Hollinger argues Minn worst then NJ. What's the point?

[wdleehi]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-091201



Call me silly but, really?


Does anyone really care which team is the worst team in the NBA? 


Is there really so little going on in the NBA, this is the best article you can come up with?

[Donoghus]

If a team is 0-17, they're the worst team. Period.

I don't need some stat-geek trying to tell me otherwise.

[wdleehi]

Best line

For starters, they were one shot away from having the same record as the Nets -- were it not for a Damien Wilkins bank shot at the buzzer on opening night that gave the Wolves a 95-93 win over New Jersey.

NJ is better because if not for the T-Wolves beating them head to head, they would have the same record.  Great logic.

[Celtic]

Can't read the article, but when a team is about to set the record for worst start EVER, they are definitely the worst team in the NBA.

[Chief]

Minny has one great player, NJ has none.

[Hoops]

Sorry, but some of the logic in this thread reminds me of the people who complain about math in school, "What's the point of studying algebra or geometry or calculus? It's not like I'm ever going to use it in real life." Well, that might be true. But it doesn't mean the information isn't useful. There are quite a lot of people who use complex math everyday and still others that find it interesting simply because they want to better understand how the world works. Same idea applies to this Hollinger article. If you don't find it interesting, that's fine. But it's not like the information is objectively useless. I actually thought it was pretty interesting really.

[fairweatherfan]

Minny has one great player, NJ has none.

Al is not a great player, though he has the potential.  Guy hasn't even made an All-Star or All-NBA team, and he hasn't gotten into a groove yet this season.

[moiso]

Both teams have two good players.

[wdleehi]

Sorry, but some of the logic in this thread reminds me of the people who complain about math in school, "What's the point of studying algebra or geometry or calculus? It's not like I'm ever going to use it in real life." Well, that might be true. But it doesn't mean the information isn't useful. There are quite a lot of people who use complex math everyday and still others that find it interesting simply because they want to better understand how the world works. Same idea applies to this Hollinger article. If you don't find it interesting, that's fine. But it's not like the information is objectively useless. I actually thought it was pretty interesting really.

Yes, I complained every day when I was teaching math.


He is still writing an article about which of the two worst teams in the NBA is the worst. 

Head to head meant nothing. 

[Fan from VT]

I think it's clear why he wrote the article.

It's interesting that NJ may set an all-time record. But does that mean they're the worst team in the NBA? Well, if you're trying to determine which opponent will be the easiest to beat if you could play either one tomorrow, one of Hollinger's ideas he really adheres to (as do I) is that point differential and other criteria are better indicators of future success (or failure) than actual win/loss record, because the actual record can be swayed by one or two lucky (unlucky) bounces, but point differential et al corrects for that going forward.

So that's why he wrote it, because it was a way to write that the point differential approach is a more accurate indicator of a team's goodness/badness than record, though the overall record is more easily understood/open to hyperbole.

[jambr380]

Both teams have two good players.

I guess at this point, I may take Lopez over Jefferson and I definitely take Harris over any player on the Wolves...maybe the Wolves are 'deeper', but the Nets have the best two players and if they somehow land Lebron or Wade, they will be much much better.

But at this point, it's true, the Wolves are better until proven otherwise (and it's already been proven the other way with the Wolves win over the Nets).

[indeedproceed]

Both teams have two good players.

I guess at this point, I may take Lopez over Jefferson and I definitely take Harris over any player on the Wolves...maybe the Wolves are 'deeper', but the Nets have the best two players and if they somehow land Lebron or Wade, they will be much much better.

But at this point, it's true, the Wolves are better until proven otherwise (and it's already been proven the other way with the Wolves win over the Nets).

Honestly I take Jefferson over lopez and flynn over harris

But I'm dangerous.

[jambr380]

Both teams have two good players.

I guess at this point, I may take Lopez over Jefferson and I definitely take Harris over any player on the Wolves...maybe the Wolves are 'deeper', but the Nets have the best two players and if they somehow land Lebron or Wade, they will be much much better.

But at this point, it's true, the Wolves are better until proven otherwise (and it's already been proven the other way with the Wolves win over the Nets).

Honestly I take Jefferson over lopez and flynn over harris

But I'm dangerous.

Haha, maybe I am going the controvertial route with Lopez over Jefferson. I just really really like what Lopez could become. He is the new Mr. Fundamental. But in all reality, Big Al is definitely better right now and has as good of a post game as anyone...I think you are crazy about Flynn over Harris, though 

[Prof. Clutch]

I don't think there is anyone out there who can say Minn is truly worse than NJ.  I'll tell you one thing, I would take NJ's first round pick over Minn's first round pick this year if I had a choice of either one.  I have a hard time believing NJ won't have the highest probability for the first pick come seasons end because they are REALLY bad.

[PosImpos]

Both teams have two good players.

I guess at this point, I may take Lopez over Jefferson and I definitely take Harris over any player on the Wolves...maybe the Wolves are 'deeper', but the Nets have the best two players and if they somehow land Lebron or Wade, they will be much much better.

But at this point, it's true, the Wolves are better until proven otherwise (and it's already been proven the other way with the Wolves win over the Nets).

Honestly I take Jefferson over lopez and flynn over harris

But I'm dangerous.

Harris is a lot better than Flynn at this point in their careers...he has the ability to play very good defense and he's a better scorer.  Flynn averages more turnovers than assists.

Lopez isn't the scorer that Al is but he's a better pure center and defends the paint much better.

The second best player on Minnesota is probably Kevin Love, but he hasn't played yet this year (which is a big part of why they've been so bad).

The Nets have a lot more raw talent and potential on their roster, but they aren't as deep and have suffered from a lot of injuries so far.  If both teams were totally healthy I would take the Nets over the Wolves.