Carmelo Anthony

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Carmelo Anthony is not the better player over Isiah Thomas.

Are you kidding me?

I mean... really?

You are comparing someone with "Amare Stoudemire" syndrome on defense and the boards to one of the greatest playmakers of all-time?

Your PER bullshit from basketballreference.com is not the motherfucking end-all-be-all when it comes to measuring how good a player was.

Those guys fucking emailed me and my friend even telling us EXACTLY that.

Essentially it was 'take all these statistics with a grain of salt because it doesn't hold water to actually watching the player play'

Apparently, you still don't watch a Goddamn thing if you actually believe that Carmelo was definitely a better player than Isiah Thomas...

I mean what the ****?

You should stick to the NFL or MLB because you have proven what you know about the NBA.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Lefty, you are drinking the Carmelo Anthony Kool-Aid, with most of the other Bulls' fans, right out of Carmelo Anthony's Goddamn scrotum.

 

[Lefty]

Carmelo Anthony is not the better player over Isiah Thomas.

Indeed he is my friend.

Are you kidding me?

Nope.

I mean... really?

Yep.

You are comparing someone with "Amare Stoudemire" syndrome on defense and the boards

What does this even mean? Is it usually associated with a case of "being of more worth than Isiah Thomas"? If so then ok, I'll buy into it.

Oh yeah, on that note: Stoudemire? Also better than Isiah Thomas.

to one of the greatest playmakers of all-time?

That is completely subjective and in no way does anything to measure Thomas' worth and overall contributions objectively, but yes.

Your PER bullshit from basketballreference.com is not the motherfucking end-all-be-all when it comes to measuring how good a player was.

Good thing I did other things too like adjust for scoring environment, usage and efficiency. You know what they all showed? Well, you can probably guess.

Those guys fucking emailed me and my friend even telling us EXACTLY that.

:lmao: WHAT? Who emailed you?

Essentially it was 'take all these statistics with a grain of salt because it doesn't hold water to actually watching the player play'

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

Yeah, because we totally shouldn't objectively look at player value and worth through different lenses (i.e. usage, efficiency and scoring environment) or anything, because those things are so easy to pick up on by just "watching the player play". Get real.

Apparently, you still don't watch a Goddamn thing if you actually believe that Carmelo was definitely a better player than Isiah Thomas...

I guess this begs the question...a few of them, really:

Line of questioning 1: How many Isiah Thomas games have you watched? In person or on television? Did you only watch Isiah when he was on the court? Did you take notes? How detailed were the notes, if any were taken at all? What percentage of Thomas' total games played in his career have you watched? Did you watch different portions of his career or just all at once? Where are those notes now?

Line of questioning 2: Same as above, just substitute in Carmelo Anthony.

Now, this is just me thinking out loud, but I'm going to go ahead and guess that you haven't "watched" enough of either player enough to say much of anything on behalf of their abilities that carries with it more weight than the statistics they put up. And even then, you would still be speaking to things that you cannot possibly take away from simply watching someone play. So enough with this "you gotta watch, numbers suck" bullshit.

I mean what the ****?

It's simple: Carmelo Anthony > Isiah Thomas. See? Now you try it.

You should stick to the NFL or MLB because you have proven what you know about the NBA.

A lot more than you? Got it.

Look, Rami, I know it's probably tough, but you have to buy in to the idea that perhaps some of your long-held notions--about anything, really, but in this case basketball--might actually be false, or at the very least founded on improper assumptions or valuations, and thus open to further exploration, and that exploration may eventually lead to your previously infallible notions being shown to be incomplete or incorrect. Hell, not too long ago, everyone knew the Earth was flat, right? And everyone knew that the seasons changed and the stars shifted on the whims of some unknowable omnipotence. We now know differently, of course, but it is not all that uncommon for widespread beliefs to be proven incorrect. Someday, hopefully soon, you'll understand.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

LMAO.... Amare is better than Isiah too! Ohhhhkkkkkk

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Amare Stoudemire is a poor man's Shawn Kemp. Just gtfoutta here already... lollll

 

[Lefty]

LMAO.... Amare is better than Isiah too! Ohhhhkkkkkk

No bullshit, I promise. Adjusted for all the same things, he's better.

