Whatever happens in games 4-7, can we agree ANALYTICS has proven to be FALSE?

[Swagnificent]

This is not "classic early 2000s" ball, because those teams lacked shooting which is why teams with isolation wings couldn't win shyt. The Cavs are playing SF's at PF just for the purpose of spacing, and doubling LeBron is extremely dangerous because of the fact he has several high percentage 3 point shooters around him and they will take a high volume of threes.

They are using LeBron like he's a big man and surrounding him with shooters for days and playing small ball for the majority of the game.

okay. my point still stands. jump shooting teams don't win rings. you need your best player to be able to get easy buckets, either in the post or penetration. the warriors strategy of using dribble penetration to create 3-point shots rather than actually taking the layups is what is killing em and why i always said they'd never win the chip.

 

[OG Talk]

All analytics means is the discovery and communication of meaningful patterns in data....

It's existed in the NBA for decades...


Fouling Wilt in crunchtime in 1959 because he was a low percentage foul shooter is an example of analytics...

Its always been a HUGE part of all sports....


The only thing thats really changed is the FACE of analytics...Which is one that most of us agree we want to punch just off of GP...

Dont let these dorky azz messengers poison the science...

 

[Malta]

okay. my point still stands. jump shooting teams don't win rings. you need your best player to be able to get easy buckets, either in the post or penetration. the warriors strategy of using dribble penetration to create 3-point shots rather than actually taking the layups is what is killing em and why i always said they'd never win the chip.

The Mavs won a title, and your point doesn't stand because if the Cavs played "2000s isolation" ball like you said they'd lose.

And Since you brought up Iverson, the Sixers were 17-59 from three in the finals vs the Lakers, of that AI was 11 for 39. That means his teammates were attempting 4 threes a game , they may have done better if they surrounded AI with shooters instead of garbage men that could only defend.

JR Smith has taken the same number of threes in 3 games as Iverson's teammates took in 5 games.

 

[FTBS]

The Mavs won a title, and your point doesn't stand because if the Cavs played "2000s isolation" ball like you said they'd lose.

And Since you brought up Iverson, the Sixers were 17-59 from three in the finals vs the Lakers, of that AI was 11 for 39. That means his teammates were attempting 4 threes a game , they may have done better if they surrounded AI with shooters instead of garbage men that could only defend.

JR Smith has taken the same number of threes in 3 games as Iverson's teammates took in 5 games.

In 5 games

 

[AkaDemiK]

:DripDrip:

 

[Malta]

KYRIE MADE 2 THREES A GAME...
LOVE MADE 2 THREES A GAME...
BRON MADE 2 THREES A GAME...

THOSE 3 ACCOUNTED FOR 6 OUT OF THEIR 10 MADE THREES PER GAME....

WELL LOVE IS OUT
KYRIE IS OUT
AND BRON SHOOTING 21% FROM 3 IN THE PLAYOFFS,

SO THOSE NUMBERS MEAN ABSOLUTELY shyt.


​

The Cavs are making 9 threes per game in the finals

 

[Pesci]

All analytics means is the discovery and communication of meaningful patterns in data....

It's existed in the NBA for decades...


Fouling Wilt in crunchtime in 1959 because he was a low percentage foul shooter is an example of analytics...

Its always been a HUGE part of all sports....


The only thing thats really changed is the FACE of analytics...Which is one that most of us agree we want to punch just off of GP...

Dont let these dorky azz messengers poison the science...

This same thing happened in baseball like 10 years ago. The only goal of advanced metrics is to get as close as possible to objective knowledge about the game. Most old timers and ex-players hate it because it threatens their monopoly on knowledge about the game. Suddenly "common sense" can look pretty dumb.

 

[Trip]

I dont see how math can be proven false.

 

[Trip]

All analytics means is the discovery and communication of meaningful patterns in data....

It's existed in the NBA for decades...


Fouling Wilt in crunchtime in 1959 because he was a low percentage foul shooter is an example of analytics...

Its always been a HUGE part of all sports....


The only thing thats really changed is the FACE of analytics...Which is one that most of us agree we want to punch just off of GP...

Dont let these dorky azz messengers poison the science...

pretty much

 

[Malta]

I dont see how math can be proven false.

It's TheColi, math be damned :RedGodGrill:

 

[Malta]

All analytics means is the discovery and communication of meaningful patterns in data....

It's existed in the NBA for decades...


Fouling Wilt in crunchtime in 1959 because he was a low percentage foul shooter is an example of analytics...

Its always been a HUGE part of all sports....


The only thing thats really changed is the FACE of analytics...Which is one that most of us agree we want to punch just off of GP...

Dont let these dorky azz messengers poison the science...

I'm the biggest fan of post play on here, and the reason why I accept all the 3s is because I know eventually somebody with a devastating post game is going to hit the league, and that person will have a team built around them with tons of 3 point shooting so that doubling them is just retarded and single covering them is just as stupid.

 

[smitty22]

KYRIE MADE 2 THREES A GAME...
LOVE MADE 2 THREES A GAME...
BRON MADE 2 THREES A GAME...

THOSE 3 ACCOUNTED FOR 6 OUT OF THEIR 10 MADE THREES PER GAME....

WELL LOVE IS OUT
KYRIE IS OUT
AND BRON SHOOTING 21% FROM 3 IN THE PLAYOFFS,

SO THOSE NUMBERS MEAN ABSOLUTELY shyt.


​

Preach

 

[Trip]

This same thing happened in baseball like 10 years ago. The only goal of advanced metrics is to get as close as possible to objective knowledge about the game. Most old timers and ex-players hate it because it threatens their monopoly on knowledge about the game. Suddenly "common sense" can look pretty dumb.

It's hard to be lazy anymore...granted, I probably prefer the days of just watching the games and forming an opinion and arguing that way...but it's not like that anymore. There's too much information out there to ignore it.

 

[360Waves]

Stats are nothing without context. Analytics are great but only when the circumstances apply.

 

[Trip]

I'm the biggest fan of post play on here, and the reason why I accept all the 3s is because I know eventually somebody with a devastating post game is going to hit the league, and that person will have a team built around them with tons of 3 point shooting so that doubling them is just retarded and single covering them is just as stupid.

Exactly. The league hasn't shifted, it's just there's been an influx of great wings and less bigs. Towns is about to go #1 overall because he translates better than every player in the draft. Someone will overdraft Winslow because they see wings playing well. Curry isnt awesome because he plays outside, he's awesome bc he's awesome.