Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 4371880, member: 1673"] My salient point is that I allow experience, whether in the form of eye tests or data, to determine what I believe and not the other way around. Using what you believe to determine what you see or what data you value exposes why the eye test can be abused just as surely as stats can. People’s a priori beliefs determines what they see, thus their eyes cannot be trusted. I do not see, nor attempt to use, debates as contests to be won or lost. Rather, in their best forms I see them as negotiations to arrive at the truth, or at least consensus. I have no difference of opinion with those who think Fudd is a better all around player, so no negotiation is necessary to persuade me of that. I see no evidence of Fudd being a better PG. There are declarations being made, most without any evidence of all, but a few like you declare she is a better passer. The evidence you gave was the eye test, but my eye test differs from yours, leaving the possibility in my mind that what you already believe is influencing what you see. I offer data to counter that, considering that when not abused data does not suffer from the biases of an eye test. I did not use assist totals, because that is an unfair comparison considering what their roles were. Of course Muhl should compile a lot more assists, as that was more her job to have them, but perhaps Fudd could have chocked up the assists just as effectively if that were her role. But there is not a good reason for Fudd’s A/T being 0.45 less than Muhl’s, other than she is not as good at taking care of the ball, a pretty important quality for a PG. But as I view “debates” as negotiations rather than contests, I am open to changing my mind based on new data. That is why I brought up AAU and European stats. If the stats reveal that Fudd’s A/T took a serious dive transitioning to UConn basketball, then I am willing to at least entertain the idea that Fudd is not innately worse than Muhl at taking care of the ball, but rather she needs to adjust more. Still, Fudd only has a few months to either learn, or regain, a better ability of taking care of the ball, whereas Muhl has been in training for precisely this role for many years. It’s also possible that Muhl’s A/T dipped from European ball, her ability to make a lay up on a drive certainly has, and she has potential she needs to regain as well, rather than learn from scratch. Generally, when I get the sense that a person views debates as only contests to win or lose I bow out. Negotiating to get at the truth or consensus is fruitless with such people. It could be they feel their self-esteem damaged if they don’t “win” a debate. Despite your reliance on the eye test only, usually a dangerous sign, I have not got that sense with you. Thus I continued to debate, though with a different objective than you apparently think I have. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach