When Stats lie

[ImKobe]

Marbury was a decent scorer, but a bad point guard & a medicore defensive player.

Anyone remember this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lrfUkLeMzA#t=29

[JebronLames]

Marbury is a two time champion. Kidd with only One.

[ImKobe]

Marbury is a two time champion. Kidd with only One.

CBA titles >>> NBA titles

2 CBA titles are like 10 NBA championships

[Pointguard]

Stats don't lie.

Liars use stats because they can be manipulated to come to any conclusion if you don't have the full picture. It seems people who believe stats lie or are empty don't really understand statistics.

Stats never ever tell a full story and when they do the computers will be your master. The gist of the post is to take it beyond what the stats tell you. Only Jlip has gone there because he trust what he knows. The rest of you guys want to believe in things because you don't trust what you know. Its a security blanket.

[DMAVS41]

Stats never ever tell a full story and when they do the computers will be your master. The gist of the post is to take it beyond what the stats tell you. Only Jlip has gone there because he trust what he knows. The rest of you guys want to believe in things because you don't trust what you know. Its a security blanket.

You only listed a few of the stats though...clown.

Oh...more stats!...ahahahahah;

Clutch play

Kidd shot 34% fg / 31% from 3 / 40%efg...on 95 shots
Marbury shot 26% fg / 23% from 3 / 29% efg...on 74 shots

It's all shaping up.

Way better defense, way better clutch play, 4 other brand new key rotation players...

Bu bu bu bu but....intangibles!

Maybe if Marbury didn't play like complete shit in close games his team would have won more. In 01, the Nets went into crunch time in 26 games that Marbury played. In 02, the Nets went into crunch time in 31 games that Kidd played.

Guess what...having a key player shoot 11% better in terms of efg% in close games is going to be a huge factor in winning close games all else equal. But the Nets had better players and better defense in 02 to begin with...LOL

[MMM]

Stats never ever tell a full story and when they do the computers will be your master. The gist of the post is to take it beyond what the stats tell you. Only Jlip has gone there because he trust what he knows. The rest of you guys want to believe in things because you don't trust what you know. Its a security blanket.

I'm aware stats don't tell the full story, which is what i mean when i say liars use stats. They can be manipulated without the proper context. When certain stats give me information that my eyes are not observing than i looks for more numbers that can explain the discrepancy and put the first series of numbers in the right context. If there is still a discrepancy than watching more to observe if there is details i'm missing. Stats definitely help you zone in on smaller details of the game that you might not initially see.

[justin12140]

never like those all encompassing stats like PER, RAPM, or WAR. Their just arbitrary numbers that have tons of exceptions that cant be explained.

How is DJ Augustine rated 79 of 87 point guards in the league in RAPM despite the fact that the Bulls have done much better this season with him.

Novak has a higher RAPM than Ariza, Webster, Batum, and Tucker. lol how?

Greg Stiesma has a higher DRPM than Bosh and Hibbert?

just goes to show how arbitrary some of these stats can be

[DMAVS41]

More stats;

In 02 the Nets played the easiest schedule in the league
In 01 the Nets played the 18th ranked schedule in the league

[Pointguard]

What?

Kidd is a monster on defense at the guard position. Not like it would take much...all I have to do is look and see how awful Marbury was in 01...and he was dreadful...-2.9 is awful dude. I don't know why you can't follow this.
Marbury was a better defender than Nash was by any margin of the stick.

I'm giving Kidd credit...isn't that what you want?

I am looking at the dynamics that highlight Kidd's strength. The credit should have always been there.

But the point is that it wasn't intangibles or offense that changed...it was the defense.

He was better offensively as well. That's one of the humongous things you missed.

Something made them go from the 23rd defense to the 1st defense. And I'd credit Kidd and having two big bodies in T-Mac and Collins...but mainly Kidd.

Jesus man...the 01 Nets didn't even really have a center.

The Nets were the 25th ranked defensive rebounding team in 01
The Nets were the 13th ranked defensive rebounding team in 02

Hahahahah...it's all in the stats. Literally everything...

