or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread - Page 1231

post #18451 of 27206
he said ecosystem
post #18452 of 27206
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

One of the biggest issues I have with advanced stats and the people that use them (and not all of them fall into this category) is that they either don't know the game that well or don't watch a lot of it but simply look at stats and determine whether player A is this or that. A basketball team is a very complex ecosystem, where the action of each player effects his teammates performance moreso than any other team sport. Nothing happens in a vacuum and to simply state something like "teams should take more 3's than 2's" as the advanced stat community advocates ignores so many aspects of what makes teams and players successful. For me, the stretch 4, a direct product of this thinking, has been the biggest "mistake" in my lifetime of watching basketball.

Teams don't need to master analytics to win, but they do need to scout and play with in accordance with the principals that analytics have revealed. Assuming they want to win of course. Popovich used analytics to confirm his intuition that corner threes were efficient shots. You don't just end up with a "complex ecosystem" you have to build it, and it's become clear that analytics are a valuable tool in building a cast of complementary players, and then you use them to deploy the talent in the most effective way.
post #18453 of 27206
And the funny thing is, Pop has gone on record as saying he hates the 3 but has to exploit its effectiveness if he wants the team to succeed. Enter Danny Green
post #18454 of 27206
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post

Teams don't need to master analytics to win, but they do need to scout and play with in accordance with the principals that analytics have revealed. Assuming they want to win of course. Popovich used analytics to confirm his intuition that corner threes were efficient shots. You don't just end up with a "complex ecosystem" you have to build it, and it's become clear that analytics are a valuable tool in building a cast of complementary players, and then you use them to deploy the talent in the most effective way.


If you buy wholeheartedly into analytics and let it rule the way a team plays, it will probably fail. This goes for letting it rule personnel decisions too.

Reminds me of a conversation in the investing thread about myopic, single minded thinking with investing. It applies with any complex ecosystem.
post #18455 of 27206
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet View Post

he said ecosystem


You like that shit, don't you
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo_Version 7 View Post

And the funny thing is, Pop has gone on record as saying he hates the 3 but has to exploit its effectiveness if he wants the team to succeed. Enter Danny Green

I'm going to say that San Antonio's success over the last 15 years has more to do with Tim Duncan than probably anyone else.
post #18456 of 27206
FOzQ2mb.png
post #18457 of 27206
Of course Pop would say something like that. He presents a face to the public yet his greatness is undeniable.

I'd agree with the comment about Duncan for the 1st half of the Dynasty; it's very arguably the Big 3 the last half. And Pop throughout.

Danny Green will drive Fantasy owners nuts. Pop will play him only when he's hitting the 3 and he's a very streaky shooter.
post #18458 of 27206
as a knicks fan, ed, i'm sure you realize that the knicks best season in the past 15 years happened mostly from tons of 3s coming off of lots of ball movement and carmelo being dominant at the 4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

One of the biggest issues I have with advanced stats and the people that use them (and not all of them fall into this category) is that they either don't know the game that well or don't watch a lot of it but simply look at stats and determine whether player A is this or that.
seriously this is the definition of straw man...can you name a single member of team management or even a single espn/yahoo/whatever analyst that does this? even if you think that people like me don't watch games (which is blatantly false), those people shouldn't matter at all to you because they don't affect the way a team is structured or strategy whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

A basketball team is a very complex ecosystem, where the action of each player effects his teammates performance moreso than any other team sport. Nothing happens in a vacuum and to simply state something like "teams should take more 3's than 2's" as the advanced stat community advocates ignores so many aspects of what makes teams and players successful. For me, the stretch 4, a direct product of this thinking, has been the biggest "mistake" in my lifetime of watching basketball.
honest question: what is a big mistake about the stretch 4?
the most successful teams in the last 5 years: spurs employed boris diaw as a stretch 4, the heat took off when they put in battier and james at the 4, serge ibaka is a great mid-range shooter, and dirk is the best-known stretch 4 in nba history.
post #18459 of 27206
You guys act like analytics is something that happens in a vacuum or is somehow exclusive. Analytics are used by teams and players to make better informed decisions. Not meant to replace coaching or scouting. It's clear that some teams should be smarter about how they use analytics. It's not clear that any team has failed due to relying too heavily, but I'm sure there will be examples. You can't take 5 low volume efficient scorers and expect to field a team.

Teams are staffing up very aggressively in this area and the playing field will be level in a few years. Right now there are still some dinosaurs out there and they will underperform until they adapt or are forced into retirement. This goes for front offices, coaches and players.

