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

[QUOTE=jlip;14923400]I want to step away from the inflated stats subject and bring up something else rather interesting from the article. Notice what the author wrote about MJ's defensive philosophy and strategy at this stage of his career.

[I]Jordan made sure his discontent was known. In an 18-page Sports Illustrated feature in which SI writer Curry Kirkpatrick entrenched himself inside Jordan’s growing empire, the Chicago Bulls star expressed deep resentment about his lack of recognition. [U][B]In particular, Jordan called out the voting contingency about its apparent disregard for box-score statistics like blocks and steals[/B][/U].

“[B]Michael Cooper is great at ball denial,” Jordan told SI. “But check his other stats[/B]...

The Chicago Bull registered another six-steal game later that month. And another. In late January against the lowly New Jersey Nets, Jordan posted a career-high and franchise-record 10 steals. He didn’t even play the fourth quarter.

The mission consumed him. After the history-making Nets game, he openly admitted to hunting for steals so he could break the record. "I knew I was close, and I asked to find out what the record was,” Jordan told the Chicago Tribune that night. “[B]I was on a roll. I was going for it, reaching for everything[/B].”[/I]

At this point in his career, by his own admission MJ, considered stats (blocks and steals) to be the barometer for defensive effectiveness. He even contrasted his defensive strategy against Michael Cooper's stating that Cooper focused on things such as ball denial while he, himself focused on stats. Then he also admitted that he did a lot of reaching to increase his steals quantity, in his mind, proving that he is a great defender.

This actually reinforces what the [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5aNUS762wM&list=PLtzZl14BrKjSMb4IFWSy0qh_nFGiy7PoZ&index=7&t=942s"]Thinking Basketball YouTuber stated about MJ's defense in his greatest peaks series[/URL]. While he praised MJ's overall defense, he mentioned that MJ often reached, swiped, and gambled for steals looking for the "home-run" play when simply playing the offensive player straight up may have been a more effective option.[/QUOTE]

LeBron would have been heavily criticized for stuff like this. MJ stans are cancer to basketball...

[QUOTE=3ba11;14923422]5 games isn't a sample - I'm sure they could get more games........ And they only provided specifics on 1 of the games... He literally used a one-off to make his case....

[/QUOTE] GTFOH, 6 games is a playoff series worth of games I'd say it's plenty considering the splits raising the questions. If they do 41 games and they've all got padded steals and blocks what then? You'd still say it was some pr campaign lol. Truth is we take smaller sample sizes to prove stuff about Mj and Lebron every day here. There was a set based on a chunk of a season that you yourself have used here as a Bible on his mid range shooting. This is new and it's not a good look. Just take the L and talk about the things he [B][I]actually[/I][/B] did, that's alot more respectable.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923584]GTFOH, 6 games is a playoff series worth of games I'd say it's plenty considering the splits raising the questions. If they do 41 games and they've all got padded steals and blocks what then? You'd still say it was some pr campaign lol. Truth is we take smaller sample sizes to prove stuff about Mj and Lebron every day here. There was a set based on a chunk of a season that you yourself have used here as a Bible on his mid range shooting. This is new and it's not a good look. Just take the L and talk about the things he [B][I]actually[/I][/B] did, that's alot more respectable.[/QUOTE]


6 games is sufficient?

Lol

Give it up

And what were the other 5 games?.. it's a bs story and the one notable possession that he talked to Broussard about was a Jordan steal!!! (shown earlier itt)... So it's just lies

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qH7hC5qOURs[/url]

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOILLoXF4dY[/url]

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923584]This is new and it's not a good look. Just take the L and talk about the things he [B][I]actually[/I][/B] did, that's alot more respectable.[/QUOTE]

We all see Jordan as a good player but literally nothing other than worship is good enough good enough for these fascists...

[QUOTE=3ba11;14923595]6 games is sufficient?

Lol

Give it up

And what were the other 5 games?.. it's a bs story and the one notable possession that he talked to Broussard about was a Jordan steal!!! (shown earlier itt)... So it's just lies[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry this is happening to you/Mj, but it's not been proven any kind of lie. You just can't handle the truth, there's help out there ya know...