And you see exactly why they made a marginal offensive improvement and a huge defensive improvement. It's literally all right there in the stats.

What are the dynamics? I'm not interested in the science that measures the people. I'm interested in how the people did what they did. What happened. Anybody can point to stats but that's just the measure not the reality, not the motivation, not the process, not the players. The stats are inept in the capture. Stats caught Kidd stole the ball more and turned it over more. The best story is why was Kidd so much better. Marbury has a better stat capture than Kidd. That's obvious. Why is it that Jlip is the only one comfortable with that. Why were you visibly offended?

You keep giving the robotic answer, the paper's answer, the stat answer, without dept or consciousness.

[Smoke117]

Stats only lie or tell the truth to those that no nothing about an opinion they are giving. This "when stats lie" thread for instance. I didn't even read what the OP said, don't even know he is, don't really give a crap. The fact of the matter is as far as basketball someone with real knowledge of the game can differentiate from the glamour of stats and the beauty of the sport they are watching. (to be poetic for a change) I know my basketball, I know there a few people that know it here to...and I really know there a majority that know nothing of what they are talking about even as THEY BELIEVE IT...and that's the saddest part...but ignorance has always been bliss and it always will be. Life is ignorance defined for all of us in one way or another.

[DMAVS41]

never like those all encompassing stats like PER, RAPM, or WAR. Their just arbitrary numbers that have tons of exceptions that cant be explained.

How is DJ Augustine rated 79 of 87 point guards in the league in RAPM despite the fact that the Bulls have done much better this season with him.

Novak has a higher RAPM than Ariza, Webster, Batum, and Tucker. lol how?

Greg Stiesma has a higher DRPM than Bosh and Hibbert?

just goes to show how arbitrary some of these stats can be

It's not arbitrary...the just don't adjust per minutes played. So a player playing 15 minutes a game can't be compared to a player playing 30 minutes per game....nor can you really compare players playing totally different roles

FYI though...

So it's hard to compare a guy like Steimsma to Hibbert here as one plays roughly a full qtr more per game. Also, Hibbert plays on a great defensive team as well...Stiemsma plays on like the 4th worst defense in the league. Easier to make an improvement when you are out there...

[DMAVS41]

I am looking at the dynamics that highlight Kidd's strength. The credit should have always been there.


He was better offensively as well. That's one of the humongous things you missed.


What are the dynamics? I'm not interested in the science that measures the people. I'm interested in how the people did what they did. What happened. Anybody can point to stats but that's just the measure not the reality, not the motivation, not the process, not the players. The stats are inept in the capture. Stats caught Kidd stole the ball more and turned it over more. The best story is why was Kidd so much better. Marbury has a better stat capture than Kidd. That's obvious. Why is it that Jlip is the only one comfortable with that. Why were you visibly offended?

You keep giving the robotic answer, the paper's answer, the stat answer, without dept or consciousness.

Dude...you asked what the stats got wrong...and the answer of course...is nothing.

You just cherry picked only offensive stats and then wanted to make a statement that stats lie.

Well, they don't...the stats show why the team transformed by 26 games...they played great defense rather than crap defense, they added 4 key new players around Kidd, and Kidd himself played far better in close games than Marbury did.

Why did this happen you ask? Well, Kidd is a much better defender than Marbury. For one, he actually tries defensively...he is bigger and tougher. He's a smarter player. He doesn't make defensive errors. He could guard positions 1 through 3 at that time...and he's a far better defensive rebounder as well.

The other part of this stuff is that you aren't even realizing that when you add 4 new players in the top 9 of a rotation...the team is just inherently far different. Kittles, Jefferson, T-Mac, and Collins all played legit roles on that team.

Maybe Marbury gets them to 40 wins or something...I doubt it, but it's not crazy. That's definitely a better squad imo...

But I really don't get your point about what the stats missed. They didn't miss anything. Replacing a horrid defender in Marbury with Kidd...and replacing Marbury's terrible clutch play is going to yield pretty big results just on those things alone.

Do you want me to now break down why Kidd is a better defender? I will, but that seems like you are changing the objective of the OP now that you have been shredded...

