Blazers ahead of Lakers in Hollinger's Power Rankings

Any stat that puts the Blazers in front of the Lakers is pretty worthless wouldn't you say?

 

Science has come up with all sorts of theories to try and explain phenomena ... and almost none of them provide absolute "proof" that something exists or functions in a certain way, but they do seem to be useful (to varying degrees) in helping to explain or predict things.

So I guess instead of attempting to come up with objective measures for things we should instead refuse to analyze them or discuss them because there is no way to provide "proof"

 

The formula is only an opinion. I'm sorry you can't see that.

 

In terms of who is playing better right now? No, I wouldn't.

 

Jesus fucking Christ dude.

Can you stay on the subject? I'm only talking about PER.

 

The team's are 1 and 1 this year ... so far I guess you could say they are even by any observed head to head measurement, who's playing better adjusted for strength of opponent, road and home and record in the past month? Well according to Hollinger's forumula the Blazers are modestly better. Where's the controversy?

 

WOOO HOOOOO! Portland is playing better than LA over a short arbitrary period of time!!!!!!

 

PER? I thought this thread was about Hollinger's power rankings? Jesus fucking christ, can you stay on subject please

 

Here's a stat like that for you:

Last 10 games:
Blazers: 8-2
Lakers: 6-4

I'm sure even you understand that one.

 

I would say opponent's PPGs is a pretty worthwhile stat. It shows how many points you give up to your opponent. The purpose is to win, adn you win by scoring mroe than your opponent. We are ahead of the Lakers in Opponent's PPG, so it's worthless, apparently. We shoot a better FG% than the Lakers. FG% = worthless stat. We shoot a better 3pt% than the Lakers. 3pt% = worthless stat. We have less turnovers than the Lakers. Turnovers = worthless stat. FT% = worthless stat.

 

The Lakers are the 1 seed, while Portland is the 8th.

 

This is getting embarrassing by the way.

 

Which has abosolutely no predictive or descriptive power about how a particular team is playing currently. Thanks for sharing.

 

You had me fooled for a little while. I thought you might be interested in having an intelligent discussion. But you're more interested in trolling.

Carry on.

 

Sorry I don't understand your point.

 

The formula is only an opinion...an opinion that this is the best current way to determine a player's contributions. The results aren't subjective, though. There's a big difference between the subjectivity in building a formula and subjective results.

Obviously, if you don't agree with the basis of the formula, then you won't agree with the results. You haven't really provided any rational argument against PER, though...just "stop sucking on PER" and "if it isn't perfect, it's worthless" (a principle which would also render all of science worthless too).

 

Great stuff.

 

judging by the rest of your responses, I'm not all that surprised. But really, you have to read what ISN'T there, not just what is there. Then maybe you'll get it.

 

Yay!