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923625]I'm sorry this is happening to you/Mj, but it's not been proven any kind of lie. You just can't handle the truth, there's help out there ya know...[/QUOTE]

hey diva, you can try to find anything to diminish anything MJ did.....but the fact is that hes 6/6 in the finals and bron has 4 chips in 20 years while switching teams LOL...now be gone or ill have to **** you up myself......got it? SHUT YOUR MOUTH

People going nuts in the comments.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x63V0I5T-zA[/url]

[video=youtube;p0M2WPEkE_w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0M2WPEkE_w[/video]

[img]https://i.makeagif.com/media/6-23-2024/S7PyT5.gif[/img]


^^^ [B]Alvin Robertson and MJ[/B]

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0M2WPEkE_w&t=09m18s[/url]


All players experience higher stocks at home, but MJ was the only DPOY on the list with high blocks AND steals, so his bounce was higher than the other 1-dimensional DPOY's on the list... See the chart above that shows Alvin Robertson with equal bounce in steals at home but Alvin wasn't a shot-blocker, so his [I]overall[/I] bounce in stocks wasn't quite as high as Jordan's..

Similarly, the shot-blocking bigs didn't steal the ball much, so they didn't see bounce in steals like Alvin or MJ... Again, only MJ saw bounce in both because he's the only guy that was doing both (elite steals and blocks), so his [I]overall[/I] stocks bounce is a little higher than the normal bounce that the other DPOY's got..

So that's the trick and the fraud that Tom Haberstroh and Klutch Sports perpetrated - Jordan's overall stocks bounce was slightly higher because he was the only DPOY that had high volume of both blocks and steals... The 5-game sample was used to say that Jordan's slightly-higher home bounce was due to bad record-keeping instead - but we know that it's actually because he was such a goat all-round defender (blocks and steals), while the other DPOY's on the list were 1-dimensional and only saw bounces in the one category (blocks OR steals).

And again - regarding the big bounce in home steals for guards like Alvin Robertson or MJ - they have 2-way burdens and therefore higher energy burdens - so apparently, when they lack the crowd boost on the road, they manage their higher energy burden by gambling less and getting less steals

[QUOTE=Da_Realist;14923666][video=youtube;p0M2WPEkE_w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0M2WPEkE_w[/video][/QUOTE]

Lol I was just coming here to post that. The article is basically a non-peer reviewed study. An obvious hit piece that doesn’t stand upon an unbiased look :oldlol:

[QUOTE=theman93;14923682]Lol I was just coming here to post that. The article is basically a non-peer reviewed study. An obvious hit piece that doesn’t stand upon an unbiased look :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

A non peer reviewed study? Wtf, so with that you just basically invalidated how many articles and documentaries in NBA history? "Peer reviewed "on inside hoops :oldlol:

[QUOTE=BlackMamba8;14923655]hey diva, you can try to find anything to diminish anything MJ did.....but the fact is that hes 6/6 in the finals and bron has 4 chips in 20 years while switching teams LOL...now be gone or ill have to **** you up myself......got it? SHUT YOUR MOUTH[/QUOTE]
:oldlol: you'd probably better quit before it gets worse.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923683]A non peer reviewed study? Wtf, so with that you just basically invalidated how many articles and documentaries in NBA history? "Peer reviewed "on inside hoops :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

Don’t get it twisted, this article is not your average article/documentary. It’s a hit piece written to question an award won by the GOAT in an effort to tear him down and prop up Lebron. And yes, the article is an equivalent to a non-peer reviewed study.

[QUOTE=theman93;14923686]Don’t get it twisted, this article is not your average article/documentary. It’s a hit piece written to question an award won by the GOAT in an effort to tear him down and prop up Lebron. And yes, the article is an equivalent to a non-peer reviewed study.[/QUOTE]

It's completely transparent to everyone

MJ stan group therapy session :roll:

[QUOTE=RRR3;14923689]MJ stan group therapy session :roll:[/QUOTE]


[B]Thread Cliffs[/B]


High steals players like Alvin Robertson and MJ have 2x steals at home

High blocks players like Eaton and MJ have 2x blocks at home

Only MJ had high steals [i]and[/i] blocks, so his overall "stocks" inflation at home was a little higher than the norm

The 5-game sample is meant to refute this and say that MJ's abnormal home inflation is due to bad record-keeping... But obviously, a 5-game sample isn't viable and no sample is possible because there's no reason to believe the new subjective ruling is any better than the original.. Subjective stats like steals, blocks, assists and rebounds are set in stone - there's no effective review of them..

