Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: Spurs sans Duncan -- POSITION PER QUESTION -- fault o...

Expand Messages
  • bchaikin@aol.com
    Perhaps you should leave it to Roland to determine what is and is not a slap to his face. sorry, but you did not tell the purveyor of 82games.com, in a private
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 19, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Perhaps you should leave it to Roland to determine what is and is not a slap to his face.

      sorry, but you did not tell the purveyor of 82games.com, in a private email, that, quote "...is 82games reliable? literally, no...". you posted that comment for any and all to see, whomever they may be, for as long as that message will be posted on Yahoo, which could be years. consequently anyone reading that message in the future can get the idea that the data is not reliable, for reasons not mentioned, and without evidence to the contrary presented. thus anyone reading that posting has just as much a right to question the comment....

      if "...is 82games reliable? literally no..." is what you believe, fine, lets hear your reasons why. if you know for a fact that the data is unreliable, tell us why. again, do you have data that shows otherwise, contradicting information? that shows the data is in fact "...literally unreliable..."? if so, lets see it. but the fact is that statement was made without any evidence presented showing why the data is unreliable....

      I have been one of the strongest defenders of the validity of the data since 82games went online.

      that may be, but how would one know this based on your posting "... is 82games reliable? literally no..."?

      Perhaps unreliable is an incorrect word choice...

      i'll say....

      but that's certainly no excuse for taking my comments out of context and dramatically
      misconstruing their meaning....

      out of context? misconstruing their meaning? this statement was made, "...As impressive as Roland and John Hollinger's work in defense by position has been, as Carlos pointed out, it can't tell you when teams are cross-matching, or when they're playing zone, or whatever. You have to understand and account for the limitations in the data. Is 82games reliable? Literally, no...."...

      now again tell me how these comments were misconstrued? tell me, how does one "...have to understand and account for the limitations in the data..."? what might need to be understood and just what are these limitations you are talking about for one to interpret the data at 82games.com? this is a stats analysis group, lets discuss it...

      My point is that there are systematic limitations to the data that I think we all recognize,

      enlighten us please, because i certainly don't seem to be recognizing whatever it is you are recognizing as to the "...systematic limitations of the data..." because you are not telling us what those might be. as far as i can tell it is simply data, no strings attached, just like offensive FGM and FGA is data. for example - what are some of the systematic limitations to offensive FGM and FGA? i mentioned what i thought were some of them, but the point is we all still use offensive FG% and normally do not quantify it based on what shots were taken or where from...

      which actually BTW i think 82games also does just this - the website has individual players offensive FG% broken down by shot distance, something like by dunks, layups, short shots, and long shots, data i find extremely compelling and quite original, that i have never seen anywhere else, at least not for the entire league. consequently i find that data quite reliable, but certainly it should be discussed as to any limitations anyone believes it has...

      and therefore to interpret 82games.com's data literally and without critically analyzing it in relation to other information would produce an incomplete picture.

      nobody - i repeat nobody - is saying not to critically analyze the data - that's what this discussion group does. but the statement was made "...is 82games reliable? literally no...". how else can one interpret that statement? it seems pretty obvious what that statement is saying...

      fine, lets "...critically analyze..." the data, and your statement - what are these limitations to the data you are speaking of?...

      The same is true of any statistics you can find. To the same extent that 82games.com's defensive numbers are "unreliable", so too are any individual or team statistics that any of us generate. They all have inherent problems or biases, and the best we can do is try to account for and mitigate these problems.

      oh, i get it now. their data is unreliable because everyone's data is unreliable...

      There is no "holy grail" and there is no perfection when it comes to an imperfect world and imperfect data.

      ???....

      82games.com happens to come a hell of a lot closer than anything else...

      i'll second that...

      and don't dare to tell me that I believe otherwise.

      and who praytell has said this?...

      bob chaikin
      bchaikin@...


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.