No they don’t. They certainly aren’t allowed to give resistance back. Anyone with eyes can see this in highlights of any player from now and the 90s, prior.
You dedicated your sig to some obscure stat that probably hasnt been validated? Wow.
Or perhaps his 38% midrange percentage, which sinks to 35% in the playoffs? And these are not even clutch stats- general stats.
Or how about his 73% free throw percentage? Think that’s been a good situation in the clutch?
Did you not watch Durant triple his clutch points in their finals series?
You should validate accusations before making them. The vast majority of positive Lebron clutch stats are cherry picked from a tiny sample size or include several minutes in the fourth. He’s definitely great in the fourth, but not for high pressure shots.
I watched KD and applauded him even though i was going for Cleveland. He was clutch as hell and a 7 footer pulling up from 3 for a dagger TWICE was amazing.
My thinking was more of the fact that you thrive on being negative about one damn player to the point of making it a sig. Just seems like loser type shyt but im a bit older and dont get off on hate like you younger fellas. Id just rather celebrate who i DO like. You life will suck and it will be your own doing.
ballzboyee wrote:Youtuber JxmyHighroller tracked and then compared Jordan's left hand points per iso efficiency against the league's best iso scorers today while using either hand. Turns out Jordan's iso efficiency with only his left hand is far superior to any player in the league even removing Jordan's dominant hand in the comparison. Jordan's ability to finish with his left hand was basically unparalleled in the history of basketball for a wing iso finsher.
For those who want to watch the video breakdown and analysis. Analysis of Jordan's iso scoring numbers starts at 19m mark for those who do not want to watch whole video.
There's no way this thread went 4 pages with no one pointing out these numbers are false lmao
So the turnpage doesn't bury the lede
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
^^^^ This is the data used by reputable historian JimmyHighRoller to create this graph trending on twitter and...here:
ballzboyee wrote:Youtuber JxmyHighroller tracked and then compared Jordan's left hand points per iso efficiency against the league's best iso scorers today while using either hand. Turns out Jordan's iso efficiency with only his left hand is far superior to any player in the league even removing Jordan's dominant hand in the comparison. Jordan's ability to finish with his left hand was basically unparalleled in the history of basketball for a wing iso finsher.
Just one problem. The Data provided here isn't even remotely accurate:
Spoiler:
LA Bird wrote:There is no way that +45 on/off net rating is remotely accurate.
1. Dipper had similarly high on/off estimates for Barkley (+36.3) and Hakeem (+34.5) but those estimates were disproven with Harvey Pollack's full season data.
Hakeem net on/off 1994: +14.5 1995: +9.0 1996: +10.3
In none of the 12 full seasons did they come anywhere near the +35 on/off estimate over the same period.
2. There has only been a handful of +20 on/off net seasons in the last 25 years, none above +25. A +35 or + 45 on/off was never realistic in the first place, especially not by 3 players at the same time in just the few seasons prior. This was most likely just a calculation error somewhere in Dipper's spreadsheet which was repeated when he plugged in new numbers for different players.
Well actually there's another problem. Despite being labelled as such, the data Jimmy High Roller is using...is not even Iso data:
Jordan's shooting tendencies & effectiveness when making a move off the dribble either to the left or right. Also recorded turnovers in each of these instances, including stolen pass outs, offensive fouls, getting stripped by the defense, or being forced into a jump ball (and possession lost).
Stand Proud GB, you were bamboozled
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
^^^^ This is the data used by reputable historian JimmyHighRoller to create this graph trending on twitter and...here:
ballzboyee wrote:Youtuber JxmyHighroller tracked and then compared Jordan's left hand points per iso efficiency against the league's best iso scorers today while using either hand. Turns out Jordan's iso efficiency with only his left hand is far superior to any player in the league even removing Jordan's dominant hand in the comparison. Jordan's ability to finish with his left hand was basically unparalleled in the history of basketball for a wing iso finsher.