[QUOTE=theman93;14923686]Don’t get it twisted, this article is not your average article/documentary. It’s a hit piece written to question an award won by the GOAT in an effort to tear him down and prop up Lebron. And yes, the article is an equivalent to a non-peer reviewed study.[/QUOTE]

Jordan stans so sensitive in 2024. If you read the piece you get a whole train of thought of how it got to Mjs dpoy season. It also goes out of its way to say this was a behavior of the time. Validating a theory isn't a hit piece, it's historical research. If it was Lebron in question you wouldn't give a shit if it was "peer reciewed"

[QUOTE=3ba11;14923691][B]Thread Cliffs[/B]


High steals players like Alvin Robertson and MJ have 2x steals at home

High blocks players like Eaton and MJ have 2x blocks at home

Only MJ had high steals [i]and[/i] blocks, so his overall "stocks" inflation at home was a little higher than the norm

The 5-game sample is meant to refute this and say that MJ's abnormal home inflation is due to bad record-keeping... But obviously, a 5-game sample isn't viable and no sample is possible because there's no reason to believe the new subjective ruling is any better than the original.. Subjective stats like steals, blocks, assists and rebounds are set in stone - there's no effective review of them..[/QUOTE]

This should be a lesson about judging new players by modern standards while not doing the same with the old. Having the same standards across the board avoids such embarrassments.

Two famous factions in ish getting hysterical against each other lol.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923696]This should be a lesson about judging new players by modern standards while not doing the same with the old. Having the same standards across the board avoids such embarrassments.[/QUOTE]



Team records are always much better at home because players perform much better at home - Jaren jackson showed this kind of home boost in 2023 when he won DPOY and so did prior DPOY's - so there's no evidence the stats were inflated in prior eras.. Teams and players simply perform much better at home and always have..

Btw, the lower overall home inflation in the modern game is due to road trips not being the drain that they once were due to private jets and modern accommodations, while also having easier scheduling for road trips than prior eras (more days in between).. And fans are generally nicer and get thrown out if they bother players.. It's just different.

Ultimately, Jordan's slightly higher bounce at home than other DPOY's like Jaren Jackson or Alvin Robertson is because high shot-blockers see great boost at home on blocks (Eaton or Jaren Jackson), while high steals guys see a great boost in steals (Robertson), but Jordan is the only DPOY that is high in both categories - so his overall "stock" inflation (blocks and steals combined) is a little higher.. In addition being elite in both steals and blocks, MJ was the goat scorer, so these factors made him a unique DPOY with different stats than normal DPOY's.

The 5-game sample is meant to refute this and say that MJ's abnormal home inflation is due to bad record-keeping.. But obviously, a 5-game sample isn't viable and no sample is possible because there's no reason to believe the new subjective ruling is any better than the original.. Subjective stats like steals, blocks, assists and rebounds are set in stone - there's no effective review of them..

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923695]Jordan stans so sensitive in 2024. If you read the piece you get a whole train of thought of how it got to Mjs dpoy season. It also goes out of its way to say this was a behavior of the time. Validating a theory isn't a hit piece, it's historical research. If it was Lebron in question you wouldn't give a shit if it was "peer reciewed"[/QUOTE]

This. We done with the 90s!

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923695]Jordan stans so sensitive in 2024. If you read the piece you get a whole train of thought of how it got to Mjs dpoy season. It also goes out of its way to say this was a behavior of the time. Validating a theory isn't a hit piece, it's historical research. If it was Lebron in question you wouldn't give a shit if it was "peer reciewed"[/QUOTE]

I did read it. If it wasn’t a hit piece then the author would have selected any other DPOY to make the topic of the article about. Out of everyone he just so happened to choose MJ? Why? Because it’s a hit piece to try and take MJ down a peg and Lebron up a peg. The article had absolutely nothing to do with Lebron, yet the title of the article mentions him? Obvious hit piece is obvious.

[QUOTE=SATAN;14923704]This. We done with the 90s![/QUOTE]

da faak 90s has to do with this you sick fakk it.

We talkin' 1988 here!

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14923258][IMG]https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/gJ_83GbfleeivDk4m5gO4A--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTI0MDA7aD0yMDM2O2NmPXdlYnA-/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2024-06/524e73d0-2807-11ef-9fff-4b08316deaf4[/IMG]

Yikes[/QUOTE]

MJ stans holding onto a fraudulent DPOY award.

