Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JPSeraph
In the end, what are we left with? If intangibles are out, and defense is simply arguable (and thus inconclusive in cases where it's 'close'), then anything that isn't adequately quantified is simply not included?
|
When did I say defense should be thrown out? I just said it's subjective.
Quote:
|
Doesn't it seem reasonable to say that the analysis would benefit from some consideration of the portion not included? Certainly one would think if we're applying the results to comparing players as a whole and not merely "who was a better offensive player?".
|
Again, I'm all for including defense. There's just no way to conclusively rule on it, so it'll remain in the realm of opinion. Which is fine by me.
As for intangibles, to be totally frank, I think opinions on it is more noise than information. Just my take. I don't render opinions on it and I don't find opinions on it very compelling. Obviously, everyone is free to weight intangibles as they like, but I'll disagree when it's weighed in to any significant degree.
Quote:
|
How else would Hollinger know that he had found a better overall measure than "efficiency" in PER without SOME sort of unquantified assumptions or observations about the game??
|
That's always a good question. The best way is if you can combine the player production into a team total and those team totals correlate well with team wins (the "objective" standard for success).