lol u mad?








Nah not really. This is an agenda free post, but now that I got you all in here I think whether your with or against analytics in basketball there were some really good/short podcasts from SLOAN this weekend that are worth your time. For those of you who study analytics--a lot of this is not new, but unless you have some insider info--there is still some insightful information here.

HERE: http://espn.go.com/espnradio/grantland/player?id=9012769 (podcast version)


For those of you not into analytics a) I think theres some real good basic information around how they can be used and b) there's just some good behind the scenes antecdotal information that talks about the backrooms and war rooms of NBA player trades and acquisitions.

I really think these are worth a listen. The podcast version has 3 interviews with Zach Lowe that are like 15 min each. During my commute I broke down each one for you so you can ffwd around if you want.

1) Daryl Morey- say what you will about Morey. I think he's one of the most important GMS in sports whether his moves are right or wrong because of the level of transparency he has. The insight he gives allow us common fans to get an idea of what really happens in the back rooms of our favorite teams.

1:30 Talks briefly about how Sloan has come from 50 ppl to 3k, and that he uses it to find people to work for him.
2:10 Great insight on the anatomy of how NBA trades happen. (recommended)
6:50 Kyle Lowry Trade for picks leading to James Harden
7:40 Harden expectations
8:38 Omer Asik and his defensive importance to Houston
11:35 How the Rockets were waaaay off the radar prior to acquiring Lin, Harden, and Omer. (HI SPM)
12:40 Restricted FA offer sheet insight.
17:07 Chandler Parsons has asked to have his contract restructured (recommended)
19:05 Talks about how trades affect team rotations and how coaching staffs feel about trades. This gave me an idea that Mchale and crew weren't thrilled giving PPAt to Sac in the midst of a playoff race but that not all moves are done with the blessings of all sides.

2)Can't remember the name of the guy but the VP of STATS--the company who introduced the SPORTSVU cameras that record like 25 frames a second of geodata on an NBA court. Listen to this and ask yourself why your team doesnt have this yet (15 teams have it). I mean its just data--but youre at a competitive disadvantage if your team doesnt have this .

24:50-talks about the cameras and their basic use. How they provide contextual information to traditional bobby boxscores.
27:12 rehash of Kevin Love being the hardest runner in the league.
29:18 names the 15 teams that have it including the Knicks who are surprising because theyre a big money market team.
29:44 NYK analytic talk
30:44 Y'all will love this CARMELO TALK: last 2 seasons Carmelo leads NBA in EFG (effective FG % buckets off his direct passes) Thats right leads the league--not just F's. I think the number was 61%
34:20 cant read what I wrote lol
36:30 Rudy Gay Trade and some anecdotal evidence around what analytics may tell (Memph surprisingly doesnt have cameras yet)

3) Ben Alamar former VP of Analytics for OKC (this was a good listen for me)

38:50 Thunders analytical decision behind drafting Wessy. In that draft they were down to drafting 2 guys, Wessy or Brook Lopez (who fell to 10)

44:30 Analytical data available on Ibaka or other overseas players.

45:50 How to get decision makers to look at analytics from nerds.

48:20 Krossover game he developed where you watch game film and make decisions. Interestingly enough--it shows that players make decisions better and faster than front office guys...Their brains just work differently. i havent played it yet myself but am gonna get on it once I clear up some morning work.

check this: http://www.krossover.com/


BONUS: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/espn-the-b.s.-report-bill/id254098743
This weeks BS report--Bill sits down with Zach Lowe again fresh off his weekend at SLOAN.

Ive only listened to the 1st 10 minutes but was really excited by what I heard. Sounds like theyre breaking down the best stuff from the weekend. Right now where Im at theyre talking Defense and Lowe's obsession with NBA defense--was interesting to me considering that Elite NBA PG post.



I'd love it if a bunch of yall listened to these and we could talk about this stuff in this post. I didnt used to be an analytics guy at all. If you look back far enough in the archives you might find a post or two of me hating on them, but I have to say all this information about basketball really excites me. Whether its right or wrong--just more sports shit to talk about.

I guess Im a NERD too

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

I don't necessarily have a beef with analytics, but when cats use them to make ridiculous statements about players is when I just smh

But it's definitely worth opening up the door to more conversation

>I don't necessarily have a beef with analytics, but when cats
>use them to make ridiculous statements about players is when I
>just smh
>
>But it's definitely worth opening up the door to more
>conversation

I think you may be surprised that the guys talking about it in real life aren't as fire and brimstone as some of the people on this board. It sucks that on this board you have to be black or white on an issue. Im always a middle guy--some will say thats the Libra in me--but its really just my personality and one of my strengths and at times weaknesses....i see both sides and play the middle well.

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

who is fire and brimstone on this board about it? lol.

everyone wants to be the rational middle guy while painting caricatures of people with actual opinions. cowards.

advanced stats are BETTER than not using statistics or relying on unadjusted boxscore stats. anyone who disagrees is a moron. advanced states aren't perfect or comprehensive because that's not the job of stats. full stop.

-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

>who is fire and brimstone on this board about it? lol.

(see below)
>
>everyone wants to be the rational middle guy while painting
>caricatures of people with actual opinions. cowards.

(not necessarily. Theres a number of posters who go far left or far right--some are just dumb and some to ruffle feathers). Agendas are only fun to me to a certain extent which is why I stay out of posts like Jeremy Lin get your shoeshine. Would have loved it if that post on why there are no elite defensive pgs got more discourse.
>
>advanced stats are BETTER than not using statistics or relying
>on unadjusted boxscore stats. anyone who disagrees is a moron.
>advanced states aren't perfect or comprehensive because that's
>not the job of stats. full stop.

I agree but like I said its a process for people who aren't statisticians like you.It took me awhile to get on board because I knew a certain way, and I watched so many sports, and had relative success gambling on sports, so I thought I knew a lot without any knowledge of advanced stats or advanced gambling systems.

I think the more people we get reading about this stuff the better discourse we can have. And the way to do it isnt by calling people idiots and dumbasses--cause we all know what that breeds on these boards.
>
>-----------
>It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

>(not necessarily. Theres a number of posters who go far left
>or far right--some are just dumb and some to ruffle feathers).

yeah, but it's such an easy middle ground. I like stats when I likethem. I don't when I don't.

>Agendas are only fun to me to a certain extent which is why I
>stay out of posts like Jeremy Lin get your shoeshine. Would
>have loved it if that post on why there are no elite defensive
>pgs got more discourse.

yeah, i stay out most of the time, unless it's my agenda or really fun.

>I agree but like I said its a process for people who aren't
>statisticians like you.It took me awhile to get on board
>because I knew a certain way, and I watched so many sports,
>and had relative success gambling on sports, so I thought I
>knew a lot without any knowledge of advanced stats or advanced
>gambling systems.

that's fair that it's a new way to think for some people and weird/uncomfortable. I probably underestimate that because I'm the son of a physicist, so quantifying things is in the blood. lol. but, it's one thing to take a while to get it, to understand the stat, etc. it's another to oppose it.

>I think the more people we get reading about this stuff the
>better discourse we can have. And the way to do it isnt by
>calling people idiots and dumbasses--cause we all know what
>that breeds on these boards.

yeah, but most of hte time, it's this process:
"Claim made about player X"
"Stats actually show that your claim isn't true"
"Stats are dumb. I watch the game"
"Fuck you, idiot."

I admit, the last response is...angry and not productive. maybe the problem is the stats only get introduced when they disagree with perception. the reality is that 95% or so of stats actually agree with what we all think/see.

dumbass.

-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

http://youtu.be/B05INM57xO8

>Agendas are only fun to me to a certain extent which is why I
>stay out of posts like Jeremy Lin get your shoeshine.

And you're full of shit because you brought your Jeremy Lin agenda to another post that had nothing to do with Lin.

________________________________________
"Take the surprise out your voice Shaq."-The REAL CP3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2H5K-BUMS0

>http://youtu.be/B05INM57xO8
>
>>Agendas are only fun to me to a certain extent which is why
>I
>>stay out of posts like Jeremy Lin get your shoeshine.
>
>And you're full of shit because you brought your Jeremy Lin
>agenda to another post that had nothing to do with Lin.


LOL im full of shit? Im not in that post and theres so many more opportunities to UP Jeremy Lin shit or go back and forth with you. When I have time sometimes I indulge, but go look back at how many Lin posts Ive upped when hes had a good game...The other night was the 1st one in awhile if not this season. Its usually Cenario or someone else who enjoys laughing at your expense.

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

there might be a bit of frustration when luddites are still scoffing at something as simple as TS% as if it's theoretical nuclear physics, but that's about it. i've patiently explained stuff over and over to truth and RBO, who inevitably reply with garbage snark or HAVE YUO EVAR PLAYIED BASKETBAL

>there might be a bit of frustration when luddites are still
>scoffing at something as simple as TS% as if it's theoretical
>nuclear physics, but that's about it. any hostility is the
>hate that hate created.


I'm mostly on your side in this but you especially goad and bait the other side into these analytics agenda wars (and yes to be fair they do it to you too). I mean in theory something like TS and WS are simple enough but when youve grown up reading Petersen's Pro and Street and Smths and listening to the talking heads talk about traditional stats--this is going to be a paradigm shift.

Maybe Fire and Brimstone is too strong but certainly for the purposes of this board when you just start calling people idiots--nobody is gonna back down--and they'll make it an agenda fest.Again, yes I know they do it to you too.


