LeBron > Jordan GOAT Super AIDS Containment, solved #22999 post by Matt R. (addendum #23174)

It doesn't surprise me that you have no idea what I referring to with this post and that you made the exact same mistake again a few posts later. Nothing in this reply is even close to being relevant to what I was getting at about you not understanding percentages.

Hint: this statement is just completely wrong from a purely mathematical perspective when we're talking about percentage increases.

The fact that he has high numbers in both stats makes zero difference when looking at percentage increases but you've implied that it does multiple times now.

Also on the other thing you seem to not understand at all:

There being more steals than live-ball turnovers literally cannot just be the result of with subjective rulings, it's straight up impossible with accurate record keeping. If someone is getting a steal on a shot clock violation that isn't a subjective ruling, it's objectively wrong. Who benefits the most from the bogus stats might be subjective but it's concrete fact that there was objectively incorrect record keeping going on when there are more steals than live-ball turnovers.

One of the major points of the article is the inflation of these subjective stats during the era. Despite the home/away split gap decreasing somewhat after, it’s still quite likely MJ was getting extra steals and blocks awarded due to the circumstances of that era.

What kind of logic is that, lol? The article only mentions Rosenberg is the scorekeeper of the Bulls and Jordan was close to him. There are references to him signaling MJ during the game. What kind of logic is it to prove a negative? Can you quote the passages in the article that state that Matt R. is capable of critical thinking? No? Wow, you must be incapable of it!

Im confused as to what your position would be. For all the games Haberstroh and his partner found, your conclusion is that it’s possible that for those games, Rosenberg deferred to his unmentioned rookie crew? I mean, lol. Obviously it’s possible but the odds of that would be extremely small. Why would you use it as a baseline case?

I’ve stated that Haberstroh posted it on his substack, paywalled. I know you don’t read posts and seem to be unable to search for things too, so here’s a link.

https://www.tomthefinder.com/p/exclusive...

Here’s a screenshot of the post:

I haven’t paid for this or viewed it. I really don’t desire to as there is little reason to doubt his findings.

I gift you his substack for a monthly fee of $7 if you agree to donate $100 to the LeBron James Family Foundation once the 10 turnovers posted above do not feature 4 clear MJ steals. It’s very obvious they will not so I don’t see why this would be necessary. The author would never have written the article if the turnovers and steals added up.

Aye caramba

Explain how Tom's subjective interpretation of MJ's steals are more accurate than the original subjective interpretation?

It's fraud what they're doing

We're supposed to base everything off the 5-game sample right??.. Well his sample allegedly found 16 fake steals (of 28 recorded steals), which means that MJ should've averaged 1.4 steals on the year, which is absurd.. That's I'm amazed that a 5-game sample saw the light of day.

It's sheer fraud... Jordan's slightly higher bounce than other DPOY's is explained any number of ways, such as him being an extremely unique DPOY in a great many ways... Bad record keeping should be the last and least likely reason, and a 5-game sample of some non-player's and non-ref's interpretation should be laughed at..

There's no reason to trust Tom's subjective interpretation more than the original.. Heck, Tom is more biased - anyone can question the stats of a player by taking the most negative interpretation of each subjective stat - i.e. anyone could reduce Lebron's assists by taking the most negative interpretation of each "assist".
.

"We watched the game and put together a reel of 10 turnovers..."

Why do we have to trust something that these amateurs put together?

Why not just post the games?

And the way he said it - "a reel of 10 turnovers"... A reel? Sounds cherry-picked.

Or why even think you can interpret steals better than official scorekeepers?.. I posted one of the steals earlier - it was a Jordan steal.. this is pure fraud - it's stunningly obvious and yet people are either playing dumb or are dumb.

Boxscores don't differentiate between live-ball turnovers and otherwise, so I don't even know how they got the official number of live-ball turnovers for each game.

And again, if we're supposed to base the entire season on this alleged sample, then we should assume that MJ's true steals average is 1.4 for 1988... This is why I'm amazed that an alleged 5-game sample is being taken so seriously.. The sample itself (with more than half the recorded steals being alleged as fake) shows that MJ averaged 1.4 steals in 1988, so the sample is completely bogus

The reason for the reel of 10 turnovers is because there were 10 turnovers in the game. Thus every turnover is posted.

Most normal people have jobs and families and can’t waste time trying to dig up old game footage that is impossible to find and then painstakingly watch every possession and manually track everything for zero financial benefit. Thankfully there are people whose job it is to do that and we can read their work.

A normal person who is an MJ GOAT guy would be like “Wow, some serious problems here with scorekeeping and MJ’s DPOY and stats around that time certainly were inflated. But even removing the DPOY off his resume and lowering his stocks per game for his career by a few tenths, he’s still the GOAT”

Sadly some flat earth level MJ truthers itt who cannot accept reality despite overwhelming evidence.

Yes it does because of historical trends.

Historically, guys that block a lot of shots have high inflation of home blocks like Eaton or Jaren Jackson.

Otoh, guys that don't block a lot of shots don't have high inflation at home.

Similarly, guys that steal a lot have high inflation of home steals like Alvin Robertson or Hakeem.

In MJ's case, he's high in both steals and blocks, so he has high inflation in both, hence the slightly higher "stocks" bounce than others on the article's list..

Hakeem in 1990 was like MJ because he had slightly higher stocks inflation than the norm due to high levels in both steals and blocks.

So the 5-game sample is designed to show that MJ's higher inflation is due to bad record-keeping and not the many other reasons that it could be.. Hstorical trends show that his higher inflation is due to him being an extremely unique DPOY (high levels in steals & blocks).. I'm sure being the goat scorer and a far better scorer than any other DPOY also plays into it somehow.. MJ was a different type of DPOY, so his stats are different

Hope that helps bud

Why would anyone trust Tom's subjective judgement over the subjective judgement of the original professional record-keepers?

Subjective stats cannot be reviewed because the new judgement is subjective too.. So this is completely bogus

But the most bogus part is the sample size - in the history of the world, there's never been a study with a sample size of 5 that was taken seriously and wasn't laughed out of the room..

The only reason it's been taken seriously is because FS1 picked up the story - they picked it up because many of their guys are affiliated with Klutch and/or are represented by them.. It's literal fraud right in front of our eyes.. I suppose that I should write a letter to my old college stats professor and say "see you were wrong - a sample of 5 is totally sufficient".

Of course, the 5-game sample showed that 16 of 28 steals were fake (more than half), so that means MJ averaged 1.4 steals in 1988... Lol... Carry on

It wasn’t just Tom - a scorekeeper he worked with independently scored the games as well.

Another guy who specializes in grading by hand historical games had weighed in as well. It looks like his findings were very similar and with more detail as well.

https://x.com/squared2020/status/1805115...

Is this guy a klutch stooge too?

It's okay because I've officially solved the fraud:

It turns out that road records were MUCH MUCH MUCH worse in the 80's than now - 2 teams were above .500 on the road in 1988 compared to half the league today (15 teams).

This accounts for the inflation of home performance vs road that was widespread in the 80's and 90's but is mostly phased out today.

GONE are the days of road trips with 8 games in 13 nights... Between the extra days off, private jets, friendly crowds and much more, the NBA has normalized the transition from home to road - they've made road trips a luxury vacation compared to the grueling camping trips that road games used to be.

Finally, the 5-game sample was to show that the home inflation was from bad record keeping instead of other reasons like the road being a much tougher experience in prior eras, or other factors - the 5-game sample is meant to say it's cheating and let's take Jordan's awards away..

But sorry, we now know that the reason Hakeem's stocks were nearly 100% higher in 1990 was because road games were like the Hunger Games, not bad record keeping

Amazing how all of that home energy and horrible road play didn’t help Scottie Pippen much. In the first 6 years of Pippen’s career COMBINED (1988-1993), he had a whopping 34 more steals at home than on the road.

MJ had 71 more steals at home than on the road during his 1988 season alone (lol), and 188 more steals at home than the road during that 6 year period.

1990 Hakeem

HOME....... 233 blocks... 103 steals... 131 assists
ROAD........ 143 blocks..... 71 steals... 102 assists

Haberstroh is basically saying that all stats in the 80's and 90's were blatantly cheated and inflated league-wide by record-keepers because it's been shown that Hakeem had the same kind of inflation in 1990, or Alvin Robertson in 1986.