I understand why some of you are hostile to the analytics when it doesn't comport with yor thinking (I was that way in a few respects a few years ago) but the value is in how you adopt and apply the tools to your situation. It's not a one size fits all solution but ignoring data entirely is an instant failure.
post #18460 of 27206
i don't really understand people who are anti-advanced stats...obviously you never want people who don't watch games and just look at stats...but those people just don't exist. this exists in football too, and pro-stats ppl there always just say: advanced stats are just more information. why would you willingly turn down more information that could be helpful to winning games? this doesn't need to be done at the expense of watching games.

re: popovich
of course duncan is the cornerstone of that franchise. but the spurs don't go ANYWHERE if they aren't one of the most innovative franchises in the league. take a look at the twolves, w/ garnett being probably almost as good as duncan, and never making it anywhere there. the spurs were the 1st ones to tap into international markets, and they have a huge stats department. they were the first ones to realize the efficiencies of a corner 3, and they're the 1st ones to realize the benefits of resting players during the regular season. all of that stuff goes hand in hand with being open to advanced stats.
post #18461 of 27206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brothersport View Post

i don't really understand people who are anti-advanced stats...obviously you never want people who don't watch games and just look at stats...but those people just don't exist. this exists in football too, and pro-stats ppl there always just say: advanced stats are just more information. why would you willingly turn down more information that could be helpful to winning games? this doesn't need to be done at the expense of watching games.

however there's annoying breed of people who rely on advanced stats too much
kind that watch a little basketball and never/rarely played it and often don't understand basketball
even on beginner level. They are making dumbass claims based mostly on advanced
stats, internet is full of them; for example realgm
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post

Popovich used analytics to confirm his intuition that corner threes were efficient shots.

weird example, as you don't really have to be a genius to figure it out ;DDDDDDDDD
post #18462 of 27206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brothersport View Post

as a knicks fan, ed, i'm sure you realize that the knicks best season in the past 15 years happened mostly from tons of 3s coming off of lots of ball movement and carmelo being dominant at the 4.
seriously this is the definition of straw man...can you name a single member of team management or even a single espn/yahoo/whatever analyst that does this? even if you think that people like me don't watch games (which is blatantly false), those people shouldn't matter at all to you because they don't affect the way a team is structured or strategy whatsoever.
honest question: what is a big mistake about the stretch 4?
the most successful teams in the last 5 years: spurs employed boris diaw as a stretch 4, the heat took off when they put in battier and james at the 4, serge ibaka is a great mid-range shooter, and dirk is the best-known stretch 4 in nba history.

in terms of your first question, just look at bball blogs/columns etc. ESPN has a computer which predicts team records strictly based on analytics. I mentioned on a knicks blog that bargnani could be a valuable member of a triangle offense due to his midrange game and immediately the first response was, "he sucks as a stretch 4 and if you are a 7 footer and can't shoot threes, you have no place in the league" confused.gif One of the local papers mentioned that Shane Larkin's 3rd year option was not going to be picked up by the team and the writer mentions that he was -5 in the game against Chicago. I guess showing that as a reason for the Knicks not picking up the option. Yet, he was the second most important player for the Knicks in that game.

The Knicks team that won 52 games did come from a ton of 3's and ball movement. But ball movement has been around since the beginning of time, that has nothing to do with analytics, As has floor spacing. Some of the analytic people act like they invented the 3 point shot and floor spacing only comes from having 2-3 point shooters on the floor at the same time.

Obviously, known of us affect how a team is managed and we really have no idea how much or how little analytics drive anyone's decision but if you like at Houston, which is a darling of the analytics community, they have probably the most analytics driven lineup. You have the 3 point chuckers in Harden and Ariza (and Garcia off the bench) and you have the guy that only take shots from 2-5 feet away in Howard yet to me, they are a poorly constructed team that will probably win a lot of regular season games but can be stopped in the first round of the playoffs.

Anyway, I am not anti information and any player that does not look at things like his shot chart is silly. Any coach that does not look at how certain lineups perform together is silly. I am sure that most use a balance approach of stats, "gut", experience etc. I guess I am railing against, if you want to call it that, the internet cowboys that know everything about teams/players based on what the +/- is, or the true shooting or whatever and use that to dismiss perfectly good players/teams.