Amare Stoudemire is a poor man's Shawn Kemp. Just gtfoutta here already... lollll

Actually, Stoudemire is better than Kemp by a pretty wide margin.

 

[Lefty]

And Rami, how about you try actually addressing the points I have made? Thanks, big guy.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Addressing what? That you're a clown... I believe I addressed that already. You don't know a damn thing so why waste my time typing when I can respond in a few sentences, grab the opcorn: and read the next basketball ignorant thing that you have to say.

 

[Lefty]

Addressing what? That you're a clown... I believe I addressed that already. You don't know a damn thing so why waste my time typing when I can respond in a few sentences, grab the opcorn: and read the next basketball ignorant thing that you have to say.

Just saying different variations of "you're wrong lolololululululzzzz!!!11%^*&3!" over and over doesn't make it so. In fact, it kind of does the opposite, seeing as how you just stated that you have no intention of addressing anything I brought up.

 

[Lefty]

I want to clear something up before people seize on it like it is their lifeblood: Obviously Isiah Thomas was really, really, really good at basketball, and his career is definitely one to be remembered, and obviously, Melo's career has only been about 60% the length of Isiah's. So, Isiah still holds sway in the total stat columns, be they points, rebounds, assists, win shares, whatever, Isiah wins. I am not talking about totals. I am talking about the level of production and worth we can reasonably expect from either player given their careers at present. It remains to be seen whether Melo will still be as valuable in a couple seasons, as who knows what could happen, but I am looking at what we can reasonably expect from each player given their respective careers, relatively long or short as they may be. This is not as much of a stretch as it would be were I to be using only one partial season's worth of data, but still it is something that needs to be clarified, I think.

 

[Lefty]

I guess that settles it. Lets use a bastardized efficiency statistic to compare two players who played different positions in different eras and had different career lengths, lets adjust this bastardized efficiency statistic further to somehow account for league average,

And let's also adjust for scoring environment and that relationship between usage and overall efficiency. You know, like I did. Why does everyone seize on PER and completely forget to notice everything else I did? Is it possible that they are just all complete fucking idiots? Yeah, I think so.

and then lets conclude that Carmelo Anthony was better than Isiah Thomas because he was a 134 while poor Isiah was a 121.

You know that I did other things than look at just PER, right?

Since you made no effort to explain what mathematical formula actually comprises PER+ (how did you say it? Show your work?), no one can really respond to you your alleged argument.

I thought I had made it pretty clear in my non-equation using explanation of PER, but you seem to be especially stupid, so here goes:

PER+= [PER/lgPER] * 100

Luckily for me, lgPER is always 15, making it a simple measure with which to compare players across eras. Of course, and I feel I need to state this now because, like I said earlier, you are especially fucking stupid, PER isn't the be-all-end-all of stats, just one that is relatively easy to adjust for the league average and so on. PER should be used in combination with other methods, like, oh, I don't know, adjusting to scoring environment and usage-efficiency.

I will say this, though. You previously said that Thomas' role as a playmaker was "completely subjective and in no way does anything to measure Thomas' worth and overall contributions objectively",

Yep.

yet I can see that Thomas had nearly as many assists in one season (1123) as Carmelo Anthony has had in his entire career (1598).

1) I understand that some of the career totals will be off because of the current difference in length of their respective careers, and I addressed this when I said I am going off of what we can reasonably expect from each player given their careers at present.

2) Assists aren't as important as scoring.

Again, I don't know where this would fit in to your PER+ equation, but I think it would have to count for something, right?

1) PER accounts for assists, but weights scoring more heavily, which agrees with our observation of the game.

2) PER is not the only method I used to judge these two players, you fucking moron, how many times does that need to be explained to you?

To sum up, have you ever watched a basketball game in your life?

This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

 

[JCM]

the fire is getting stronger.....

 

[Scoot26]

Wait, someone actually thinks Carmelo Anthony is better than Isiah Thomas?

 

[Lefty]

Good to see that the only thing you agreed with in my posting was when you quoted me quoting you, and said "yep". Are you really this stupid? You are agreeing with my quote of what you said??

It was a joke, my friend.

Now I am going to quote you again, so you don't need to agree with my quoting of you....

Ok.......

I asked you what comprises PER+, and your response was:

PER+= [PER/lgPER] * 100

That wasn't really a quote, more of a transposition, really.

