No Cav's Game Thread?

[Ned Ryerson 94]

I didn't think it'd be neccesary to post about my personal life, but since Sky brought it into this discussion.

 

I have 3 children (2 boys and a girl). My little girl is only 2 years old so she's still a handful. My two boys are also a handful in their own right. I work a full time job as a programmer at a major software firm. I also am going to school at night to get my real estate license.

 

I still find time to post on the forums, probably more than anyone else. So suck it.

 

Which software firm, if I may ask? Penetrode? Initrode?

[Jareth Cutestory 678]

Which software firm, if I may ask? Penetrode? Initrode?

 

I can't reveal that sort of information on the Internet.

[ma 6]

I have decided and promised to not directly reply to DOM before, so I am presenting

this argument as a general example:

 

Dwight Howard is shooting 60% EFG, Arenas is shooting 39% EFG this year (FACT).

 

In tonight's game vs. Team X, Arenas is clearly displaying a lot of energy

and playing solid. He must have heard some good news today or something.

He seems to be shooting very well also, he made 6 out of 12 attempts. While Dwight

Howard is his usual self, he has 7 of 12 shooting performance, but doesn't

seem that much interested in the game. The coach is trying to determine who he

should give the ball in the next critical possession to shoot?

 

A coach who is a person who worships statistics, lives his life according to them,

and ON TOP OF THIS, DICTATES to other people what "the correct way" is based on

statistical counting results, will give the ball to Dwight every time. He knows for

sure that Dwight has a lot more chance of scoring then Arenas. In fact, he thinks

that Dwight should take every shot in the game since he has the highest EFG in

the team.

 

While another coach would realize that Arenas is having a good and hot game, and

playing with a lot of enthusiasm and energy. Then, he will make up his mind based

on this process, and not statistical history. He might still give the ball to Dwight for

other reasons, but he will pause before doing so.

 

 

 

I am very well qualified on the scientific side, but the details of my qualifications are

beyond the point. Statistics is the science of COUNTING, anybody is welcome to argue otherwise

all they like. Statistical analysis can only tell you WHAT HAPPENED (thus counting), and not what

is GOING TO HAPPEN. Any predictions of real life events based on statistics is just educated guessing.

I know that many people make decisions based on stats day in and day out, but it doesn't

make it "the correct way" or the ABSOLUTELY true thing. One needs to learn

how to be flexible at times, and live their life beyond statistics.

 

What are the chances that I roll double-sixes 100 times in a row? Statistics will tell me

one in a bazillion chance right (10 ^ -156)? But what happens when someone does it

in front of your eyes and becomes that ONE in a bazillion.

Now, if you had bet all your wealth and health against him, then you lose big time.

 

 

 

History is full of events like this, where the most unexpected happens and defies

COMMON sense. These things turn into big stories for centuries after that

(for example the story of David-Goliath, etc.)..

 

-----

 

To turn a long story short, I beg people not to belittle or jump on someone just because

they come up with an argument or point out something that doesn't coincide with

COMMON sense/knowledge. They have a reason for saying things too, and everybody

deserves a chance to be heard. NOT just the so called "elite, high post count" people.

People need to realize that the correct way is not always "your way".

It is very easy to destroy relationships (like the people who bother to read and write

on this forum) than building them.

 

Peace

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

I have decided and promised to not directly reply to DOM before, so I am presenting

this argument as a general example:

 

 

 

 

 

I am very well qualified on the scientific side, but the details of my qualifications are

beyond the point. Statistics is the science of COUNTING, anybody is welcome to argue otherwise

all they like. Statistical analysis can only tell you WHAT HAPPENED (thus counting), and not what

is GOING TO HAPPEN. Any predictions of real life events based on statistics is just educated guessing.

I know that many people make decisions based on stats day in and day out, but it doesn't

make it "the correct way" or the ABSOLUTELY true thing. One needs to learn

how to be flexible at times, and live their life beyond statistics.

 

What are the chances that I roll double-sixes 100 times in a row? Statistics will tell me

one in a bazillion chance right (10 ^ -156)? But what happens when someone does it

in front of your eyes and becomes that ONE in a bazillion.

Now, if you had bet all your wealth and health against him, then you lose big time.

 

 

 

History is full of events like this, where the most unexpected happens and defies

COMMON sense. These things turn into big stories for centuries after that

(for example the story of David-Goliath, etc.)..