I thought this was about the stats missing stuff?

[Pointguard]

I'm aware stats don't tell the full story, which is what i mean when i say liars use stats. They can be manipulated without the proper context. When certain stats give me information that my eyes are not observing than i looks for more numbers that can explain the discrepancy and put the first series of numbers in the right context. If there is still a discrepancy than watching more to observe if there is details i'm missing. Stats definitely help you zone in on smaller details of the game that you might not initially see.

Because stats are not whole they are always partial. They always have a slant. They are not neutral as many think they are. They take on the flavor of the person using them 90% of the time.

Stats can back up concept and context but it you look to them for context you are very susceptible to being duped. Stats are not interchangeable with reality, and do not carry a full truth with it... it is always a representation of a small piece at best, and even when dead on, it is but is one dimension in a three dimensional world... .

Nonetheless, Kidd never had great stats to me. But he was definitely one of the best PG's. He had modest numbers.

[DMAVS41]

Because stats are not whole they are always partial. They always have a slant. They are not neutral as many think they are. They take on the flavor of the person using them 90% of the time.

Stats can back up concept and context but it you look to them for context you are very susceptible to being duped. Stats are not interchangeable with reality, and do not carry a full truth with it... it is always a representation of a small piece at best, and even when dead on, it is but is one dimension in a three dimensional world... .

Nonetheless, Kidd never had great stats to me. But he was definitely one of the best PG's. He had modest numbers.

But his defense and rebounding was great. If you don't consider those "stats"...then fine, but you aren't going to get the entire picture on a player like Duncan or Kidd or so many others if you just stop at points/assists and TS%

Do you really not understand that there are ways to quantify defensive impact?

And that those are stats as well...

Like...do you understand that Kidd has a defensive rating of 102 for his career and Marbury has s defensive rating of 110 for his career?

That is a huge difference in defensive impact...you compare their offensive ratings and they are basically the same.

You see? Once you really start to look in depth about this stuff....things start to become more clear.

Then you'd like at rebounding...Kidd has a 10% total rebounding percentage...while Marbury's is 4.5%...

Kidd did have modest stats, I guess, if you just look at ppg....but he was a

15/7/9 50% TS player for a 12 year period while playing elite defense at his position.

In 03 he had a 19/6/9 53% TS year and was again a huge beast defensively with a 96 drtg....that isn't modest at all...that is great

I mean...depends on how you are defining "modest"...

[Pointguard]

Dude...you asked what the stats got wrong...and the answer of course...is nothing.

You just cherry picked only offensive stats and then wanted to make a statement that stats lie.

Well, they don't...the stats show why the team transformed by 26 games...they played great defense rather than crap defense, they added 4 key new players around Kidd, and Kidd himself played far better in close games than Marbury did.

Why did this happen you ask? Well, Kidd is a much better defender than Marbury. For one, he actually tries defensively...he is bigger and tougher. He's a smarter player. He doesn't make defensive errors. He could guard positions 1 through 3 at that time...and he's a far better defensive rebounder as well.

The other part of this stuff is that you aren't even realizing that when you add 4 new players in the top 9 of a rotation...the team is just inherently far different. Kittles, Jefferson, T-Mac, and Collins all played legit roles on that team.

I want to see the defensive RAPM for those guys when they defensively changed other teams. You are saying that they changed the team defensively. I'm telling you that both Gill and Newman were better defensively than Kittles and Jefferson. T-mac had some problem moving quickly (forgot what it was but he retired because of it). Collins had good energy on defense. But I want to see stats that the other three were good defensively.

Maybe Marbury gets them to 40 wins or something...I doubt it, but it's not crazy. That's definitely a better squad imo...

But I really don't get your point about what the stats missed. They didn't miss anything. Replacing a horrid defender in Marbury with Kidd...and replacing Marbury's terrible clutch play is going to yield pretty big results just on those things alone.

Do you want me to now break down why Kidd is a better defender? I will, but that seems like you are changing the objective of the OP now that you have been shredded...

I thought this was about the stats missing stuff?

Oh yeah I will tell in time but I want to see the stats tell you first.