West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Sports & Entertainment => Topic started by: Antonio_ on June 23, 2008, 03:03:33 PM
-
Who the fuck is this journalist named John Hollinger?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FinalsPerformances-1
D-Wade ranks #1 in the Greatest NBA Finals Performances Ever. No fucking comment.
-
Shit i'm watching the whole list! WOW... just WOW!! It sucks from the top to the bottom. Damn. I knew you guys considered ESPN gargabe (i don't watch it).. but i didn't know they were that bad.
Top 10 Finals PERs since merger
Name Team Year PPG RPG APG FG% PER
Dwyane Wade Mia 2006 34.7 7.8 3.8 46.8 33.8
Tim Duncan SA 2003 24.2 17.0 5.3 49.5 32.0
Michael Jordan Chi 1991 31.2 6.6 11.4 55.8 31.5
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2002 36.3 12.3 3.8 59.5 31.4
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2000 38.0 16.7 2.3 61.1 31.1
Michael Jordan Chi 1998 33.5 4.0 2.3 42.7 30.8
Tim Duncan SA 1999 27.4 14.0 2.4 53.7 30.7
Michael Jordan Chi 1997 32.3 7.0 6.0 45.6 29.5
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2001 33.0 15.8 4.8 57.3 29.4
Michael Jordan Chi 1992 35.8 4.8 6.5 52.6 29.2
Are we fucking joking??
LOL @ Kobe not even being in the Top-50 list (but they added Latrell Sprewell in it, LMAO)
-
Hollinger is one of the worst writers ever...What the fuck are you doing reading BSPN in the first place?
-
Hollinger is one of the worst writers ever...What the fuck are you doing reading BSPN in the first place?
I was watching if there was something online about that Shaq freestyle. I googled it and ESPN appeared. LOL, i don't even why.
-
You're overreacting. The list is clearly heavily influenced by the PER stat, which doesn't take into consideration the strength of the opposing team.
-
^Doesn't matter, Hollinger has always been a mockery to real basketball heads. This is the same guy who says Kobe isn't the best player in the league... Antonio, I hope that's your last BSPN article.
-
You're overreacting. The list is clearly heavily influenced by the PER stat, which doesn't take into consideration the strength of the opposing team.
PER?
Per game.
-
Naw. I quote him.
That's where this project comes in. Using both numbers and a healthy dose of opinion, my task today is to rank the top 50 individual NBA Finals performances since the merger. I've included the player efficiency rating (PER) of every player in the top 50 as a guide, but this wasn't my only measuring stick. Basically, everything counts: competition, defense, clutch play, winning, durability ... it all matters.
He doesn't even have that excuse.
-
Antonio, I hope that's your last BSPN article.
Hahahaha.. sorry. It was my first and last one. But i was in a shock, lol.
-
i never read those stupid Hollinger rankings.
-
If it makes you feel better, you can always print out the article and use it to the line the bottom of your bird cage.....
-
Naw. I quote him.
That's where this project comes in. Using both numbers and a healthy dose of opinion, my task today is to rank the top 50 individual NBA Finals performances since the merger. I've included the player efficiency rating (PER) of every player in the top 50 as a guide, but this wasn't my only measuring stick. Basically, everything counts: competition, defense, clutch play, winning, durability ... it all matters.
He doesn't even have that excuse.
He claims everything counts, but you can tell it's heavily influenced by PER alone.
-
If it makes you feel better, you can always print out the article and use it to the line the bottom of your bird cage.....
Naw, i care for them.
-
Naw. I quote him.
That's where this project comes in. Using both numbers and a healthy dose of opinion, my task today is to rank the top 50 individual NBA Finals performances since the merger. I've included the player efficiency rating (PER) of every player in the top 50 as a guide, but this wasn't my only measuring stick. Basically, everything counts: competition, defense, clutch play, winning, durability ... it all matters.
He doesn't even have that excuse.
He claims everything counts, but you can tell it's heavily influenced by PER alone.
Ok man, but he's supposed to be an NBA expert. So he's supposed to better than that. Putting Wade in top of the list is just incredibly stupid no matter what the criteria was.
-
ESPN has some good baseball writers.
-Keith Law
-Rob Neyer
-Peter Gammons (he has his days though)
All the others are pretty much trash, well most of them. The worst of them is Steve Phillips and Buster Olney.
-
^Since I don't follow baseball much, let me ask you, is there a HEAVY east coast bias with them in other sports or is it just with basketball?
-
If it makes you feel better, you can always print out the article and use it to the line the bottom of your bird cage.....
Naw, i care for them.
lol... you wouldn't even let your birds shit on it?