Just one problem. The Data provided here isn't even remotely accurate:
Spoiler:
LA Bird wrote:There is no way that +45 on/off net rating is remotely accurate.
1. Dipper had similarly high on/off estimates for Barkley (+36.3) and Hakeem (+34.5) but those estimates were disproven with Harvey Pollack's full season data.
Hakeem net on/off 1994: +14.5 1995: +9.0 1996: +10.3
In none of the 12 full seasons did they come anywhere near the +35 on/off estimate over the same period.
2. There has only been a handful of +20 on/off net seasons in the last 25 years, none above +25. A +35 or + 45 on/off was never realistic in the first place, especially not by 3 players at the same time in just the few seasons prior. This was most likely just a calculation error somewhere in Dipper's spreadsheet which was repeated when he plugged in new numbers for different players.
Well actually there's another problem. Despite being labelled as such, the data Jimmy High Roller is using...is not even Iso data:
Jordan's shooting tendencies & effectiveness when making a move off the dribble either to the left or right. Also recorded turnovers in each of these instances, including stolen pass outs, offensive fouls, getting stripped by the defense, or being forced into a jump ball (and possession lost).
Stand Proud GB, you were bamboozled
Did you delete the separate thread created or was it a mod/merge? Anyway, good catch if true, although after reading the text you quoted, I could use some additional explanation.
Or perhaps his 38% midrange percentage, which sinks to 35% in the playoffs? And these are not even clutch stats- general stats.
Or how about his 73% free throw percentage? Think that’s been a good situation in the clutch?
Did you not watch Durant triple his clutch points in their finals series?
You should validate accusations before making them. The vast majority of positive Lebron clutch stats are cherry picked from a tiny sample size or include several minutes in the fourth. He’s definitely great in the fourth, but not for high pressure shots.
I watched KD and applauded him even though i was going for Cleveland. He was clutch as hell and a 7 footer pulling up from 3 for a dagger TWICE was amazing.
My thinking was more of the fact that you thrive on being negative about one damn player to the point of making it a sig. Just seems like loser type shyt but im a bit older and dont get off on hate like you younger fellas. Id just rather celebrate who i DO like. You life will suck and it will be your own doing.
See, I really appreciate your maturity and objectivity in terms of respecting Durant. That said, your second paragraph is immature as can be. Most fans of Lebron downgrade KD, hate him for joining Steph etc. despite the Heat Big 3. They won't compliment Durant one bit and make excuses for his finals efficiency/performance and act like Lebron was on another tier. Durant was awesome, as was Lebron.
The only reason that I do this is to refute these annoying actions. It's not me going out of my way to insult Lebron. I'm just giving a reality check; he's not perfect.
But when a lot of fans of one player start trying to downplay another player (Jordan slander, obviously in this case, is very annoying), Lebron will get the arguments in return and it won't look good a lot of the time. Jordan is a very high measuring stick to be measured against.
If it weren't for these posters, I'd barely be chatting about Lebron and my sig wouldn't exist. It's simply enjoyable for me. A while ago, it involved James Harden's playoff woes, because a few posters were telling me that he was an equal or better scorer to Jordan. I thought it was ridiculous, so I posted why in my signature.
Or perhaps his 38% midrange percentage, which sinks to 35% in the playoffs? And these are not even clutch stats- general stats.
Or how about his 73% free throw percentage? Think that’s been a good situation in the clutch?
Did you not watch Durant triple his clutch points in their finals series?
You should validate accusations before making them. The vast majority of positive Lebron clutch stats are cherry picked from a tiny sample size or include several minutes in the fourth. He’s definitely great in the fourth, but not for high pressure shots.
I watched KD and applauded him even though i was going for Cleveland. He was clutch as hell and a 7 footer pulling up from 3 for a dagger TWICE was amazing.
My thinking was more of the fact that you thrive on being negative about one damn player to the point of making it a sig. Just seems like loser type shyt but im a bit older and dont get off on hate like you younger fellas. Id just rather celebrate who i DO like. You life will suck and it will be your own doing.
