Mj stan on the board, not the weirdest but easily the most paint by the numbers. I don't care enough about your posting habits to sink any amount of time into digging up any quote for the obvious. Nice try to sidetrack away from proving the article wrong though, I applaud you but you've exhausted the entire denial playbook and haven't disproven a single thing stated.[/QUOTE]

Hearsay is not proof. You can’t disprove something that was never proved in the first place. That’s called illogic my friend. Seems you are too dull to understand that concept. Not surprising though /shrug.

[video=youtube;wpU59joEZhI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpU59joEZhI&lc=UgwKK-cP8GvgmDf_B9B4AaABAg[/video]

:applause:

.
[B]Thread Cliffs[/B]


Play-by-play information is required to know which plays to dispute and match a player's 5 steals from the boxscore to plays in the game - otherwise there's no way to know if you're looking at the right plays, thus compounding the errors.. A close call that you assume was awarded to Jordan could've already been awarded to the other guy... So it isn't possible to do what Haberstroh claims until 1997 when play-by-play information began.. But even then, stats like steals, assists and blocks are largely subjective, so there's no reason to believe that the 2nd subjective judgement is any better than the 1st one.

The live-ball turnover thing is innovative but it isn't believable that Jordan's steals were more than an entire team's live-ball turnovers.. So it requires showing your work, which hasn't been done because the games weren't posted or made available to anyone outside of the author, aka fraud.

Ultimately, all players have one-offs of massive inflation such as 120% and 73% higher blocks for Lebron as a rookie and sophomore, or 82% higher stocks for 88' Jordan, or 50-65% higher for 90' Hakeem, 22' AD and 23' Jaren Jackson... But these are all one-offs, otherwise every other year of their career had normal home inflation, which decreased over time as road records improved.. So the home inflation isn't due to bad record keeping - it's due to bad road records/conditions that improved over time, while the one-offs of massive inflation that every player has could be due to any number of reasons other than cheating, such as personal issues affecting home/road performance.

[QUOTE=theman93;14924705]Hearsay is not proof. You can’t disprove something that was never proved in the first place. That’s called illogic my friend. Seems you are too dull to understand that concept. Not surprising though /shrug.[/QUOTE]
Such a lazy and self destructive argument to pose, but ok. Whenever your point starts to cannibalize and contradict other points you've made/will make, you kinda show your level.
If the article where guys carried out their own research based on anomalous findings and concluded more anomalous findings is hearsay, then everything is hearsay that you've ever hung your hat on. You've lived and died by these same stats for your entire Fandom of ball, we're they ever proven to be true? Peer reviewed? Apparently not because the 1st time someone ever shines a bright light on them they're stained. Every analysis of anything is hearsay because it wasn't proven directly to or by you. Mj is the goat is hearsay, right? What a stupid take.