Theocy wrote:cloverleaf wrote:Theocy wrote:
he is averaging those numbers in what 5 games? come on seriously let's get real with the idiotic statistics. He's growing but saying he makes a fraction of what those guys make is just plain stoopid.
Also I'm sure i can build a cluster of data analytics in which terry is only comparable with MJ and KB. this makes no practical sense at all.
You're quick in reply (if misguided therein). But wasn't the stat also thrown around this week that he was the first Celtic player on a rookie contract to score in double digits for 22 consecutive games--since Paul Pierce?
I think you're just making up some ridiculous standard to try to judge him against, for whatever reason.
Let's get soemthing clear. I absolutely love scary terry. yes? I'm just fed up with the recent trend of trying to cluster all players in a group of 'X player in question - scary Terry' and future HOFs - Lebron Durant etc . Honestly mate I'm a data scientist and this is absurd. I can do that for any given player. Anyone. The trick is to start filtering your data in such a way as to make sure that you are left in a small group of all-stars and your guy. I can probably do that with Jordan mickey too

. ie add points rebounds assists with minimum cutoff Terry's numbers. Of course there's only a small group above that. The permutations are endless there's abound to be one solution to your problem that looks nice!
I did say he is growing and he is showing excellent potential. 1 month ago i said we could get an Oladipo breakout season from him. Love him. To bits.
But the statistics is just plain stoopid.
He isn;t a bargain. He is a rookie. (logical fallacy). all rookies get bargain salaries. The stats clustering makes no sense. This is all i am saying.
0. If we're going to cite credentials here, I have a PhD in a probability-related field (game theory) from a good university (Harvard). I am also credited by Spark's originators as a major contributor to its original popularization.
1. Most of your generalities are spot-on.
2. Unfortunately, you messed up a little when you wrote what I bolded. What you probably meant is something like:
-- All good rookies are bargains.
-- Rozier is a good rookie.
-- Therefore he is a bargain, and it is unremarkable that he is one.
Somehow, however, your wording got twisted up, and on a plain reading you seemed to almost be saying the opposite of that.
Banned temporarily for, among other sins, being "Extremely Deviant".