Battle Tested20 wrote:I like the video, but absolutely disagree with the notion that "Numbers Never Lie". I have always hated that concept.
trodgers wrote:Battle Tested20 wrote:I like the video, but absolutely disagree with the notion that "Numbers Never Lie". I have always hated that concept.
Numbers don't lie. They don't assert anything but themselves - and asserting is required for a lie.
trodgers wrote:I agree that the video doesn't do very much to really dispel the notion - but based on what is " as a general rule, the best way to win games whether you're behind or ahead is by getting efficient contribution from the team as a whole"? Prove that as a general rule. Then prove that it applies also to the Lakers with their current lineup. Then prove that the other players step up if event X occurs. Then prove that even X can occur with a regularity sufficient to justify THAT approach instead of a Kobe heavy approach.
In other words, we can criticize the video for being either off the mark or simply wrong - but we can surely do the same with armchair remarks.
trodgers wrote:Battle Tested20 wrote:I like the video, but absolutely disagree with the notion that "Numbers Never Lie". I have always hated that concept.
Numbers don't lie. They don't assert anything but themselves - and asserting is required for a lie.
Murdock wrote:trodgers wrote:Battle Tested20 wrote:I like the video, but absolutely disagree with the notion that "Numbers Never Lie". I have always hated that concept.
Numbers don't lie. They don't assert anything but themselves - and asserting is required for a lie.
well numbers themselves don't lie ... but they lie in context ... this whole video is a great example ... they focused on specific part of kobe's game not whole ... another interpretation can be made when Kobe shoots around 40% of the teams shots they tend to lose by 10 of more points ... we have no data that shows the progress of how the team got to that fourth quarter when they are losing by 10 or more - the reason might be because Kobe is shooting over 40% of all teams shots before the 4th quarter ... they also din't say if his increasing volume is actually increasing the negative differential or decreasing it which is the whole point
this video proved absolutely nothing ... you can always spin the numbers to your liking by separating certain things ... only complex analysis gives you the whole picture ... i wonder why they focused on 4th quarter only
JGC wrote:trodgers wrote:I agree that the video doesn't do very much to really dispel the notion - but based on what is " as a general rule, the best way to win games whether you're behind or ahead is by getting efficient contribution from the team as a whole"? Prove that as a general rule. Then prove that it applies also to the Lakers with their current lineup. Then prove that the other players step up if event X occurs. Then prove that even X can occur with a regularity sufficient to justify THAT approach instead of a Kobe heavy approach.
In other words, we can criticize the video for being either off the mark or simply wrong - but we can surely do the same with armchair remarks.
Well, I'm not sure anyone can empirically prove much of anything in sports. You can't even PROVE that Kobe is better than Mark Madsen. It's possible, we haven't seen the best of Mark Madsen. We can only draw some conclusions based on assumptions about what we have seen thus far.
For me, what I've observed, is that with all of the teams in all of the sports I have seen play, that play well and succeed, they have had positive contributions from multiple players. So that leads me to conclude that the recipe for success, and by success I mean win, in team sports, is to get positive contributions from multiple players. I haven't seen many, if any, teams have great success by NOT getting positive contributions from multiple players.
That doesn't mean it has to be one guy taking all the shots, or perfectly even distribution across all of the players on the court -- it just means that you have to get help, on both ends of the court, from more than 1 person.
From a proof standpoint, the video proves nothing. But, the animations are pretty slick IMO.
puffyusaf#2 wrote:SO then by that logic you don't believe any of the statistical information provided by anyone on anything? We can add our own stipulations to anything to negate or support a finding. Why not focus solely on the 2nd and 3rd quarters in games that start at 430 instead of 730? I don't find it suprising that certain posters find so many flaws in this video. Of course I am sure those same posters will say the same about those who don't find the flaws in it... Guilty!
In the end, this video and research looked at some specifics that have been complained about or atleast pointed too as reasons the Lakers are losing. They chose the 4th quarter, in my opinion, because that is when games are won.
puffyusaf#2 wrote:^so you don't agree with any statistical data. OK. Then it must be left up to strict opinion to explain "context". I look at the team standing around and/or missing as a need for Kobe to shoot the ball. You on the other hand see Kobe shooting the ball as a cause for guys standing around. Same game different view. Stats be damned.
puffyusaf#2 wrote:^And all that is to say that none of the statistics given is worth anything because there is not way to input all the particular variables one would need to get a true accurate picture of anything that has a million variables. Again, by your reasoning every single statistical presentation is flawed because it cannot possible consider every variable and put those variables into context that would satisfy the masses. If that is the case I have one question. Why even bother watching, commenting on or waisting your time on this at all?
Murdock wrote:trodgers wrote:Battle Tested20 wrote:I like the video, but absolutely disagree with the notion that "Numbers Never Lie". I have always hated that concept.
Numbers don't lie. They don't assert anything but themselves - and asserting is required for a lie.
well numbers themselves don't lie ... but they lie in context ...
this whole video is a great example ... they focused on specific part of kobe's game not whole ... another interpretation can be made when Kobe shoots around 40% of the teams shots they tend to lose by 10 of more points ...
we have no data that shows the progress of how the team got to that fourth quarter when they are losing by 10 or more - the reason might be because Kobe is shooting over 40% of all teams shots before the 4th quarter ... they also din't say if his increasing volume is actually increasing the negative differential or decreasing it which is the whole point
this video proved absolutely nothing ... you can always spin the numbers to your liking by separating certain things ... only complex analysis gives you the whole picture ... i wonder why they focused on 4th quarter only
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests