RealGM Top 25 Player Poll-#22 2019-20

[KqWIN]

sorry you took offense to my statement. transparency is great, but that is not the problem with the blackbox model. the problem is the "set it and forget it" nature that does not incorporate human assessment. all of the statistics you talked about are just that - a quantitative measure, but only a mere morsel without the context that actually tells the story.

Ok...basically what I'm gathering is that you don't like stats...OK. I'm not forgoing context, but by ignoring the statistics you are forgoing an incredible amount of information. I specifically address the context that these numbers as it was core to my argument. At the end of the day, numbers are just recorded observations. No need to get philosophical and wordy here.

You would never rank a list of 3 point shooters without looking at their percentages. In the same way, I would not rank a player's defense without considering how their team performs on defense relative to the other players on the court. This is really simple stuff. No need to delve into the human existence. If you wanted to just say "eye test says so", just say go with that.

I am not pointing out anything unique, but rather applying the same arguments used for every other ranking to this ranking. I don't see you lecturing anyone for posting Ben's numbers and leaving it at that.

[dorkestra]

sorry you took offense to my statement. transparency is great, but that is not the problem with the blackbox model. the problem is the "set it and forget it" nature that does not incorporate human assessment. all of the statistics you talked about are just that - a quantitative measure, but only a mere morsel without the context that actually tells the story.

Ok...basically what I'm gathering is that you don't like stats...OK. I'm not forgoing context, but by ignoring the statistics you are forgoing an incredible amount of information. I specifically address the context that these numbers as it was core to my argument. At the end of the day, numbers are just recorded observations. No need to get philosophical and wordy here.

You would never rank a list of 3 point shooters without looking at their percentages. In the same way, I would not rank a player's defense without considering how their team performs on defense relative to the other players on the court. This is really simple stuff. No need to delve into the human existence. If you wanted to just say "eye test says so", just say go with that.

You consider it, sure, but it's not a core part of the process - it's supplemental. Because the statistics you are talking about are very inaccurate if they were expected to be a holistic assessment. They're not treated that way by serious people. It's not about like or not like. It's about good or not good.

[RaptorPride]

Nominate DeRozan

[KqWIN]

sorry you took offense to my statement. transparency is great, but that is not the problem with the blackbox model. the problem is the "set it and forget it" nature that does not incorporate human assessment. all of the statistics you talked about are just that - a quantitative measure, but only a mere morsel without the context that actually tells the story.

Ok...basically what I'm gathering is that you don't like stats...OK. I'm not forgoing context, but by ignoring the statistics you are forgoing an incredible amount of information. I specifically address the context that these numbers as it was core to my argument. At the end of the day, numbers are just recorded observations. No need to get philosophical and wordy here.

You would never rank a list of 3 point shooters without looking at their percentages. In the same way, I would not rank a player's defense without considering how their team performs on defense relative to the other players on the court. This is really simple stuff. No need to delve into the human existence. If you wanted to just say "eye test says so", just say go with that.

You consider it, sure, but it's not a core part of the process - it's supplemental. Because the statistics you are talking about are very inaccurate if they were expected to be a holistic assessment. They're not treated that way by serious people. It's not about like or not like. It's about good or not good.

I disagree. The numbers are absolutely core and are a natural starting point. When you break it down and consider the context, as I did, they certainly have value. The notion that a statistics are not as useful because they are not this perfect godsend is actually hilarious. We can talk all day about the inaccuracies that come about from a non-quantative analysis. I suppose it's not surprising considering that fans think they know everything and their opinion is actually flawless and not prone to bias.

"They're not treated that way by serious people". Says who? Who are these serious people who don't use numbers in the analysis of players. GeorgeMarcus takes these into consideration. Is he not a serious fan? Once again, these numbers have been used to argue for and against every player thus far. I am not introducing new arguments. I am simply applying the same arguments that have been used continuously throughout this process. If it is true that no one serious uses statistics as a core part of their analysis, we have very few serious people on this forum. The serious ones, under your definition, would also seem to be the same users who use memes as the core of their arguments.

