Not the first time. There was a Phantom vid on Linsanity last year with Knicks. Just goes to show how belittling and not caring Houston Rockets fans are about JLin. Jeremy is already very good. He. Will. Be. Great. He is just in a new system in a new team and a youngest team playing along side a ball dominant SG, that is not favorable to him or anyone (see Steve Nash's stats this year with Lakers playing along side Kobe) in terms of stats padding. And you guys really do not deserve having him.
He's secretly a Lin fan, but just posts negative things so that he can unite all the other fans :grin:
It wasn't that long ago that we were all complaining about not getting enough media coverage and that no one cared about the rockets. I myself am happy with as much exposure as we can get.
Just wait until the Rockets play in Taiwan. I'm guessing the Taiwanese fans will get very loud on every JLin move. Poor guy couldn't even go out in public.
Just wait until the Rockets play in Taiwan. I'm guessing the Taiwanese fans will get very loud on every JLin move. Poor guy couldn't even go out in public.
First post ever! I did some number crunching in Excel to help with the John Wall vs. Jeremy Lin "debate": Hopefully the image isn't too large - I resized it but any smaller and it got too blurry... Honestly I'm not really sure why anyone would want to compare Jeremy Lin's first 25 starts in the NBA against John Wall's latest 25 starts in a 3-year career, but whatever. From what I can tell, the numbers in this pre-selected sample don't really seem to indicate that one player is significantly better than the other. Statistically speaking, the best indicator for a player's future performance is their entire career, so you can't really cherry-pick either player's stats and expect to be able to predict where they will be. More data is always better. What you should be saying is, based on all of the data available, John Wall projects a P% to have Q production, while Jeremy Lin projects A% to have B production. If you're trying to prove some sort of side-by-side analysis, then you should be doing something like grabbing the first 2,000 minutes of John Wall's NBA career and laying that against the first 2,000 minutes of Jeremy Lin's career. Then, based on how those projects play out for all similar NBA players, you can see where they "should" end up in the future based on the same amount of information. I haven't bothered to look at that info, although I'm pretty sure there are websites that do that sort of thing (behind a paywall). Here's what I am pretty comfortable saying: 1) Let's say you had two players, Player X and Player Y. 2) Both players put up the same production (within a small margin) over a 25-game sample (of equivalent minutes). 3) Player X put up that production in his first 25 starts ever. 4) Player Y put up that production after more than 2 seasons of NBA play, but did not match that production up to that point. Then I would tell you that over the course of their full NBA careers, Player X is probably going to be better than Player Y. Why? Because the fact that Player X did it in his very first 25 starts actually makes it less likely that his performance is a fluke. In other words, he will most likely get better with time (or at least sustain his current level of performance). Nate Silver did a pretty basic analysis of this during the whole Linsanity thing. It's like asking who would win a basketball game after knowing the score in the first quarter. There's no guarantee that the team that's ahead is going to win, but based on past history, the team that's ahead is going to win more often than the team that's behind. Because good teams tend to score more points than their opponents, regardless of whether it's the first 20 minutes or the last 20 minutes. Honestly, I find it kind of disturbing that people are so ready to dismiss Jeremy's Linsanity performance as some kind of fluke, but are less willing to do so for any other player going through a similar stretch of production over a similar 25-game sample. It doesn't even have to be their first 25 games. It could be Kobe Bryant's last 25 games, and if you looked at those numbers, you might think they are crazy but you wouldn't second-guess that they are not indicative of his actual potential talent. You'd just think that the guy was having a good stretch of games. You wouldn't be saying that he was a hack and not "really" that good at basketball. Production proves talent. Talent without production is meaningless (literally - if you define talent as something that can't be linked to production, then I question your definition of what "talent" means). You can't put up the numbers without the talent to back it up, especially not when you're talking about an elite professional league like the NBA. P.S. - I actually think that Jeremy Lin and John Wall have very similar potential. They could both eventually be All-Stars, but they both have a lot more experience and development to get there. Otherwise, they could probably "coast" and have careers as solidly above-average at this point.
You can see me and my buddy in the crowd very clearly at 1:17 and 1:43 hehe. The footage taken from there was used in this thread: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=234157
This video and the music are kind of depressing but kudo to whoever spent the time making it. Oh and why's everyone arguing over Wall vs Lin? We all know Lin **** on Wall every time they played against each others. Not saying who's the better player but head to head Lin>Wall just like Rockets>Knicks but doesn't mean Knicks is worse against other teams that Rockets lost to. Anyway Wall will be getting max and as Kentucky fan, I'm happy for him. But it also shows Lin has already lived up to his contract this year.