[QUOTE=gengiskhan;14923721]da faak 90s has to do with this you sick fakk it.

We talkin' 1988 here![/QUOTE]

Most Jordan stans didn't even watch basketball in the 80s. It's like Jordan only existed in the 90s unless they want to try boost their guy by mentioning things such as this DPOY award, even though it's clearly fraudulent anyway and they seen no games that were played. :lol

They did this with stocktons assists too. It is only a 6 game sample size but you can do statistical analysis on how likely it is to just be random error and not have something else be going on. It takes less coin flips than you think for example to determine a coin is 95% rigged

If you stans on either side of the isle are serious about this discussion, then what you'll do is compare the total differential by percentage relative to their peers for that specific year.

It doesn't make sense to cross compare years as that doesn't tell you if the player was worthy of DPOY that year based on box scores.

MJ's total was 176% for 1988. The next highest in the top vote getters I believe was Alvin Robertson, and his was 162%.

I decided to look at Robertson's DPOY in 1986. There were only 3 vote getters:

Robertson: 170%
Bol: 99.5%
Moncrief: 77.9%

Intuition tells me if more players were in the voting, then this discrepancy wouldn't be as large. But this is quite alarming and the disparity is a heck of a lot greater than 1988. I believe Eaton was somewhere around 133%, Robertson 162%, and Hakeem at 118% that year.

I saw Jaren Jackson's name mentioned, so I decided to check his from a year ago.

Jackson: 162%
Lopez: 93.2%
Mobley: 80.8%
Green: 123%

I think what we can gather from this is that stars or players in the running for a particular can and do have their stats padded by the scorers at their home crowd. MJ is of no exception. Having said that, I don't think it matters as much when his fellow SG and previous DPOY was getting the same treatment and seemingly by a larger disparity.

It would be interesting to see the breakdown of the top 4-5 vote getters by each year to see if more disparities exist.

[QUOTE=theman93;14923712]I did read it. If it wasn’t a hit piece then the author would have selected any other DPOY to make the topic of the article about. Out of everyone he just so happened to choose MJ? Why? Because it’s a hit piece to try and take MJ down a peg and Lebron up a peg. The article had absolutely nothing to do with Lebron, yet the title of the article mentions him? Obvious hit piece is obvious.[/QUOTE]

I'd venture to say that he used that one because of all the corroborating snips surrounding it. The stat guy from Vancouvers anecdote on his training and how things were in that specific era, the Bulls stat guy "making a guy famous" by padding his stats, who still was there until just recently. Pippens quote in his book on the stat guy "taking care" of Mike. And the fact that some fans had already questioned if Mjs dpoy was deserved over 2 centers in 88. If you've ever done research Info found leads you to conclusions you might not have started out with. For the guys who want to write it off as error? Possibly but I'd imagine if padding was the way of life then and everyone got away with it, it's less likely an accident and more likely a practice. I'm sure of more games were available he'd have gone even deeper, this might have something to do with the league keeping such a tight grip on its game archives, releasing them might cause a ton of historical trouble

Imagine using Pippen’s book as a source

lol

[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14923779]If you stans on either side of the isle are serious about this discussion, then what you'll do is compare the total differential by percentage relative to their peers for that specific year.

It doesn't make sense to cross compare years as that doesn't tell you if the player was worthy of DPOY that year based on box scores.

MJ's total was 176% for 1988. The next highest in the top vote getters I believe was Alvin Robertson, and his was 162%.

I decided to look at Robertson's DPOY in 1986. There were only 3 vote getters:

Robertson: 170%
Bol: 99.5%
Moncrief: 77.9%

Intuition tells me if more players were in the voting, then this discrepancy wouldn't be as large. But this is quite alarming and the disparity is a heck of a lot greater than 1988. I believe Eaton was somewhere around 133%, Robertson 162%, and Hakeem at 118% that year.

I saw Jaren Jackson's name mentioned, so I decided to check his from a year ago.

Jackson: 162%
Lopez: 93.2%
Mobley: 80.8%
Green: 123%

I think what we can gather from this is that stars or players in the running for a particular can and do have their stats padded by the scorers at their home crowd. MJ is of no exception. Having said that, I don't think it matters as much when his fellow SG and previous DPOY was getting the same treatment and seemingly by a larger disparity.