If you remember, I posted those numbers as a response to the claim that people hate Ben Simmons and that the discussion itself was due to an inability to separate emotion from objective analysis. I quite literally said that stats aren't everything. The reason why I brought up numbers in the first place was to reject the idea that the only arguments against Simmons were emotional.

[dorkestra]

Ok...basically what I'm gathering is that you don't like stats...OK. I'm not forgoing context, but by ignoring the statistics you are forgoing an incredible amount of information. I specifically address the context that these numbers as it was core to my argument. At the end of the day, numbers are just recorded observations. No need to get philosophical and wordy here.

You would never rank a list of 3 point shooters without looking at their percentages. In the same way, I would not rank a player's defense without considering how their team performs on defense relative to the other players on the court. This is really simple stuff. No need to delve into the human existence. If you wanted to just say "eye test says so", just say go with that.

You consider it, sure, but it's not a core part of the process - it's supplemental. Because the statistics you are talking about are very inaccurate if they were expected to be a holistic assessment. They're not treated that way by serious people. It's not about like or not like. It's about good or not good.

I disagree. The numbers are absolutely core and are a natural starting point. When you break it down and consider the context, as I did, they certainly have value. The notion that a statistics are not as useful because they are not this perfect godsend is actually hilarious. We can talk all day about the inaccuracies that come about from a non-quantative analysis. I suppose it's not surprising considering that fans think they know everything and their opinion is actually flawless and not prone to bias.

"They're not treated that way by serious people". Says who? Who are these serious people who don't use numbers in the analysis of players. GeorgeMarcus takes these into consideration. Is he not a serious fan? Once again, these numbers have been used to argue for and against every player thus far. I am not introducing new arguments. I am simply applying the same arguments that have been used continuously throughout this process. If it is true that no one serious uses statistics as a core part of their analysis, we have very few serious people on this forum. The serious ones, under your definition, would also seem to be the same users who use memes as the core of their arguments.

If you remember, I posted those numbers as a response to the claim that people hate Ben Simmons and that the discussion itself was due to an inability to separate emotion from objective analysis. I quite literally said that stats aren't everything. The reason why I brought up numbers in the first place was to reject the idea that the only arguments against Simmons were emotional.

You are free to use the information, but you should expect to be corrected when you misuse it. This is also the third or fourth strawman from you in as many posts. Getting a little silly.

[KqWIN]

You consider it, sure, but it's not a core part of the process - it's supplemental. Because the statistics you are talking about are very inaccurate if they were expected to be a holistic assessment. They're not treated that way by serious people. It's not about like or not like. It's about good or not good.

I disagree. The numbers are absolutely core and are a natural starting point. When you break it down and consider the context, as I did, they certainly have value. The notion that a statistics are not as useful because they are not this perfect godsend is actually hilarious. We can talk all day about the inaccuracies that come about from a non-quantative analysis. I suppose it's not surprising considering that fans think they know everything and their opinion is actually flawless and not prone to bias.

"They're not treated that way by serious people". Says who? Who are these serious people who don't use numbers in the analysis of players. GeorgeMarcus takes these into consideration. Is he not a serious fan? Once again, these numbers have been used to argue for and against every player thus far. I am not introducing new arguments. I am simply applying the same arguments that have been used continuously throughout this process. If it is true that no one serious uses statistics as a core part of their analysis, we have very few serious people on this forum. The serious ones, under your definition, would also seem to be the same users who use memes as the core of their arguments.

If you remember, I posted those numbers as a response to the claim that people hate Ben Simmons and that the discussion itself was due to an inability to separate emotion from objective analysis. I quite literally said that stats aren't everything. The reason why I brought up numbers in the first place was to reject the idea that the only arguments against Simmons were emotional.

