Odd Stats

By -
Both from NBA.com:

"75%: Rajon Rondo's shooting percentage per 36 minutes when Dwyane Wade is off the court in this series."

Huh? What is a "shooting percentage per 36 minutes"?

"the Spurs turned loose 36-year-old, 6-foot-11 Tim Duncan as the world's oldest, tallest point guard to put down the rebellion."

Since there are several point guards older than Duncan, this has to be a combined measure: when you multiply his age times his height, Duncan comes out as "oldest-tallest"... or something like that.

Comments

  1. Thomas L. Knapp8:13 AM

    "What is a 'shooting percentage per 36 minutes?'"

    That's sort of like asking what's a millime, and leaving off the ter.

    75%: Rajon Rondo's shooting percentage during the 36 minutes when Dwyane Wade has been off the court in this series.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah10:28 AM

      That probably is what they meant, Tom, but that is not the way the word "per" is standardly used in English: would you ever say "I went on a bender per the weekend my wife was away"? "I won't be working per the Christmas season"?

      No, the word "per" is used like this: "ninety miles per hour."

      Delete
  2. Thomas L. Knapp8:22 AM

    Gene,

    It's an odd usage, but I don't think it's formally incorrect. The strange unit of measurement associated with it ("36 minutes when Dwyane Wade has been off the court in this series") really does make it pop out though, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah9:05 AM

      Here is the way I would expect "per" to be used in such a situation: "Rondo scores 3 points per minute when Dwayne Wade is off the floor": to describe a rate.

      As I said, I think your interpretation is probably what was meant. But why not just say "during," like you did, and make the meaning clear? I think what happened was that the author was writing thinking he had a rate at hand, even though he did not.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more