Nothing you said changes the fact that I think Torocan has a pro-Lin agenda and that OP has an anti-Lin agenda. That's my opinion -- and for that reason, I take both posters' contributions with a grain of salt. That's my prerogative, and I'm sorry if you don't like it.
Lin is the biggest wild card on this team. If he balls we can win championship. You can mostly trust Harden, Dwight, Asik, and Parsons give you something positive each game. Lin? IDK. Stay tuned
Actually I think the problem really stems from the fact that he is getting paid 8M a year, plus a balloon payment of 15M next year. People see these numbers and say 'Lin sucks!' If however Lin was only paid the minimum and produces the same stats, nobody would have said anything about it.
Correct on both accounts. torocan has a clear bias, but is a good poster because at least he is respective and doesn't put the rest of the team down. The annoying part is when LOF cite him like he is preaching words that descended directly to him from god.
Who care about stats...it's about what you do on the court to be effective. Have you heard the phrase about a certain players where a lot of things they do on the court don't show up on stats? That's what i am talking about.
Shouldn't the content of a post better inform whether you should take it with a "grain of salt" or not rather than some personal subjective feeling about the poster's agenda (unless he is clearly trolling, which the OP has personally admitted to doing)? You are right, of course, you are free to do what you want
I agree. I feel like he is one of the few LOFs that deserve the effort of refuting. Most Lin posters, including the one before me, assume that when the data is presented as "objective" it indicates that Lin is much better than he actually is. You can definitely take a majority of "statistical analysis" with a grain of salt. If there is an accurate scientific method to advanced statistics that does not include bias it has not translated into a dominate sports franchise.
My argument was that regardless of whether Lin critics believe he (or other rational Lin fans) has bias or not, it is important to engage in discussion about the actual content of the post rather than write him (them) off from the start simply because they are "Lin fans"/ "LOF's"/ "Lin apologists"/ etc. I'm not saying all Lin critics did this, but there were a few posters that called him out and accused him of "cherry-picking" data without specifying exactly how, or why (suggesting to me that they did not even read his post, and probably never intended to do so in the first place). This behavior, I am assuming, is because some have labeled torocan as a Lin apologist who can offer nothing of value to the discussion. Of course many Lin fans are also guilty of this as well (writing off a rational "LOH" post simply because it is criticizing Lin). IMO reversing this trend, and trying to promote moderates on both sides to be more open to each other can improve this forum. I do fully agree though that there are some Lin fans that need to stop putting other teammates down and be a bit more respectful.
When have I ever said this or anything suggesting that I made such an assumption? Please find the quote as I would be pretty surprised that I had typed up something so dense.
I think it is the other way around. If you are effective on the court, it shows in you stats line. That's why we go to see the stats line and see if our personal impression has the support of the cold numbers. It is ridiculous when some people say that stats lie. Stats never lie. Simply, people who don't know how to do the stats in order to get the right answers and understand their limitations. In this I'm totally with Torocan. For instance Beverley does not have a good stats line. His PER is only 12.30 and he has a miserable 2.7 APG for his 31.3 min per game (low for a PG). With that few assists he still makes only 9.9 PPG. He is not a good 3PT shooter for a PG, but not bad either (35.7%). He makes 3rd most 3PT attempts of the Rockets (after Harden and Parsons). Having said that, very few question his role as the starting PG. That's mainly because of his defensive effort which tends to be contagious as well. So, clearly, it is not all about stats, but the stats don't lie. It's about the players function in the game plan and his overall impact on the game that makes the coach select his players on the court.
Lineup combinations is so important in Basketball, that's why it's impossible to really gauge on some of these stats without putting them into further context than your advanced stats. Bottom line is we need Bev and Howard back. From my observations during the whole season is that... Harden is a lot more offensively efficient when his not playing with Lin. Harden seems to go more on ISO mode and shoot more inefficient shots when Lin is on the court. I can't put my finger on why that is the case. And same goes for Lin, his a lot more offensively efficient when he is not playing with Harden. These 2 just don't gel well together as we/fans would have liked. Beverley allows Lin to play off the bench and provide more time on the court where they are not together which maximizes there production. Howard is a big compliment to Harden defensively. I find Harden can get away with a lot more defensive lapses when Howard is on the court than even what Beverley or Asik can provide. I also find that Howard compliments Lin's offensively than let's say Asik. I guess one benefit (if you can call it that) while Howard and Beverley are not playing is that we can work on improving our lineup with Harden and Lin being on the court. Improving Lin's offense and entry passes while Asik is on the court and our defense when Harden and Asik are together etc..