Last thing, I don't consider Dirk a stretch 4, at least in the sense that I think analytics people mean it, so maybe that is more of a semantics thing.
post #18463 of 27206
To me stretch 4 is someone like Matt Bonner/Robert Horry who's main job on offensive side of things is drive opposing bigs away from the basket
Dirk main job is to score and create scoring opportunities for rest of the team so he doesn't seem to fit into that label imo
post #18464 of 27206
wojt and ed,

yeah, you are right that internet dumbasses do exist that just look at stats and think they are the end all be all. i just think they are in the minority, rather than majority, and i don't think they're any worse than super homers who don't provide any rational thought or explanation. i group them in the same category where you just have to ignore them. i don't think that should say anything about the legitimacy of the concept of advanced stats, etc. like youre always going to find idiots, but you don't need to provide them any status.

i truly don't agree with you guys that dirk isn't a stretch 4. he does other stuff yeah, but their entire offense is predicated upon dirk getting crazy amounts of respect on the perimeter while being a big and opening up tons of space for everyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
in terms of your first question, just look at bball blogs/columns etc. ESPN has a computer which predicts team records strictly based on analytics. I mentioned on a knicks blog that bargnani could be a valuable member of a triangle offense due to his midrange game and immediately the first response was, "he sucks as a stretch 4 and if you are a 7 footer and can't shoot threes, you have no place in the league" confused.gif One of the local papers mentioned that Shane Larkin's 3rd year option was not going to be picked up by the team and the writer mentions that he was -5 in the game against Chicago. I guess showing that as a reason for the Knicks not picking up the option. Yet, he was the second most important player for the Knicks in that game.

The Knicks team that won 52 games did come from a ton of 3's and ball movement. But ball movement has been around since the beginning of time, that has nothing to do with analytics, As has floor spacing. Some of the analytic people act like they invented the 3 point shot and floor spacing only comes from having 2-3 point shooters on the floor at the same time.

Obviously, known of us affect how a team is managed and we really have no idea how much or how little analytics drive anyone's decision but if you like at Houston, which is a darling of the analytics community, they have probably the most analytics driven lineup. You have the 3 point chuckers in Harden and Ariza (and Garcia off the bench) and you have the guy that only take shots from 2-5 feet away in Howard yet to me, they are a poorly constructed team that will probably win a lot of regular season games but can be stopped in the first round of the playoffs.

Anyway, I am not anti information and any player that does not look at things like his shot chart is silly. Any coach that does not look at how certain lineups perform together is silly. I am sure that most use a balance approach of stats, "gut", experience etc. I guess I am railing against, if you want to call it that, the internet cowboys that know everything about teams/players based on what the +/- is, or the true shooting or whatever and use that to dismiss perfectly good players/teams.

Last thing, I don't consider Dirk a stretch 4, at least in the sense that I think analytics people mean it, so maybe that is more of a semantics thing.
to be honest, i don't think those people should be used as examples of the normal person that uses advanced stats for anything. a random commenter on a knicks blog and whichever intern mentioned larkin's option decline shouldn't really have any impact on your opinions, you know?

espn's computer program that predicts records (schoene or something?) is another story. the whole idea of stats is to find useful information that isn't clear to the naked eye, so it makes sense that that program might be able to find some trends that scouts aren't able to...like the biggest victory for schoene is that they predicted a horrible knicks season 2 years ago and were roundly and scathingly destroyed by every single knicks fan. it turns out they were like a game or two off of the knicks' final win total. that doesn't mean they're always right (they miss a lot, like last year's pistons season), but sometimes they can catch things that scouts and viewers can't. that's the whole deal, it's just more viewpoints and information.

sure floor spacing and ball movement have been around forever but it's not accurate to say those have nothing to do w/ analytics. analytics can absolutely influence how much offensive plans can skew towards that sort of stuff. doug collins in philly a couple of years ago was famously anti-advanced stats and aimed his whole offense towards long 2s, rather than floor spacing or anything.

also, advanced stats is great for efficiency of players at different positions and 5-man lineups. i know for a fact that tons of reporters brought up melo's overwhelming efficiency at the 4 compared to the 3, and those stats definitely impacted woodson playing him there more.

i know houston is the obvious analytics team that everyone brings up, but everyone forgets the spurs (everyone's darling franchise), the mavs, and the celts. these franchises (and honestly most franchises nowadays) spend tons of $$ and resources and they've been very successful. (obv houston is a 2nd-tier team, but nobody wins a franchise w/ only 2 great players, blah blah blah)

i know you were exaggerating your hate of advanced stats and using hyperbole, but i still don't have any idea why a stretch 4 is a huge mistake. just baffling.
post #18465 of 27206
btw klay got his max contract. 4 yrs, $70M

rfx, here's where the guy you quoted earlier was wrong. it wouldn't really have saved the warriors any money extending him now.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2014/11/02/klay-thompson-max-deal/
Quote:
And the Warriors didn’t really have to do this now–if you’re giving a guy the max he can make, you can just wait it out and see if he’s worth it when you absolutely have to give it to him. Which wasn’t until next summer.

–More details: Actually, the Warriors could always offer MORE than Thompson could get in an offer from anybody next summer, because the free agent’s own team can offer 7.5% annual raises and outside teams can only offer 4.5% raises.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread