Is PDSS a good way to analyze the Raptors defense?

[BorisDK1]

Supersub and Ripp are much more polite, and willing to recognize flaws in their analysis.
That's what I'd like to see in Boris.

With all due respect, I think you are misreading me quite a bit. I've been defending the validity of PDSS data against multiple people, but not once have I said that we don't need to consider other data. How many times do I have to say, "we need to learn to synthesize and accept more data and take the questions those data provoke to the basketball floor" before I'm taken at face value? I've been very willing to accept the validity of lineup data, what I've been challenging are some of the conclusions people have been taking from it. That hardly seems like I'm unwilling to accept what other people have, no?

And if I come across as impolite, I certainly apologize because that's not what I want to be doing. In fact, I have gone out of my way to interact with both ripp and supersub competely in everything they've argued, showing respect for the time they've spent responding to what I've said. (I have not necessarily received the same treatment, especially from Ripp.)

In short, I have been accused of:

1. Not knowing anything about stats (Ripp);
2. Not being competent enough in basketball praxis to tabulate these kind of numbers (supersub);
3. Hopelessly biased (supersub).

In response, I challenged the both of them to take their noses out of Microsoft Excel and to start acting as though they actually believe the basketball floor holds the answers, not various stats. (Edit: I did so probably more condescendingly than I should have.) Just because difference of opinion exists and I've defended this method and its results doesn't mean I'm invalidating what other people are saying, am unwilling to refer to those data and it certainly doesn't mean I've been impolite.

[Truthrising]

I'm sorry, but I think Elmer_yuck sounds like a pompous condescending jerk. Unwilling to take criticism, but quite willing to criticize others.

This sounds just about right

[andreafan]

Supersub and Ripp are much more polite, and willing to recognize flaws in their analysis.
That's what I'd like to see in Boris.

You're such arse it's unbelievable. Ripp has been dipping deep into condescension like, "You don't understand statistics"... blah, blah.

If there is one thing that we can count on from your ilk - yes, ilk, it's pejorative - is hypsocrisy and loads of it.

I know I am a rude poster. But you actually think you're something your not, and you extend that cloak of hypocrisy to the rest of your greasy mob.

For my response, I'll just use andreafan's response to everything:

[Reignman]

LOL, PDSS vs DRTG reminds me of Jose vs TJ for some reason.

Remember, at the end of the day both are overpaid bench players on their own. They worked best in 06/07 when they were used together.

We should look at this debate the same way. On their own their scopes are limited but when used in conjuction they can be quite effective.

[BorisDK1]

Boris - your work and extended time explaining and re-explaining things is immensely appreciated by everyone. Even the guys you're debating with have been complimentary in this regard, but as a someone you'd probably come to consider an ally here, I'd like to ask that you remember the "attack the post, not the poster" guideline that forums generally follow.

As big a smile as some of your quips have given me ( lol'd at the fertilizer and diesel fuel bit), I think we'd rather see you stick around over the long term as a respected, level headed poster and not some guy who always takes subtle jabs at those who don't/won't/can't accept or understand everything you're giving them. We all cross the line once in a while and get things out of our system, so if you need to lose it then just go ahead and do so - that would be preferred to become the snide guy that stays within the TOS, but continually makes subtle or not-so-subtle jabs at other posters.

Fair enough. I think I was responding too ungraciously to a couple of suggestions that I didn't know at all what I was talking about in matters statistical or basketball and responded too out-of-sorts, and that just doesn't need to get done. And certainly the extent to which Ripp dismissed warnings about pitfalls of what he was trying to do and then started an entire thread (this one) based entirely on his misunderstandings chafed a little. And I shouldn't have chafed. For that, I will generally apologize to the board.

And no, I don't want to be perceived as the snide guy, because I'm not IRL and I don't want to become that guy here. My desire is that people learn to use the data I'm providing and find applications for it, rather than be met with abject dismissal because the conclusions don't jive with what they've come to believe. All assertions to the contrary, I am and have been willing to do business with on/off court and other data.

[andreafan]

Ironic,boris is playing defense in a way now.

[dagger]

LOL, PDSS vs DRTG reminds me of Jose vs TJ for some reason.

Remember, at the end of the day both are overpaid bench players on their own. They worked best in 06/07 when they were used together.

We should look at this debate the same way. On their own their scopes are limited but when used in conjuction they can be quite effective.

And therein lies some healthy debates which would spice up this board in season, as opposed to every post game thread becoming, "they sucked, they stank, I can't watch these bozos, fire _____, trade_____".

I'd love to see the statheads bring their individual game stats to a comparison thread say, within 48 hours of a game being concluded. Then debate the conclusions so we can compare what they graphed/charted with what we saw, or at least thought we saw. That would be immensely valuable, and in some ways more productive than arguing about certain player virtues from purely historical view. I prefer forward looking trends that suggest improvement or lack thereof in our young players, as opposed to telling me so and so sucked as a rookie.

I hope that Boris in particular isn't turned off by some of the ego here. Ripp in particular, who cannot abide ever being wrong on anything, like his manhood would shrivel if he ever admitted he had been shown evidence that forces a change in his opinion. We have a number of obsessive compulsives who believe they are God's gift and always right and will spend hours, even days, debating the number of angels on a pinhead rather than admitting that maybe there never was such a thing as an angel.

I don't pretend to be right all the time. I was wrong on Araujo, wrong on Jose - though not vs TJ Ford, just versus the evolving field of point guards. I think Bargnani is a supremely talented offensive player, with loads of flaws, but unlike some who would trade him for an expiring contract, I believe his situation is a lot more gray than the black and white terms often used here to describe him. And that's how I feel about stats. They enlighten, but only up to a point. The NBA corrupts its own stats. We know that. There have been startling admissions about how assists and rebounds are handed out. The league doesn't distinguish between high-difficulty rebounds and assists and ridiculous gimmes. Individual statisticians pad stats, sometimes because they are ordered to do so. It's a flawed world, and there is a lot of room for the subjective and objective to grind against each other to create a new Hegelian synthesis of understanding. Which half the board won't accept anyway.

[elmer_yuck]

Boris - your work and extended time explaining and re-explaining things is immensely appreciated by everyone. Even the guys you're debating with have been complimentary in this regard, but as a someone you'd probably come to consider an ally here, I'd like to ask that you remember the "attack the post, not the poster" guideline that forums generally follow.

As big a smile as some of your quips have given me ( lol'd at the fertilizer and diesel fuel bit), I think we'd rather see you stick around over the long term as a respected, level headed poster and not some guy who always takes subtle jabs at those who don't/won't/can't accept or understand everything you're giving them. We all cross the line once in a while and get things out of our system, so if you need to lose it then just go ahead and do so - that would be preferred to become the snide guy that stays within the TOS, but continually makes subtle or not-so-subtle jabs at other posters.

Fair enough. I think I was responding too ungraciously to a couple of suggestions that I didn't know at all what I was talking about in matters statistical or basketball and responded too out-of-sorts, and that just doesn't need to get done. And certainly the extent to which Ripp dismissed warnings about pitfalls of what he was trying to do and then started an entire thread (this one) based entirely on his misunderstandings chafed a little. And I shouldn't have chafed. For that, I will generally apologize to the board.

And no, I don't want to be perceived as the snide guy, because I'm not IRL and I don't want to become that guy here. My desire is that people learn to use the data I'm providing and find applications for it, rather than be met with abject dismissal because the conclusions don't jive with what they've come to believe. All assertions to the contrary, I am and have been willing to do business with on/off court and other data.

I like this Boris a lot better.
You're clearly a smart guy, you know a lot about basketball, and I think you're going to be a valuable contributor to this board, Much more valuable than me.

[disoblige]

I like the synergy method (watch the game).Their Iso and post up data is accurate because there is not many intangibles. Too bad their other category such as pick and roll defense can be majorly affected by many things such as coaching and teammates.

[Reignman]

LOL, PDSS vs DRTG reminds me of Jose vs TJ for some reason.

Remember, at the end of the day both are overpaid bench players on their own. They worked best in 06/07 when they were used together.

We should look at this debate the same way. On their own their scopes are limited but when used in conjuction they can be quite effective.

And therein lies some healthy debates which would spice up this board in season, as opposed to every post game thread becoming, "they sucked, they stank, I can't watch these bozos, fire _____, trade_____".

I'd love to see the statheads bring their individual game stats to a comparison thread say, within 48 hours of a game being concluded. Then debate the conclusions so we can compare what they graphed/charted with what we saw, or at least thought we saw. That would be immensely valuable, and in some ways more productive than arguing about certain player virtues from purely historical view. I prefer forward looking trends that suggest improvement or lack thereof in our young players, as opposed to telling me so and so sucked as a rookie.

I hope that Boris in particular isn't turned off by some of the ego here. Ripp in particular, who cannot abide ever being wrong on anything, like his manhood would shrivel if he ever admitted he had been shown evidence that forces a change in his opinion. We have a number of obsessive compulsives who believe they are God's gift and always right and will spend hours, even days, debating the number of angels on a pinhead rather than admitting that maybe there never was such a thing as an angel.