You are free to use the information, but you should expect to be corrected when you misuse it. This is also the third or fourth strawman from you in as many posts. Getting a little silly.

At least make one argument man, you haven't even corrected me. The actual person I was responded acknowledged my point as fair and furthered this discussion. All you've offered are long winded ways to say that stats aren't everything...which is literally a statement I said myself.

Your reasoning includes your professional status, industry knowledge, and "serious people". Do you have anything at all to offer other than that you know better because you know better? I don't see any actual arguments added to this discussion about apparent Ben Simmons hatred or the Lou Williams discussion which you were asking for input on.

[pootbrah]

I disagree. The numbers are absolutely core and are a natural starting point. When you break it down and consider the context, as I did, they certainly have value. The notion that a statistics are not as useful because they are not this perfect godsend is actually hilarious. We can talk all day about the inaccuracies that come about from a non-quantative analysis. I suppose it's not surprising considering that fans think they know everything and their opinion is actually flawless and not prone to bias.

"They're not treated that way by serious people". Says who? Who are these serious people who don't use numbers in the analysis of players. GeorgeMarcus takes these into consideration. Is he not a serious fan? Once again, these numbers have been used to argue for and against every player thus far. I am not introducing new arguments. I am simply applying the same arguments that have been used continuously throughout this process. If it is true that no one serious uses statistics as a core part of their analysis, we have very few serious people on this forum. The serious ones, under your definition, would also seem to be the same users who use memes as the core of their arguments.

If you remember, I posted those numbers as a response to the claim that people hate Ben Simmons and that the discussion itself was due to an inability to separate emotion from objective analysis. I quite literally said that stats aren't everything. The reason why I brought up numbers in the first place was to reject the idea that the only arguments against Simmons were emotional.

You are free to use the information, but you should expect to be corrected when you misuse it. This is also the third or fourth strawman from you in as many posts. Getting a little silly.

At least make one argument man, you haven't even corrected me. The actual person I was responded acknowledged my point as fair and furthered this discussion. All you've offered are long winded ways to say that stats aren't everything...which is literally a statement I said myself.

Your reasoning includes your professional status, industry knowledge, and "serious people". Do you have anything at all to offer other than that you know better because you know better? I don't see any actual arguments added to this discussion about apparent Ben Simmons hatred or the Lou Williams discussion which you were asking for input on.

Let's bring back nbad bro. Where only srs posters post srs. You in?

[KqWIN]

Let's bring back nbad bro. Where only srs posters post srs. You in?

As you can see, I haven't changed

Forget NBAD. I want BinaryBasketball back.

[Alatan]

This experiment has gone of the rails after the 9th place. Simmons a top 25 player? Give me a break. Id rather have Covington than Simmons on my team. Such an overrated player.

I bet you felt really intelligent typing that out.

I bet that in a few years you will claim how no one could see Simmons being a stagnant perennial loser and that he lacks the "will to be great" or some other lame excuse.

[Alatan]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Swap Mitchell and Simmons to each others teams and think about witch team would improve and witch team would regress. I bet that Utah would be the worst offense in the league while the Sixers would improve dramatically.

People tend to forget how offense starved the Jazz were. Its hard being the sole offensive option on a team without any spacing as a 2nd year player. Call him a chucker all you want but the kid is a superstar in the making.

[pootbrah]

Let's bring back nbad bro. Where only srs posters post srs. You in?

As you can see, I haven't changed

Forget NBAD. I want BinaryBasketball back.

Fortyy said he'll knock you out. Let's tee it off

[nurseryc]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Swap Mitchell and Simmons to each others teams and think about witch team would improve and witch team would regress. I bet that Utah would be the worst offense in the league while the Sixers would improve dramatically.

People tend to forget how offense starved the Jazz were. Its hard being the sole offensive option on a team without any spacing as a 2nd year player. Call him a chucker all you want but the kid is a superstar in the making.

