Are you a statistics person or a Impact person?
Options
caddo man
Members Posts: 22,476 ✭✭✭✭✭
How much clout do you put into numbers? Does the statistics tell the whole story to you?
OR are you a Impact person? If a player score 50 points but still lose, do you brush it off as, "They still lost" vs. That same player score 25 and win!
So Are you a statistics person or a Impact person?
To answer my own question, I am a Impact person. You can score 50 points in a game, but if all those points came in garbage time or the first half and you lost then it was all for not.
What say you?
OR are you a Impact person? If a player score 50 points but still lose, do you brush it off as, "They still lost" vs. That same player score 25 and win!
So Are you a statistics person or a Impact person?
To answer my own question, I am a Impact person. You can score 50 points in a game, but if all those points came in garbage time or the first half and you lost then it was all for not.
What say you?
Comments
-
people only use stats when its convenient
-
A lil bit of both..... More of an impact person though, but I use stats. In this day of this fantasy league ? people tend to use and value stats more. I dont care what your stats look like as long as you got the job done when your team needed you and got the win.
-
Impact.. and eyetest someone can score 13 pts and set the tone of the game and those points would be just as impactful as 35.. its about the how and when
stats dont tell you the circumstances -
Results person I want Wins!
-
I think it's a combination of the two.. In the 2 sports that I really care about Hoops and Football... there are plenty of dudes that get numbers but those numbers don't translate into W's. In the NFL you see this a lot with WR's in that they gan put up huge HOF type numbers but have ? teams so their stat lines look GOAT but team success is WOAT... Ocho comes to mind with this... It's the same in the NBA, a dudes like Tyreke Evans, Nick Young, Brook Lopez, etc all put up solid numbers, however they play on perennially bad teams so their numbers really have no impact on the team in terms of W's and L's.
This is why the arguments about dudes like Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Paul, Rose, etc are far more interesting to me because these dudes put up stats and have a HUGE impact on their team's success (all win). In football your QB stats generally can dictate the success or failure of your team. Very rarely will you find a QB with a 90+ rating, a high TD to INT ratio and a high Completion rate playing for a bad team that loses more than it wins. So when you analyze that QB's stats, it's based on their impact to the W column. Example of this is David Carr vs Ryan... pretty similar QB's except Ryan is pretty efficient and Carr wasn't (terrible O line too). -
its over: 2012! wrote: »I'm hip...
that's why I laugh at fools who try to say Shaq carried Lakers to those 3 chips, at the turn of the century;
when they handed Shaq his MVP trophies, since 2001, he made sure to say, "thank you thank you thank you, haters, for extending me these Awards...but remember, I was out there in the trenches I was out there in the battle I was out there watching History be made, and from what I experienced, Kobe is the biggest reason we won these championshps!"
Yep he did say all of that and to a degree it was the truth... however, Shaq was the IMPACT player in all of those Title runs... At the time, Shaq was the most dominate force in the league. Kobe's rise to greatness after Shaq's departure should and does not diminish what Shaq was in those days. -
its over: 2012! wrote: »SELF-ETHERAGE
DUDE. STOP IT. NOW!!
Dont' try to mince Shaq's words, don't try to minimize Shaq's truths, don't try to downplay Shaq using his experience in those trenches his sight in those battles his adrenaline, as a gawker/fessing up to how Kobe was looking like NBA-GOAT out there and was the true MVP of those NBA Finals' showcases.
FOH weirdo.. -
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^playmaker88 wrote: »eye test -
My question is who ever minimized shaqs impact.... all you hear from certain dummies is shaq carried Kobe.. when in reality it was a partnership
-
its over: 2012! wrote: »SELF-ETHERAGE
DUDE. STOP IT. NOW!!
Dont' try to mince Shaq's words, don't try to minimize Shaq's truths, don't try to downplay Shaq using his experience in those trenches his sight in those battles his adrenaline, as a gawker/fessing up to how Kobe was looking like NBA-GOAT out there and was the true MVP of those NBA Finals' showcases.
