Bonn1997 wrote:

sebstar wrote:Lets try to keep the convo focused on Felton, the link provided, and what it is exactly you are trying to explain, to avoid an unmanageable discussion. Perhaps we can broaden it out into a wholesale defense of advanced stats in b-ball as it develops.

I appreciate your knowledge of stats as a contained object of study --- but what I am telling you is that from my vantage point, your use of the efficiency stat as explanation for winning basketball when it comes to Felton and other PGs is, charitably speaking, very messy.

You have not presented any argument or evidence that it is messy though. The best validated stats give high weight to efficiency. You have not found evidence of flaws in this validation research. It is also doubtful that you need a strong theory in order to make use of data anyway. Inductive statistics basically works by getting the data first and then making sense of them theoretically. If you initially did not realize it but then find that scoring efficiency is actually critical when looking at the data, it is acceptable to then formulate a theory that accounts for the importance of efficiency.

You realise that these sums you promote as objective truth, came about because a man sat in a room and made them up? Basketball isn't quantum physics- mathematics are no more reliable than the old eye test when it comes to sports, but for some reason people like to pretend their sums are cast iron facts.

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:From you, I will take that as a compliment since few posters have been wronger more often than you. You've supported almost every major acquisition Dolan made in the past 10 years.
I never disputed that the team was 20-8. So I don't know why you're bringing that up. You seem to think that if the team has a good record, it means the PG is great? You know the team was 18-5 and then started looking bad even before Felton went down, right?

Not actually correct...I never supported Donnie, MDA, the acquisition of Amare or Felton, the first time for that matter...Hated LB, The Ariza trade, playing dudes in their home town...Didn't like the JKidd signing either but have come around, he can be useful, just not at PG...But I'm happy to see you bring the conversation towards results...What I felt makes Felton a good PG is how he has made players around him better which in turn yielded a winning result...I gave him the credit throughout...I understood from day one, and let me point out not many around here knows this, and still don't understand what he means to the team...He simply makes others better...He is the engine that makes the offense flow...You are still trying to figure if JKidd is old all of a sudden..NO, he has always been old..He doesn't have anyone to get him open looks and make the game easy for him...Something that does not show up in the stats u so treasure...Same for Chandler and Brewer...Overall ball movement is nonexistent, a big factor in winning but doesn't show up on the stat sheet...Good perimeter defender and hard nosed player..No stat for that...Felton has his flaws, but I think NOW, u and many others can appreciate what he brought to this ball club, or just maybe u still can't...Class will be in for another two weeks or so...

makes others around him better hmmmm. engine of the offense huh?!?. good perimeter defender wtf. wow what a steal he is for the knicks.

what i see is that teams like boston and chicago have figured out that the way to beat us is by chasing us off the 3 point line, crowding and jamming, and hounding the backcourt. how does felton help there?

or teams with superior guards that he transparently strives with and falls short. how does felton help us there?

or teams back off of felton and dare him to shoot? how does felton help us there?

you should check your registration card because you are in the wrong classroom

Well let's not engage in the hypotheticals...Let's wait and see...Felton went out of control after the Miami game..Melo was out and he had to shoot more...He hit some big shots for us and won the game..I think he scored 27 that game without me looking...Knicks went on to Chicago and he tried the same thing and shot badly..For some reason, he has been shooting since..Let's hope he looked at some game tapes and saw he was over shooting...But I like our chances when we are fully up to speed...Can't wait for Amare and Felton together...

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:From you, I will take that as a compliment since few posters have been wronger more often than you. You've supported almost every major acquisition Dolan made in the past 10 years.
I never disputed that the team was 20-8. So I don't know why you're bringing that up. You seem to think that if the team has a good record, it means the PG is great? You know the team was 18-5 and then started looking bad even before Felton went down, right?

Not actually correct...I never supported Donnie, MDA, the acquisition of Amare or Felton, the first time for that matter...Hated LB, The Ariza trade, playing dudes in their home town...Didn't like the JKidd signing either but have come around, he can be useful, just not at PG...But I'm happy to see you bring the conversation towards results...What I felt makes Felton a good PG is how he has made players around him better which in turn yielded a winning result...I gave him the credit throughout...I understood from day one, and let me point out not many around here knows this, and still don't understand what he means to the team...He simply makes others better...He is the engine that makes the offense flow...You are still trying to figure if JKidd is old all of a sudden..NO, he has always been old..He doesn't have anyone to get him open looks and make the game easy for him...Something that does not show up in the stats u so treasure...Same for Chandler and Brewer...Overall ball movement is nonexistent, a big factor in winning but doesn't show up on the stat sheet...Good perimeter defender and hard nosed player..No stat for that...Felton has his flaws, but I think NOW, u and many others can appreciate what he brought to this ball club, or just maybe u still can't...Class will be in for another two weeks or so...

