iicybershotii

quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: Bro, I already asked YOU this question a page ago: If you have another comprehensive statistic that exists other than PER, please by all means present it. I don't know of any. And jesus christ, repetitive argument much? How many times do I have to respond to something this stupid? I already told you I'll gladly discuss their attributes qualitatively. By the way, in general, I would say that Dwight is better than all 3 of those players, but I think it's arguable with Gasol. I know you'll hate hearing that. Also, watch what you say with Rodgers, you might be biting your tongue in a year or two. Rose's adjusted +/- is better, his efficiency is better, his unadjusted Lenovo stat is better, his Roland Rating is better, he had more offensive AND defensive win shares, and he had a superior PER as you mentioned and a superior adjusted PER(which is like PER, except further adjusted to use real data rather than estimates on assisted v. unassisted field goals and includes charges taken as a stat). Curry has a higher efficiency stat on hoopdata, but given that hoopdata's own glossary says that it's efficiency stat is "not held in very high esteem by the statistical community", I'm not sure how much meaning there is to that. Although unlike your basketballmonster bull****, at least they show their methodology on it. And I asked an additional comparison question because of a reason that should be crystal clear: A statistic like PER that states the obviously true isn't very useful. A statistic like your nonsense that states the obviously true is wrong, defies even basic function. And what Aaron Rodgers does 3 years from now doesn't change the fact that he wasn't even a top 4 quarterback last season, where fantasy stats ranked him first. Finally some stats. First of all, forget +/- and therefore also Lenovo and Roland. +/- is nearly useless in basketball. Every member of bad teams is going to be dead last in each one of those statistics. +/- is better for comparing within a single team. So then PER doesn't account for the time a player has the ball in his hands. Win shares... are a complete joke and are basically proportional to total wins. You can't compare a team with more wins to another team with less wins and expect that statistic to mean anything. The maximum number of win shares Curry could have is 26, where as rose can have 41. Why not look at win share %? And which efficiency stat are you talking about? On the other hand, the individual statistics all favor curry. Using Hoopdata (and/or basketball-reference, EFF excluded), for advanced offense, Curry has a higher: TS%, %AST, AR, DRR, TRR, EFF, WS and AWS. So that leaves Rose with better ORR, TOR and the PER's. So he's better at offensive rebounding only, turnovers, and the amazing PER... sounds good. http://www.hoopdata.com/player...name=Stephen%20Curry http://www.hoopdata.com/player...?name=Derrick%20Rose Oh yea, and http://basketballmonster.com/Help.aspx

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: im just going to say troll and call it a day. He's putting words down but his argument has no flow. Curry is better because of his per minute fantasy rankings. But the rankings dont matter because you use your eyes. Rose had the ball more but it didn't matter that the Bulls generally ran a slow down 1/2 court offense. Curry had a lower usage rate and thats what matters. Just to let you know, Curry's statistical numbers are even MORE insane in cumulative and per-game. I used per-minute only because that one guy said something about Curry's numbers being inflated because he played so many minutes. Also, the Bull's weren't slow loppers like the Blazers. They were 12th in pace.

quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: Go ahead and use Yahoo and ESPN, their rankings are almost the exact same. Basketballmonster, Baseballmonster, and Footballmonster are the best fantasy websites though. If you play fantasy sports, you can thank me later. So, I mean, let's see here, um, well, do you even have an argument? Or is mine just invalid because you don't like it? Ok, my gentle snowflake. I will declare you King of the Internet if you can provide me with a single comprehensive statistic to suggest Curry is better than Rose that doesn't involve Fantasy. Also, the fact that you're arguing for these "sportmonster" sites as statistical analysis of player x is better than player y is jaw-dropping. Last year, Aaron Rodgers was the #1 QB in fantasy. Do you believe he was the #1 QB in reality? And if you don't like comparing players who don't play the same position, fine: Do you believe Dwight Howard is a worse center than Amare, Pau Gasol and Brook Lopez. Bro, I already asked YOU this question a page ago: If you have another comprehensive statistic that exists other than PER, please by all means present it. I don't know of any. And jesus christ, repetitive argument much? How many times do I have to respond to something this stupid? I already told you I'll gladly discuss their attributes qualitatively. By the way, in general, I would say that Dwight is better than all 3 of those players, but I think it's arguable with Gasol. I know you'll hate hearing that. Also, watch what you say with Rodgers, you might be biting your tongue in a year or two.