The only reason that I do this is to refute the annoying and false comments. It's not me going out of my way to diss Lebron.
But when a lot of fans of one player start trying to downplay another player (Jordan, obviously in this case), Lebron will get the arguments in return and it won't look good. Jordan is a very high measuring stick to be measured against.
If it weren't for these posters, I'd barely be chatting about Lebron.
Except all the times you bring up Lebron without him being mentioned right?
Like on page 3 when he wasn't mentioned at all and you slipped his name in there? You don't have to like him, you can hate him if you want, I just find it hilarious how people try to justify there hate of a player with poor reasoning.
Feeling defensive about a player and in turn finding every opportunity to downplay them is not a healthy mindset at all but to each there own.
Or perhaps his 38% midrange percentage, which sinks to 35% in the playoffs? And these are not even clutch stats- general stats.
Or how about his 73% free throw percentage? Think that’s been a good situation in the clutch?
Did you not watch Durant triple his clutch points in their finals series?
You should validate accusations before making them. The vast majority of positive Lebron clutch stats are cherry picked from a tiny sample size or include several minutes in the fourth. He’s definitely great in the fourth, but not for high pressure shots.
I watched KD and applauded him even though i was going for Cleveland. He was clutch as hell and a 7 footer pulling up from 3 for a dagger TWICE was amazing.
My thinking was more of the fact that you thrive on being negative about one damn player to the point of making it a sig. Just seems like loser type shyt but im a bit older and dont get off on hate like you younger fellas. Id just rather celebrate who i DO like. You life will suck and it will be your own doing.
Marrrcuss wrote:I watched KD and applauded him even though i was going for Cleveland. He was clutch as hell and a 7 footer pulling up from 3 for a dagger TWICE was amazing.
My thinking was more of the fact that you thrive on being negative about one damn player to the point of making it a sig. Just seems like loser type shyt but im a bit older and dont get off on hate like you younger fellas. Id just rather celebrate who i DO like. You life will suck and it will be your own doing.
The only reason that I do this is to refute the annoying and false comments. It's not me going out of my way to diss Lebron.
But when a lot of fans of one player start trying to downplay another player (Jordan, obviously in this case), Lebron will get the arguments in return and it won't look good. Jordan is a very high measuring stick to be measured against.
If it weren't for these posters, I'd barely be chatting about Lebron.
Except all the times you bring up Lebron without him being mentioned right?
Like on page 3 when he wasn't mentioned at all and you slipped his name in there? You don't have to like him, you can hate him if you want, I just find it hilarious how people try to justify there hate of a player with poor reasoning.
Feeling defensive about a player and in turn finding every opportunity to downplay them is not a healthy mindset at all but to each there own.
1. Everyone was already chatting about Lebron on that page prior.
2. This thread was filled with the usual suspects (Lebron fans) throwing the unfounded era excuses, stating literally the opposite of what is true (rules make it more easier to score now, sorry.) Of course I'd bring him up because he's a perfect example of this. I'll call it out when it's apt.
3. I just mentioned Lebron alongside Westbrook, Harden and Luka, because these point/scorer players are more possible because of the rule changes. Of course I'd mention him here.
^^^^ This is the data used by reputable historian JimmyHighRoller to create this graph trending on twitter and...here:
ballzboyee wrote:Youtuber JxmyHighroller tracked and then compared Jordan's left hand points per iso efficiency against the league's best iso scorers today while using either hand. Turns out Jordan's iso efficiency with only his left hand is far superior to any player in the league even removing Jordan's dominant hand in the comparison. Jordan's ability to finish with his left hand was basically unparalleled in the history of basketball for a wing iso finsher.
Just one problem. The Data provided here isn't even remotely accurate:
Spoiler:
LA Bird wrote:There is no way that +45 on/off net rating is remotely accurate.
