PDA

View Full Version : John Hollinger acts like he smokes massive quantities of marijuana


OldDirtMcGirt
10-10-2007, 12:11 AM
That's the only logical explanation to make a player ranking list this whacked out.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/rankings?&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fhollinger%2frankings

Timmy is the sixth best powerforward?! Pau Gasol is better than Steve Nash?! Yao Ming is the best player in the NBA?!
Emo_T_Park
10-10-2007, 12:14 AM
he's going by per stats.

duh.
RC's Boss
10-10-2007, 12:17 AM
That's the only logical explanation to make a player ranking list this whacked out.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/rankings?&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fhollinger%2frankings

Timmy is the sixth best powerforward?! Pau Gasol is better than Steve Nash?! Yao Ming is the best player in the NBA?!
WU TANG, WU TANG!
ss1986v2
10-10-2007, 12:18 AM
those rankings are PER based. take a look here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&id=2850240
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Efficiency_Rating
OldDirtMcGirt
10-10-2007, 12:34 AM
those rankings are PER based. take a look here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&id=2850240
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Efficiency_Rating

I know that they are. But it's based on his "projected PER", and any system that turns out those rankings is clearly significantly flawed.
spurs_fan_in_exile
10-10-2007, 12:35 AM
Hollinger's a stat nut. What would make me question his smoking habits would be picking the Rockets to take the #1 seed in the west when they are going to be such a different team that there's pretty much no statistical data to base that decision.
And1Mak
10-10-2007, 12:42 AM
It's not a ranking of "best" as in who helps most by leading/contibuting to wins.
It's mainly about being good and efficient on offense. One of the best, if not the best, for those categories actually.

Defensive players are usually underrated in PER rankings (as they are in real life).
Still, the Spurs have 3 players in the top 22.
Indazone
10-10-2007, 12:42 AM
haha see you guys at the Western Conference Finals. Buy ya a beer when we win.
OldDirtMcGirt
10-10-2007, 12:44 AM
Hollinger's a stat nut. What would make me question his smoking habits would be picking the Rockets to take the #1 seed in the west when they are going to be such a different team that there's pretty much no statistical data to base that decision.

Typically most of his stuff can at least be defended by numbers (although I question that alot), but his predictions are just ridiculous. I'd be shocked if the Rockets cracked the top three in the West, they have absolutely no shot at the number one spot. Yao is an awful fit in Adelman's system, and it's pretty much guaranteed that him and T-Mac are going to have health problems.
And1Mak
10-10-2007, 12:48 AM
Didn't Hollinger pick the Spurs to win the title in 06-07?
O-Factor
10-10-2007, 12:57 AM
John Hollinger has really dissapointed me.
WalterBenitez
10-10-2007, 05:21 AM
he's going by per stats.

duh.

I told you what I know ... Stats sucks, not only in school :p:
Summers
10-10-2007, 06:34 AM
Hollinger's a stat nut.

Because we all know it's stats that win championships!
Holt's Cat
10-10-2007, 07:21 AM
Yao Ming is the best player in the NBA?!

If you speak Mandarin, Cantonese, or live in a doublewide in East Texas.
wildchild
10-10-2007, 07:23 AM
If you speak Mandarin, Cantonese, or live in a doublewide in East Texas.

:elephant :elephant :elephant :elephant
Holt's Cat
10-10-2007, 07:26 AM
Anyways, an excessive reliance on a player's performance as measured numerically, to the point of ignoring other pertinent data, say, whether or not his team has actually won a postseason series, makes one stupid. Houston's getting a lot of love from the stat geeks this summer, in no small part due to the fact that one of their own is running the show there.
Mister Sinister
10-10-2007, 07:58 AM
Because we all know it's stats that win championships!
I thought ratings did.
ambchang
10-10-2007, 09:20 AM
Those weren't even PER ratings, it was projected PER ratings.
I believe what he did was look at a player's stats, compare them with historical data from similar players in the past (say similar stats, age, same position, height, weight, etc....), look at the trends, create a multiplier, and then plug it into last year's PER to get a "projected PER".
The flaws are numerous, mostly because each player is very different from others in terms of peak years, and that system changes, team makeup and such are extremely important to a player's productivity (see Mike Bibby, Bonzi Wells and so forth).
It's looking at productivity by looking strictly at stats, and not the effect on final win-loss (because he can't), so if you define productivity in such a manner, then he is "correct".
hater
10-10-2007, 09:49 AM
I he really smoked weed wouldn't he pick Denver?
Rummpd
10-10-2007, 10:09 AM
I just send him a question - Why? He had Duncan 4 overall last year and the dropoff from a PER of about 26 to under 24 is perplexing - granted Tony etc. will probably take away some of his offense but Duncan is like Groundhog Day - at the end he will be in the top 5 again. Furthermore, he hits a few more FTs and he is a top three.
Extra Stout
10-10-2007, 11:36 AM
Hollinger's system is pretty good at extrapolating team data. He's not so good at evaluating individual players, because his PER is hamstrung by being limited to statistics which are kept by the NBA. I think that of all the major sports, basketball has the set of statistics which omit the most player contributions to winning.
FromWayDowntown
10-10-2007, 11:42 AM
PER projections last year spit out a number for Jackie Butler that would have made him a top 40 player this year, for whatever it's worth . . . .
spurs_fan_in_exile
10-10-2007, 11:44 AM
PER projections last year spit out a number for Jackie Butler that would have made him a top 40 player this year, for whatever it's worth . . . .
And Pop didn't play him? What a shitty coach.
FromWayDowntown
10-10-2007, 11:59 AM
And Pop didn't play him? What a shitty coach.

Exactly.
JamStone
10-10-2007, 12:19 PM
I didn't know fans still got riled up over player rankings and pre-season predictions. They never meant squat. They'll never mean squat. And, especially by fans of a team that has won several recent championships.
DOMINATOR
10-10-2007, 02:10 PM
Yao is an awful fit in Adelman's system, and it's pretty much guaranteed that him and T-Mac are going to have health problems.

i watched the entire first pre-season game and was very surprised by how well yao played in the new system. he got his shots plus created easy layups for his teammates. hornets couldn't do anything when yao was in the game.
Tmac seems to be the one having troubles with the new system. every time he would touch the ball his teammates would become spectators. tmacs teammates have to make things happen off the ball for tmac to become more effective.
nacho estrada
10-10-2007, 06:07 PM
Fuck Stats.. Except The Stat Counting Larry O Briens Per Career..