But I'm all about good discourse and debate. Like I said below, I like that point Simmons made to Lowe on the BS report about Magic and jalen talking bout how perception of Rudy Gay means something--kinda like that Dwight Effect paper on offense.

Rex has been a longtime skeptic but overall I think he's a smart and rational guy. Glad he was planning on listening and open to getting more info.

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

>But I'm all about good discourse and debate. Like I said
>below, I like that point Simmons made to Lowe on the BS report
>about Magic and jalen talking bout how perception of Rudy Gay
>means something--kinda like that Dwight Effect paper on
>offense.

If anything, the Gay effect (pause) is that by having a better offensive player guard him, his supposedly "good" defense is actually more related to tiring out an opposing player than to being good on defense. that's interesting, but it kinda helps prove that a good coach who uses analytics would say "nah, fuck this. Let Rudy Gay try to beat us" and everything would be much, much better for that team. If perception is creating reality (what you wrote), then statistics can be used to break that (gay's not actually that good. stop gameplanning for him to your detriment!).

the dwight effect showed that dwight not only convinces players/teams not to take shots, but they're also not making shots that well even factoring for that. That was stats confirming reality (though I'm not 100% on that stat).


-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

>
>If anything, the Gay effect (pause) is that by having a better
>offensive player guard him, his supposedly "good" defense is
>actually more related to tiring out an opposing player than to
>being good on defense. that's interesting, but it kinda helps
>prove that a good coach who uses analytics would say "nah,
>fuck this. Let Rudy Gay try to beat us" and everything would
>be much, much better for that team. If perception is creating
>reality (what you wrote), then statistics can be used to break
>that (gay's not actually that good. stop gameplanning for him
>to your detriment!).
>


Zach touched on this briefly. But until everyone starts using advanced stats then thats not universal knowledge. A lot of coaches are former players like Magic and Jalen and among that crowd there is still a huge fear of the math--but the reality is those guys will continue to be the coaches and analysts that we see because the conventional wisdom says that makes sense. Its shifting but its going to be slow.


>-----------
>It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

except, oddly, the lakers.

as i said, i've explained stuff patiently over and over to these dudes. and i'm not even some hardcore absolutist with metrics - i think they just help explain what's been occuring and indicate ways that players/teams should improve. i rarely even bring up composite stats like WS or PER these days. we also shouldn't conflate all the L's i've handed out to SPM about harden/asik/morey with discussion of metrics.

but a few people, like the truth, are idiots. fuck the dumb.

They did a part 2 on baseball analytics but I didnt listen cause Im not really a baseball guy, but I know you are.


Either way I'd imagine most of this information isnt that new to you though there are probably some new facts you hadnt heard about before.

At the very least youl get some new fuel for the Melo agenda war.

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

>They did a part 2 on baseball analytics but I didnt listen
>cause Im not really a baseball guy, but I know you are.
>
>
>Either way I'd imagine most of this information isnt that new
>to you though there are probably some new facts you hadnt
>heard about before.
>
>At the very least youl get some new fuel for the Melo agenda
>war.

I'm warming to this

Had no idea Morey was so intrepid

He didn't say a whole lot that was interesting

The second guy (talking about the camera thing) was really
interesting

The former OKC guy was the most interesting

That krossover game idea was fascinating

Even more soon

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

guess that's the advantage of being a selfish gun -- defenses are never in position to defend the instances where you actually pass.

(listening now -- the StatsVU guy is much more interesting than Morey, who was just cagey)

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

with his brashness. But overall I enjoy listening to him just because he's more honest than other GMS. Of course part of Morey's transparency is I think theres a part of him that wants everyone to see how smart he is.

But yea interesting take on the Melo EFG thing. I can definitely see it.


>guess that's the advantage of being a selfish gun -- defenses
>are never in position to defend the instances where you
>actually pass.
>
>(listening now -- the StatsVU guy is much more interesting
>than Morey, who was just cagey)

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

He passes and when guys are open and in position
to score, and shoots when they aren't.

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

together.

when they double melo, amare has been filling the lanes perfectly. I like that lineup so much better than melo kicking it to kidd/jr/felton for a 3 and crossing his fingers.

i'd still like to see more plays and postups run for amare (not melo fault) but they look great together and have played decently together on defense too.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

carmelo leads the entire NBA in usage rate by a relatively substantial margin. and his assist rate is far below every player in the top ten of the category except brook lopez (a center who takes only 14 FGA a game).

top ten in usage rate

34.2 anthony - 14.6% assist rate
32.5 westbrook - 39.1% assist rate
31.9 bryant - 27.8% assist rate
29.9 irving - 31% assist rate
29.9 james - 35.1% assist rate
29.8 wade - 25.9% assist rate
29.6 durant - 21.4% assist rate
28.8 harden - 24.9% assist rate
28.3 lopez - 6.8% assist rate
28.1 parker - 40.8% assist rate

the point here is that because carmelo shoots so much and passes so little, it means that the only time he gives up the rock is for a pretty sure score. i'm not saying carmelo should be passing more--he's scoring very well this season--just saying that the eFG% resulting from his passes is more a testament to his style of play than anything else. melo makes smart passes, but not very many of them.

he's also got a 1:1 assist:turnover ratio and is averaging a career-low in assists, so lauding his passing is a dubious game overall. for shits and giggles, demarcus cousins has a 16.8% assist rate, higher than melo's.

more than half the starting 5 are reluctant shooters. Kidd and Shump usually only take kickout jumpers if they are wide open and Chandler is only shooting if he's gonna finish around the rim and he's shooting 65%.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

there are some guys with very good eFG% around melo, too.

chandler leads the NBA at 65%
novak 60%
amare 60%
prigioni 60%
kidd 52%

granted, JR and felton drag those numbers down some.

but the sixers, in extreme comparison, don't have a single guy who plays a lot of minutes higher than thad young, at 51%. melo passes to teammates who are open, and a lot of them are very good at scoring when they have the chance. shit, that's how a good offense is supposed to work!

Just like I thought.

it's obviously a nice stat, but this stat mostly *makes sense* because of the knicks' excellent offense (of which carmelo is a component) and his role as a primary scorer and infrequent distributor.

he just doesn't pass enough to make it uber-meaningful.

But y'all use that to promote good passers all
the time

That is related to handling rate, handling time,
and teammates

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

a lot of debates in the stat-nerd community about their value.

>a lot of debates in the stat-nerd community about their
>value.


Assists are partly helpful for understanding why
Chris Paul is a great passer.

This Melo EFG assist% stat is partly helpful for
understanding why Melo is a good passer.

Like any stat, you simply have to be smart enough to
understand what it really means.

That's where the real problem is -- people don't really
understand numbers or the spirit of statistics. This
transcends sports -- stats have an essence. You either get
it or you don't.

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

his teammates are infrequent shooters. Besides felton, JR and now Amare, no one on that team looks for their own shots and they only shoot layups or open jumpers, which they sometimes pass up.

If you put melo on a different squad his usage would go down but his assists would likely increase.

-The Knicks’ coaching search still includes a lone frontrunner, Kurt Rambis, whose qualifications for the position include a strong relationship with Jackson and a willingness to take the job.

i don't mind the theory, but wish we had numbers for the eFG off his passes from previous years. but since melo has only had an assist rate over 20% once in his career-last season, when they tried to make him a point-forward temporarily--it's pretty clear that giving up the rock just isn't his thing. his career assist rate is 16%.

fact: he doesn't pass much
fact: when he does, it's usually a good pass
question: does this mean he should pass more, or would more passing lead to diminishing eFG results?
half-ass answer: since melo is scoring efficiently this year, his teammates are scoring efficiently off his passes and the knicks' offense is excellent, they should probably leave shit alone.

because if you can find a comparison to another player who is an efficient individual scorer with a low pass rate, you could compare the eFG% of their pass recipients to see if it's more a function of team defenses focusing on the high usage / high efficiency scorer or if it's actually a function of Melo's superior passing ability.

but everything I hear is presently we lack the data to perform such comparisons (or at least Joe Q. Public does), although we're in the process of building it, which is why the analytics of tomorrow is much more interesting than the analytics of today to me.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

>because if you can find a comparison to another player who is
>an efficient individual scorer with a low pass rate, you could
>compare the eFG% of their pass recipients to see if it's more
>a function of team defenses focusing on the high usage / high
>efficiency scorer or if it's actually a function of Melo's
>superior passing ability.

There is only one Carmelo Anthony, who is Black and Puerto
Rican, who was born in Brooklyn and raised in Baltimore and
is married to Lala and wears a headband.

You can't duplicate every variable and control for every
single aspect of his game that makes him unique. Statistics
don't work that way.

BUT

There are plenty of chuckers who don't have as high a
EFG% -- that might be meaningful, might not be meaningful.
Depends on the situation and how you interpret it.

Same way points per game is sometimes a great measure of
scoring ability, sometimes its an awful measure of scoring
ability.

Same way steals is a good measure of one-on-one defense.
Sometimes its an awful measure of one-on-one defense.

Same way assists is a good measure of passing ability
in some situations and not in others.

Carmelo Anthony makes the right pass on his team, in the
situations that he's in. That's what the stat tells you.

>but everything I hear is presently we lack the data to perform
>such comparisons (or at least Joe Q. Public does), although
>we're in the process of building it, which is why the
>analytics of tomorrow is much more interesting than the
>analytics of today to me.


