• SPORTS
    AND
    GAMING
  • Welcome Guest!
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
  • Sports & Gaming Moderators: ghostfreak

Is it STILL ridiculous to argue that Kobe . . .

I don't necessarily disagree with you glowbug, but let the record reflect that Steve Kerr is a faggy little bitch.
 
Benefit said:
I don't necessarily disagree with you glowbug, but let the record reflect that Steve Kerr is a faggy little bitch.
Click to expand...
Duly noted. Just for the record though, is there anyone who ISN'T a faggy little bitch? Besides Kobe I mean.

I'm asking purely to simplify record housekeeping matters, you understand.

posner said:
Can we objectively evaluate a player's true value?

http://www.newyorker.com/critics/books/articles/060529crbo_books1
Click to expand...
I've got that book on order, so I'll let ya know how it rates Kobe.
 
posner said:
Can we objectively evaluate a player's true value?

http://www.newyorker.com/critics/books/articles/060529crbo_books1
Click to expand...
I Barnes & Noble'd that book last night (translation: I read/scanned the sections in which I was interested for 2 hours before returning the book to the customer service desk and telling them thanks for the special order but I didn't want to buy it ;))...and (if memory serves correctly) according to their econometric formula, Shaq was worth approximately 15 Laker wins per season during the 2003 and 2004 seasons while Kobe was worth roughly 10.

Of note also was that Shaq maintained approximately the same production with the Heat in 2005 while being surrounded by a supporting team cast similar to his former Lakers team, so apparently his productivity is holding steady.

So the econometricians have spoken. By their formula, Shaq was indeed Big Daddy to Kobe's Little Brother. In the book they equivocate a bit, as econometricians are known to do, on the issue of whether Buss made the right decision in keeping Kobe over Shaq and conclude (in guarded fashion) that the aging factor supports the decision, but they aren't equivocal as to who was worth more to the team.

As a general note re: their formula, they conclude that AI is WAY overrated as a productive player, so there must be some validity to it. They address MJ also, and I wasn't displeased at all with their conclusions...you can read between the lines on that. ;) :D

I give this book a thumbs up, and not just because it supports the correct view. ;) It was a pretty entertaining read...the authors wrote it in an often quite witty style. It also discussed football in terms of productivity value, Brett Favre being the main player studied. I would have bought it if not for the $29.95 price tag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top