Here's something.... You take a sample size of 9 games and subtract it directly from a sample size of 52 games? That's like saying Aaron Brooks was a 19% better FT shooter on March 3rd when he went 2-2 that night because 100 - 81 = 19? It's not even a weighted analysis, much less a "detailed" analysis. So if the Lakers are 0-3 last 3 games, they're 75.4% (46-15 before the losing streak) worse than they were 3 games ago. What must've happened 3 games ago that made them that much worse?!?!? Maybe Phil Jackson got rejected by Kobe and the team just spiraled at record pace. What a conundrum. I mean, for all we know, it's not Kevin Martin, it's that darned 2012 pick that's killing us. If we did not get that 1st round pick in 2012, we might not be 19% worse!? On the other hand, maybe it's this.... 1) Teams play a different schedule. 2) Players are hurt 3) New players need time to develop chemistry 4) Rookies need time to develop 5) The Rockets are building for when Yao gets back 6) Future picks are in order 7) Aaron Brooks is on and off with the 3 pointers 8) It's a 9 game sample size!! 9) Comparing 52% over 52 games to 33% over 9 games is comparing apples and oranges. (If I use that as a statistcal analysis in high school, I would still be in high school. I wouldn't even want to bother finding out what the standard deviation or variance of that would be, nor would I want to know how much normality it pushes to the y=x graph. But then again, that makes my analysis much less "detailed."
Isn't that cute, he's trying to be like Daryl Morey with his statistical analysis. I think there's a little more to it than winning percentages before and after the trade.
I find it very funny when a lot of these guys post threads with their analytical numbers; they all want to pretend to be but they're not. I'm not a huge Morey fan but I'm still going to be a fan of the rockets and let DM do his job but all these geeks here need to stop posting all their Detailed Analysis and pay a little more attention to their wives otherwise those wives are gonna start analyzing more and more the mailman , the gardener, the cleaning lady, or someone else to fulfill that void left by these guys posting their calculated numbers. " Just Saying"
....pretty bad post as many have pointed out...one of those posts, where Math and Science would be looking for a little payback after you defamed them in this pseudo scientific analysis. Among the problems with the ridiculously small sample, non-trade related variables(injuries to Ariza and Lowry), and the strength of schedule, the worst part about this post is you clearly took a position and then tried to justify it with incomplete data to suite your own half baked argument. Simply put, your both trying too hard, and not trying hard enough. Please take a brake from posting and read some of the more insightful posters here and see how they construct their arguments.
why am i still reading this? maybe its the outside change that OP will come back and try to defend himself for the lulz
Is it possible the OP was being sarcastic? He did try to defend it once already but he could have just been playing along. I mean the calculating the differences and the argument he is making, he cannot actually believe what he said. Right?
Even if he did consider all the factors - injuries, etc - the trade wasn't for this year. Not a single team involved in the trade had any plans to make a deep playoff run. And the Rockets were the only team even saying they were trying to make the playoffs (and I don't believe them at all).
Is this guy serious..... As you have heard many times already, this trade is not for NOW. This trade is for the future. And the way the NY knicks are looking, this was a GREAT trade. SHEMAC already sidelined, reports are they are going to lose David Lee in the offseason, and they are not going to land any major free agents (other than Joe Johnson). That really doesn't make NY better and makes OUR FUTURE draft picks better. Do you understand JCDenton , or do I have to explain it in simpler terms. One request please stop posting, this was horrible.
I haven't seen the OP's other posts and feel sorry for the guy. Let's just make some HUGE assumptions to begin with that there are no other methods for evaluating the trade nor any other variables that factor into team W/L records of teams. A better starting point would have been to understand the W/L record in context. Here are the Rockets, Kings, & Knicks Win-Loss records for this season thus far: The trouble with using a flat average is that it treats your entire data set linearly. But as we look at the W/L records in question we see that they are non-linear. More to the point, the Rockets had a nice run in Dec 09, but the W/L trend is negative from January onward. Infact in argument can be made that the Rocket trades have helped to stabilize the downward trend that the team was on prior to the trade. Looking at the Kings the trade seems to have helped them stabilize their W/L trend as well. The Knicks on the other hand don't appear to have benefitted as much as the Rockets or Knicks.
Hahaha thanks OP, you actually made me LOL! Seriously go easy on the kid, he is probably some 10 year old who just learned how to add and subtract and got really excited and tried to apply it to the Rockets. Don't worry kid, we will all be really excited to see your new thread in the future when you find out how to use your times tables.