makes others around him better hmmmm. engine of the offense huh?!?. good perimeter defender wtf. wow what a steal he is for the knicks.

what i see is that teams like boston and chicago have figured out that the way to beat us is by chasing us off the 3 point line, crowding and jamming, and hounding the backcourt. how does felton help there?

or teams with superior guards that he transparently strives with and falls short. how does felton help us there?

or teams back off of felton and dare him to shoot? how does felton help us there?

you should check your registration card because you are in the wrong classroom

Well let's not engage in the hypotheticals...Let's wait and see...Felton went out of control after the Miami game..Melo was out and he had to shoot more...He hit some big shots for us and won the game..I think he scored 27 that game without me looking...Knicks went on to Chicago and he tried the same thing and shot badly..For some reason, he has been shooting since..Let's hope he looked at some game tapes and saw he was over shooting...But I like our chances when we are fully up to speed...Can't wait for Amare and Felton together...

i didn't list any hypotheticals here i have recounted what we have seen from him. no need to lionize the guy he is what he is which is a scrubby scrappy shot happy backup hybrid guard. but yeah lets see how woodson folds the felton stat combo into the mix and i mean that sincerely. we need a more versatile offense.

First off he isn't a combo guard...I say hypothetical because u can't base anything off one game after the Miami game, and Felton didn't play against Boston and Bulls the second time..So how is it not hypotheticals???..No one is lionizing him..But understand, he was a big reason for our good start...So he is a bit better than a scrub PG...

Bonn1997 wrote:

sebstar wrote:Lets try to keep the convo focused on Felton, the link provided, and what it is exactly you are trying to explain, to avoid an unmanageable discussion. Perhaps we can broaden it out into a wholesale defense of advanced stats in b-ball as it develops.

I appreciate your knowledge of stats as a contained object of study --- but what I am telling you is that from my vantage point, your use of the efficiency stat as explanation for winning basketball when it comes to Felton and other PGs is, charitably speaking, very messy.

You have not presented any argument or evidence that it is messy though. The best validated stats give high weight to efficiency. You have not found evidence of flaws in this validation research. It is also doubtful that you need a strong theory in order to make use of data anyway. Inductive statistics basically works by getting the data first and then making sense of them theoretically. If you initially did not realize it but then find that scoring efficiency is actually critical when looking at the data, it is acceptable to then formulate a theory that accounts for the importance of efficiency.

Sorry. Busy day. Didnt even get to watch the game.

For starters, as mentioned, the knicks had one of the best records in the league, over a 1/3 of the way through the season, with Felton manning the point. Overall, his teams have been successful throughout his career, except for when he had his head up his *** last year, so thats problematic for you off top because winning is the dependent variable. Not efficiency.

Then there is Jason Kidd and his ranking. Kidd is ranked, what 3rd? So with efficiency as a de-facto variable that explains success and w/ls, Kidd should therefore be considered one of the best current pgs in the league. We know thats not true.

Kidd is wonderful as a specialist, role player --- but as a featured pg? A liability. He cant put pressure on a defense, nor make things happen as an athlete anymore at his age, which hurts the effectiveness of his teammates. Anyone who watches knows as much.

But if you look at "efficiency", it says hes a top 5 pg. Efficiency often rewards those who do less, not impact the game more. Kidd plays almost a mistake free game --- but he cant assert himself physically to the benefit of his teammates. Its a great example on how stats, decontextualized, are dangerous (especially concerning more substantive studies).

Feltons aggressive play, and decent shooting for a PG the most important position, stresses the defense w/ consistent pressure. As a legit offensive threat, the d is on their heels, which has a positive effect on Melo and the team as a whole. Even when he misses, its potentially a positive as a cumulative effect (and direct effect w/ an offensive rebound). The formula for success with him as pg works, but it doesnt show up on a sheet sometimes.

- Carmelo Anthony

sebstar wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

sebstar wrote:Lets try to keep the convo focused on Felton, the link provided, and what it is exactly you are trying to explain, to avoid an unmanageable discussion. Perhaps we can broaden it out into a wholesale defense of advanced stats in b-ball as it develops.

I appreciate your knowledge of stats as a contained object of study --- but what I am telling you is that from my vantage point, your use of the efficiency stat as explanation for winning basketball when it comes to Felton and other PGs is, charitably speaking, very messy.

You have not presented any argument or evidence that it is messy though. The best validated stats give high weight to efficiency. You have not found evidence of flaws in this validation research. It is also doubtful that you need a strong theory in order to make use of data anyway. Inductive statistics basically works by getting the data first and then making sense of them theoretically. If you initially did not realize it but then find that scoring efficiency is actually critical when looking at the data, it is acceptable to then formulate a theory that accounts for the importance of efficiency.

