Re: Sullinger Theory
posted at 12/2/2013 12:44 PM EST
In response to aciemvp's comment:
In response to teejaytee70's comment:
Right. Statistics are very subjective. Instead of focusing on what Sullinger did in those 5 games, focus on what the rest of the team did. Blaming Sullinger is a very Chris33 thing to do.
i remember when davis was here and the celts were 33-8 with davis playing lion's share of #5 minutes when both jabreel and shaqueel o'neal broken down, all we heard about davis' advanced stats being horrible. but most who knew anything knew that davis' help defense was what was holding the team together and getting pierce, kg and ray big breaks on the defensive end by plugging holes on switch-backs, etc. and that was when doc would actually go on record and say he liked what davis was doing for us.
but then with bass and now with sullinger we should ignore the stats? i'm not saying i don't like sullinger. i do. but how can stats be so damning in one instance and then claims stats are "subjective" for sullinger when they were used to club davis like a baby seal? and furthermore, stat analysis was outright abolished when bass came to town and turned out LESSER stats (per 36 mins played and advanced) than davis produced?
how do all these fancy stats work like this- apply to some players, not at all to others (bass), and with discretion to yet others (sullinger)........... ? i think we have some hypocrites in the fold, that's all i can come up with.
BTW, the correct answer is that STATS ARE SUBJECTIVE by the way..... just not for everyone.. lol
If the Celtics lose on days when it rains, it is not necessarily a statistical correlation. It could be a coincidence. Show me the advanced statistical analysis you performed to determine that if Sullinger scores in double figures that leads to a Celtics loss. Maybe it proves that Sullinger is even more valuable to this team than we think. Maybe it means that Sullinger had tip ins and put backs from offensive rebounds and that the reason we lost was not Sullinger scoring in double figures, but that the rest of the team was not shooting well that night. People like you look at stats and see Sullinger had 20 points and the Celtics lost, so therefore it means that Sullinger is responsible for the loss. It's more complex than that.