Pompous words from Kblaze volume 422: If you can prove it you are probably wrong.

No in-depth response from you Kblaze? I was hoping for it.

Im looking over it now. When first I saw it my only thought was "Did this guy really create a series of charts and graphs?". Not that im complaining about too much effort being put in. I respect taking the time to explain yourself well. I just....was suprised by it.

[img]http://officeforward.com/main/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/1067629-cool_story_bro_super.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Im looking over it now. When first I saw it my only thought was "Did this guy really create a series of charts and graphs?". Not that im complaining about too much effort being put in. I respect taking the time to explain yourself well. I just....was suprised by it.[/QUOTE]

Well they where already made, I just used them as I thought they where relevant for the discussion.

[IMG]http://i45.tinypic.com/8yyulw.gif[/IMG]

I think the problem is not having a in-depth use of statistics. Most just post 1 or 2 and think they have proven their point. However, 1-2 stats rarely tell the whole picture. But if you include more and more, you will get a more clearer understanding and get closer to the actual truth.

I think Zenmaster in this thread has shown good examples of this.


I can also give an example for one of the examples the OP used to show statistics don't tell the real story

[QUOTE]
We have people on here talking about Chris Pauls backup point having good numbers proves hes overrated when anyone who watched them both sees that Paul is far better setting the tempo, knowing when to defer to others, and most importantly...when not to. A point is supposed to have command. Not bend to the will of more established teammates.[/QUOTE]

Here is a classic case where the given numbers don't tell the whole story. So what added statistics will cover for this case? Team production. Your team's offensive production when Paul was the PG vs. Darren. I mean, essentially that is what you said Paul does better. It can be shown by statistics.


I could go on, but essentially almost everything can somehow be quantified. The key is to analyze the situation correctly. Nonetheless, you still will never have proven anything. "Prove" is too strong of a word. You will have greatly strengthen your argument, and that's usually all that is needed.

In summary, proper analyzation and statistical use can get you pretty close to the truth. Notice, analyzation requires watching the game. But after that, to make it more than just your interpretation of the game, you have to somehow quantify it, this is usually possible. If not, use strong logic.

:applause:

And still, this place is a cesspool.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Isnt that pretty much saying that teams that make their shots while keeping the other team from making theirs tend to win? Might as well say playing basketball well makes you good at basketball.

For a team I can see how that would be a factor in winning because really all a team needs to do is outscore the opponent. For a single player compared to another there are way too many issues unrelated to the individuals.

Its almost like using simple games won and lost to judge players. You can judge a teams ability by it(for the most part). Not players.[/QUOTE]
:biggums:

:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=The Iron Fist]And still, this place is a cesspool.[/QUOTE]
Kblaze tried but I’m fairly certain he was told not to ban any of Simons accounts anymore because that is all this forum is at this point.

kBlaze, youre the GOAT
:applause: