anyway, it seems like, if we had good enough statistics, leadership/heart would be the residuals or intangibles left out of the model for teams. So if a team keeps outdoing what statistics predict they should do, that could be attributed to leadership or heart.

but in general, in other sports, those ideas are largely non-existent. Leadership/heart don't seem to impact baseball success. It's possible that baseball is a uniquely non-leadership-oriented sport (it is far more individualized a set of performances), but it also is possible that leadership and heart are actually quantifiable in terms of how well others play when you're on the court or not. It's a complicated statistic to measure that, and basic stats like +/- are really, really poor attempts to do that, but it'd be doable over a whole season for at least high minutes players because there are so many possessions in an 82 game season.

>But heart and leadership...how do you tangibly quantify the
>impact that has on a team or specific other players? And it's
>not just some bs made up value...those two things play a great
>deal in team unity, mentality, attitude, young player
>improvement, etc.


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