-
Naw. I quote him.
That's where this project comes in. Using both numbers and a healthy dose of opinion, my task today is to rank the top 50 individual NBA Finals performances since the merger. I've included the player efficiency rating (PER) of every player in the top 50 as a guide, but this wasn't my only measuring stick. Basically, everything counts: competition, defense, clutch play, winning, durability ... it all matters.
He doesn't even have that excuse.
He claims everything counts, but you can tell it's heavily influenced by PER alone.
Ok man, but he's supposed to be an NBA expert. So he's supposed to better than that. Putting Wade in top of the list is just incredibly stupid no matter what the criteria was.
He was hired as an advanced stats expert, so he gives his opinion in that perspective. Obviously, basketball is a bit more trickier than just breaking it down with advance stats.
-
Don't put too much stock into this. It's just his PER system which only takes stats into account. Pretty much anybody who knows anything about basketball knows PER is a highly unreliable and inconsistent way to measure player performance.
-
^Since I don't follow baseball much, let me ask you, is there a HEAVY east coast bias with them in other sports or is it just with basketball?
It depends on the writer. The writers I listed are very balanced. Some of the bad writers talk more about the Red Sox or Yankees though, but I don't look into it too deeply since some of them are big fans of those teams so there will be a bias towards that particular team. And recently the overall baseball coverage has been leaning towards the Red Sox/Yankees rivalry, but again that's understandable since that's basically been one of baseball's highlights in recent years. A lot of people claim that there is an east coast bias with baseball though, I don't think so. The show Baseball Tonight comes out around 10pm eastern, I believe. That's basically about the same most West Coast teams start playing, so the Baseball Tonight crew aren't giving a full recap of those games because they are still in progress lol. All they do is give quick updates, on either runs or spectacular plays.
-
^Since I don't follow baseball much, let me ask you, is there a HEAVY east coast bias with them in other sports or is it just with basketball?
Yes, they are in love with anything to do with the Red Sox and Yankees, and then sometimes give the Cubs a little bit of love. They used to cover Barry Bonds during his home run chase, and would barely mention the Giants games or anything, and gave the Dodgers a little attention because of Joe Torre. That's more of the SportsCenter thing, some of the writers do a good job covering the teams that deserve it.
And that Hollinger guy is in love with that PER stat, and he is swearing that Anthony Randolph from LSU is going to be a MAJOR bust..I might give him a little respect if he is right about that, but he still seems like a douche.
-
Hollinger is all abouth maths... and therefore all about stats, he cares about nothing else.
-
Hollinger is all abouth maths... and therefore all about stats, he cares about nothing else.
AKA an idiot
-
Bill Simmons has been taking jabs at him for a while :D He didn't rank Shane Battier as a top 40 SF, (because of his stats, of course) and Simmons dissed him for that. Then he ranked the 2001 Laker team too low in terms of best NBA teams of all time and Simmons dissed him for that, too. Probably also some other stuff I didn't read.
-
Bill Simmons has been taking jabs at him for a while :D He didn't rank Shane Battier as a top 40 SF, (because of his stats, of course) and Simmons dissed him for that. Then he ranked the 2001 Laker team too low in terms of best NBA teams of all time and Simmons dissed him for that, too. Probably also some other stuff I didn't read.
Simmons is an idiot too...Hollinger makes him look like a genius, though. Hollinger hates anything Laker related, which is also why he ranked the 2001 Laker team so low.
-
Who the fuck is this journalist named John Hollinger?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FinalsPerformances-1
D-Wade ranks #1 in the Greatest NBA Finals Performances Ever. No fucking comment.
the list is definetely biased for recent players but its not bad
-
Bill Simmons has been taking jabs at him for a while :D He didn't rank Shane Battier as a top 40 SF, (because of his stats, of course) and Simmons dissed him for that. Then he ranked the 2001 Laker team too low in terms of best NBA teams of all time and Simmons dissed him for that, too. Probably also some other stuff I didn't read.
Simmons is an idiot too...Hollinger makes him look like a genius, though. Hollinger hates anything Laker related, which is also why he ranked the 2001 Laker team so low.
I DUNNO HE RANKED THE 1987 LAKER SQUAD AS THE SECOND BEST FINALS SQUAD EVER. (AND HAD THE 85 SQUAD AT #6)
-
Bill Simmons has been taking jabs at him for a while :D He didn't rank Shane Battier as a top 40 SF, (because of his stats, of course) and Simmons dissed him for that. Then he ranked the 2001 Laker team too low in terms of best NBA teams of all time and Simmons dissed him for that, too. Probably also some other stuff I didn't read.