You lost me at ‘witch’

[Simmons25]

Mitchell should win this easily.

[leolozon]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Swap Mitchell and Simmons to each others teams and think about witch team would improve and witch team would regress. I bet that Utah would be the worst offense in the league while the Sixers would improve dramatically.

People tend to forget how offense starved the Jazz were. Its hard being the sole offensive option on a team without any spacing as a 2nd year player. Call him a chucker all you want but the kid is a superstar in the making.

There's absolutely no chance that Utah would be the worst offense in the league either with last year's team or this year's team. I refuse to believe that you really think that and so it seems like you're ready to exaggerate to push your point.

Utah would be better defensively and maybe worst offensively. But I think they would be a better team considering Conley, Bojan and Ingles are all good shooters. A line-up of Simmons, Conley, Bojan, Ingles and Gobert is scaring me a lot more than if you put Mitchell in there.

It's not as if Mitchell made the Jazz a great offense last year. They were average and the team didn't have a bad offensive starting 5 (3 of the other guys had a positive ORPM, Ingles was right up there with Mitchell, 50th vs 46th). Mitchell was great at the end of the year, but he was atrocious in the playoffs... so who knows? If he keeps playing like he played in March and April, he'll probably be better than Simmons.

[Hoopz Afrik]

Vote - Ben Simmons

Nominate - Jayson Tatum

[gh123]

Simmons got so many votes in less than last 24 hours, 76 fans must have asked their friends and families to register on here.

[mowcrowbar]

Simmons hate on this board is getting real lol

He severely underperformed against the Raptors. Failed to produce when it mattered. This is his third year, and he hasnt added anything new to his game.

[Asif16]

Simmons hate on this board is getting real lol

He severely underperformed against the Raptors. Failed to produce when it mattered. This is his third year, and he hasnt added anything new to his game.

I've never seen a guard player more non-existent in a Half Court offense ever in my life.

Like I dont care how good you are on defense and how many assists you give out....if you're as useful as a chair on offense...I cant take you seriously.

They should just switch Simmons over to the C spot in this case

[Asif16]

Simmons got so many votes in less than last 24 hours, 76 fans must have asked their friends and families to register on here.

Lol I saw this poll yesterday and Mitchell was winning comfortably.

Sixers fans had a intervention on their board it looks like

[Alatan]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Swap Mitchell and Simmons to each others teams and think about witch team would improve and witch team would regress. I bet that Utah would be the worst offense in the league while the Sixers would improve dramatically.

People tend to forget how offense starved the Jazz were. Its hard being the sole offensive option on a team without any spacing as a 2nd year player. Call him a chucker all you want but the kid is a superstar in the making.

There's absolutely no chance that Utah would be the worst offense in the league either with last year's team or this year's team. I refuse to believe that you really think that and so it seems like you're ready to exaggerate to push your point.

Utah would be better defensively and maybe worst offensively. But I think they would be a better team considering Conley, Bojan and Ingles are all good shooters. A line-up of Simmons, Conley, Bojan, Ingles and Gobert is scaring me a lot more than if you put Mitchell in there.

It's not as if Mitchell made the Jazz a great offense last year. They were average and the team didn't have a bad offensive starting 5 (3 of the other guys had a positive ORPM, Ingles was right up there with Mitchell, 50th vs 46th). Mitchell was great at the end of the year, but he was atrocious in the playoffs... so who knows? If he keeps playing like he played in March and April, he'll probably be better than Simmons.

Firstly i was talking about the last seasons teams. And year 100% Simmons would yank them to the bottom of the offensive standings. He is a 0 on the offensive end. A team with Gobert, Favors, Rubio and Simmons would leave a wall of 4 defenders surrounding the paint.

Face it Simmons is almost useless without the ball and mediocre with it. The only thing he has is being a good defender. He is closer to a worse version of Draymond Green than he is to LeBron James.