 

-----

 

To turn a long story short, I beg people not to belittle or jump on someone just because

they come up with an argument or point out something that doesn't coincide with

COMMON sense/knowledge. They have a reason for saying things too, and everybody

deserves a chance to be heard. NOT just the so called "elite, high post count" people.

People need to realize that the correct way is not always "your way".

It is very easy to destroy relationships (like the people who bother to read and write

on this forum) than building them.

 

Peace

 

Statistics show likely scenarios. Statistics aren't a crystal ball, but they tell you what is likely/unlikely to happen. In EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO it is better to make choices based on educated guesses than a blind choice.

 

in the scenario you provided, a coach would want to give the ball to the open player.

 

People have the right to be heard and the right to respond to any post here.

[AcuWill 45]

It is too bad that there wasn't a game thread. Truly.

 

And it is true that the boards have gone down quite a bit from their peak of a few years ago.

 

But I think this concept of bullying and being bullied is really relegated to a few select members. I'd even go so far as to say that those members that could be classified as bullies and those that would call themselves the bullied could be counted on one hand. Furthermore, these incidents are extremely infrequent, and tend to be repetitive (i.e., the same actions/interaction for each occurrence).

 

Also, it seems to be that those that are being bullied are standing up for themselves. If I remember my playground rules, once you stand up for yourself, you're no longer being bullied.

I think your justifying is flawed because of the idea that only those that are being bullied no longer want to be associated with the boards.

 

I will put it out there: I personally have stopped being as active due to the treatment of TMF that I have observed in addition to the general treatment of members by someone specifically (although that has not really happened in some time after he was called out.)

 

I can't speak for anyone else or the board in general, but that is my reason. I do expect the board to explode during the playoffs though.

[ma 6]

I absolutely agree that educated guessing is better than blind guessing.

 

 

The question is, are you educating yourself purely with numbers and counting results,

or do you look into more depth including emotional, mental, etc. levels ?

My original point was that, human behavior can not be explained or predicated

by counting/statistics. Humans are a lot more complicated than two dice

being rolled. And since the human element is part of the GAME of basketball (nonetheless

GAME is the defintion of basketball) , all bets are off in my book.

 

Yes, everybody has a right to post and respond to posts, but a little respect and courtesy

goes a looong way.

 

I probably won't be able to post for a while due to busy-ness, but try to read as much as possible.

 

Peace

 

Statistics show likely scenarios. Statistics aren't a crystal ball, but they tell you what is likely/unlikely to happen. In EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO it is better to make choices based on educated guesses than a blind choice.

 

in the scenario you provided, a coach would want to give the ball to the open player.

 

People have the right to be heard and the right to respond to any post here.

 

 

 

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

I absolutely agree that educated guessing is better than blind guessing.

 

 

The question is, are you educating yourself purely with numbers and counting results,

or do you look into more depth including emotional, mental, etc. levels ?

My original point was that, human behavior can not be explained or predicated

by counting/statistics. Humans are a lot more complicated than two dice

being rolled. And since the human element is part of the GAME of basketball (nonetheless

GAME is the defintion of basketball) , all bets are off in my book.

 

Yes, everybody has a right to post and respond to posts, but a little respect and courtesy

goes a looong way.

 

I probably won't be able to post for a while due to busy-ness, but try to read as much as possible.

 

Peace

 

Human behavior can be explained by statistics. Thats how game theory came about.

[Jareth Cutestory 678]

 

I will put it out there: I personally have stopped being as active due to the treatment of TMF that I have observed in addition to the general treatment of members by someone specifically (although that has not really happened in some time after he was called out.)

 

 

 

Here's what I don't understand. Isn't TMF equally to blame for stirring the pot by constantly making threads/comments like the ones in this thread? By all accounts and purposes, if said "cyber bullying" did exist, and the examples given in this thread are valid, then for the most part they have basically stopped. I mean, the forum is dead correct? Can't be much bullying going on. If there is, I'd love to see the examples.

 

Yet here is TMF, yet again throwing around words like "clique", etc. and blaming certain posters for the downfall of our beloved forum, while the accused sit back and think about why they're being called out yet again.

[I love my PTSD. 92]

I guess I need to tell a little about the real me. I am retired, 62, gray hair, happily married 40 years, and my 3-kids have added 9 grandkids since I started following the Magic in 89. I enjoy being crotchity.

