hollinger or stein's power rankings?

[pinkizdead]

Hollinger has the bulls at 7 2010-2011 Hollinger Power Rankings 1-15- National Basketball Association - ESPN





stein has the bulls at 3.

Multiple ulcers for D-Rose. Only six games out of 47 with a full complement of big men. And somehow that adds up to a 25-6 record since Dec. 4, when a heavy loss to Orlando and an L in Boston left the Bulls at a humble 9-8.

which one do you agree with?

 

[WindyCity7]

neither we sould be #1

 

[WindyCity7]

hollinger has the bucks @#15 :rolling:

 

[Crystallas]

Hollinger's power ranking is just a formula. Marc Stien is actually a ranking, and not a rating.

 

[houheffna]

Stein is the better of the two, uses feelings and eyes, not formula.

 

[Shakes]

The formula is useful, but doesn't take into account injuries. I'd say Hollinger's gives a good account of where teams are at, Stein's attempts to estimate where they're going. They're not really in competition, they're trying to do different things.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Are we really to care about a 4 position difference?

 

[Crystallas]

Are we really to care about a 4 position difference?

I dont even care about power rankings in general. To me, they are there for some entertainment value, but really, power rankings mean jack squat.

 

[Chi-Town Brahma]

Stein is the better of the two, uses feelings and eyes, not formula.

This.

 

[Anytime23]

Like mentioned, Hollingers rankings are based on his own formula, which i dont really care for. The guy has a math hard on and most of the time, im convinced he doesnt even watch basketball. It amazes me he gets paid to put out some of the BS he does.

 

[Shakes]

Like mentioned, Hollingers rankings are based on his own formula, which i dont really care for. The guy has a math hard on and most of the time, im convinced he doesnt even watch basketball. It amazes me he gets paid to put out some of the BS he does.

Everyone brings up the "Hollinger plays basketball on a calculator" argument against him, when he watches a heap of basketball, everything I've ever read about him says that he's the biggest basketball fanatic at ESPN.

Yes, he does attempt to quantify things with statistics, but if you read his articles you can see he adds a lot of his own subjective opinion too. His power rankings are pure formula because they're designed to be automated. Plus I think Hollinger is paid by ESPN to piss off the anti-stats crowd because it drives traffic.

 

[houheffna]

Everyone brings up the "Hollinger plays basketball on a calculator" argument against him, when he watches a heap of basketball, everything I've ever read about him says that he's the biggest basketball fanatic at ESPN.

Yes, he does attempt to quantify things with statistics, but if you read his articles you can see he adds a lot of his own subjective opinion too. His power rankings are pure formula because they're designed to be automated. Plus I think Hollinger is paid by ESPN to piss off the anti-stats crowd because it drives traffic.

If he watches the game, his lame assessment of Derrick Rose's place in the game shouldn't have been so...well...lame. And yes, he goes to a gang of ballgames. A lot of them. My only issue with him is that HE is not willing to deviate from some of those statistical measures he uses. Everything will not support his statistical categories because they are not 100% accurate.

 

[Shakes]

IMO like most journalists he's paid to sometimes says things just to be controversial. Saying "such and such a player is exactly what you already think he is" doesn't get millions of angry fans clicking to read the article.

You have to take any article by a professional sports writer with a grain of salt, they're always going to be prone to exaggeration because strong opinions bring strong responses.

 

[marky mark]

like it was said before, Stien is off of his beliefs not a formula so stien wins!