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

>Carmelo Anthony makes the right pass on his team, in the
>situations that he's in. That's what the stat tells you.

that's what the stat doesn't tell you, but personally that's what I'd be most interested in finding out.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

>>Carmelo Anthony makes the right pass on his team, in the
>>situations that he's in. That's what the stat tells you.
>
>that's what the stat doesn't tell you, but personally that's
>what I'd be most interested in finding out.

Well, wouldn't that change possession to possession?

On some play, Carmelo makes a great pass.

Some plays, his teammates make a great shot.

Right?

Just like rebounding % is sometimes because Durant has
long arms and scoops a rebound. Sometimes its because of
where he is on the offense (Russy shoots a lot of jumpers,
leading to long rebounds, which Durant can grab charging
from the wing)

But again: You're missing the point of statistics:

Carmelo has LED THE LEAGUE TWO YEARS IN A ROW.

He lead it when his starting back court was Lin and Shumpert.

He lead it when his starting backcourt was Felton and Kidd.

He lead it when he played power forward (this year).

He lead it when he played small forward (last year).

That the stat distributes itself over different sample
sets SCREAMS that it IS the player.





----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

generally, carmelo's efficiency/usage/assist rates are similar to those put up by power forwards. in recent years, dirk and bosh (in toronto) are reasonable comparisons. lamarcus too, although he typically hasn't been as efficient.

this all is more evidence that melo should be playing the 4 instead of the 3.

I've messed with basketball-reference.com a bit but either I need to learn how to use that site better or it's somewhere else, because I don't know what data set holds that information in digestible form yet.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

for that, i just scanned a list of players with high usage rates and looked for forwards. if you want guards to compare him to, reggie miller and michael redd fit the bill.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

not sure how it works

>his teammates are infrequent shooters. Besides felton, JR and
>now Amare, no one on that team looks for their own shots and
>they only shoot layups or open jumpers, which they sometimes
>pass up.
>
>If you put melo on a different squad his usage would go down
>but his assists would likely increase.

Other than Melo

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

even playing with the GOAT, who was third in the NBA in scoring that season.

>even playing with the GOAT, who was third in the NBA in
>scoring that season.


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Further demonstrating that it really might be him.
He actually might just be a really, really good
passer.


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

stop agenda-ing, you agenda-ing bastard.

no one is saying melo is a bad passer. we are saying he is an infrequent passer, and one currently surrounded by a number of eFG players. it makes sense that people score when he gives them the ball.

because like you said Melo is a reluctant passer, meaning anyone who took that simple, discrete stat and tried to paint a picture of Melo as a good passer would be misrepresenting the truth. we can see this as a result of other advanced stats, but taken by itself it essentially tells us very little, or what it seems to tell us is misleading to the eyeball test which makes it plain to see Melo shoots more than he passes.

it's why professional analytics guys develop a range of stats and create larger composite pictures, and why lay people like most here arguing over these things can't generate much solid meaning from the limited data sets available to us.

it's also why I'm not particularly interested in comparing single stats like eFG% or TS% between players, when those can be a function / influenced by so many other factors in a basketball game. you generally need more data than just that single point to reach any real pertinent meaning about a player. it's why I keep saying basketball analytics are incomplete (or at least the access most lay people have to them is incomplete), because single, sortable data points don't do enough to really explain the game. sure, they can offer insight, but they can be misleading as well.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

personally, i thought it was an interesting stat and unpacking the basketball reasons surrounding it made for a compelling discussion that we haven't specifically had before. but if talking about any numbers whatsoever is a pandora's box you're unwilling to open, feel free to exit stage left.

and that Melo stat, taken by itself, is a perfect example of how advanced analytics can be misleading (or incomplete) if they lack the greater context of an actual basketball game.

personally, I'm much more interested in the stats the StatsVU guy was starting to talk about, the team stats, which they've said are all generally too new and incomplete to be drawing strong conclusions on at this point, but where I see this sort of thing going, i.e. the fact that James Harden's team gets the most points per drive in the NBA is a much more compelling stat than his eFG% / TS% / assist% etc. or the analytics about the return on Marc Gasol on the elbow and how removing Rudy Gay from that equation transforms the Grizzlies' ability to be efficient on offense, as opposed to just discussing usage, shot selection, or FG% with Rudy Gay.

when those team-wide stats become more available for public consumption, I will be much more interested in those, but just chopping up PER (which correct me if I'm wrong is just a slightly manipulated composite of old box score stats anyway) or WS (which doesn't explain very much about individual players' styles or preferences) or eFG% or TS% (which can be strongly influenced by so many other factors in a basketball game not captured by that stat) leaves plenty of room to say the eyeball test is being ignored.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

>and that Melo stat, taken by itself, is a perfect example of
>how advanced analytics can be misleading (or incomplete) if
>they lack the greater context of an actual basketball game.