 

 

One of the things I have learned about my opinions about things is that sometimes it is better to keep them to myself. That seems to be especially true for the internet.

 

No matter what I opine, some will say my ideas are good and some are idiotic. True wisdom comes from knowing that often they both are correct.

[Jareth Cutestory 678]

I guess I need to tell a little about the real me. I am retired, 62, gray hair, happily married 40 years, and my 3-kids have added 9 grandkids since I started following the Magic in 89. I enjoy being crotchity.

 

 

One of the things I have learned about my opinions about things is that sometimes it is better to keep them to myself. That seems to be especially true for the internet.

 

No matter what I opine, some will say my ideas are good and some are idiotic. True wisdom comes from knowing that often they both are correct.

 

 

Do you get to sit on a porch and wave sticks at young whippersnappers all day?

[Chase 209]

I say we don't make another game thread untill the Playoffs start.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

I have decided and promised to not directly reply to DOM before

I beg people not to belittle

 

Now that pointing out that little hypocrisy is out of the way, lets address your post.

 

First of all, analyzing your hypothetical scenario is impossible because of VAST quantity of information that's missing. Who is "team X"? Who is in the game for the other team? Who is guarding Dwight? What about Gilbert? How many fouls do those players have? Who else is in the game for the opponent? What about for us? Are they in the penalty? What's the score? What quarter is it? What is the eFG% of the two players you mentioned? What about their DrawFT% for the game?

 

Those are all relevant questions I came up with while on the phone over a 90 second period, and they're all relevant to a specific in game scenario.

 

But in a vacuum, when you have no specific answers to those questions? You give it to Dwight. Always. Because there is historical evidence to suggest Dwight would be a better option than Gilbert.

 

What are the chances that I roll double-sixes 100 times in a row? Statistics will tell meone in a bazillion chance right (10 ^ -156)? But what happens when someone does it

in front of your eyes and becomes that ONE in a bazillion.

Now, if you had bet all your wealth and health against him, then you lose big time.

So? Yes, in that highly unlikely scenario, had you bet in favor of something that was otherworldly likely, you'd have lost.

However, given an option of betting on something that has a 1/(36^100) of happening or betting that it won't, you'd have to be functionally brain dead to not bet on it failing to happen.

The reason people use stats in predictions is because they suggest likely outcomes. Yes, if we force feed Gilbert instead of Dwight in some randomly chosen individual game, it might wind up the better outcome. However, we have no way of knowing what game, if there is one, where that would occur, and we have overwhelming historical evidence to suggest we'd be better off with Dwight. So we go with Dwight, because a statistical majority of the time, he'll be the better option.

And as for this sentence:

Any predictions of real life events based on statistics is just educated guessing.

It's not specific enough.

Any prediction of real life events based on ANYTHING is just guessing. It is the analysis of previous data in those statistical predictions that makes those guesses educated. Or are you suggesting we should make uneducated guesses, like guessing that Dwight will shoot free throws well on days of the month that are prime numbers?

History is full of events like this, where the most unexpected happens and defiesCOMMON sense. These things turn into big stories for centuries after that

(for example the story of David-Goliath, etc.).

History remembers things that are unique, and while David/Goliath is hardly history since it's a Biblical story with very little in the way of non-religious historical confirmation, you should probably recognize that fantastic stories linger in the psyche precisely because they're so fantastic, not because they were common enough to be considered likely. Hell, Catherine the Great is mostly known as "that Russian woman who died having sex with a horse", and that story isn't even true.

We remember because of the oddity, but that hardly means we should treat is as a statistically valid likelihood.

The fact is the things that stick with us are deviations from the norm, not the common place.

I know people who think it's weird or spooky when they meet someone with the same birthday as them. But analyzing that statistically, even for 2 minutes, points out how absurd that feeling of spookiness actually is, since any given person you meet has a 1/366 chance of sharing your birthday, and you'll meet thousands of people over the course of your life.

Think about all the things you could reveal about yourself potentially to a stranger in a five minute conversation: your name, your age, how many siblings you have, their names and ages, your birthday, your siblings' birthdays, your hometown, a couple of your favorite likes and dislikes.

So if you met a complete stranger, went through that list, and discovered that you were both huge fans of The Warriors, that might seem interesting. But it would have also been interesting if you both had sisters with the same name, you were both from the same city, or anything else. It's interesting because it's unique, not because it was unlikely.