Sorry. Busy day. Didnt even get to watch the game.

For starters, as mentioned, the knicks had one of the best records in the league, over a 1/3 of the way through the season, with Felton manning the point. Overall, his teams have been successful throughout his career, except for when he had his head up his *** last year, so thats problematic for you off top because winning is the dependent variable. Not efficiency.

Then there is Jason Kidd and his ranking. Kidd is ranked, what 3rd? So with efficiency as a de-facto variable that explains success and w/ls, Kidd should therefore be considered one of the best current pgs in the league. We know thats not true.

Kidd is wonderful as a specialist, role player --- but as a featured pg? A liability. He cant put pressure on a defense, nor make things happen as an athlete anymore at his age, which hurts the effectiveness of his teammates. Anyone who watches knows as much.

But if you look at "efficiency", it says hes a top 5 pg. Efficiency often rewards those who do less, not impact the game more. Kidd plays almost a mistake free game --- but he cant assert himself physically to the benefit of his teammates. Its a great example on how stats, decontextualized, are dangerous (especially concerning more substantive studies).

Feltons aggressive play, and decent shooting for a PG the most important position, stresses the defense w/ consistent pressure. As a legit offensive threat, the d is on their heels, which has a positive effect on Melo and the team as a whole. Even when he misses, its potentially a positive as a cumulative effect (and direct effect w/ an offensive rebound). The formula for success with him as pg works, but it doesnt show up on a sheet sometimes.

I don't see how anything you said about Kidd negates the importance of scoring efficiency. For the season as a whole, he's been a very efficient scorer and it has definitely helped the team. Scoring efficiency is obviously only one of many factors that are considered in the advanced stats though. If you're very low in scoring efficiency but outstanding in other areas, that probably wouldn't be a problem. That doesn't apply to Felton, though.

misterearl wrote:None of it matters

Scoring efficiency, field goal percentages, plus minus

Based on his scientific model Nate Silver predicted every electoral college vote, by state, accurately

He has also predicted the four NFL playoff winners.

None of it matters until you are on the field, or on the court. Unless you can measure Raymond Felton's TQ (toughness quotient), sweat gland production (SGP), determination under duress (DUD) or his PIP Quotient (pride in performance), statistics don't mean Jack.

Has anybody seen Sheed?

Do you use blue pom-poms or orange?

sebstar wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

sebstar wrote:Lets try to keep the convo focused on Felton, the link provided, and what it is exactly you are trying to explain, to avoid an unmanageable discussion. Perhaps we can broaden it out into a wholesale defense of advanced stats in b-ball as it develops.

I appreciate your knowledge of stats as a contained object of study --- but what I am telling you is that from my vantage point, your use of the efficiency stat as explanation for winning basketball when it comes to Felton and other PGs is, charitably speaking, very messy.

You have not presented any argument or evidence that it is messy though. The best validated stats give high weight to efficiency. You have not found evidence of flaws in this validation research. It is also doubtful that you need a strong theory in order to make use of data anyway. Inductive statistics basically works by getting the data first and then making sense of them theoretically. If you initially did not realize it but then find that scoring efficiency is actually critical when looking at the data, it is acceptable to then formulate a theory that accounts for the importance of efficiency.

Sorry. Busy day. Didnt even get to watch the game.

For starters, as mentioned, the knicks had one of the best records in the league, over a 1/3 of the way through the season, with Felton manning the point. Overall, his teams have been successful throughout his career, except for when he had his head up his *** last year, so thats problematic for you off top because winning is the dependent variable. Not efficiency.

Then there is Jason Kidd and his ranking. Kidd is ranked, what 3rd? So with efficiency as a de-facto variable that explains success and w/ls, Kidd should therefore be considered one of the best current pgs in the league. We know thats not true.

Kidd is wonderful as a specialist, role player --- but as a featured pg? A liability. He cant put pressure on a defense, nor make things happen as an athlete anymore at his age, which hurts the effectiveness of his teammates. Anyone who watches knows as much.

But if you look at "efficiency", it says hes a top 5 pg. Efficiency often rewards those who do less, not impact the game more. Kidd plays almost a mistake free game --- but he cant assert himself physically to the benefit of his teammates. Its a great example on how stats, decontextualized, are dangerous (especially concerning more substantive studies).

Feltons aggressive play, and decent shooting for a PG the most important position, stresses the defense w/ consistent pressure. As a legit offensive threat, the d is on their heels, which has a positive effect on Melo and the team as a whole. Even when he misses, its potentially a positive as a cumulative effect (and direct effect w/ an offensive rebound). The formula for success with him as pg works, but it doesnt show up on a sheet sometimes.

your sophistry is truly breathtaking.