Mike Miller is a stud, but just because he is better than some guy who never made the NBA doesn't mean he will be a stud for this exercise.

YOU NEVER SAW 22 BEAT AA NO0B!?!?!?!

I can't believe you guys are silly enough to use a players career as data points. I mean thats only 1 career!! Sample size amirite!??!

Disagree, I think it's much LOWER than people like Franchise and you think.

Now if you want to say 35+ I will agree with you, but not 30-33.

I don't think that you got my point.
An argument can be made based on the Shrempf's body type that his durability is an anomaly and that he ran good with the injuries.(I'm not sure that I would made it though)
Not being results oriented does not mean that you shouldn't take the results in your evalutation of the player durability. The fact that DS did not get injured is not proof that he's unbreakable.
I just found your response silly as you dismissed Epips argument as iif it was silly. His idea was not necessartly bad he just that he did not give any explaination as to why Schrempf would likely to be injury prone and that is durabillity is an anomoaly.

Thats perfectly fine. I'm sure I'll pick a young guy to soon. I'm just saying you can't discount the things an older player did throughout his career, thats all.

exactly, glad to see some people on here have some common sense.

Wow, great argument. I'm convinced.

So now the argument is that his durability is an anomaly because of his body type? So we should discount his actually 10+ year career in favor of the opinion that his body type is likely to get hurt? Do you not agree this opens up a ton of problems to?

So what he did matters nothing, but your educated guess is a big enough sample size?

haha. CLASSIC coming from you.

I think with younger players and dependant on how young you have something like this.

Chances of MVP Season 2%
Chances of All-NBA Type Season 10%
Chances of PER > 20, TS% 55% XX%.
Chances of Serious Injury 20%
Changces of XX X%
ETC.

For older players if it's a role player.
Chances of MVP Season 0%
Chances of All-NBA Type Season 0%
Chances of PER > 20, TS% 55% XX%.
Chances of Serious Injury 20%
Chances of XX X%

But chances he does nearly what he did in the NBA before 95%.

I think with younger players there are chances for almost anything while with retired vets chances for somethings are 0 or nearly 0. I don't think anyone is going to argue a player like Joey Dorsey has any chances or something nearly 0 of being an MVP in the league but you can easily argue that a player like Rose or Beasley could eventually. Likewise you have vets who let's say were career role players, in this "game," you give them starting minutes but in this game there is still a 0% chance to win MVP or get all-nba, cause the odds are almost set where they should be based on their career. Injury's could have derailed guys like Penny, Webber, etc. to force their careers down and in this they might not get hurt BUT their chances of improving from their career is pretty much 0 even if they did or did not get hurt.

No one made that argument that Schrempf was likley to get hurt, we are just saying Joe Johnson (and other young guys) are in the same catagory as Schrempf for NOT likley to being able to get hurt.

anyone who agrees with me I deem smart, even when they also criticize my awful arguments in the same post but I just ignore that part. Mom I told you to get some protein.

But a player being durable in his mid 20s does not equal durability and long peek in early-mid 30s.

They are different types of breaking down in many cases.

I was being sarcastic about MM.

early 30's yes it does, mid-late 30's no.

[QUOTE=EPiPeN11;4387970] No, you don't understand what makes this analogy terrible. It's not the percentages.

Poker: to figure out whether you should get it in with A7 agaisnt KT, you would have to be a complete ****** to rely on prior results. You know with 100% certainty that A7 is 57% against KT. Any other information is completely irrelevant.

Basketball: You can't pokerstove Joe Johnson durability vs Detlef Schrempf durability. The most relevant data point for an older player's durability is how durable he actually was in his NBA career. No, it doesn't guarantee that he will be just as durable in this exrcise, but that's the only datapoint we have here, so it is extremely relevant. For a player who is still in his 20's, the most relevant datapoint is the average durability of players with similar body types / skillsets. The average durability of a player like Joe Johnson is less than the durability displayed by Detlef Schrempf.

If mid starts at 33 than fine.

[QUOTE=sergsz;4388173] So JJ has a better chance of doing something he hasn't done than someone who already did it?

That was what it was in response to. I was not using the A7 v K10 comment to say Joe Johnson was more durable than Shrempf, I was using it to prove that just because someone who hasn't gotten the chance to do something doesn't mean he is less likley to do something that someone already did.

I personaly have no opinion on the matter and don't see why Schrempf would be more injury prone in our league but I m' open to all suggestion. I'm just saying that dismissing any argument that he could suffer an injury is ridiculous.
Of course, the fact that he was durable is huge,but we assumed at the beginning of this draft that a player who got injured was not necessarly going to be injured, and that there is a luck factor regarding injury. (I agree with this ). Dismissing any argument about the a player was lucky to play an injury free career beforehand is therefore contradictory as you're simply denying the luck factor.

By the way, I don't think that Epip brought any argument that could defend the theory that jj is more durable than Schrempf, but if he find any there is no reason to dismiss it beforehand.

no it's all just speculative and we'll all just argue incessantly about how our guys really aren't injury prone due to robots and cloning and **** and while we're at it completely ignore the flaws in our guys' games and now Dale Davis is shooting FTs at an 85% clip and McHale has zen like passing while Drazen actually becomes a legit #1 option who can pass and rebound and handle the ball a lot.

You are right I didn't make an argument yet on why JJ is less injury prone than Detlef, so I will right now.

Here are Joe Johnson's games played each season up until his current age (26)

77, 82, 82, 82, 82, 57, 82

Here are Detlef's up until Johnson's age (26)

64, 81, 82, 69

Who do you think is more durable going on that?

i'd say mid 30's starts at 34 but whatever

Phew, good thing we have more information on Detlef. If anything, he proves that someone's durability until age 26 does not predict their career durability!

Agreed, and you will also note that it's not like i'm saying Detlef is injury prone or anything, i'm just saying Joe Johnson is less likley to get injured in our make believe league than Detlef.

Haha exactly. its amazing someone can argue that someones GP'd from 22-26 is more indicative of long term durability than somones 15+ year career.

Ya it's pretty amazing that someone would actually even think Lebron James would have a better year at age 29 than Dirk! What crazy people they are!!!