MVP Watch 2008... Part 5

[ILikeTheGrizz]

Wrong? His entire argument is that we should listen to authorities because they know more than the 'lay person', which at this point virtually no one on this board is a 'lay person' when it comes to the NBA.

Secondly, it's rather clear that I can find one person that says Kobe isn't the best player for any single one of those years so that's pointless. Do we need a link for each expert? That will refute it?

The point is you need to supply some argumentation. It doesn't matter if an 'expert' cop- an authority- is sure, just sure that he's nabbed his killer. There needs to be some evidence. Kobe's resume is sorely lacking.

[Bgil]

I took philosophy and logic 8 years ago, but keep trying to insist I just "looked it up on wikipedia" to learn about it.

I believe the point is that you erroneously referenced Appeal to Authority. The mistakes you've made in that regard are the same ones made by people who are inexperienced with the subject. The wikipedia page assumes the reader has a certain base of knowledge or that the reader understands all the linked articles.

[eatyourchildren]

I hope someone comes to your rescue and says that you are, in fact, correct about appeals to authority.

Anyone? KDRE, want to step up to the plate?

[yaya banana]

Wrong? His entire argument is that we should listen to authorities because they know more than the 'lay person', which at this point virtually no one on this board is a 'lay person' when it comes to the NBA.

Secondly, it's rather clear that I can find one person that says Kobe isn't the best player for any single one of those years so that's pointless. Do we need a link for each expert? That will refute it?

The point is you need to supply some argumentation. It doesn't matter if an 'expert' cop- an authority- is sure, just sure that he's nabbed his killer. There needs to be some evidence. Kobe's resume is sorely lacking.

Based on my authoritative expert judgement:
that is nowhere close to his (presumably EYC) entire argument. I'm not sure whether you're being disingenuous or whether your judgement is clouded by emotion, but honestly it just seems like you're pursuing a lost cause.

edit: i think I speak for most in begging you guys to just move on.

[ILikeTheGrizz]

I believe the point is you *think* I erroneously referenced it. I simply wanted a link and, these days, type anything in google and the first thing that pops up is a wikipedia page on it, if it has one. So I sued that to explain to you: No, you need to actually have an argument.

You can't just say the guys the best because his coach says so.

[ILikeTheGrizz]

So you're saying, basically, that I need to provide links to other authorities that believe other players are better in order to prove that the actual argument is more important than who says it? You don't believe that anyone thinks differently?

[yaya banana]

ok - i tried. But I guess some things just won't die.

[Bgil]

Wrong? His entire argument is that we should listen to authorities because they know more than the 'lay person', which at this point virtually no one on this board is a 'lay person' when it comes to the NBA.

You're arguing the semantics of "lay person" now. The point that coaches, players, and scouts know more about the game than people on this forum (YOU) still stands. I'd have your "I watched the games and crunched the numbers" spiel in my sig if the forum allowed for more characters.

Secondly, it's rather clear that I can find one person that says Kobe isn't the best player for any single one of those years so that's pointless. Do we need a link for each expert? That will refute it?

You're moving goal posts. You originally claimed it was ridiculous for me to even believe in a certain idea. I presented consensus of expert opinion and you suddenly moved the goal posts from "that's a ridiculous belief" to "maybe it's true but I can't find evidence of it", all without admitting your previous argument was faulty.

What makes it worse is that you have continually ignored presented evidence and provided weak arguments in an attempt to undermine others (offense vs defense).

Have you ever just admitted you're wrong?

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



Based on my authoritative expert judgement:
that is nowhere close to his (presumably EYC) entire argument. I'm not sure whether you're being disingenuous or whether your judgement is clouded by emotion, but honestly it just seems like you're pursuing a lost cause.

edit: i think I speak for most in begging you guys to just move on.

For sure. He's wrong on this point. Let's move on to more pertinent issues, like Kobe being a better MVP candidate than CP.

[Bgil]

I believe the point is you *think* I erroneously referenced it. I simply wanted a link and, these days, type anything in google and the first thing that pops up is a wikipedia page on it, if it has one. So I sued that to explain to you: No, you need to actually have an argument.