1. Dipper had similarly high on/off estimates for Barkley (+36.3) and Hakeem (+34.5) but those estimates were disproven with Harvey Pollack's full season data.
Hakeem net on/off 1994: +14.5 1995: +9.0 1996: +10.3
In none of the 12 full seasons did they come anywhere near the +35 on/off estimate over the same period.
2. There has only been a handful of +20 on/off net seasons in the last 25 years, none above +25. A +35 or + 45 on/off was never realistic in the first place, especially not by 3 players at the same time in just the few seasons prior. This was most likely just a calculation error somewhere in Dipper's spreadsheet which was repeated when he plugged in new numbers for different players.
Well actually there's another problem. Despite being labelled as such, the data Jimmy High Roller is using...is not even Iso data:
Jordan's shooting tendencies & effectiveness when making a move off the dribble either to the left or right. Also recorded turnovers in each of these instances, including stolen pass outs, offensive fouls, getting stripped by the defense, or being forced into a jump ball (and possession lost).
Stand Proud GB, you were bamboozled
Did you delete the separate thread created or was it a mod/merge? Anyway, good catch if true, although after reading the text you quoted, I could use some additional explanation.
The mods merged it ensuring less people read the correction and more people see the fabrication....
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
^^^^ This is the data used by reputable historian JimmyHighRoller to create this graph trending on twitter and...here:
Just one problem. The Data provided here isn't even remotely accurate:
Spoiler:
Well actually there's another problem. Despite being labelled as such, the data Jimmy High Roller is using...is not even Iso data:
Stand Proud GB, you were bamboozled
Did you delete the separate thread created or was it a mod/merge? Anyway, good catch if true, although after reading the text you quoted, I could use some additional explanation.
The mods merged it ensuring less people read the correction and more people see the fabrication....
Dipper 13 admits that his +/- stats might have some "highlight bias." In any case, I went back and looked at some of his old posts, and he appears to correctly interpret Pollack's raw data to get Barkley's true plus-minus statistics that you posted. Indeed, he even contrasts Pollack's data with his own and admits the highlight effect. So these the poster was aware of the inconsistency. However, in terms of his points per possession analysis, he gives ever game and charts every shot with their outcome. That data has nothing to do with any plus-minus data, so I am not sure why you are using plus-minus to disprove a separate analysis. This is what he calls "isolation tendencies," and like I said we are getting into the realm of semantics, i.e. is a play an assist or an iso scoring a situation. Some of this gets chalked to the score keeper who decides. The point is that he took a large sample of plays over many games and charted Jordan's ppp going left to come up with his figure. Since the games are listed in his post and probably all still on youtube, anybody can double check his results. In any case, it's kind of overkill to use ppp for something like this anyway since this ppp efficiency is more of a team stat. Simple fg% vs league average is good enough for a single player, and the youtuber did another sample of Jordan's games and noted Jordan was above league average, i.e. "efficient."
In an case, Jordan had 10 scoring titles and is #1 all-time in OBPM. There is nothing to debate.
Johnny Firpo wrote: Did you delete the separate thread created or was it a mod/merge? Anyway, good catch if true, although after reading the text you quoted, I could use some additional explanation.
The mods merged it ensuring less people read the correction and more people see the fabrication....
Dipper 13 admits that his +/- stats might have some "highlight bias." In any case, I went back and looked at some of his old posts, and he appears to correctly interpret Pollack's raw data to get Barkley's true plus-minus statistics that you posted. Indeed, he even contrasts Pollack's data with his own and admits the highlight effect. So these the poster was aware of the inconsistency. However, in terms of his points per possession analysis, he gives ever game and charts every shot with their outcome. That data has nothing to do with any plus-minus data, so I am not sure why you are using plus-minus to disprove a separate analysis. This is what he calls "isolation tendencies," and like I said we are getting into the realm of semantics, i.e. is a play an assist or an iso scoring a situation. Some of this gets chalked to the score keeper who decides. The point is that he took a large sample of plays over many games and charted Jordan's ppp going left to come up with his figure. Since the games are listed in his post and probably all still on youtube, anybody can double check his results. In any case, it's kind of overkill to use ppp for something like this anyway since this ppp efficiency is more of a team stat. Simple fg% vs league average is good enough for a single player, and the youtuber did another sample of Jordan's games and noted Jordan was above league average, i.e. "efficient."