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: Why are we being trolled by Stephen Curry's mother? What's better on the internet, taking sarcastic jabs or presenting an argument? quote: Even though the entire reason you brought up this fantasy rankings site was to claim it did. Explained below... quote: Which shouldn't matter since you just claimed that statistical rankings don't determine who is a better player. Ok, what do you want to argue then? I'll gladly tell you about Steph's vision, hands and beautiful shooting stroke. quote: Oooh! Ooooh! I know this one, Trebeck. "What is anyone who has ever watched basketball and has at least 4 brain cells to bang together!" More of the same... I guess you just don't feel like having this discussion? quote: There is no analysis that could ever exist by a rationally thinking person that would suggest David Lee is better than Kobe. None. I'm just telling it like it is. Most people here believe Jameer and Rashard are elite players... quote: That's a reasonable, if incredibly cliche and obvious, point. Lets see how long it takes you to undercut it. Still bored. quote: Well, you didn't undercut the different position point, but you did instead opt to undercut the "stats don't decide" point AGAIN. I'm sorry but these two points weren't mutually exclusive even if you want them to be. quote: Also, if a statistical comparison WERE to be made, one has to consider a wide variety of sources, not just one. You've provided one stat to suggest Rose is inferior to Curry. I could provide, and have already provided in this thread, several to suggest that your assertion is pants-****tingly crazy. So at best, we agree to disagree, but either way I leave shaking my head wondering to myself how you could possibly buy into what you're selling here. Actually, I can barely find ANY stats that suggest Rose is superior to Curry. PER is almost the only one, and that formula doesn't include usage rate, basically making it COMPLETELY meaningless. quote: Also, I don't trust any comprehensive statistic like the one those basketballmonster guys used if they're not willing to submit their methodology to public criticism, and I can't find it anywhere on their site. Go ahead and use Yahoo and ESPN, their rankings are almost the exact same. Basketballmonster, Baseballmonster, and Footballmonster are the best fantasy websites though. If you play fantasy sports, you can thank me later. So, I mean, let's see here, um, well, do you even have an argument? Or is mine just invalid because you don't like it? if i'm playing fantasy sports I'm taking Danny Granger over lebron this year. Why? BECAUSE FANTASY STATS ARE A REFLECTION OF OPPORTUNITY NOT TALENT!!! Lebron is going to get less points, probably coast a bit more, and let wade or bosh take over some too. It doesn't mean Lebron suddenly becomes a worse player. Alright dude, we get it, you didn't read anything I wrote.

