[IMG]http://www.jennhoffman.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Never-Go-Full-******.jpg[/IMG]

Yeah, I think there's no doubt Michael Jordan is the best to ever play the game, that's equal to thinking Ben Wallace was a top 10 player at his peak

Why is this true? Couldn't RAPM consistently over- and underrate the same types of players year-in and year-out.

As with the Lebron-guarding-centers question, I'm asking for my own curiosity, not to rebut your argument (even though I don't quite buy it).

"We should probably listen" doesn't mean "ends the discussion".

Seems like everyone is in agreement you're the one doing this most often

+1

Yeah dudes who want to drink brons man mayo think I'm perpetually going full ******, I'm fine with that

I'm all ears if you have a theory why RAPM would consistently overrate Ben Wallace year-in, year-out, or consistently underrate Kobe. Please, give me a suggestion. All it does is measure how the team does with the player and without the player. There were two possible theories I came up with for why Wallace would be overrated and they both got shot down pretty hard. First was the team construction thing, that somehow that Pistons team was just set up to make the starters look good, and Wallace look good specifically. However, that's shot down by the fact that Wallace was Top 5 in RAPM in both 2001 and 2002. Those teams both had a different coach than the eventual champion Pistons, and an entirely different starting lineup other than Wallace. The team construction was too radically different for that to be the decisive factor. The other thing that I thought of was that maybe Wallace just didn't play enough minutes to be a major impact player. However, look at his yearly averages at his peak:

2000: 24.2 MPG
2001: 34.5 MPG
2002: 36.5 MPG
2003: 39.4 MPG
2004: 37.7 MPG
2005: 36.1 MPG
2006: 35.2 MPG
2007: 35.0 MPG
2008: 30.6 MPG

Those are really, really solid averages every year he was in Detroit at the very least (2001-2007). Certainly right in line with other superstars around the league. So no, I can't find any compelling reasons why Wallace would be overrated by RAPM. I can, however, find a really compelling reason he'd be underrated by the general public and Kobe would be overrated. And that's that the general public mainly just pays attention to offense. Of all the players in the last 20 years, Wallace probably has the most disproportionate affect on defense compared to offense. And likewise, Kobe has one of the most disproportionate affects on offense relative to defense. Thus, my conclusion is that it's quite likely the general media perception of both players is way off, and while the RAPM numbers probably aren't exactly right in their perception, they're likely close enough that Wallace at his peak was at least as valuable as Kobe at his. Seem reasonable?

yup to everything, esp bolded

you got it.

everyone, pro MJ and pro lbj think you are terrible. your only proponents have been TWK and Mucks or whatever who are both terrible posters.

iggy: assuming you're using the stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com RAPM, there's a very simple explanation as to why he'd rate high year-in and year-out. It's because it uses previous years as priors. Example:

'10-11 Chris Andersen 0.0 4.9 +4.9 1931.0
'11-12 Chris Andersen 0.1 4.9 +4.9 2941.0

Is every year's number always still included in the prior number? For example, would Duncan's number still be influenced to some small degree by the 2002 season today? I was under the impression that previous years washed out of the formula within 2 or 3 seasons, but I don't know if that's correct. If it were correct, I think it would still show a 5 year sample to be pretty solidly predictive when all 5 years have the player in the Top 5.

Offhand, not sure specifically. The changes in the RAPM on that site are pertinent, think there's some relevant info in the RAPM thread pre-SORTING discussion.

Yeah, I read through the RAPM vs. xRAPM thing. I did notice that the data does look quite a bit less noisy than before, and you don't have Dirk #1 in a recent season like he was in the more raw data. Looking at raw +/- data, it looks like Tayshaun Prince is first on the team for both of Big Ben's last 2 seasons in Detroit with Ben being roughly average among starters so the priors may be a bigger factor than I thought.

Had an argument with a friend: 5 lebrons against MJ, scottie,KG, rodman, hakeem.

What say you?

KG and Hakeem will guard the basket so much better and with Rodman they'll outboard the Brons by too wide a margin.

I think I take the LeBrons. Team LeBron can just pack the paint on defense, double quickly on Hakeem, and the 90s team won't have enough shooting to make them pay. Meanwhile, on the other end, whichever LeBrons have KG and Hakeem on them can just go out to the perimeter and either force the shot-blockers to come out on them, opening the paint up, or else just drill the 3 in their faces all day.

It's kind of tough having Rodman because he's so useless on offense. You may be right McFly. What do you think if prime Shaq is subbed in for Rodman? You aren't scoring in the paint or getting any rebounds against Shaq/Hakeem/KG and Jordan/Pippen is a great perimeter defense. Those bigs can all score too.

I don't think a 3rd big is the answer. Just makes it even easier for the LeBrons to get open 3s, and the paint's too clogged up for all 3 to operate efficiently on offense. I think you probably need to get rid of Rodman and Pippen honestly. You could replace one of them with Durant, not sure who fills in for the other one. Maybe Steph Curry? If he gets beat off the dribble, there's plenty of help inside. Taking 90s players only, it would be pretty tough. You could try Stockton and Drexler I guess, but I dunno if that gets it done.

I feel like prime KG/Shaq/Hakeem could be better perimeter defenders than you are giving them credit for considering a big man has them covered if they get blown by. They were all pretty quick young guys. As long as one of them (Hakeem or Shaq) stays closer to the basket it will be very hard to the Brons to score inside, and if limited to outside shooting, the inability to rebound against the big 3 would make for a tough game. The bigger team would dominate the boards a great deal, and the Brons would have to double team to stop the big guys (especially Shaq and Hakeem) and that would leave MJ and Pippen with open shots. Shaq was a beast in the late 90's, Brons can't guard him. I think the Brons go down.

NBA fan fiction FTW.

There's no way Shaq can guard LeBron. All he has to do is take him out to the 3-point line, and he either gets a free wide open 3 which is an awesome, awesome shot, or he blows right by him. This wouldn't be as big of a deal in a normal game since the guy that KG/Hakeem is helping off is usually someone like Chris Andersen and he can kinda split the difference and guard both of them, but if you're helping off another LeBron? LeBron's just gonna find LeBron for the alley-oop jam every time. 3 bigs makes your defense worse, and your offense worse. It's not close.

Lolololololololol

Twog is one of the most pathetic ppl I've ever encountered

twog is a sad, sad human being. And, as an aside, let us all LOL at Jordan.

I have shaved a vagina before, so guilty as charged I guess.