But we don't all agree that it is valid data. (By "valid," I mean useful, not whether the data is accurate.) But I don't use win/loss records with Oden playing, either. I agree that that's too small a sample size, as well. 14-7 is quite small, to tell something like this. In addition, quality of competition over those games seems like something that could completely overwhelm Oden's impact, as a factor.
proving subjective is not really possible... it's also near impossible to disprove. This is getting tiresome. he absolutely shot you down in flames. When you claim "not based on any fact or truth" and then a clear fact is provided, your claim is in flames. I gave stats to provide context as to how Greg contributes to the club's better play. again I was talking subjectively. I've explained this repeatedly now... you're free to disagree, but I think most here would agree that the club is better with Greg then without. Besides, it's not like Greg has been regularly cutting into Joel's PT. JP is averaging about 1 minute less per game this year compared to last when there was no Greg at all... dude gets into foul trouble. thats the measure you've decided on as the end all. Like any statistical measure at this point I think this is a flawed one with as small as sample of games Greg has played in and that he's been coming back the foot strain as well as the knee... those wins and losses are far from equal. My measure is my impression of the collective pulse of posters here. I noted this in my initial comments. You're free to disagree but I think most here view Greg as a big positive in the lineup noted STOMP
When I mentioned the size of the other sample, I'm saying that Oden hasn't really played that much. The sample size of Oden's minutes played is pretty small as well.
Are we even discussing the same thing here? It seems you keep thinking I am challenging your statement that we are better with Oden than without. That isn't what I am challenging. I agree that the team subjectively seems to be better with Oden. I am putting out some data to show that our intuition isn't "obviously" and undeniably correct. The data I used doesn't disprove what we already both agree on, but it can challenge our position. If you don't want to look at the other side of the coin, that is certainly up to you. I am challenging the statement that it is "obvious" that we are better when Oden plays. If it is obvious, we wouldn't be having this conversation. You can call data that I present as "too small of a sample" but doing so doesn't justify your position on the "obvious" front.
we've been arguing different things for some time now. I've laid out my position enough times and would only be inventing ways to not completely repeat myself word for word answering your latest post. take it easy STOMP
True enough. But the sample size for Oden's individual numbers doesn't need to be as large because every minute is a direct measure of his individual impact...while games played is only an indirect measure. For an indirect measure, you need much more sample size (a key point about +/-, another indirect measure of individual impact). So, I think Oden's numbers are a more confident measure of his impact than win/loss records. Win/loss records are more "bottom line" but also very tenuous to connect to a single player.