You can't just say the guys the best because his coach says so.

Moving goal posts again. The quotes I provided weren't to show Kobe was the best (I provided my own separate argument for that) but that the belief wasn't ridiculous to hold in 2003, as you claimed.

[ILikeTheGrizz]

ok - i tried. But I guess some things just won't die.

That's what I've been saying about the whole "Kobe is hands down the best player in the NBA" thing. And I guess all that's respected isn't even facts or actual on-court production, just people's opinon. Ooookay.

MVP voters through the years, Kobe's name not to be found. Other greatest players of their generation are there- why not Kobe!?Here.

One side of an argument for LeBron, against a guy who says it's Duncan.
Here.

A year and a half ago, this expert said Wade.Here.

From Foxsports this guys says: "Tim Duncan should win MVP every year and we all know it, but we have to make it fun for the fans so we use statistics as indicators instead." I don't agree but yet another vote against Kobe.

At the bottom of this TSN link, the writer says CP has been the best player this season. Here.

Starting of last season, this guy argues LeBron.

Two years ago, give or take, this guy had crowned LeBron the best player.
Click.

WSJ says it's LeBron in 06.

Jeff Van Gundy called Duncan 'obviously' the best in 2003.Hmm. Obviously?

Is this enough appealing to authority to realize that you need to have some solid argumentation behind you without just name dropping? Do we want to argue actual facts more? Or no? We need more?

[Bgil]

And I guess all that's respected isn't even facts or actual on-court production, just people's opinon. Ooookay.

We've (I) have broken the game down to you on a technical level several times you refuse to go there with us (me). Your "actual on-court production" is still a box score or box score derived stat which we have already shown to be limited at best.

[Bgil]

Do we want to argue actual facts more?

You don't argue actual facts. The facts are the game footage not the box score. The box score is simply not the game nor an accurate measure of player performance, action, or impact.

[greenbeans]

F*** the box scores. . KG deserves it

[ILikeTheGrizz]

The box score is simply not the game nor an accurate measure of player performance, action, or impact.

Man, that's weird. The guys on top of most the statistics leaderboards throughout the history of the league are very often guys considered to be good players. The's a hell of a coincidence!

[KDRE]

I believe the point is you *think* I erroneously referenced it. I simply wanted a link and, these days, type anything in google and the first thing that pops up is a wikipedia page on it, if it has one. So I sued that to explain to you: No, you need to actually have an argument.

You can't just say the guys the best because his coach says so.

Wake me up when bean can reach a consistent level the greats have an outplay his peers at least on a top 3 of birdies of efficiancy, which he has failed miserably at, and which is why he isnt on that list ilkegrizz posted.

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



Man, that's weird. The guys on top of most the statistics leaderboards throughout the history of the league are very often guys considered to be good players. The's a hell of a coincidence!

You're either arguing something else or mischaracterizing him. Probably both.

The stats themselves only in a minority of cases really help to distinguish players intra-tier, although they do a decent job distinguishing players inter-tier (someone touched upon this in the PER v. Box Score thread). Otherwise, Carl Landry, 12th PER at some point, really was an elite player in the League during the season.

It's not like Kobe's always been outside the top 5-10 statistically. But within the top 5-10? Very debatable as to who's actually #1 and who's #5. That's where you have to rely on game footage. You know, actually seeing the game being played. Otherwise, we'd be saying things like Vince Carter has been as good as Kobe Bryant in their careers.

[KDRE]

So you're saying, basically, that I need to provide links to other authorities that believe other players are better in order to prove that the actual argument is more important than who says it? You don't believe that anyone thinks differently?

leave him alone ilikegrizz

he wont believe you if kobe himself said it.

kinda reminds me of Vic the Brick

[Dirk_diggler_41]

F*** the box scores. . KG deserves it

Unspectacular statistics and Boston is 9 and 2 without him. Nope!

[greenbeans]

-= original quote snipped =-



Unspectacular statistics and Boston is 9 and 2 without him. Nope!

it isnt all box scores despite popular belief