RealGM

Kobe?

I'd be interested if it weren't behind a paywall and worse yet an ESPN one.

Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Anyone got a link to steam?

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Jaqua92 wrote:

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

What are you talking about exactly? People often misuse advanced statistics - a good example is a cross era comparison of TS% which really should be measured as a standard deviation from a season’s mean - but you haven’t really pointed out any one statistic that is an issue. Give me one or two basic examples.

I also can’t follow what you mean by picking statistics that disprove your argument. Anyway, using statistics is not really about the scientific method as plenty of fields use it that aren’t scientific in the traditional way - ala economics.

Jaqua92 wrote:

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

dhsilv2 wrote:

Jaqua92 wrote:

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

KRSN wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

Jaqua92 wrote:Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

KRSN wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

Jaqua92 wrote:Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

1 is rewarded for just being on a team, the other is an award. Neither are stats.

thebigbird wrote:

KRSN wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:
Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

Lets not go so extreme as to say they're "against him". The stats paint a picture that is less than the rose colored glasses that his fans and the media (who love la) painted. Lets not act like stats don't consider Kobe a great great player. They just show him a bit lower than many of his fans want him to be.

dhsilv2 wrote:

Jaqua92 wrote:

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

Lmao seriously. I lol'd reading that whole post cos it said basically nothing.

The NBA is wasting Kobe's communications talent. They need to get him in the booth calling at least the ABC games. No one really cares which of the TNT/ESPN people are calling the game but people (Lakers fans) will tune in to watch a game called by Kobe. Then everyone will discover he's really good at it, leading to a sustainable higher rating broadcast. In addition to lots of money, Kobe gets to become the most influential voice in the game. We as fans get to listen to incisive analysis for a change.

Jaqua92 wrote:

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Some people would rather their favorite player have a high TS% than lead their team to a championship with the way people discuss Kobe lately.

This generation has grown with the mentality that as long as the box score and you look good on basketball reference, nothing else matters.

Hate to see it.

ajdontwatchthat wrote:

Jaqua92 wrote:

youngthegiant wrote:Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Some people would rather their favorite player have a high TS% than lead their team to a championship with the way people discuss Kobe lately.

This generation has grown with the mentality that as long as the box score and you look good on basketball reference, nothing else matters.

Hate to see it.

nobody thinks that and everybody, even this generation, has him as an all time great. They just don’t compare him highly to other all time greats

udfa wrote:The NBA is wasting Kobe's communications talent. They need to get him in the booth calling at least the ABC games. No one really cares which of the TNT/ESPN people are calling the game but people (Lakers fans) will tune in to watch a game called by Kobe. Then everyone will discover he's really good at it, leading to a sustainable higher rating broadcast. In addition to lots of money, Kobe gets to become the most influential voice in the game. We as fans get to listen to incisive analysis for a change.

Maybe he likes being around his family. Most the guys who pick up those jobs dont want to be home lol

dhsilv2 wrote:

thebigbird wrote:

KRSN wrote:
What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

Lets not go so extreme as to say they're "against him". The stats paint a picture that is less than the rose colored glasses that his fans and the media (who love la) painted. Lets not act like stats don't consider Kobe a great great player. They just show him a bit lower than many of his fans want him to be.

I think pro-kobe people and not-so-pro-kobe people focus on different aspects.
Trying to be as objective as possible:

-PER, WS etc..: underrate Kobe
-RAPM and family rate Kobe well
- accolades overrate Kobe (best player on a championship tream only 2/5, undeserved all-defensive selections)

dhsilv2 wrote:

thebigbird wrote:

KRSN wrote:
What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

Lets not go so extreme as to say they're "against him". The stats paint a picture that is less than the rose colored glasses that his fans and the media (who love la) painted. Lets not act like stats don't consider Kobe a great great player. They just show him a bit lower than many of his fans want him to be.

I meant that they're against him in the sense that if one thinks he's a top 5 player ever the numbers don't support that.

udfa wrote:The NBA is wasting Kobe's communications talent. They need to get him in the booth calling at least the ABC games. No one really cares which of the TNT/ESPN people are calling the game but people (Lakers fans) will tune in to watch a game called by Kobe. Then everyone will discover he's really good at it, leading to a sustainable higher rating broadcast. In addition to lots of money, Kobe gets to become the most influential voice in the game. We as fans get to listen to incisive analysis for a change.

There’s no real way you’d get a deep and focused bball analysis out of one of these game broadcasts because the goal is not to drive away the casual fan. Kobe would bring in casual fans and they’d go right the other way once he starts breaking down not just basketball but the moves, footwork etc.