Simmons is an idiot too...Hollinger makes him look like a genius, though. Hollinger hates anything Laker related, which is also why he ranked the 2001 Laker team so low.
I DUNNO HE RANKED THE 1987 LAKER SQUAD AS THE SECOND BEST FINALS SQUAD EVER. (AND HAD THE 85 SQUAD AT #6)
Oh, wow...As if he wouldn't have been fired for leaving those teams out. (Nevermind... he's employed by ESPN.)
-
Bill Simmons has been taking jabs at him for a while :D He didn't rank Shane Battier as a top 40 SF, (because of his stats, of course) and Simmons dissed him for that. Then he ranked the 2001 Laker team too low in terms of best NBA teams of all time and Simmons dissed him for that, too. Probably also some other stuff I didn't read.
Simmons is an idiot too...Hollinger makes him look like a genius, though. Hollinger hates anything Laker related, which is also why he ranked the 2001 Laker team so low.
I DUNNO HE RANKED THE 1987 LAKER SQUAD AS THE SECOND BEST FINALS SQUAD EVER. (AND HAD THE 85 SQUAD AT #6)
Oh, wow...As if he wouldn't have been fired for leaving those teams out. (Nevermind... he's employed by ESPN.)
YEAH BUT PUTTING WADE'S FINALS PERFORMANCE AT #1 IS FUCKIN WACCCKKKKK!
-
d-wade is a great player
but seriously, he must be best friends with this guy lol.
he must be in his fav 5
-
^^Haha, Chuck better praise him on Inside the NBA next year, or his spot in the Fave 5 is in jeapordy..By the way, that Hollinger guy doesn't see any of the guards as "slam-dunk lottery picks" because of that PER stat, even Derrick Rose. He keeps swearing by that stat saying that it has worked better than teams have drafted, so I imagine this is the year that nobody takes him seriously anymore if anyone still does. Obviously, at least 1 or 2 of the guards should develop into star players, if not more, so this will expose him for being lame.
-
Shit i'm watching the whole list! WOW... just WOW!! It sucks from the top to the bottom. Damn. I knew you guys considered ESPN gargabe (i don't watch it).. but i didn't know they were that bad.
Top 10 Finals PERs since merger
Name Team Year PPG RPG APG FG% PER
Dwyane Wade Mia 2006 34.7 7.8 3.8 46.8 33.8
Tim Duncan SA 2003 24.2 17.0 5.3 49.5 32.0
Michael Jordan Chi 1991 31.2 6.6 11.4 55.8 31.5
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2002 36.3 12.3 3.8 59.5 31.4
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2000 38.0 16.7 2.3 61.1 31.1
Michael Jordan Chi 1998 33.5 4.0 2.3 42.7 30.8
Tim Duncan SA 1999 27.4 14.0 2.4 53.7 30.7
Michael Jordan Chi 1997 32.3 7.0 6.0 45.6 29.5
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2001 33.0 15.8 4.8 57.3 29.4
Michael Jordan Chi 1992 35.8 4.8 6.5 52.6 29.2
Are we fucking joking??
LOL @ Kobe not even being in the Top-50 list (but they added Latrell Sprewell in it, LMAO)
it goes off stats only
-
Yeah, my bad. In fact that wasn't the final list. But the final one is even worse!!!!! :o
And Wade is still there!!! :o
-
Shit i'm watching the whole list! WOW... just WOW!! It sucks from the top to the bottom. Damn. I knew you guys considered ESPN gargabe (i don't watch it).. but i didn't know they were that bad.
Top 10 Finals PERs since merger
Name Team Year PPG RPG APG FG% PER
Dwyane Wade Mia 2006 34.7 7.8 3.8 46.8 33.8
Tim Duncan SA 2003 24.2 17.0 5.3 49.5 32.0
Michael Jordan Chi 1991 31.2 6.6 11.4 55.8 31.5
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2002 36.3 12.3 3.8 59.5 31.4
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2000 38.0 16.7 2.3 61.1 31.1
Michael Jordan Chi 1998 33.5 4.0 2.3 42.7 30.8
Tim Duncan SA 1999 27.4 14.0 2.4 53.7 30.7
Michael Jordan Chi 1997 32.3 7.0 6.0 45.6 29.5
Shaquille O'Neal LAL 2001 33.0 15.8 4.8 57.3 29.4
Michael Jordan Chi 1992 35.8 4.8 6.5 52.6 29.2
Are we fucking joking??
LOL @ Kobe not even being in the Top-50 list (but they added Latrell Sprewell in it, LMAO)
it goes off stats only
stop using this argument, you fucks...he already specified in the article that he took everything into consideration.