In an case, Jordan had 10 scoring titles and is #1 all-time in OBPM. There is nothing to debate.
That dude shows up in every single MJ thread with some biased statistical effort to discredit MJ. Every single thread.
Johnny Firpo wrote: Did you delete the separate thread created or was it a mod/merge? Anyway, good catch if true, although after reading the text you quoted, I could use some additional explanation.
The mods merged it ensuring less people read the correction and more people see the fabrication....
Dipper 13 admits that his +/- stats might have some "highlight bias." In any case, I went back and looked at some of his old posts
Alot of words to excuse the fact you and jimmy lied to make your guy look good. The data here doubles the marks estabilshed by actual numbers, by your admission is a sample that is massively biased towards Jordan, does not measure what you said it measure. Additionally the drive numbers don't track if you reference them with itself:theye either cooked them up or only counted blowbyes (synergy counts if they walk you off, or if you step back).
How about instead of digging further you admit you **** up.
In an case, Jordan had 10 scoring titles
Good for him, he seemed to care alot about those:
Spoiler:
According to one official, Hughes was explicitly told by Jordan to get him the ball if he wanted to play. When Hughes began passing it to Stackhouse as much as to Jordan, he was soon benched. Point guard Tyronn Lue, the official said, obliged and began finding Jordan every time he played. ''He was scared to death of what would happen to him in his career if he didn't,'' the player said of Lue. ''He was always looking at the bench at Michael.''
Late last fall, Richard Hamilton and Jordan got into an ugly shouting match. The two officials said it began when Hamilton told Jordan he was tired of being a ''Jordannaire,'' the term used for Jordan's role players in Chicago. ''Rip was a young, brash guy who threatened the idea of Michael being the guy here,'' the official said. ''He was promptly gotten rid of for Stackhouse.'' A person close to Jordan denied Hamilton was traded because of a personality conflict. He insisted contractual issues led to the Stackhouse deal.
In the season's final weeks, players openly complained about the double standards for Jordan. Promptly dressed and ready to speak with reporters after games, they were forced to wait in the locker room for 15 or 20 minutes while Jordan showered and dressed in a private room.
Basically I was planning to ask Michael, who had won his third scoring title in a row the previous season, to reduce the number of shots he took so that other members of the team could get more involved in the offense. I knew this would be a challenge for him: Michael was only the second player to win both a scoring title and the league MVP award in the same year, the first being Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in 1971. I told [Michael] that I was planning to implement the triangle and, as a result, he probably wouldn’t be able to win another scoring title. “You’ve got to share the spotlight with your teammates,” I said, “because if you don’t, they won’t grow.” "Okay, I guess I could average thirty-two points,” he said. “That’s eight points a quarter. Nobody else is going to do that.” “Well, when you put it that way, maybe you can win the title,” I said. “But how about scoring a few more of those points at the end of the gbame?” Looking back, Michael says that he liked this approach because it “allowed me to be the person I needed to be.” Sometimes I would tell him that he needed to be aggressive and set the tone for the team. Other times I’d say, “Why don’t you try to get Scottie going so that the defenders will go after him and then you can attack?” In general, I tried to give Michael room to figure out how to integrate his personal ambitions with those of the team. “Phil knew that winning the scoring title was important to me,” Michael says now, “but I wanted to do it in a way that didn’t take away from what the team was doing.”
Sadly we're talking goat players, not scorers, soooo
and is #1 all-time in OBPM.