It would be interesting to see the breakdown of the top 4-5 vote getters by each year to see if more disparities exist.[/QUOTE]
Sure. But if we're really taking any of these debates "seriously" then the 1st reaction to anything negative about Mjs career wouldn't be: find a way to give him a pass. It's only done for him, meanwhile every other player in the same discussions has to be taken down a notch to ensure his status. As much as Lebron superstans try to do this for him, even they admit his short comings from time to time. I'm still waiting for the 1st MJ stan to concede anything negative about him. That would be taking these debates "seriously "

[video=youtube;V7Gd1sFO2bY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Gd1sFO2bY[/video]

"Get the pulitzer prize ready" :oldlol:

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923783]I'd venture to say that he used that one because of all the corroborating snips surrounding it. The stat guy from Vancouvers anecdote on his training and how things were in that specific era, the Bulls stat guy "making a guy famous" by padding his stats, who still was there until just recently. Pippens quote in his book on the stat guy "taking care" of Mike. And the fact that some fans had already questioned if Mjs dpoy was deserved over 2 centers in 88. If you've ever done research Info found leads you to conclusions you might not have started out with. For the guys who want to write it off as error? Possibly but I'd imagine if padding was the way of life then and everyone got away with it, it's less likely an accident and more likely a practice. I'm sure of more games were available he'd have gone even deeper, this might have something to do with the league keeping such a tight grip on its game archives, releasing them might cause a ton of historical trouble[/QUOTE]

My guy, if it wasn’t a hit piece then Lebron wouldn’t have been included in the title of the article. There’s no getting around that lol.

All I take from this is that it's amazing the lengths Klutch are willing to go to prop up their guy. Putting analysts, reporters, anyone they can get their hands on, on the payroll. I was shocked when Broussard admitted the other day that Klutch "represent him". They are like a virus taking over.

[QUOTE=theman93;14923792]My guy, if it wasn’t a hit piece then Lebron wouldn’t have been included in the title of the article. There’s no getting around that lol.[/QUOTE]

Tell us you never read it without telling us you never read it. The Lebron vs Mj angle is a great way to make someone click on an article, but you should actually read it before you talk. [B]Including the titles tag line the word Lebron appears in the article 9 times. In a 6,000 word article. [/B] Some hit piece, he really capitalized on the Lebron angle didn't he? If it was about Lebron's stats you'd argue it was the truth being revealed for a manufactured star. It's just showing us what was behind the magicians curtain from our youth.

[QUOTE=theman93;14923792]My guy, if it wasn’t a hit piece then Lebron wouldn’t have been included in the title of the article. There’s no getting around that lol.[/QUOTE]

I didn't read the entire thing because it's long, but Lebron really wasn't a part of it. And there isn't any bias inflected in the verbiage.

It reads more like a case-study than a hit piece.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;14923795]Tell us you never read it without telling us you never read it. The Lebron vs Mj angle is a great way to make someone click on an article, but you should actually read it before you talk. [B]Including the titles tag line the word Lebron appears in the article 9 times. In a 6,000 word article. [/B] Some hit piece, he really capitalized on the Lebron angle didn't he? If it was about Lebron's stats you'd argue it was the truth being revealed for a manufactured star. It's just showing us what was behind the magicians curtain from our youth.[/QUOTE]

Buddy, Lebron wouldn’t have been mentioned at all if this wasn’t a hit piece. In an article that had nothing to do with Lebron he somehow still made the headline? A headline about chasing MJ in the GOAT discussion? LOL cmon man we all know what this is really about. Take those blinders off sweety.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14923802]I didn't read the entire thing because it's long, but Lebron really wasn't a part of it. And there isn't any bias inflected in the verbiage.

It reads more like a case-study than a hit piece.[/QUOTE]

So then you’ll have to explain what, “Has Lebron James been chasing a ghost” has to do with the article.

[QUOTE=theman93;14923808]Buddy, Lebron wouldn’t have been mentioned at all if this wasn’t a hit piece. In an article that had nothing to do with Lebron he somehow still made the headline? A headline about chasing MJ in the GOAT discussion? LOL cmon man we all know what this is really about. Take those blinders off sweety.[/QUOTE]

It's an obvious hit piece.