I don't pretend to be right all the time. I was wrong on Araujo, wrong on Jose - though not vs TJ Ford, just versus the evolving field of point guards. I think Bargnani is a supremely talented offensive player, with loads of flaws, but unlike some who would trade him for an expiring contract, I believe his situation is a lot more gray than the black and white terms often used here to describe him. And that's how I feel about stats. They enlighten, but only up to a point. The NBA corrupts its own stats. We know that. There have been startling admissions about how assists and rebounds are handed out. The league doesn't distinguish between high-difficulty rebounds and assists and ridiculous gimmes. Individual statisticians pad stats, sometimes because they are ordered to do so. It's a flawed world, and there is a lot of room for the subjective and objective to grind against each other to create a new Hegelian synthesis of understanding. Which half the board won't accept anyway.

I'm no statistician myself and prefer to rely on empirical evidence to support my arguments but I have been trying to use stats to see if they support my position. I'd absolutely LOVE it if SS and Boris could do something like you suggested. Not sure of the amount of work involved but Boris seems to already be doing it on his own. And if SS can't track the data himself I know he has access to the Synergy data that could be used as well.

Along with Sub's SOTD we could add a SOTG (Stats of the Game) and debate what we saw vs. what the stats bear and hopefully the intermingling of what we see vs. what the stats say can bring this board to a less polarized place.

[OvertimeNO]

Every time I think I have the Raps board figured out, it surprises me.

I definitely look forward to a post-game thread devoted to comparative statistical analysis.

[Courtside]

Along with Sub's SOTD we could add a SOTG (Stats of the Game) and debate what we saw vs. what the stats bear and hopefully the intermingling of what we see vs. what the stats say can bring this board to a less polarized place.

Great idea.

[supersub15]

[*]Not being competent enough in basketball praxis to tabulate these kind of numbers (supersub);
[*]Hopelessly biased (supersub).[/list]

Just wanted to chime in one more time here, because I am being directly accused of things:
- Never said you were not competent enough. I just questioned the veracity of your computations when they don't jive with about 3 or 4 other statistical measures (Berri, APM, ON/OFF DRTG, Synergy), and 3 and 4 other anecdotal proofs, like the coach and GM saying that Bargnani has to improve his defensive awareness. Heck, even Doug Smith chimed in this morning:

I guess the biggest thing he needed to do this summer, in my opinion, was the play games and continue to develop the on-court intuition – especially defensively – that had been lacking.

Everything is pointing to the opposite of what you presented, hence my wariness.

- The hyperbole is just too much, to tell you the truth. I never said "hopelessly". Again, I questioned your subjectivity when you admitted that you'd have no problem running Jose over with your car if he were to stop in front of you (jokingly of course).

I think I have been courteous to you, the person, while attacking the arguments and the stat.

[dagger]

Just wanted to chime in one more time here, because I am being directly accused of things:
- Never said you were not competent enough. I just questioned the veracity of your computations when they don't jive with about 3 or 4 other statistical measures (Berri, APM, ON/OFF DRTG, Synergy), and 3 and 4 other anecdotal proofs, like the coach and GM saying that Bargnani has to improve his defensive awareness. Heck, even Doug Smith chimed in this morning:

A little desperate quoting Doug Smith, eh Carlos. Did Boris ever say Bargnani didn't have to improve his defensive awareness.

[supersub15]

A little desperate quoting Doug Smith, eh Carlos. Did Boris ever say Bargnani didn't have to improve his defensive awareness.

"Desperate"? I've presented enough statistical proof, methinks. That's just the cherry on the Sunday.

[garbagnani]

hey Boris,

how do Bosh/Bargs compare using PDSS???

[Reignman]

hey Boris,

how do Bosh/Bargs compare using PDSS???

I believe Bosh ranks slightly above Bargs but fairly close.

[Truthrising]

hey Boris,

how do Bosh/Bargs compare using PDSS???

I believe Bosh ranks slightly above Bargs but fairly close.

I'd like to see the info as well, Boris is it possible for you to repost the links in relation to PDSS or maybe create a new topic containing the documents?

[Courtside]

A link to a PDF version of his 2009-10 PDSS is available here:

http://www.mediafire.com/?p4zrtxxppxghwka

Bosh and Bargs have identical 110.0 DRats, but their net points are different (Bosh is higher).

[DasKoo]

"I've got my spreadsheets and some methods I really like and this is gospel and anything that doesn't agree goes out the window".

Is this directed at me?

is your last name hollinger?