Right, just like assists per game, points per game, rebounds
per game, blocks per game, steals per game, field goal
percentage are all misleading.

The Melo stat is useful because it tells you something
very specific about his role on the TEAMS that he's on.

Last two years he's played on teams with nobody who can
create their own shot. Its all streaky jumpshooters for
the most part. He's adapted by making the right pass to
people in position to make the shot.

Nobody is saying he's Magic Johnson.

The stat says that IN THE CONTEXT THAT HE FINDS HIMSELF (his
team), he is doing a great job of putting others in position
to score.

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

the StatsVU guy simply said, "we have this interesting stat, the eFG% of recipients from individual passers. who do you think leads in that statistic?"

Zach Lowe didn't know, the StatsVU told him it was Melo at 61%. that was the whole discussion. and I cherry-picked it out to talk about here because it was interesting to me.

maybe that # was even better while Melo was in Denver? we don't know!! yes, I'd *like* to know but we don't know! which is why context is needed to properly understand all these things.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

If the statistics on assist-EFG% were completely
meaningless than the guy wouldn't be on the podcast
because he'd be fucking fired for hyping useless
stats that say that Carmelo Anthony and Nate Robinson
are the best passers in the league. Obviously he's measured
this and concluded that highlighting Carmelo's excellent passing
is important to bring up.

Same with Kevin Durant's rebounding percentage. He brought
it up because the stat is meaningful. If Nate Robinson and
Matt Bonner had the 2nd and 3rd highest rebound percentages,
you're probably looking at statistical noise and its not worth
discussing.



----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

>and that Melo stat, taken by itself, is a perfect example of
>how advanced analytics can be misleading (or incomplete) if
>they lack the greater context of an actual basketball game.

like we just had a much more in depth discussion than anything else BECAUSE a more useful (not even advanced) stat was used than normal. that was great. and you're criticizing that, when it was a much more useful discussion of basketbal strategy, a particular offense, and a particular player.

>players' styles or preferences) or eFG% or TS% (which can be
>strongly influenced by so many other factors in a basketball
>game not captured by that stat) leaves plenty of room to say
>the eyeball test is being ignored.

per sucks, ws is better but a broad, highly variable brush. but why are you hating on eFG and TS? they're actually surprsingly consistent across seasons. yes, there's better stats out there and what we have is limited, but your writing is making the perfect stat the enemy of the good stat. eFG and TS are better indicators of who scores well than FG% and, yes, better than watching alone.

-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

>like we just had a much more in depth discussion than anything
>else BECAUSE a more useful (not even advanced) stat was used
>than normal. that was great. and you're criticizing that, when
>it was a much more useful discussion of basketbal strategy, a
>particular offense, and a particular player.

I'll just go ahead and say that discussion was in part because I heard an advanced stat, immediately applied my own eyeball test to it, and presented it here with that wholly unresearched, purely gut-based critique attached. the fact that other advanced stats Guinness presented support my own observation is nice, sure, but it's just as much an example of how applying the eyeball test to advanced stats is just as important as the advanced stat itself.

yet you attribute all the value in the discussion to the advanced stat, which is what drives me nuts.

>per sucks, ws is better but a broad, highly variable brush.
>but why are you hating on eFG and TS? they're actually
>surprsingly consistent across seasons. yes, there's better
>stats out there and what we have is limited, but your writing
>is making the perfect stat the enemy of the good stat. eFG and
>TS are better indicators of who scores well than FG% and, yes,
>better than watching alone.

yes, they are better than "watching alone," but they are not better than watching with nothing else, and they still require an extensive understanding of basketball fundamentals to derive any real meaning from them. but the trap the Nerds (c) Bin keep falling into is presenting the advanced stat without context and presuming that imparts the meaning necessary to make the point.

which is why I nitpick, because I'm interested in contextual meaning, not just numbers.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

>but the trap the Nerds (c)
>Bin keep falling into is presenting the advanced stat without
>context and presuming that imparts the meaning necessary to
>make the point.

the idea that there are people who love basketball enough to pore through stats without watching games is beyond ridiculous. if they exist, they're definitely not on this board.

>the idea that there are people who love basketball enough to
>pore through stats without watching games is beyond
>ridiculous. if they exist, they're definitely not on this
>board.

the #s are interesting, but the discussion will (and always should be) rooted in watching games. the #s support that, don't supplant that. and generally when I nitpick is when I don't like how the #s are being presented without context, because I'm interested in the context. that's all I'm trying to get at.

completely, 100% tangential -- have you ever played / are familiar with the Football Manager series?

in case you haven't, it's a long-running soccer game that reduces it to #s, allows you to manage a team. it's weirdly, strangely addictive and as much as I wanna say basketball is about watching and avoiding the #s, for YEARS and YEARS now I've dreamt of a Basketball Manager game (which oddly enough sounds like exactly what that one gambler built in that ESPN Mag swipe, what could become the guts of a video game franchise). if I ever made it to Sloan, I'd be trying to do some video game development...

