That's not the argument YOU made, so why would you try to change it?

You said Dwight only nets you more than 5 wins, conservatively, what does any of the rest of the injuries have to do with that statement?

quote:
Nope sorry, do your own work bro

Don't have to, we both know it's higher than 4.21, but you won't even touch trying to explain that away, will you?

quote:
but while you're at it do OKC to show how far ahead of the Pels they would've finished with full health. then come back and make the same tired argument that the pels still would've been a playoff team without the okc injuries

OKC woulda been better than the Pels, BOLD TAKE!!! Whoe ver said they wouldn't? Why are you bringing up all these things that no one is talking about or have any relevance to anything at all?

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Boomshockalocka

Member since Feb 2004

59707 posts

Posted on 7/21/15 at 2:19 pm to shel311

quote:
You said Dwight only nets you more than 5 wins, conservatively, what does any of the rest of the injuries have to do with that statement?

IMO it does. NO advanced metric stands alone as the end all be all. The WS/48 calculation gets me close enough to go along with what I know to support what I'm saying.

quote:
we both know it's higher than 4.21, but you won't even touch trying to explain that away, will you?

Still wouldn't have gotten them into the playoffs. Add 5 wins to the Pels. Hey guess what Dallas was resting guys the last week had they been in an actual race they would've played those guys and been more than 5 games ahead of the Pels. No one outside of a couple Pels fans is even willing to argue this.

2 ...

Report Post

More Sports - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board