This is actually both partial truth and partial myth. Sports Analytics is a constantly evolving discipline, and the number of statistical tools and statistical models has only increased over time. What was mostly true 10 years ago is no longer true today, and will be even less true tomorrow. While there is no such thing as an all encompassing statistic that tells you everything about a player, the advent of increasingly sophisticated methods of data collection and data mining are decreasing the sphere of "opaque" information. When most people say that a player's contributions "don't show up in the stats", they are usually referring to the box score. And for the most part this is true because the box score is a terribly primitive tool statistically speaking. Using the box score as a basis for understanding a player is akin to trying to measure the circumference of the Earth with a 12 inch ruler. Sure, you can do it but it's going to be terribly inaccurate and subject to error. In days past you would look at two players and pull their scores from the box score as a start for comparison. This would lead to a debate like this... Tom : "A is a better shooter than B. Look their FG%" Harry : "Yes, but A has more help on the floor, so he gets more open shots." Tom : "I don't know, that's a pretty big difference in FG%..." Harry : "Look, A isn't the focus of the opposing defense the way B is, of course B's going to shoot at a lower percentage. This is why you can't believe the stats. Not to mention that player A gets better screens." Unfortunately, many people unfamiliar with advanced statistics are not familiar with how data collection and analysis has evolved. The changes in data collection is dramatic You can go to SportsVu and pull down the number of shots that a player shoots that are contested or uncontested. You can then go to Vantage and pull down HOW they were contested. You can tell whether a player was within 4 feet or not, how often a hand was in their face, whether they were being physically pressured (up in their grill) or whether they were being double teamed. You can go to Synergy and get raw counts of how many screen plays were run as well as pull down the raw video to see exactly how those play sets were run. You can go to 82 games or NBAWowy and pull raw +- data, or popcornmachine.net and see when they were scoring and who was on the floor both with them and on the opposing team within the flow of the game. Today's data can tell how often a shot was off the dribble, catch and shoot, a drive, a dunk, a post up, or a put back. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. The depth of information regarding players has expanded so far and so quickly that the analysis side is only beginning to process the deluge of information. Not only has the methods of data collection improved, but the statistical methods used to interpret the data have improved. Some of the brightest minds in the country are now working on ways to extract information from the data. Sophisticated data modeling methods that traditionally were used only by industrial giants, scientific think tanks, and the Military are increasingly working their way into the Sports world. SportVu camera technology is based upon Israeli missile tracking technology. Morey's staff includes analysts from Ivy League schools with expertise honed in the world of finance, industry and science. Mathematical tools and computer algorithms designed to reduce "noise" and unrelated variables to answer actual questions about aspects of a player's play have improved. While there are certainly things that can not be described by statistics and the game will most likely always have things that can not be described, that list is decreasing by the year. Things that would have been impossible to measure in any meaningful way not even 5 years ago can not only be measured, but analyzed, compared and parsed in dozens of ways we couldn't have even imagined 5 years ago, let alone 10 years ago. The assumption I see posted over and over again is that because one particular statistic or a set of statistics does not answer or illuminate a particular question, then every statistic can not offer illumination to that question. In many cases this cannot be further than the truth. FG% may not tell us whether a player is not a good shooter from mid range, but what if I broke down their shooting percentage at mid range distances? What if I could tell you exactly how many times those shots were contested versus uncontested and their shooting percentages under each circumstance? What if I could tell you exactly where they attempted those shots and their success rates on various parts of the floor? What if I could tell you if they had the benefit of a pick or screen? What if I could tell you if the shot was rushed or they had time to set their feet? What if I could tell you how their shot accuracy changed as their minutes increased or how physically fatigued that player became over different stretches on on court time? What if I could tell you how many shots were generated off assists and how many were generated through their own isolation play? Would statistics STILL not be able to shed some light? Would you still say that statistics couldn't tell us something? The point is simply this... the world of advanced statistic/sports analytics is far, Far, FAR larger than most sports fans realize. And it's growing faster and becoming more sophisticated by the day, week and year. Do not be so quick to discount the value of statistics presented if you do not understand the individual statistics being presented just because the tools being used in the past were more primitive and less useful. In the early days of optics, a telescope could barely make out a person a mile or two away. Now a satellite camera can make out the headline of a newspaper from orbit. Don't always be so quick to discount statistical analysis just because of past experiences. Just like a high school prospect, the discipline of analytics is still evolving and growing and still very far away from reaching its prime. And if those advanced statistics tell us that a player is better than general perception (like James Harden in OKC), or those advanced statistics tell us that a player is worse than general perception (like Andrea Bargnani), would it not be wise to at least reconsider one's position? While today it is acknowledged that James Harden is an all star/super star, James Harden was turning heads as early as 2011-2012 in the stats community. And let's be honest, when Morey signed Harden to a Superstar contract how many of you wrote it off as yet another example of a "stats head" being swept away by numbers? Stats don't give us all the answers, nor is it likely they ever will. However, completely discounting the value of advanced statistics is not only an antiquated position among increasingly large portions of the fan base, but amongst the GM's in the NBA. If NBA franchises are willing to pay serious money for statistical analysis, then is it possible, just Possible that there's something to all these numbers?
He can't Be Linsanity in this system. Maybe when he's traded he will be in that system. He is very limited here and doesn't truly play the point guard position. Only time can tell.
When Lin was a Knick, he got paid 80k. Haters like to complain his TOs and how he was destroyed by Miami. Salary is another excuse. If Lin is really overpaid, they should blame Morey.
Here are his stats for the last two years: 12-13 HOU 82 82 32.2 0.441 0.339 0.785 0.4 2.6 3.0 6.1 1.6 0.4 2.88 2.50 13.4 13-14 HOU 66 30 29.2 0.443 0.340 0.817 0.5 2.2 2.6 4.2 0.9 0.4 2.50 2.26 12.5 Career Does that look like a young up and coming PG in this league at age 25 getting worse, with better players around him? Lin isnt as bad as many people here have made him out to be (including me..hes just so frustrating) but he will never be anything more then a bench player period. What has stood out to me the most this year is that he seems to have no clue what hes doing on his drives 50% of the time , its like there is 0 chemistry between him and the team and hes the freakin PG!! And i will admit some of my frustration comes with his salary since he is hindering us from becoming ELITE , but honestly most of it has come from his inability to get better(3pt shooting,drive to basket,passing), his complete lack of confidence on the court, and his lack of awareness as a PG....i mean he wasnt brought here for his defense thats for sure ...iam not so sure anymore what he was brought here for ??... Marketing probably
