Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jordoo, post: 884639, member: 569"]
But its completely arbitrary really. Its a made up stat using other stats not something real and quantifiable so in other words a hodge podge of actual measurable stats used to create a new not real stat. It is not logical because Ennis didn't win 2.9 of our 16 games or whatever. We won 16 and he contributed to each one just like when we lose he would be part of that. I find using stats and math to make something up funny. Really stats do not tell the whole story anyways and one of the beautiful things about our team this year is that we are more than the sum of our parts and the guys seem to fit together well in a way that makes it easier on each other. This wins thing is taking measurable stats and trying to figure out which players are actually contributing the most to wins I get it, but its still silly to me because often times players are more efficient because of the better players around them that get more attention and wind up being less efficient. Don't these metrics rate efficiency quite heavily?

1st my understanding of bball is outdated.
2nd I am not able to understand intro level college stat classes.
What's next? I am attacking the particular statistic not you. If you want to value it go for it I find it to be silly and a waste of time because it tells us nothing new and tries to quantify something that isn't really quantifiable numbers wise IMO.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?