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

as in: people watching a few games and then making sweeping generalizations and building narratives without a clue as to the actual statistical realities.

again, where is this army of non-watching stat nerds? they're not on this site, they're not on ESPN, they're not on TNT, they're not writing columns for the sporting news.

haven't heard of the soccer thing, sounds kind of cool. the funny thing about hoops.ws is that it's basically a PER/48 league. and it was one of the first things that made me think about how seemingly productive players were improperly being used by NBA teams.

Baseball is a scientific heaven because it isolates
variables and creates discrete interactions that
really are comparable across players and times and
settings (relatively)



----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

which is obviously just as much a part of the message board as it is anything else, just saying that's why I nitpick, because the stats only interests me in context, not as standalone #s.

but I do understand what you're saying about the faith-based basketball viewers. I just don't mind them so much.

and seriously whether or not you have much interest in soccer, it might interest you to give Football Manager a look (it's actually the tool I used to *teach* myself soccer when I decided I wanted to learn, I went into it wholly blind). it's on Steam if you're on a PC, dunno about Macs. you are given a salary budget and a transfer budget and the game is in making valuation decisions on players to fill that out, hiring a coaching staff for style of play, assembling a team that has good chemistry, putting players in their best position to succeed etc. it seems stupid, but playing that game is part of what helps me understand Presti's perspective on the Harden trade for example, because sometimes you only have so many resources and you need to sacrifice to get by. anyway, it's a fun numbers-heavy game that has been around for over a decade now and is a big seller in the UK, always funny to me it remains such a fringe/cult thing even as #s keep growing in importance in the US.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

call it non-watching or non-contexualizing or whatever you want, but i don't see it as a prominent part of the basketball dialogue. and if you don't mind faith-based hoops analysis, we're not going to agree on much.

and talking about an individual's #s < talking about five man unit production. so any time those stats are getting introduced as definitive player ranking tools I'm casting the side eye, because they really only give a very limited, very small glimpse into the game.

and I understand larger sample sizes etc. and how all that influences how reasonable it is to predict off those stats, just saying I think those simple measures will be increasingly diminished as advanced analysis starts identifying larger trends for how teams work together and how individuals / styles of play can influence team #s. that's what *I'm* interested in, and wisdom from faith-based narratives are going to continue to influence that as people learn which truisms have value and which don't, i.e. "get to the rim as much as possible" is a truism advanced analysis supports.

and just in general, the thing I *like* about Bill James is that his default position is to assume you can always know more. he's a skeptic, not a know-it-all.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

again, where is this relentless assault by non-watcher, non-contextualists happening?

and you do know that TS% = points per possession, right?

it tells you something, but not everything, hence my gripe about lack of context.

e.g. the Rudy Gay problem in Memphis isn't just about Rudy Gay's TS%. yes, it's part of it, but it's also about the style of play which putting Rudy Gay in the lineup necessitates. faith-based narratives would say "this is good because it means more touches for Marc Gasol" which style of possession oriented points per possession metrics (outside of TS%) tell us would be an accurate observation.

reducing it simply to a tale of TS% with Rudy Gay doesn't really tell the whole story.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

for the third time, please tell me where all these non-watchers/non-contextualizers are. you've avoided it twice by trying to spiral discussion into a "DUH NO SHIT" conversation about how box-score-based stats aren't the end-all-be-all.

and any time players are compared or ranked via TS% it's misleading and/or incomplete.

ANY TIME

it's insightful, but not definitive. I believe saying "Kobe's '12-13 TS% is > than Melo's '12-13 TS% therefore Kobe is a better shooter than Melo this year" (or any similar statement) lacks the context to hold any meaning of real value. it's the first question which should lead to more questions, i.e. who are the teammates, what's the style of play, what's the usage, etc. and so on.

so I'm not devaluing the stat as much as I'm saying it might not say as much as lots of the stat heads seem to think it says <--- this is my gripe.

maybe you and the other new school stat heads recognize these sorts of stats are merely an imperfect tool to help support our understanding of the game, but it doesn't come across in posting here imo.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

so you're just outright refusing to back up your statement. got it.

the Harden trade post, as an obvious example, is rife with you pumping TS% and people replying to add context re: the lockout season and Harden performing against bench units.

not incidentally, anyone who noted this was CORRECT in identifying the '11-12 #s as outliers, as Harden -- while still very good -- has hardly replicated what he was doing last year in OKC. also, Kevin Martin has seen a sharp jump in his #s as well with the move from Houston to OKC.

because TS% only captures a small part of the game. it is very, very far from explaining it.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

but he's at or above his 10-11 numbers, so...?