Really?? God's honest truth, you are this Special person??! Do you expect a person to think that answer is sufficient? I've seen some morons on the internet, but you, sir, take the cake.

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

Really?

"What is PER+"

"well, it's just PER/lgPER times 100"

"ZOMGZ FUCKING Special person UR STUPID OMMFG LOLOLOLOL@!@!#%&*&$3"

Better luck next time, Senser.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Wait, someone actually thinks Carmelo Anthony is better than Isiah Thomas?

Yes, and that person (God's gift to basketball analysis aka Lefty) also believes:

Amare Stoudemire > Isiah Thomas

and

Amare Stoudemire > Shawn Kemp

 

[TopekaRoy]

PER+= [PER/lgPER] * 100

I asked you what comprises PER+, and your response was:

PER+= [PER/lgPER] * 100


Really?? God's honest truth, you are this Special person??! Do you expect a person to think that answer is sufficient? I've seen some morons on the internet, but you, sir, take the cake.

This made total sense to me. PER+ is a comparison of a players PER to the league average (which is always 15). So if a players PER is 18 then his PER+ is 18/15=1.2*100=120. That is, he is 20% better than the league average.

The only problem was that I had no idea what PER was, so I guessed that it was similar to a QBs passer rating in football. I thought maybe "Player Efficiency Rating?" From there I googled "NBA Player Efficiency Rating" and here's what I found:

PER strives to measure a player's per-minute performance, while adjusting for pace. A league-average PER is always 15.00, which permits comparisons of player performance across seasons.
PER takes into account positive accomplishments, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls. The formula adds positive stats and subtracts negative ones through a statistical point value system. The rating for each player is then adjusted to a per-minute basis so that, for example, substitutes can be compared with starters in playing time debates. It is also adjusted for the team's pace. In the end, one number sums up the players' statistical accomplishments for that season.

Source: Wikipedia

Here is the Formula for calculating PER:

Where

,

,

.
Once uPER is calculated, it must be adjusted for team pace and normalized to the league to become PER:

This final step takes away the advantage held by players whose teams play a fastbreak style (and therefore have more possessions and more opportunities to do things on offense), and then sets the league average to 15.00.
Also note that it is impossible to calculate PER (at least in the conventional manner described above) for NBA seasons prior to 1978, as the league did not keep track of turnovers before that year.

I'm glad I could clear that up for you.

 

[Lefty]

You got me. Why don't you post at VSN? The forum could use you over there to generate discussion.

Because I don't want to deal with you arbitrarily taking the other side of any argument I engage in just because, as well as finding equally arbitrary faults in my statements, even though you know them to be logically sound.

 

[Scoot26]

I honestly think that Isiah Thomas was better than Carmelo Anthony.

I second that statement.

 

[Lefty]

I don't arbitrarily take the other side of any argument you engage in...I make a conscience choice to do so.

I honestly think that Isiah Thomas was better than Carmelo Anthony.

Ok, but how are you viewing that, though? From the standpoint of overall contributions throughout each respective career, Isiah obviously wins. He was in the league for, what, 13 years as a really, really good player? That's obvious, if not rather simplistic. When you look at their respective careers though and take away what you can reasonably expect from them, though, you get a completely different view when you adjust for context as well as some other things.

 

[rolyo]

Alright already. FACTS.......
#1 Carmelo Anthony is still on the Nuggets.
#2 This roster wont get us a championship.
#3 Deng, although quite explosive a few nights ago, he's inconsistent.
#4 Thibs will coach whatever he's got in front of him and adjust accordingly.
#5 Three teams, plus Melo's green light, plus beating other teams with a sweeter deal for Nuggets FO is what it's gonna take for us to get him.
#6 Melo's going to want to win big if(when) he leaves to (whatever team) We've got the best look for him to do that. (o.k thats an opinion)
#7 Whatever team is playing the Heat will be everyone's favorite team that night.
#8 We are 1-2 pieces away from contention, that said.....
#9 If not Melo, then who?
#10 I just saved 15% or less by switching to Geico.



* You guys are very passionate about the Bulls, thats never a bad thing.
Keep it up. Remember: WE ALL WANT THE BULLS TO WIN EQUALLY.