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: ...those are fantasy rankings. Are you kidding me? Do you have a better way of ranking players? It's a statistical ranking and it's better than PER... So am I correct in assuming that you believe David Lee was a better basketball player last season than Kobe Bryant? The first thing I would ever say when comparing two players is to watch them play. I'm assuming you know who is good and who is bad when you watch a basketball game. When I watch Steph and Rose, to me Steph is the better player. I think it's obvious. Some of the games he had last year were down right insane. I think after this year you will think Steph is the better player, but I don't blame you for not knowing how good he is yet. Secondly, a statistical ranking does not make you a better player, but we're not talking about someone who is ranked 8th to someone who is ranked 9th... We're talking about someone who is not even in the top 100 compared to someone who is ranked in the top 20. Also, who is to say that if David Lee was on a winning team, or had won the championship that people wouldn't be saying he is better? Also, players at different positions are much harder to compare. Many different things go into comparing players, but I think if you are going to make an argument for two players who play the same position a good place to start is by using statistics. so if you were forming a franchise you would choose rodrigue beaubois over rudy gay? Does anyone else think this guy is smart? I'm convinced now, great argument. quote: Secondly, a statistical ranking does not make you a better player, but we're not talking about someone who is ranked 8th to someone who is ranked 9th... We're talking about someone who is not even in the top 100 compared to someone who is ranked in the top 20. Do you want me to give you an explanation for why you're an idiot or do you want to grow up and try presenting an argument? I believe in you. you are using rankings that describe opportunity rather than talent. Curry did well because he was in an open offense, an offense that decided to focus on developing him rather than win games. We could do that too if we wanted to with JJ. We could play JJ 48 minutes some nights and give him 25 shots some games and eventually he's going to put up 50 points but we aren't going to win many games in the process. In 2006, Colt Brennan threw for 58 touchdowns and led the nation in several passing catagories. Was he a significantly better player than Chad Henne? Matt Ryan? Josh Freeman? Mike Teel? No. Because the offense he ran gave him more opportunity to shine. The thing is, Rose's usage rate was the 2nd highest for any point guard in the NBA. Meaning, he had the ball in his hands a TON. He and Steph played extremely similar minutes... He took 3 more shots per game than Steph... I just see your argument as the typical anti-GSW argument when you aren't actually looking at the individual player's statistics. And if you think Rose wasn't the focal point of the offense for the 41-41 Bulls than you're crazy.

quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: Why are we being trolled by Stephen Curry's mother? What's better on the internet, taking sarcastic jabs or presenting an argument? quote: Even though the entire reason you brought up this fantasy rankings site was to claim it did. Explained below... quote: Which shouldn't matter since you just claimed that statistical rankings don't determine who is a better player. Ok, what do you want to argue then? I'll gladly tell you about Steph's vision, hands and beautiful shooting stroke. quote: Oooh! Ooooh! I know this one, Trebeck. "What is anyone who has ever watched basketball and has at least 4 brain cells to bang together!" More of the same... I guess you just don't feel like having this discussion? quote: There is no analysis that could ever exist by a rationally thinking person that would suggest David Lee is better than Kobe. None. I'm just telling it like it is. Most people here believe Jameer and Rashard are elite players... quote: That's a reasonable, if incredibly cliche and obvious, point. Lets see how long it takes you to undercut it. Still bored. quote: Well, you didn't undercut the different position point, but you did instead opt to undercut the "stats don't decide" point AGAIN. I'm sorry but these two points weren't mutually exclusive even if you want them to be. quote: Also, if a statistical comparison WERE to be made, one has to consider a wide variety of sources, not just one. You've provided one stat to suggest Rose is inferior to Curry. I could provide, and have already provided in this thread, several to suggest that your assertion is pants-****tingly crazy. So at best, we agree to disagree, but either way I leave shaking my head wondering to myself how you could possibly buy into what you're selling here. Actually, I can barely find ANY stats that suggest Rose is superior to Curry. PER is almost the only one, and that formula doesn't include usage rate, basically making it COMPLETELY meaningless. quote: Also, I don't trust any comprehensive statistic like the one those basketballmonster guys used if they're not willing to submit their methodology to public criticism, and I can't find it anywhere on their site. Go ahead and use Yahoo and ESPN, their rankings are almost the exact same. Basketballmonster, Baseballmonster, and Footballmonster are the best fantasy websites though. If you play fantasy sports, you can thank me later. So, I mean, let's see here, um, well, do you even have an argument? Or is mine just invalid because you don't like it?

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: ...those are fantasy rankings. Are you kidding me? Do you have a better way of ranking players? It's a statistical ranking and it's better than PER... So am I correct in assuming that you believe David Lee was a better basketball player last season than Kobe Bryant? The first thing I would ever say when comparing two players is to watch them play. I'm assuming you know who is good and who is bad when you watch a basketball game. When I watch Steph and Rose, to me Steph is the better player. I think it's obvious. Some of the games he had last year were down right insane. I think after this year you will think Steph is the better player, but I don't blame you for not knowing how good he is yet. Secondly, a statistical ranking does not make you a better player, but we're not talking about someone who is ranked 8th to someone who is ranked 9th... We're talking about someone who is not even in the top 100 compared to someone who is ranked in the top 20. Also, who is to say that if David Lee was on a winning team, or had won the championship that people wouldn't be saying he is better? Also, players at different positions are much harder to compare. Many different things go into comparing players, but I think if you are going to make an argument for two players who play the same position a good place to start is by using statistics. so if you were forming a franchise you would choose rodrigue beaubois over rudy gay? Does anyone else think this guy is smart? I'm convinced now, great argument. quote: Secondly, a statistical ranking does not make you a better player, but we're not talking about someone who is ranked 8th to someone who is ranked 9th... We're talking about someone who is not even in the top 100 compared to someone who is ranked in the top 20. Do you want me to give you an explanation for why you're an idiot or do you want to grow up and try presenting an argument? I believe in you.

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: ...those are fantasy rankings. Are you kidding me? Do you have a better way of ranking players? It's a statistical ranking and it's better than PER... So am I correct in assuming that you believe David Lee was a better basketball player last season than Kobe Bryant? The first thing I would ever say when comparing two players is to watch them play. I'm assuming you know who is good and who is bad when you watch a basketball game. When I watch Steph and Rose, to me Steph is the better player. I think it's obvious. Some of the games he had last year were down right insane. I think after this year you will think Steph is the better player, but I don't blame you for not knowing how good he is yet. Secondly, a statistical ranking does not make you a better player, but we're not talking about someone who is ranked 8th to someone who is ranked 9th... We're talking about someone who is not even in the top 100 compared to someone who is ranked in the top 20. Also, who is to say that if David Lee was on a winning team, or had won the championship that people wouldn't be saying he is better? Also, players at different positions are much harder to compare. Many different things go into comparing players, but I think if you are going to make an argument for two players who play the same position a good place to start is by using statistics. so if you were forming a franchise you would choose rodrigue beaubois over rudy gay? Does anyone else think this guy is smart? I'm convinced now, great argument.

quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: ...those are fantasy rankings. Are you kidding me? Do you have a better way of ranking players? It's a statistical ranking and it's better than PER... So am I correct in assuming that you believe David Lee was a better basketball player last season than Kobe Bryant? The first thing I would ever say when comparing two players is to watch them play. I'm assuming you know who is good and who is bad when you watch a basketball game. When I watch Steph and Rose, to me Steph is the better player. I think it's obvious. Some of the games he had last year were down right insane. I think after this year you will think Steph is the better player, but I don't blame you for not knowing how good he is yet. Secondly, a statistical ranking does not make you a better player, but we're not talking about someone who is ranked 8th to someone who is ranked 9th... We're talking about someone who is not even in the top 100 compared to someone who is ranked in the top 20. Also, who is to say that if David Lee was on a winning team, or had won the championship that people wouldn't be saying he is better? Also, players at different positions are much harder to compare. Many different things go into comparing players, but I think if you are going to make an argument for two players who play the same position a good place to start is by using statistics.

quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: ...those are fantasy rankings. Are you kidding me? Do you have a better way of ranking players? It's a statistical ranking and it's better than PER...

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by gporter: To be fair though, it's not like Steph Curry has a choice on where he plays, and every team plays 48 minutes... so you can say what you want about pace, and it's not like Steph was the one jacking up every shot, the whole GS team will jack it up if they get a chance. It's true that players don't choose where they're drafted, but it's equally true that one has to consider things like pace and mpg if we're going to make apples-to-apples comparisons of raw stats. Let's do ourselves a favor then and look at Rose vs. Curry in a PER MINUTE statistical comparison. Curry was ranked 19th in all of basketball in per minute statistical production, which is a drop down from 7th in per game value (6th in cumulative). Rose was ranked 122nd in all of basketball in per minute statistical production, which is a drop from 62nd. In fact, he was actually of NEGATIVE value, meaning he was WORSE than your average player in per minute production on the floor. To be fair, over the last 3 months of the season, Steph was 9th in the NBA while Rose was 100th (and still negative). take golden state statistics. throw in trash. And why exactly? see my post on the last page. Their offense does to guards/wings what texas tech's offense does to Quarterbacks. I'm glad you can just look at "pace" and make blanket statements about players. What about usage rate? I guess the fact that Rose has the ball a ton more than Steph has no effect on his statistics...