-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

which is why it's important to place equal value on fundamental discussion of basketball philosophies and not just view stats as ultimate arbiters of the game.

otherwise we get into the weird world where Tiago Splitter's WS/48 (.224) is better than Tim Duncan's WS/48 (.201) which might foolishly lead one to believe that Tiago Splitter is somehow better or more relevant to the Spurs' success when anybody with any sense who watches basketball knows that isn't true.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

you seriously won't explain where all these "non-contextualists" are shouting their "non-contextualisms" in your face? i've now asked you five times to clarify where you're encountering such people.

or is your rhetorical technique simply ignoring the contents of a conversation and spewing something ancillary?

and I'm of the opinion this statement is pretty simple to understand, lack of direct support and all:

TS% is a stat that, by definition, lacks context, because it only tracks one individual's performance within a team game.

therefore any time players are compared using TS% context needs to be added in order to derive any real meaning.

I'm not trying to win some argument here, just pointing out what I think should be obvious.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

there's not a single person arguing that TS% is the golden theorem. not here, not anywhere. yet, while continuously refusing to say where this army of nerds is plying its myopia, you keep furiously rebuking arguments that no one is making.

shout out to shawn for just linking me to this site, this post re: "a tribe mentality" at the Sloan conference seems to jive with what my perception of the discourse is, so my confirmation bias says obviously it's a good essay:

http://www.hickory-high.com/?p=6776

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

and introducing this hypothetical stats nerd who doesn't watch the game and believes the stats perfectly express the game?

-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

"Sharing a sliver of statistically gleaned information with an analytically disinclined coach or general manager may be tolerated if it’s presented in a certain way. In the event that the information is acted upon with a successful result, that process may even be repeated. But no real meaningful work has been done to change the way that person measures and evaluates the things they see in front of them.

When most people think of the Sloan conference I imagine they envision an endless parade of graphs and spreadsheets. To an unfortunate majority, those things represent analytics. But they aren’t analytics, those are statistics and visual representations of statistics. Statistics are not analytics. Statistics are evidence gathered to support or refute an idea. Analytics is the critical thinking that is done using that evidence."

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

(also, sorry i edited so your response looks like it makes no sense).

>"Sharing a sliver of statistically gleaned information with
>an analytically disinclined coach or general manager may be
>tolerated if it’s presented in a certain way. In the event
>that the information is acted upon with a successful result,
>that process may even be repeated. But no real meaningful work
>has been done to change the way that person measures and
>evaluates the things they see in front of them.

>When most people think of the Sloan conference I imagine they
>envision an endless parade of graphs and spreadsheets. To an
>unfortunate majority, those things represent analytics. But
>they aren’t analytics, those are statistics and visual
>representations of statistics. Statistics are not analytics.
>Statistics are evidence gathered to support or refute an idea.
>Analytics is the critical thinking that is done using that
>evidence."


-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

>funny thing about hoops.ws is that it's basically a PER/48
>league. and it was one of the first things that made me think
>about how seemingly productive players were improperly being
>used by NBA teams.

________________________________________
"Take the surprise out your voice Shaq."-The REAL CP3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2H5K-BUMS0

Amazing!!! Ive been playing off and on since 2000.

I downloaded 2013 and started but couldnt do it...shit kills me...and I got a kid now.


There is actually a basketball version of it.. Cant remember what its called. My boy who was a non soccer head --who I got into FM, found it. I never played it in much depth but he loved it. Dont know if its still in existence.



>>the idea that there are people who love basketball enough
>to
>>pore through stats without watching games is beyond
>>ridiculous. if they exist, they're definitely not on this
>>board.
>
>the #s are interesting, but the discussion will (and always
>should be) rooted in watching games. the #s support that,
>don't supplant that. and generally when I nitpick is when I
>don't like how the #s are being presented without context,
>because I'm interested in the context. that's all I'm trying
>to get at.
>
>completely, 100% tangential -- have you ever played / are
>familiar with the Football Manager series?
>
>in case you haven't, it's a long-running soccer game that
>reduces it to #s, allows you to manage a team. it's weirdly,
>strangely addictive and as much as I wanna say basketball is
>about watching and avoiding the #s, for YEARS and YEARS now
>I've dreamt of a Basketball Manager game (which oddly enough
>sounds like exactly what that one gambler built in that ESPN
>Mag swipe, what could become the guts of a video game
>franchise). if I ever made it to Sloan, I'd be trying to do
>some video game development...

---
"though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought

Stop making up new strawmen with every post.
-----------
It's only funny till someone gets mad. Then it's hilarious.

both insights into the game are equally valuable to me, but the scientific community seems a bit to quick to dismiss the value of the eyeball test for my taste. calling that a "strawman" does little to dissuade me of that notion.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu