RealGM

"First of all I've always believed analytics was crap," Barkley said on TNT's postgame coverage of the Rockets' 127-118 win over the Phoenix Suns. "You know I never mention the Rockets as legitimate contenders 'cause they're not. And listen, I wouldn't know Daryl Morey if he walked into this room right now."

Barkley made his case after saying the Rockets -- 36-16 and third in the West -- were poor on defense among playoff-contending teams despite being among the top statistical teams in the NBA defensively.

"Just because you've got good stats doesn't mean you're a good team defensively," Barkley said. "They're not a good defensive team. They gave up 118 points. No good team gives up 118 points."

An NBA coach, speaking to ESPN.com senior writer Ramona Shelburne, said there is value in the use of analytics but that it is limited.

"To say they've revolutionized everything about coaching or basketball is just wrong," the coach said.

The NBA coach said he uses analytics but that a lot of the statistics and formulas have been available for 10 years.

"You just had to look it up yourself on a computer," the coach said.

"These guys are bright, ambitious and a lot of them have carved out niches for themselves where they take credit for everything," the coach added. "You're taking people with a background in analytics. But they're out evaluating players and making decisions."

DanoMac wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/Tjonessltrib/status/565741739831721984[/tweet]

DH34Phan wrote:

DanoMac wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/Tjonessltrib/status/565741739831721984[/tweet]

Maybe having Ersan and Zaza would make Kanter want to come to Milwaukee. And his brother plays for UWGB.

I'd offer Henson and the Clippers 1st. They'd probably want more, though.

JayMKE wrote:A lot of people want analytics in basketball to be like they are in baseball but I think there are certain intangibles in this game that cannot be measured statistically so their usefulness is much limited. That's not saying it doesn't have any value but there isn't going to be a movie made about Daryl Morey starring Brad Pitt any time soon.

Ron Swanson wrote:I think somebody more eloquent than Charles Barkley is needed to convey the downside of taking analytics too far, because there is definitely a legitimate debate to be had with this issue. If used correctly, analytic stats are helpful for scouts and GMs to more accurately identify which players fit a certain role, and what personnel to surround your current players and coaching staff with.

Ultimately though, it's just that, another tool and not some magic "money-ball" philosophy that's going to revolutionize sports and build dynasties. Chuck's right on his basic premise, it's all about talent. If you don't have talented players, analytics are useless. Talent combined with a coaching staff and scouting dept. invested in analytics is maximizing it's effectiveness.

I think there's a growing wing of new age GMs who think that analytics is some fail-proof formula to build a contender and coincidentally ignore the important personal connections that make a team truly click. Numbers don't articulate personalities, tendencies, and cohesive chemistry. It's the guys who try to build a team like it's a simulated season in NBA 2K15 franchise mode that will fail. Which is where I think most old-school basketball guys are coming from in their criticism of analytics.

I was actually more surprised at how childish Morey came off through this whole thing. I don't think I've ever seen a GM resort to petty Twitter insults to try and slam a TV personality...

blazza18 wrote:Houston play the least entertaining game of all the good teams in the league. It's 4pm here and this games putting me to sleep.

Bernman wrote: Incidentally, Chuck realizes he uses analytics when he cites a 20-10 performance, right? It's just an inferior form. So he's pro inferior analytics.