quote: Originally posted by ButterMilkPancakes: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by ButterMilkPancakes: What, you mean you have never heard of per minute statistical comparison (AKA PMSC)?? It's on par with the Point Guard efficiency rating over wins over replacement player, using nvAST% (Inverse assist percentage). EFF/WORP and PMSC can be combined into the PMSE/WORPPM (per minute statistical efficiency / wins over replacement player per minute), which is the ultimate formula one can use to statistically prove which point guard is the best. Cybershot's post was especially amazing because not only did all of those stats sound made up, but none of them even made sense given the context of actual stats already posted in the thread. It seemed that he was talking about PER, but Rose's PER was around 2 points higher than Curry's, and certainly above league average, so I'm still trying to figure what the hell he was talking about. Not talking about PER.

quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by ButterMilkPancakes: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by gporter: To be fair though, it's not like Steph Curry has a choice on where he plays, and every team plays 48 minutes... so you can say what you want about pace, and it's not like Steph was the one jacking up every shot, the whole GS team will jack it up if they get a chance. It's true that players don't choose where they're drafted, but it's equally true that one has to consider things like pace and mpg if we're going to make apples-to-apples comparisons of raw stats. Let's do ourselves a favor then and look at Rose vs. Curry in a PER MINUTE statistical comparison. Curry was ranked 19th in all of basketball in per minute statistical production, which is a drop down from 7th in per game value (6th in cumulative). Rose was ranked 122nd in all of basketball in per minute statistical production, which is a drop from 62nd. In fact, he was actually of NEGATIVE value, meaning he was WORSE than your average player in per minute production on the floor. To be fair, over the last 3 months of the season, Steph was 9th in the NBA while Rose was 100th (and still negative). Ok, I'll bite. What the **** are you talking about? What, you mean you have never heard of per minute statistical comparison (AKA PMSC)?? It's on par with the Point Guard efficiency rating over wins over replacement player, using nvAST% (Inverse assist percentage). EFF/WORP and PMSC can be combined into the PMSE/WORPPM (per minute statistical efficiency / wins over replacement player per minute), which is the ultimate formula one can use to statistically prove which point guard is the best. Cybershot's post was especially amazing because not only did all of those stats sound made up, but none of them even made sense given the context of actual stats already posted in the thread. It's called basketballmonster.com.

quote: Originally posted by Lewis4thewin: quote: Originally posted by iicybershotii: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by gporter: To be fair though, it's not like Steph Curry has a choice on where he plays, and every team plays 48 minutes... so you can say what you want about pace, and it's not like Steph was the one jacking up every shot, the whole GS team will jack it up if they get a chance. It's true that players don't choose where they're drafted, but it's equally true that one has to consider things like pace and mpg if we're going to make apples-to-apples comparisons of raw stats. Let's do ourselves a favor then and look at Rose vs. Curry in a PER MINUTE statistical comparison. Curry was ranked 19th in all of basketball in per minute statistical production, which is a drop down from 7th in per game value (6th in cumulative). Rose was ranked 122nd in all of basketball in per minute statistical production, which is a drop from 62nd. In fact, he was actually of NEGATIVE value, meaning he was WORSE than your average player in per minute production on the floor. To be fair, over the last 3 months of the season, Steph was 9th in the NBA while Rose was 100th (and still negative). take golden state statistics. throw in trash. And why exactly?