Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"A lot of people get into the analytic stuff — we don’t pay no attention to that..."

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    octothorp wrote: View Post
    Stats make a lot more sense for some sports than others, particularly sports that can be most effectively broken down into individual actions. Baseball, absolutely. Football, somewhat. Hockey and basketball, not very much. I'm all for people attempting to work out better statistical measurements for basketball, but any sort of superiority complex on the part of guys like the WoW guys is laughable. Most of the analytics right now are focused on rankings: reducing a player's impact to a single sortable stat, so that they can say 'this guy is better than that guy.' Maybe that's what the stat-reading public wants. And I don't blame DeRozan for ignoring it: it does him absolutely no good to to care about how some metric ranks him.

    On the other hand, I do believe there is real potential in the sort of analytics that the SportVU cameras bring, because the amount of information that it's dealing with is exponentially greater than what most analytic systems use, and because the the whole approach (as it's being implemented by Toronto and others) is based less around ranking players, and more about constructing offenses and defenses to account for the strengths and weaknesses of individual players. It's also way beyond the grasp of fans, which is fine. The level of analytics that's appropriate for fans and the level that's appropriate for coaches and GMs isn't going to be the same.
    First I want to say I agree with you on WoW. I think they are at the extreme of the stats debate - there is a unspoken belief that their stats (WP specifically) are so incredibly accurate the room for error is negligible. They always believe they are the smartest ones in the room, and you don't even deserve to be there with them if you don't agree with them. What makes this, for lack of a better word, disgusting, is their complete failure to use good science and do a rigorous test of their numbers. Regardless, no faithful stats guy takes their metric seriously, and the hypothesis that is their metric has been debunked numerous times and numerous ways. (I also agree with Fully on the irony of WoW's rebuttal)

    However most stats aren't really about actually about ranking players. Yes that is done by some more than others, but generally its only for 'ease of use/interpretation', since most discussions come down to comparing players anyways. ie. one can get an idea of how much impact (or combined impact) player A has vs player B. There is nothing wrong with this except that people take it too literally.

    We have to remember stats are not finite precision, they are probable predictions. Think of them like a coin flip - no one knows for certain what side of the coin will come up, but we do know there are only 2 possibilities and each has an equal chance of happening (if we don't cheat ofcourse). Over the long run (say 100 flips) we could have any combination of flips, but the most likely outcome will be close to 50/50. Basketball stats aren't saying (are indeed never saying) it will be heads or tails, what they are saying is "its most likely to be close 50 of each side over a period of time".

    I think where the problem lies is non-stats guys don't quite realize this (they think its predicting heads or tails), and the stats guys forget it (and pretend they can predict heads or tails).
    Last edited by Craiger; Wed Oct 16, 2013, 03:09 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Mediumcore wrote: View Post
      You have to show that you can before you actually say it.
      Can't argue with you on this. Talk is cheap.

      Comment


      • #18
        Craiger wrote: View Post
        However most stats aren't really about actually about ranking players. Yes that is done by some more than others, but generally its only for 'ease of use/interpretation', since most discussions come down to comparing players anyways. ie. one can get an idea of how much impact (or combined impact) player A has vs player B. There is nothing wrong with this except that people take it too literally.
        Well put. My issue is really the way stats get disseminated on the internet quite often. There's been some excellent posts and discussions about stats here on RR, where people are actually trying to disseminate what goes into a statistic and what they mean. Like you say, the problem is more-so the non-stats guys trying to use stats in a more absolute way than what the stats are intended for. The discussion should be 'is this stat useful and what does it tell us, how often is it right and are there specific circumstances where it's more likely to be wrong' and instead it tends to be 'here's my argument, and oh look, here's a stat that sort of backs this up.'

        Comment


        • #19
          joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
          I didn't get that from those quotes at all... I simply got the impression that this team doesn't care about the critics, and will fight and claw and do everything they know they can do to win.
          I think the counter-point is that as noble as his sentiment it, it seems to be completely ignorant of the fact that there might be better, more effective & efficient ways to achieve the same goal.

          If the goal is to get to the the top of the hill, should we applaud the guy who struggles with rock climbing and finally reaches the top with bloodied fingers and is completely out of breath, or should we applaud the guy who steps back, sees the stairs and finds a much easier way to get to the top of the hill?

          I think DeRozan is taking things too personally, putting too much emphasis on his role of scorer (who does that sound like?), without realizing that by finding a more efficient way of being a scorer he can not only fulfill his role, but make the entire team better.

          Comment


          • #20
            slaw wrote: View Post
            These WoW guys can *&$^ off. My guess is that 99% of players don't pay any attention to "analytics" nor do they need to.

            Clayton Kershaw doesn't need to be an expert in fWAR to be a good pitcher any more than Lebron James needs to understand TS% or WS48 to be the greatest player of his time..

            The people paying attention to trends, stats, etc. should be the coaching staff and management teams. They should then be working with players to put those players in the best position to succeed utilizing as much information as possible from their analysis of their own team and others. If the players can't do the job required, then you get new players.

            Arencibia's problem isn't that he doesn't pay attention to OBP, it's that he can't hit and has a terrible approach at the plate he refuses to change. That has nothing to do with stats (or understanding them) and everything to do with a player who doesn't want to or can't get outside his comfort zone to improve.
            Players (and agents) will eventually start paying more attention to stats, since the GMs and owners paying those player salaries are paying attention to stats. The Gay trade was kind of like a watershed moment for analytics pitting new school (Hollinger & Grizz owners) vs. old school (Gay/Hollins). New school seems to have won the first round, anyway. Once the agents start telling players that stats like PER have an impact on your market value, then players will start paying more attention. I mean, not so long ago, a volume scorer like Michael Beasley would have been considered at least a borderline all-star. Now, he's being released outright and grateful to latch onto another team. There's no question that 'not paying attention to no analytics' like efficiency will ensure that Beasley's next contract won't be anywhere near what it could have been in old times. You think his agent is paying attention to that?

            Gay and Derozen don't care, because they've already been paid a fool's ransom. Guys looking for that first big contract will surely care 'bout analytics.
            Last edited by golden; Wed Oct 16, 2013, 05:03 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Craig wrote: View Post
              Ok, I am not going to make this long, but I hate stats, always have. The reason is that SO MUCH goes into the decision making process during actual play, that some stats are affected. So A guy see's a shooting percentage fall, take Gay, however how much attention is placed upon how his teammates affected that? It isnt on a sheet. Never will be. Poor timing, shitty screens etc.

              And this is just one small example.

              Can we look at championship team who have stars with poor efficiency numbers and become bewildered?
              Championship teams have stars with poor efficiency numbers?

              I checked theNBAgeek.com for the shooting efficiency numbers (true shooting efficiency - includes drawing and making free throws and the added value of 3-pointers) of the top SEVEN players on last year's championship team(s):
              Miami Heat TS%: 57% (Dwayne Wade) to 64% (LeBron James)
              San Antonio Spurs TS%: 55% (Tim Duncan) to 61% (Tiago Splitter)

              Rudy Gay has a TS% of 51%, and DeMar is 52%. They're less efficient than bench players on championship teams, according to the stats. While I get you hate stats, you might want to take a look at them. Clearly Miami and San Antonio are winning more than Toronto. Maybe stats have some way of explaining that?

              Comment


              • #22
                By the way, in DeMar's defense, his TS% seems to have gone up a whole bunch this year. How? He's apparently taking more high percentage shots from the paint rather than long twos (he's taking the ball to the basket more), which any stats guy would tell you is a smarter thing to do.

                If DeMar takes his pre-season play into the regular season, ironically he may turn into a poster boy for stats: showing how smart shot selection can dramatically improve a player's shooting percentages.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Brandon wrote:
                  What, specifically, would you like to see them do to their wp48 stat to test it more rigorously?
                  Just a simple idea (and I'm sure there are much smarter people than me that would have much better ways):

                  1) find each players expected WP
                  2) predict each teams project Wins based on their player's WP
                  3) at the end of the season adjust the initial projected wins in 2) for minutes players actually played (and thereby account for injuries, coaches decisions on minutes, trades etc)
                  4) compare the real life results to the adjusted projected results

                  If the results aren't within a reasonable level of confidence, we can fairly say WP is not accurately measuring wins - and then they can actually go about finding where the problem is (say, I don't know, perhaps the double counting on defense (rebounding + defensive field goals missed) and missing the relationship between usage and a players efficiency)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    'He takes a hell of a lot of pressure off me and vice versa,’ DeRozan said of Gay. ‘A lot of people get into the analytic stuff — we don’t pay no attention to that because we know how much we can help this team. As long as we play on the defensive end, we don’t have to worry about scoring — nothing, none of that — because we can score the ball at will.’
                    It's the bold that gets me; his willful admission that he and Gay, and possibly other players, flat-out refuse to explore a tool that could help their game and help the team.
                    "Stop eating your sushi."
                    "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                    "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                    - Jack Armstrong

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I'm a little surprised, not at the response to the article, but the harshness.

                      I like stats but by no means do I think they are the be all and end all. I've said numerous times in the forums they are a good tool to back up the eye test. I admit there are times when I likely put too much weight on a stat to 'prove' a point - I've been called rightfully so on that in the past.

                      With all that said though, to totally throw them out is a quite extreme as well. In sport you do anything and everything you can to gain an advantage. Just less than 20 years ago, most players guys put no thought in to nutrition. A lot of guys still don't but a lot of guys do - all to gain any and all advantage.

                      It seems that many have taken the stance that DD is more skilled/talented and athletic, so WTF do these stat guys know that he doesn't. I think that is silly. Different perspectives offer different views. A lot of CFO of major corporations have an engineering educational background versus a business/finance educational background. Why? Most business backgrounds think in the box and were taught that way. Engineers think outside the box and are taught to think that way.

