Re: mvk, as a matter of fact.....
At this point, I've become convinced this guy is just arguing for the sake of the argument. He has said he likes nothing more than a good argument and I think he's sitting somewhere in front of a keyboard laughing his a** off at the people sincerely trying to explain simple math to him.
There are valid discussions that can be held about how statistics can best be used. Offensive efficiency is only one statistic. Others are as useful, too in the big picture. Some of the in-depth advanced statistics analyses can become convoluted. There are some numbers generated by the experts that I don't completely buy into. For example, the advanced models value high usage players, even if their usage is generated by taking and MISSING lots of shots. Their formulas give even a missed shot a value of something like 0.3 points. I don't understand that. But I've seen about a page of equations how they generate that number so there is a basis for it.
Pitt79 is arguing with 3rd or 4th grade arithmetic.
He's wrong. EVERYBODY knows he's wrong. I've gotta assume even HE knows he's wrong but he just doesn't care. He just wants to argue, regurgitating a position that has been proven indefensible for a couple years now.
The best way to handle this is not to play his little game. We could just put him on ignore or even better, just DO NOT RESPOND to his trolling posts about higher scoring and better offenses. It takes two to have an argument.
We're never going to change the mind of a guy who can't or WON'T understand the difference between two and three.
As I've said, arguing with math is like arguing with gravity.
At this point, I've become convinced this guy is just arguing for the sake of the argument. He has said he likes nothing more than a good argument and I think he's sitting somewhere in front of a keyboard laughing his a** off at the people sincerely trying to explain simple math to him.
There are valid discussions that can be held about how statistics can best be used. Offensive efficiency is only one statistic. Others are as useful, too in the big picture. Some of the in-depth advanced statistics analyses can become convoluted. There are some numbers generated by the experts that I don't completely buy into. For example, the advanced models value high usage players, even if their usage is generated by taking and MISSING lots of shots. Their formulas give even a missed shot a value of something like 0.3 points. I don't understand that. But I've seen about a page of equations how they generate that number so there is a basis for it.
Pitt79 is arguing with 3rd or 4th grade arithmetic.
He's wrong. EVERYBODY knows he's wrong. I've gotta assume even HE knows he's wrong but he just doesn't care. He just wants to argue, regurgitating a position that has been proven indefensible for a couple years now.
The best way to handle this is not to play his little game. We could just put him on ignore or even better, just DO NOT RESPOND to his trolling posts about higher scoring and better offenses. It takes two to have an argument.
We're never going to change the mind of a guy who can't or WON'T understand the difference between two and three.
As I've said, arguing with math is like arguing with gravity.