Why?
because Shaq has spent 18 years comprehending, the nba, and he knows that 2000-'03 Kobe = proof of how impact trumps stats.
riiiighht and dominating the paint averaging over 30PPG and 12RBS a game is somehow not considered as IMPACTFUL???? Really???? You must have forgotten that Kobe never took a BIG shot in those days... Phil Jackson drew up plays for Horry and Fisher back then, Kobe was the 3rd option in crunch time aka IMPACT time. Has he grown since then??? ? yea... Is Kobe an All-Time Great??? Yup... but again that does not in any way diminish SHAQ's dominance back then. ? you're dumb -
Oh and BTW on cue, the KOBE stans come running in here to defend their lord and savior...
-
I'm an impact person. Stats are cool but at the end of the day, wins matter the most.
-
a little of both...
i think it's more important to when you get your points and the impact of it , like you said if your piling up points in garbage time and at the end of the night you got a stat line of 22 points and 8 Rebounds then most people will look at that and go "he balled out"
Jason Terry to me is someone who's PPG may not be a 27ppg guy and never will be , but his Impact to me is just as good cuz he hits a lot of meaningful shots and hits shots at the right time ...and in 4th qt's he seems to step it up, he may end up with 16 or 17 points but it was a very impactful 16 or 17 ...
As Much as i liked Watching Stephon Marbury cuz i was just a fan of his since his GT days i would say he is the blueprint of someone with Misleading stats , he never really made his teams much better at all , if you just look at Marbury stats you probably go "Damn a PG with a career average of 20 and 7" ..but he seem to stat stuff more than actually make his team better....
Joe Johnson and Jamal Crawford i think would be another example, Joe Johnson is viewed as "The guy" on the team he has the big contract ,averages the most points , he's the all-star, he's Solid but grossly overrated but how many times are his points impactful? i usually hear people say "Joe had a quiet 20 points" , to where i see jamal Crawford have meaningful moments and big time moments in games more so than joe johnson, he may not average what joe does but i think Crawfords impact is greater. -
theres no way stats can't be impactful. and our new obsession with metric stats is trying to prove that everyday. Points Per Sneaker Squeak and all those other acronyms. The last 10 years have seen us try to close the gap and try in every sport to get a measurable number and what makes a player great. So it has to be both
-
almighty breeze wrote: »theres no way stats can't be impactful. and our new obsession with metric stats is trying to prove that everyday. Points Per Sneaker Squeak and all those other acronyms. The last 10 years have seen us try to close the gap and try in every sport to get a measurable number and what makes a player great. So it has to be both
i seem plenty of guys shoot out the gate and get a quick 8 to 10 points in the 1st QT and finish the game with 14
Or Guys taking advantage of a blowout and then turning it on...
some guys hide from pressure and just float around the perimeter because they dont want the rock...but when theres no pressure they throw up 25 points -
KeepOnPushing wrote: »i seem plenty of guys shoot out the gate and get a quick 8 to 10 points in the 1st QT and finish the game with 14
Or Guys taking advantage of a blowout and then turning it on...
some guys hide from pressure and just float around the perimeter because they dont want the rock...but when theres no pressure they throw up 25 points
exactly but those are seen by those who know sports and disregarded. the reliance on stats as proof of ones greatness is what we're essentially talking about. but even in the crunchtime joe johnson vs. jamel crawford examples given, there are stats and formulas being cooked up to measure that so we dont have to look at Danny Granger score 25 a game and wonder why he's not in the Kobe/Lebron discussion
But stats like Phil Jackson has never lost a series when winning game 1 or Between 1990-98 The Bulls never lost 3 games in a row while Michael Jordan was playing are as impactful as looking on a spreadsheet or seeing those games live. For a while the stat that Tampa Bay Bucs couldnt win in any temperature under 41 degrees held true and impacted both teams psyche. There are also stats that need to be seen such as plus/minus in hockey which measures what happens when certain players play with each other. It happens in every sport. without Player X hitting in front him Albert Pujols bats __ and hits __ less HRs & RBIs than Player Y in the same slot. So it has to be both -
Impact over course. Gotta put stats in context.