But I'm realizing that these examples of massive inflation are one-offs - Jordan achieved nearly the same blocks and steals in 87' but with little or no inflation, so 88' is a one-off of massive inflation for him, while 86' is a one-off for Robertson, and 90' is a one-off for Hakeem - these one-offs could be due to personal issues that affected their home/road performance... Otherwise, their other years have the standard "normal" inflation that occurred back then due to tougher road environments and the subsequent horrible road records of teams compared to today's teams.. Only 2 teams had .500 records on the road in 1988, while half the league does today (15 teams).

carry on but I really think I solved it - the "normal' inflation of home stats n previous eras was due to the tougher road environments and significantly worse road records that teams had back then, while the abnormal one-offs of massive home inflation like 90' Hakeem, 88' Jordan, or 86' Robertson are likely due to personal issues that affected home and road play.

About the other players that year ?

good work fallguy

jellie pippen

If you were a fan that was trying to count Jordan's steals for the game shown above and counted the play in the gif as a Jordan steal, you wouldn't know for certain if the steal was actually credited to Jordan, or if the steal was credited to Mike Brown - only the record-keepers are tracking that and know that information.

That's why Haberstroh needed to count all the live ball turnovers in the game himself, and then claim that Jordan's reported steals were more than the live-ball turnovers - that's the only way to know that some of Jordan's steals were fraudulent without knowing who all the deflections and steal were credited to.

That's why the live-ball turnover thing mattered because it was the only fool-proof way to show that Jordan had fake steals - if Jordan's steals were higher than the live-ball turnovers, than voila - this shows that Jordan was credited with fake steals... But we cannot verify the live-ball turnovers because Haberstroh chose 6 games that aren't on youtube - he got the games from a guy in Latvia that had them on VHS... literally.

[QUOTE=sdot]They know the steals were credited to MJ because there were 10 Hawks turnovers, 10 Bulls Steals. 3 uncredited dead ball turnovers, 3 missing steals for Jordan. It's not that hard to connect dots.[/QUOTE]

The dead ball numbers are Haberstroh's numbers and aren't documented anywhere else in history except Haberstroh's account of the footage, which he got from a guy in Latvia so no one can verify.. So the fraud is very real.. That's why I said that Haberstroh made sure that no one can verify the live-ball numbers, but this goes for the dead-ball numbers as well - this stuff isn't reported - you have to watch the entire games to see.

But again, the entire idea that someone can take the most negative interpretation of subjective things like deflections, steals or live balls and have that override the previous subjective ruling, while having a "night-before-class" 6-game sample is unbelievable.

So again, there are other far more viable reasons than league-wide cheating by bookkeepers for the "normal" level of home inflation that everyone had in previous eras, such as the far tougher road conditions that yielded horrible road records compared to today's teams.. So the "normal" levels of inflation can be explained this way, while the one-off, massive inflation from 88' Jordan, 90' Hakeem, 86' Robertson and others is due to personal reasons that affect home/road performance in that particular year, or other reasons.

Still chasing the ghost

It's impossible to watch old games and know which plays that Jordan was credited an assist, steal, or block because it normally isn't announced during the game and we don't have the play-by-play information - this matters in close calls where you don't know who the steal was credited to, or if the scorekeeper credited an assist on a certain play... For this reason, reviewing subjective plays like steals, blocks, assists or even rebounds cannot be done before play-by-play information began in 1997.

Nick Wright and Haberstroh quickly realized this when they reviewed the first close call and assumed it was awarded to Jordan before realizing "wait a minute... do we know that Jordan was awarded that steal?.. What if the scorekeeper awarded it to the other guy like we think it should be?"... This is why they invented the live-ball turnover method - it's never been reported before, so they hoped Jordan's steals from the boxscore were more than the live-ball turnovers they counted, thus proving fraudulent steals awarded to Jordan... However, reporting new things like live-ball turnovers requires showing your work - you can't provide a summary video of the turnovers because that isn't verification - the games must be posted otherwise it's invalid altogether.. Choosing games that can't be verified is clever and fraud.

Ultimately, the 6-game sample is meant to prove that the home inflation is due to cheating by record-keepers instead of normal for all players - every player across the league had one-offs of massive inflation at some point in their careers.. This includes modern players because AD's stocks were 55% higher in 2022, or Jaren Jackson's were 50% higher in 23', or Lebron's blocks were 120% higher during his rookie year and 73% higher in his 2nd year - and MJ had 80% inflation in 88'... These were all one-offs that occur for any number of reasons, while every other year these guys had "normal" inflation that has been decreasing over time as road conditions and records have improved., The point is that Jordan's inflation, and everyone else's inflation isn't due to league-wide cheating by record-keepers.

Learn your fractions you ****ing punk kids!