Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DeRoZan is top 10 in opp. PER

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    TRX wrote: View Post
    Comments like Matt52's are a perfect example of why comments like thead's "This is a perfect example of why I find stats flawed." are moronic.
    I'm confused... I thought Matt pointing out the discrepancies of various individual stats on their own was only proving thead's point about stats being flawed. Wouldn't that make his comment more valid and not moronic??

    Any stat alone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, compared to other stats and an objective eye-test of watching games. Relying on blind stats, especially when cherry-picked to support a pre-conceived opinion, is flawed... isn't it???

    Comment


    • #32
      Nope. Stats aren't flawed. Stats without context are flawed and flawed stats are flawed and stats can be misinterpreted, but I would certainly not say stats are flawed. And that's my point. thead didn't say this stat was flawed; he said stats, plural, are flawed. And I interpreted this to mean thead has a general distrust of stats. If I'm wrong and that's not what he meant, my bad, but to summarily dismiss stats because some don't confirm your preconceived notions is a flawed approach to stats, not a flaw of the stats.
      Last edited by TRX; Tue Apr 23rd, 2013, 12:56 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        TRX wrote: View Post
        Nope. Stats aren't flawed. Stats without context are flawed and flawed stats are flawed and misinterpreted stats are flawed, but I would certainly not say stats are flawed. And that's my point. thead didn't say this stat was flawed; he said stats, plural, are flawed. And I interpreted this to mean thead has a general distrust of stats.
        He said stats were flawed. You just said that stats without context are flawed. Wouldn't it be fair to say that stats without context are just stats? He never said that stats with context are flawed... I think we've entered the realm of a semantics debate now!

        Comment


        • #34
          No, because quite frankly, stats without context are not stats at all. They're just numbers. Unless you don't find there to be a difference between information and data. I guess it depends on what he meant by "stats are flawed", but that's obviously hard to tell with a one liner post.

          Also, I guess I edited my post again while you were replying, rofl

          Comment


          • #35
            NoPropsneeded wrote: View Post
            He could never post those numbers so keep dreaming. He's a great offensive player but he is very inconsistent with his D. One night he plays above average defense and another night he's completely lost
            Not saying he ever would Im talking hypothetically if he did people would still find a flaw about him and yell trade him trade him merp merp merp!

            Comment


            • #36
              TRX wrote: View Post
              No, because quite frankly, stats without context are not stats at all. They're just numbers. Unless you don't find there to be a difference between information and data. I guess it depends on what he meant by "stats are flawed", but that's obviously hard to tell with a one liner post.

              Also, I guess I edited my post again while you were replying, rofl
              The way I took it was that "stats are flawed" meant that any stat on its own is exactly that; just a number without context, interpretation and a comparative analysis with other stats. The other issue is that context and interpretation is very subjective, hence the need for stat comparisons and the eye-test.

              That's why I like Matt's post, which showed how a variety of other equally credible/flawed stats could paint an entirely different picture of DeRozan's defense prowess (or lack thereof). Regardless of the stat in question, there's a lot of other qualitative data that needs to be analysed in order to evaluate the credibility of each specific quantitative statistic.

              Comment


              • #37
                So really, we agree for the most part on the bigger picture. We just interpreted thead's post differently, lol

                I guess the other thing too is defensive stats are definitely behind offensive stats and other stats in terms of sophistication and "accuracy", for lack of a better term - and the stats community for the most part agrees on this, I think.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Guys, we all know DeMar isn't a good defender. He showd up on single stat that says otherwise so lets just laugh it off and be happy for him even though we know that the way that single stat is being used in this tread is flawed.

                  I'm already feeling bad for JV, knowing that everyone is going to rip him to shreds once the franchise status gets put on his shoulders.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Copywryter wrote: View Post
                    And that's one of the reasons I don't come here - the rose-coloured glasses view of the Raptors, where JV is a future Dwight Howard (really, I've seen it here) and every Raptor is a future all-star.

                    The Raptors aren't good in large part because the players aren't good enough. That isn't their fault, but it's also no reason to stop being objective.

                    DD is better. He's a gym rat who works hard plus he's getting more calls these days. But his limitations are the same as they were in his rookie year and his ceiling is obvious.
                    Copywryter doesn't come here often? Then who is the copywryter commenting multiple times on every single article every day? He just found another opportunity to take a pot shot at the team and dove in head first.

                    Opp PER is useful in context, like many have said. The context being Demar is a SG and it's only fair to compare his numbers to other SG (as some noted, C's have a higher opp PER due to playing more efficient opponents than a SG, that's why you compare by position). It's the same with regular PER, where PG's average a higher PER than any other position due to all the assists they get.

                    It's pretty easy using the link to drill down a little further into these defensive rankings. When you look at On/Off court +/- you see that Demar being on court doesn't result in a better point differential. Everyone else in the top 10 has a positive point differential, so it's clear something is different about what Demar brings to the table than other guys, especially considering how shitty our bench is, we shouldn't be better with Demar off the court.

                    See how easy that was? I didn't need to throw the stats in the garbage just because I've seen Demar play and know he isn't a great defender. The stats actually spelled that out quite clearly.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      NoPropsneeded wrote: View Post
                      Charles Barkley is a dumbass....
                      So is this stat. lol
                      Twitter: @ReubenJRD NBA, Raptors writer for Daily Hive Vancouver, Toronto.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        NoPropsneeded wrote: View Post
                        He could never post those numbers so keep dreaming. He's a great offensive player but he is very inconsistent with his D. One night he plays above average defense and another night he's completely lost
                        Terrence Ross is the one completely lost. Demar Derozan just can't stay in front of anyone. How great is life for both, that the two shooting guards lack key parts of the defense.
                        Twitter: @ReubenJRD NBA, Raptors writer for Daily Hive Vancouver, Toronto.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          I feel like at least Ross' problem is easier to fix. Especially for a rookie. I feel like not being able to stay with anyone is more or less permanent.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X