Harden or Paul George?

I think Westbrook sux and hurts his team a lot and will in the playoffs even more. PG and Harden>>>>> Westbrook in my opinion.

 

nope, it's a extension of your argument. you are correlating the entire team's performance way to closely with a single player's performance. that's your pitfall.

 

The public stats won't help you a lick in mine and malakas' scenario. They don't really measure botched defensive rotations and assignments.

 

No, it's not. You just made up something completely different. I'll postpone this argument, maybe next games focus on Harden's defensive role, assignments, rotations and especially tranisition defense.

Then we can discuss this gain.

 

again, those public stats are all way better than your subjective eye metric. what if I argue that Harden had the best game in the history of the game? will you buy that? same thing.

 

what?

 

nope, it's what logically follows from your silly argument.

 

No, it doesn't. A team winning despite someone having a horrible game has nothing to do with my point.


Watch the next games and re-evaluate your statistics again.

 

There are NO good PUBLICLY available stats for single games for DEFENCE. For offence yes. RPM and Def RTG are worthless.
But be certain that teams in their FO have one thousand better defensive stats than us.

 

Spoiler

 

you are saying just because Harden recorded good stats, you can't come to that conclusion given the overall team's performance.

and the inverse of your logic is exactly the case of today's Westbrooks game. why is this so hard to understand? so by your argument, Westbrooks 14pts(5/14 FG) 11 turnovers must mean much more than what it looks at a first glance, since his team won the game easily, right?

 

an inadequate as it might be, still better than nothing or engaging in meaningless subjective jibber-jabber. again, Capela/Harden topping the +/- rating and Brewer coming in at dead last, is just not a wild coincidence. is it inadequate measure? sure. but totally meaningless? nope.

 

Yung-T's argument :

Harden : good individual stat, team won barely --> conclusion : Harden had a 'worse' game than the numbers show.

Westbrook : bad individual stat, team won handily --> conclusion : Westbrook had a 'better' game than the numbers show.

is is easier to understand now?

 

Not it's not better than nothing. It's worse than nothing.
It's called misleading and manipulating stats.
You must FIRST OF ALL know what the stat means and put it in the right context otherwise it does the opposite of what it's meant to be. It misleads instead of illuminating a situation.

 

That's the worst logical fallacy I've seen in a long time.

 

so it must be a wild coincidence that Capela and Harden topping +/- and Brewer coming in at dead last? wow, today seems like a good day to buy a lottery.

 

of course, can't point to any specific error

 

I can't point to anything specific if the whole construct shows you don't comprehend what we're saying one bit.

 

your argument put in other context seems totally nonsensical. that's why it's wrong.

 

It is clear that Harden is one of the best players in the league when considered playing offense and he can be efficient as hell...

But his putrid D makes him only a very good player and the worst superstar that has gotten away with almost no Defense