Awww, Jordan fan think I care about his favorite made-up formulas. How about actual data like:
konr0167 wrote:lebron 09-21 656-263 with lebron 0.714% win rate 37-73 without lebron 0.336% win rate net rating with lebron +6.49 (59 win pace level) net rating without lebron -5.50 (25 win pace level) +8.6 ortg difference -3.68 drtg difference +12 total swing
...
jordan 88-98 bulls with MJ 490-176 (73.6% win rate) bulls without MJ 90-64 (58.4% win rate) net rating with MJ +7.7 (62 win pace level) net rating without MJ +3.6 (52 win pace level) +5.1 ortg difference +1.1 drtg difference +4 total swing
Player B has a case as the goat stat-padder. Player A is an actual goat candidate. Please learn the difference.
Jaqua92 wrote:That dude shows up in every single MJ thread with some biased statistical effort to discredit MJ. Every single thread.
Ignore him.
"Biased statistical effort" while trying to shoo shoo the fact mj stans spent 5 pages using made-up numbers. Have some shame.
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
TroubleS0me wrote:people have time on their hands ..to track something like that...
if by "track" you mean "completely make it up"...
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
OhayoKD wrote:The mods merged it ensuring less people read the correction and more people see the fabrication....
Dipper 13 admits that his +/- stats might have some "highlight bias." In any case, I went back and looked at some of his old posts, and he appears to correctly interpret Pollack's raw data to get Barkley's true plus-minus statistics that you posted. Indeed, he even contrasts Pollack's data with his own and admits the highlight effect. So these the poster was aware of the inconsistency. However, in terms of his points per possession analysis, he gives ever game and charts every shot with their outcome. That data has nothing to do with any plus-minus data, so I am not sure why you are using plus-minus to disprove a separate analysis. This is what he calls "isolation tendencies," and like I said we are getting into the realm of semantics, i.e. is a play an assist or an iso scoring a situation. Some of this gets chalked to the score keeper who decides. The point is that he took a large sample of plays over many games and charted Jordan's ppp going left to come up with his figure. Since the games are listed in his post and probably all still on youtube, anybody can double check his results. In any case, it's kind of overkill to use ppp for something like this anyway since this ppp efficiency is more of a team stat. Simple fg% vs league average is good enough for a single player, and the youtuber did another sample of Jordan's games and noted Jordan was above league average, i.e. "efficient."
In an case, Jordan had 10 scoring titles and is #1 all-time in OBPM. There is nothing to debate.
That dude shows up in every single MJ thread with some biased statistical effort to discredit MJ. Every single thread.
ballzboyee wrote: Dipper 13 admits that his +/- stats might have some "highlight bias." In any case, I went back and looked at some of his old posts, and he appears to correctly interpret Pollack's raw data to get Barkley's true plus-minus statistics that you posted. Indeed, he even contrasts Pollack's data with his own and admits the highlight effect. So these the poster was aware of the inconsistency. However, in terms of his points per possession analysis, he gives ever game and charts every shot with their outcome. That data has nothing to do with any plus-minus data, so I am not sure why you are using plus-minus to disprove a separate analysis. This is what he calls "isolation tendencies," and like I said we are getting into the realm of semantics, i.e. is a play an assist or an iso scoring a situation. Some of this gets chalked to the score keeper who decides. The point is that he took a large sample of plays over many games and charted Jordan's ppp going left to come up with his figure. Since the games are listed in his post and probably all still on youtube, anybody can double check his results. In any case, it's kind of overkill to use ppp for something like this anyway since this ppp efficiency is more of a team stat. Simple fg% vs league average is good enough for a single player, and the youtuber did another sample of Jordan's games and noted Jordan was above league average, i.e. "efficient."
In an case, Jordan had 10 scoring titles and is #1 all-time in OBPM. There is nothing to debate.
That dude shows up in every single MJ thread with some biased statistical effort to discredit MJ. Every single thread.
Ignore him.
His dedication is admirable somewhat.
It's funny at this point.
So are you disputing that the data is fabricated ooooooor
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