-
Definitely Impact. And impact can only be measured by those that actually know the sport, the team, and watch the games.
You can almost every championship team and find two things:
1. The elements that people *think* made them champs (star players, etc.)
2. And the REAL things that made them superior (scheme, intangibles)
Take my Falcons for example. Tony Gonzales has never put up the same kind of numbers he had in KC, but his presence opened so much up for Turner and Roddy White, neither of which were perennial pro-bowlers before playing with TG. He made the linebackers and Safeties account for him which helped the rest of the offense flourish. And I know somebody else whose "impact" will do the same, if not more....
-
I'm an impact person. Stats are cool but at the end of the day, wins matter the most.
Basically.
The perfect examples in the NFL is Ben Roethlisberger and Phillip Rivers.
Big Ben may never put up the kind of numbers Rivers did last year, but who had the biggest impact on their teams?
None of Rivers cute lil' stats did the Chargers any good when they were on the couch come playoff time, meanwhile, Big Ben was converting third downs with his nose looking like Gonzo of the muppet babies. -
I'm definitely an impact person. Half the time I roll my eyes when they start listing stats. 60 points is impressive but if the team loses, that don't mean ? to me.
-
nthngis4vr& alwyzisalie wrote: »I'm definitely an impact person. Half the time I roll my eyes when they start listing stats. 60 points is impressive but if the team loses, that don't mean ? to me.
^^^^^^^^^^ Real ish.
And you see all the time on here. ? 's with losing teams start clinging to any player on their squad with decent numbers like its some kind of consolation prize for your team having double-digit losses.
The ? a player making the pro-bowl do for me if my team's winning percentage look like a NBA guard's shooting percentage? -
I mostly just mess with football, and I'm a statistics person. Choking can be an exception. Like AP used to fumble at big times, so that was a real negative impact. But all you can do is control yourself on the field. If you're a RB, and your QB is throwing INT after INT, despite you havin a good game. And ur defense can't stop the other team's offense, I can't fault you for the loss. Or if you're Revis, but Cromartie is lettin the other WR beat him all game...what can you do about it? Just gotta do ur job
Basketball can be different tho, because a player may score a lot but not play solid defense. And it's harder to keep track of defense statistically in the NBA, so your offensive numbers may show you as being great because stats can only tell half the story. -
25% Heart..25% Impact..25% Eye Test..and 25% Stats...I think ? overall put to much emphasis on stats, and that's stupid as hell just based on the fact that gaudy stats don't always equal wins for your team...Example, I'd take Tom Brady on my squad before Peyton Manning based on the fact that I feel like he's a better leader, he passes the eye test as far as having command of his team, and his heart is greater than Peyton..Even though Peyton will light up the stat sheet and i consider him still to be one of the greatest qb's ever, he can be shaky in big situations, and stats don't measure that....and how the hell did this thread turn into another "Kobe hate fest" smh...damn, this ? is every day on here lol..
-
greenwood1921 wrote: »^^^^^^^^^^ Real ish.
And you see all the time on here. ? 's with losing teams start clinging to any player on their squad with decent numbers like its some kind of consolation prize for your team having double-digit losses.
The ? a player making the pro-bowl do for me if my team's winning percentage look like a NBA guard's shooting percentage?
So with this said, you should agree Eli Manning:64-46 and 1 SB win>>>Tony Romo:40-25 0 SB wins???? -
9 times outta 10 the stats and the impact show the same thing. Its just most of you dumb ? on this forum are too stupid to understand how to interpret stats, especially in context.
