OK? I mean I see your argument, but as I understand it, blocks, steals, turnovers, and such were based upon matching players from prior eras to those of more recent eras on the basis of measureable stats. While Russell is in some respects similar to Wallace, it isn't an exact match by any means, and the comparison is generally done against multiple players, not a single player, or more accurately an amalgam of multiple players. So it isn't surprising that Russell ends up with fewer blocks than the highest block percentage players you can find. Russell was fairly unique, which is why the comparison model doesn't work as well for him as it does for the average player.

Russell's blocks is an old argument anyway. The key is that these missing stats have to be generated in a manner that is uniform and consistent for all players. So there may be a better method that the way WIS does it, but I haven't seen one proposed that doesn't contain considerable subjectivity based primarily on unreliable anecdotal evidence that isn't available for all players.

I already conceded that the fact that Masino is the best at these stats probably indicates an error. Their system, as I understand it, should not result in producing numbers more extreme than those found in the comparable players from the measureable era. (My point on Masino was that I well believe there may be statistical extremes among measureable players with low minutes.)

Im ok with adding a little subjectivity when the current supposedly 'objective' system spits out: 08-09 Zach Randolph defensive rating 93 or Kevin Love 100% effective at SF but Scottie Pippen not 100% effective at SG until his mid 30s

and they have or at least last year did allow for some subjective adjustments on a committee basis - which I think created healthy discussion and increased interest and activity both in these forums and in game play

the real problem is just that they have no one putting any time or effort into the engine or customer service right now as is apparent from this very thread

Quote: Originally Posted By monkee on 8/05/2009
Im ok with adding a little subjectivity when the current supposedly 'objective' system spits out: 08-09 Zach Randolph defensive rating 93 or Kevin Love 100% effective at SF but Scottie Pippen not 100% effective at SG until his mid 30s

and they have or at least last year did allow for some subjective adjustments on a committee basis - which I think created healthy discussion and increased interest and activity both in these forums and in game play

the real problem is just that they have no one putting any time or effort into the engine or customer service right now as is apparent from this very thread

This part is absolutely unarguable.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

clearly outperforming your opponent in almost every single area is not the way to win at this thing.

...

positive differentials on made FTAs and 3pas too

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

this is after a massive 2 wins in the last 20 game

I totally thought your team was a 55-60 win team when you drafted it. Mostly because I figured you would outperform your opponent in many if not most of the key areas. And you have. But you're not winning. You're in a tough division but IMO you have at least the 2nd best if not the best team in the division, yet the record shows otherwise.

In summation: the sim is crap.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

scud's draft analysis:

remember folks, u heard it here, first... two words, payton and brandon (was that 3 words?) these 2 guards are the engine to this team. it's not the dwight-parish-grandmama show here, though the big men will perform well, it's about the little guys. u can't stop them, u can't focus on them, and u can't draft them now...lol. i hate this team. hate it! u show me a weakness, and i'll show u to the eye doctor. all the bases are covered. i'm just a little happy dwight can't hit a free throw (wasn't that a liabilty in one of the laker games?). mad-monk will draft some 3's now, and a role palyer off the bench. i really hate this team! playoffs, conference finalists.


I echoed his prediction at some point. This was a really strong team. The differentials should indicate at least a .500 record if not more. Yet it's far from it. I don't get it. I also don't get how you're only averaging 49.4 rpg and allowing 49.4 rpg. Your frontcourt, in a draft league, should be enough to be getting you 2.5 to 3 more per game while allowing 3 or 4 less. It's flat out dumb. I don't like you, but you have an absolute legitimate complaint.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

ltb are you saying you want to see the advanced numbers for the entire league? or just this team? Im not sure the latter is meaningful without the prior

nor am I sure what the advanced numbers can say about the fact that according to the numbers above this team has outscored its opposition and holds a slight advantage in both generating possessions and efficiency (diffs on FTMs and 3PMs are positive as well) and yet loses 2/3rds of its games

and mind you Im not even complaining at this point - Im posting these more in the spirit of fortean times stuff : man spontaneuosly combusts; frogs fall from the sky; team beats opponents, loses

I certainly wouldn't ask you to post numbers for the entire league. And you may very well be right about the futility.

But at least clarify what kind of league this is (open or theme, cap, any special rules). I'm just interested in having a bit of additional context. Don't mean to question your level of frustration. I believe I understand about frogs falling from the sky at this point.

it's in the ODL - $42 million draft league.