                      Many have mentioned the idea of five on five and one guy not being responsible for the actions/inactions of the other 4 teammates. This totally ignores a big crutch of the stat guys argument, which is:

                      In one game of five-on-five, factors like shooting efficiency, rebounds, and turnovers matter.
                      they may not be helping their team win if they are:

                      Shooting poorly (hence wasting shots their teammates could have taken) and/or
                      Not gaining or keeping possession of the ball
                      Shooting efficiency, rebounds, and turnovers have very little to do with your teammates. Turnovers can in some cases but overall all three of those areas are directly tied to the individual.


                      I think the author failed in the last paragraph. Instead of the highlighting shooting efficiency as an area to improve on, he should have put it in the same context as and also highlighted the need to improve in rebounding and taking care of the ball as well.

                      At the end of the day, you get more opportunity to win (i.e. score more points) by having more possessions (rebounds and turnovers) and by increasing efficiency of scoring (scoring more points with less opportunity).



                      **For the record, I don't think DD's comments were meant as conceded or thinking higher of himself. I do think they show ignorance and a classic case of turning a blind eye to something he might not like to see (i.e. denial).

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                        It's the bold that gets me; his willful admission that he and Gay, and possibly other players, flat-out refuse to explore a tool that could help their game and help the team.
                        Read the quote again.... "we don’t pay no attention to that"

                        It's a double-negative. lol. Demar is waaay smarter than we thought. He's actually really into analytics.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Craiger wrote: View Post
                          Just a simple idea (and I'm sure there are much smarter people than me that would have much better ways):

                          1) find each players expected WP
                          2) predict each teams project Wins based on their player's WP
                          3) at the end of the season adjust the initial projected wins in 2) for minutes players actually played (and thereby account for injuries, coaches decisions on minutes, trades etc)
                          4) compare the real life results to the adjusted projected results

                          If the results aren't within a reasonable level of confidence, we can fairly say WP is not accurately measuring wins - and then they can actually go about finding where the problem is (say, I don't know, perhaps the double counting on defense (rebounding + defensive field goals missed) and missing the relationship between usage and a players efficiency)
                          This article has nothing to do with WP though. Sure the WoW guys love that but this article is particularly about shooting efficiency, rebounds, and turnovers which are all about as individual as it gets in basketball.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            golden wrote: View Post
                            Players (and agents) will eventually start paying more attention to stats, since the GMs and owners paying those player salaries are paying attention to stats. The Gay trade was kind of like a watershed moment for analytics pitting new school (Hollinger & Grizz owners) vs. old school (Gay/Hollins). New school seems to have won the first round, anyway. Once the agents start telling players that stats like PER have an impact on your market value, then players will start paying more attention. I mean, not so long ago, a volume scorer like Michael Beasley would have been considered at least a borderline all-star. Now, he's being released outright and grateful to latch onto another team. There's no question that 'not paying attention to no analytics' like efficiency will ensure that Beasley's next contract won't be anywhere near what it could have been in old times. You think his agent is paying attention to that?

                            Gay and Derozen don't care, because they've already been paid a fool's ransom. Guys looking for that first big contract will surely care 'bout analytics.
                            Every year at my company we send all the junior guys on a thousand seminars, lectures, training programs, etc. to show them what they need to do to be successful. We also mentor them to death. Every year a bunch of those guys will underperform or outright fail. Why? I guess in the odd circumstance there are guys that just don't listen or care or want to understand but, for the most part, it's simply that, while they understand what is required, they simply can't do it.

                            You can tell your client to become a 3-pt specialist or improve his TS% till you are blue in the face. If your guy can't shoot efficiently then he can't shoot efficiently. There's a disconnect here between the analysis of the game and the actual playing of the game. Even if a player tries to "play to" the tendencies of WP or WS, it doesn't mean he can actually do it.

                            My earlier point was that management teams should be using every analysis tool available to evaluate players and coaches should be using every tool available to try and get the most out of the players they have. But, at the end of the day, you can't make an orange an elephant. Yeah, it would be awesome if Gay and Derozan both were high percentage shooters and efficient playmakers. They aren't. Won't ever be. If that's a problem, you don't blame the player, you trade them.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              This article has nothing to do with WP though. Sure the WoW guys love that but this article is particularly about shooting efficiency, rebounds, and turnovers which are all about as individual as it gets in basketball.
                              oh I realize that....

                              my response was not exactly what I'd call 'on topic' to the article

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Stats are for stupid nerds with no girlfriend!!! They think they're smarter than us because of stupid math?!? I HATE STATS!! They don't tell me anything that my gut doesn't know!! I WANNA PUNCH STATS IN THE FACE!?!?!



                                (sarcasm implied)
                                When Tom Chambers dunks an NBA player gets their hops...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X