ImageImageImageImageImage

OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court

Moderators: mpharris36, GONYK, HerSports85, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Capn'O, j4remi, Deeeez Knicks, NoLayupRule

JohnStarksTheDunk
General Manager
Posts: 8,595
And1: 2,008
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Location: Los Angeles
       

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#21 » by JohnStarksTheDunk » Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:53 pm

TKF wrote:How do you know who he was talking about? His quote was "he scores tend to come from jump shots taken immediately after receiving a pass".

how can you get anything else from that?

Nice article, nothing genius and nothing most of us didn't figure out.. I just had a problem with that quote...


I took it as a reference to guys who just stand there and spot up, and don't create any of their own offense by running around like crazy ala Reggie or Rip. Hitting an open jumper is great, but is often created more by someone else getting that guy open (via a double-team or drive, etc.)

After reading your response, I agree that his statement can include players like Reggie who make you chase them all over the court and use screens extremely well. However, I also think players like that make up a very small percentage of the players who tend to take shots immediately after receiving a pass. And then there are guys like Ray Allen who do create offense that way, but are also capable of creating it off the dribble.
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#22 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:55 pm

TKF wrote:really you are overreacting.. It was a response to a quote. If you don't like it, I suggest you not post on internet forums.. It is what it is....


No it doesn't have to be. I'm on other bball message boards where every post must have worthwhile content. That's a cop-out to say well, welcome to the internet!

which dimension are you talking about? Great catch and shoot players can be nightmares as myself and bluest gave an example.. If I had a choice of guarding Reggie miller, who is more one dimensional than let say, stephen Jackson, I would say miller is much harder to guard, and we pointed that out with the example I gave of guys who move, catch and shoot...


Miller is not one-dimensional though. And even so, he's an extreme case. Even running through picks is an art form he's perfected. It's dubious of you to assume the GM was alluding to players like Miller as opposed to someone who parks their ass at the 3, ie. Bowen, and Battier. He clearly wasn't so Miller shouldn't be even part of the discussion.

did , I question it's worthiness? again, you are creating different argumenets here.... I just said, that these stat keepers tend to over think, especially in basketball.. and how ironic because the article is basically saying how stats can measure how effective a player like battier is.. So again, what is your point? why are you creating arguments that were never formed in the first place?


You were pretty dismissive in your first 2 posts and I cannot read minds. You only brought it up later on.
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#23 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:03 pm

My point still stands but I will add that I did overreact and unfortunately you didn't catch my edit when I thought better of it. My apologies good sir.

I just think it's a shame that for once in a long while, a well-written, insightful article about ball came out, and I didn't appreciate the "treatment" it was receiving considering all the negativity and senseless threads like "rudy got robbed" etc etc etc
JohnStarksTheDunk
General Manager
Posts: 8,595
And1: 2,008
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Location: Los Angeles
       

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#24 » by JohnStarksTheDunk » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:09 pm

frogfood wrote:
Miller is not one-dimensional though. And even so, he's an extreme case. Even running through picks is an art form he's perfected.


I agree with this. While on the surface, he could perhaps be labeled as simply a "shooter", there were a lot of factors that separated Reggie from someone like Hubert Davis. Most notably, his endurance and perhaps unparalleled ability to "get open", using screens effectively, pump faking, drawing fouls, etc.

Steve Kerr was a great shooter, but didn't have these elements to his offense.
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#25 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:30 pm

JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:
TKF wrote:How do you know who he was talking about? His quote was "he scores tend to come from jump shots taken immediately after receiving a pass".

how can you get anything else from that?

Nice article, nothing genius and nothing most of us didn't figure out.. I just had a problem with that quote...


I took it as a reference to guys who just stand there and spot up, and don't create any of their own offense by running around like crazy ala Reggie or Rip. Hitting an open jumper is great, but is often created more by someone else getting that guy open (via a double-team or drive, etc.)

After reading your response, I agree that his statement can include players like Reggie who make you chase them all over the court and use screens extremely well. However, I also think players like that make up a very small percentage of the players who tend to take shots immediately after receiving a pass. And then there are guys like Ray Allen who do create offense that way, but are also capable of creating it off the dribble.


I thought the same thing, but there are more than you think.. I just thought the comment was too inclusive and misleading... thats all.. I understood where he was trying to go, I just think a lot of these GM's are trying to be too cute with the way they evaluate players that they so often drop the ball.... Trying to evaluate a player this way, is a mistake.. At least going by his quote.... If I gave you a list of guys who shot the ball, right after receiving it and said, these guys are players who really don't have the ability to improve their offense, you are going to miss some gems... compiling stats in such a way can be dangerous.. for me, it just goes back to good scouting.. go watch the guys, put together a good group of scouts and watch, sometimes we create stats for too many things and they become misleading at times...
Image
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#26 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:38 pm

frogfood wrote:My point still stands but I will add that I did overreact and unfortunately you didn't catch my edit when I thought better of it. My apologies good sir.

I just think it's a shame that for once in a long while, a well-written, insightful article about ball came out, and I didn't appreciate the "treatment" it was receiving considering all the negativity and senseless threads like "rudy got robbed" etc etc etc


no problem.. I had a problem with the qoute of the gm, not the article as I mentioned already.... And the problem I have as stated is that a lot of these GM's over think the field.. That comment he made, left things pretty wide open... And the main problem I have with that kind of stat keeping is this.. If I gave you a list of guys you have never seen before, and asked you to make a decision based upon this information some of these stats can be so misleading... Like he said, guys who shoot right after they get the ball, usually, can't ramp up their offense.. well in that group on paper, you will have Bruce bowen, Ray allen, Reggie miller, Kevin martin, jason kapono, rip Hamilton, etc.. Now some of these guys are great at putting the ball on the floor, but stats will show that most of them take shots right off the pass.... By just taking his quote and or stat(if compiled) you dismiss guys like ray allen and kevin martin and reggie miller and group them with the bruce bowens...

That is the problem I had.. Now maybe I am nitpicking a bit, but I just hate the way some of these advanced stats mislead and these GM's over think the field doing so....
Image
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#27 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:39 pm

JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:
frogfood wrote:
Miller is not one-dimensional though. And even so, he's an extreme case. Even running through picks is an art form he's perfected.


I agree with this. While on the surface, he could perhaps be labeled as simply a "shooter", there were a lot of factors that separated Reggie from someone like Hubert Davis. Most notably, his endurance and perhaps unparalleled ability to "get open", using screens effectively, pump faking, drawing fouls, etc.

Steve Kerr was a great shooter, but didn't have these elements to his offense.



exactly... but when you make quotes like that, when you keeps stats like that.. it becomes misleading.. very misleading.... Miller would score 30 points on you without putting the ball on the floor at all... and he was considered a very good offensive player..
Image
JohnStarksTheDunk
General Manager
Posts: 8,595
And1: 2,008
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Location: Los Angeles
       

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#28 » by JohnStarksTheDunk » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:49 pm

TKF wrote:
JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:
frogfood wrote:
Miller is not one-dimensional though. And even so, he's an extreme case. Even running through picks is an art form he's perfected.


I agree with this. While on the surface, he could perhaps be labeled as simply a "shooter", there were a lot of factors that separated Reggie from someone like Hubert Davis. Most notably, his endurance and perhaps unparalleled ability to "get open", using screens effectively, pump faking, drawing fouls, etc.

Steve Kerr was a great shooter, but didn't have these elements to his offense.



exactly... but when you make quotes like that, when you keeps stats like that.. it becomes misleading.. very misleading.... Miller would score 30 points on you without putting the ball on the floor at all... and he was considered a very good offensive player..


Yeah, point taken. A GM using that stat on its own would be a mistake, because it would filter out the few special guys like Reggie or Rip. However, it could be helpful when comparing guys who might seem otherwise very similar.
User avatar
stuporman
RealGM
Posts: 28,280
And1: 15,606
Joined: Nov 27, 2005
Location: optimistic skeptical realist

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#29 » by stuporman » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:18 pm

I wonder if the rise of statistical importance and the rise of the internet happening simultaneously is mere coincidence.......hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm :meditate:
If you'd rather see your team fail so you can be right
...you are a fan of your opinion not the team.
Image?
Knowledge is just information stuffed into a mental bag
Wisdom is knowing what to pull out of the bag to do the job
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#30 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:20 pm

Common sense. Info is proliferated at an exponential rate. Here we are, you and I, discussing ball on the internet.

It's also why there are so many "fake fans" at agmes. Without the internet, there wouldn't be all these tickets resold.
StutterStep
RealGM
Posts: 30,424
And1: 58
Joined: Jul 04, 2005
Location: WAIVED

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#31 » by StutterStep » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:22 pm

I chimed in on this article late last night and I'm just getting back to it and have read some the comments.

One of the things I can appreciate is that GMs like Morey (and others) are creating new ways of measuring players, etc... For example there was a time when a "blocked shot" was not computed, etc...and pretty soon the NBA might come up with credit for the second assist (the one that leads to the assist that is currently recorded).

While these stats might help to foster team play, I agree to a certain degree with those who want to avoid the oversimplification of players by extending the use of stats. I got in touch with this analyst I've done work with. His specialty is salary, so I asked him about his computation for Battier's most recent season -- and his worth:

Last Year's Performance:
Maximum ( 6,370,000) Actual (5,883,600) Mininum (2,300,000)

His analysis shows that Battier earned his keep, in that at best Battier's value to the club was that of a player making $6.3.

But in that same instance you can replace Battier's on-field contribution with a player making $2.3million (think Balkman if he were to get a new contract).

This is one of the reasons people still rag JVG and Morey over the draft day trade that sent Rudy Gay to Memphis.
User avatar
thefuriousfive
Rookie
Posts: 1,103
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 13, 2008

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#32 » by thefuriousfive » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:38 pm

I don't think these GMs are over-thinking; i think this has much more to do with a new way of thinking that has produced tremendous results in baseball, i.e. Red Sox and A's etc. The underlying assumption in the article is that numbers catch what your naked eye cannot see or measure, like for instance the zones of inefficiency for Kobe Bryant, which don't show up in the scoreboard. The article was a good read and rockets definitely have a tremendous supporting cast, if only their stars can stay healthy and effective together.

TKF: You're definitely overreacting to that one quote. With articles so huge, I could find many different points to nitpick. Rather than focusing on the minutiae, it'd be more productive to talk about the main points of the article. Honestly, I kinda expected more from you. Very disappointing, especially by using "geeks", c'mon man.
Image
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#33 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:46 pm

thefuriousfive wrote:I don't think these GMs are over-thinking; i think this has much more to do with a new way of thinking that has produced tremendous results in baseball, i.e. Red Sox and A's etc. The underlying assumption in the article is that numbers catch what your naked eye cannot see or measure, like for instance the zones of inefficiency for Kobe Bryant, which don't show up in the scoreboard. The article was a good read and rockets definitely have a tremendous supporting cast, if only their stars can stay healthy and effective together.

TKF: You're definitely overreacting to that one quote. With articles so huge, I could find many different points to nitpick. Rather than focusing on the minutiae, it'd be more productive to talk about the main points of the article. Honestly, I kinda expected more from you. Very disappointing, especially by using "geeks", c'mon man.


so you can find something to nitpick on and it is OK, I find a quote and it is not? is that what you are saying... why do I have to focus on what you want me to...really the article for me is not "new" news....


The underlying assumption in the article is that numbers catch what your naked eye cannot see or measure, like for instance the zones of inefficiency for Kobe Bryant, which don't show up in the scoreboard.


that is great, but guys like myself, stutter and bluest talk about these things all the time.. It is why bluest like kevin martin more than he like kobe bryant.. again, nothing new, that is why I really didn't see any need to pick anything out of the article, because I had no problem with the author.. Just had a problem with the point the GM was making and his methods.. It is a worth discussion, even if you don't approve.. the Underlying message has been discussed by me and others a lot, too bad you missed the bus on that one...

with a new way of thinking that has produced tremendous results in baseball, i.e. Red Sox and A's etc

that works more with baseball, but honestly theo is no genius, take away bostons ability to spend like the yankees and what do you have? with all of that number crunching, he has won less rings and divisions than brian cashman... the same thing with the A's exec, I think billy beane. he does well with little, I give him more credit than theo, but in the end, what have they won? I just think these GM's who over think and overuse stats get waaaaay too much credit.. I don't see how this can effectively apply to basketball , or at least have such an impact.. again, it is worth discussion... the article is good, but a lot of the points have already been touched on around here in basketball conversations..


But my post was just one point of many.. why is the focus on my one comment.. if the article is so good, then you guys should be busy posting away with great points from the article.. so far the focus has been on my one point, and a valid point I feel about a comment made by a GM.....
Image
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#34 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:51 pm

StutterStep wrote:I chimed in on this article late last night and I'm just getting back to it and have read some the comments.

One of the things I can appreciate is that GMs like Morey (and others) are creating new ways of measuring players, etc... For example there was a time when a "blocked shot" was not computed, etc...and pretty soon the NBA might come up with credit for the second assist (the one that leads to the assist that is currently recorded).

While these stats might help to foster team play, I agree to a certain degree with those who want to avoid the oversimplification of players by extending the use of stats. I got in touch with this analyst I've done work with. His specialty is salary, so I asked him about his computation for Battier's most recent season -- and his worth:

Last Year's Performance:
Maximum ( 6,370,000) Actual (5,883,600) Mininum (2,300,000)

His analysis shows that Battier earned his keep, in that at best Battier's value to the club was that of a player making $6.3.

But in that same instance you can replace Battier's on-field contribution with a player making $2.3million (think Balkman if he were to get a new contract).

This is one of the reasons people still rag JVG and Morey over the draft day trade that sent Rudy Gay to Memphis.


As an accountant I appreiciate numbers, having a minor in finance I appreicate the use of numbers as well.. but the overextending of stats to me is just so overblown... I think stats are a way of weeding out and grouping players, and the initial study and analysis of a player, the rest is visual.... Good old fashion scouting...
Image
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#35 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:27 pm

TKF wrote:But my post was just one point of many.. why is the focus on my one comment.. if the article is so good, then you guys should be busy posting away with great points from the article.. so far the focus has been on my one point, and a valid point I feel about a comment made by a GM.....


Well, it's because you came off as dismissing the article. You may not have outright said it but that's the impression a lot of us got. And we have been posting discussion about it, but also replying to your post.

"Intangibles" is nothing new but the article, and the discussion, alludes to more. You "getting it" before us laymen isn't what this is about; we all get it, it's not news to us either! It does springboard into other discussions too, like Stutter's post which was cool.

Like another poster said, Isiah brought in Marbury based on gaudy #s for the most part. The NBA awards players on these gaudy #s, as do owners. Again nothing new, but why do they continue to act like so. And speaking of Gay, that looked painfully lopsided in Memphis' favor but would Gay be enough to put them over the top anyway? Or any better? He doesn't seem anything special in the "intangibles" dept.. and this coming from me, a UConn superfan. In terms of value yea, Rockets still got ripped, not going to defend them to that extent.
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#36 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:32 pm

frogfood wrote:
TKF wrote:But my post was just one point of many.. why is the focus on my one comment.. if the article is so good, then you guys should be busy posting away with great points from the article.. so far the focus has been on my one point, and a valid point I feel about a comment made by a GM.....


Well, it's because you came off as dismissing the article. You may not have outright said it but that's the impression a lot of us got. And we have been posting discussion about it, but also replying to your post.

"Intangibles" is nothing new but the article, and the discussion, alludes to more. You "getting it" before us laymen isn't what this is about; we all get it, it's not news to us either! It does springboard into other discussions too, like Stutter's post which was cool.



I dismissed the GM more than the article.. again, a classic case of overreacting... there were other points I wanted to mention, but look how much time we wasted discussing if I dismissed an article based on one comment about a QUOTE...

I find some of the things morey said interesting, some very good ideas and forward thinking when it comes to evaluating players, I just found too much of it overthinking, but this is my opinion, never said it was the gospel.....
Image
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#37 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:34 pm

TKF wrote:
I dismissed the GM more than the article.. again, a classic case of overreacting... there were other points I wanted to mention, but look how much time we wasted discussing if I dismissed an article based on one comment about a QUOTE...


I realize this but you asked the question why are we nitpicking your comment and I could only honestly answer with the impression I got. I said you didn't outright say it.

I'm guessing the same impression was experienced by the others.

All good. Moving on yes I've wasted too much time arguing over this.
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#38 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:37 pm

I'm thinking, is there a formula to building a team now? People sweat Portland but really, I'm not that impressed. Loads of high lottery guys.

It's also why I think they should really trade off Aldridge and get something before they're stuck with him.
User avatar
TKF
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,138
And1: 116
Joined: May 21, 2001
Location: Atlanta GA, via The Bronx.

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#39 » by TKF » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:39 pm

frogfood wrote:
TKF wrote:But my post was just one point of many.. why is the focus on my one comment.. if the article is so good, then you guys should be busy posting away with great points from the article.. so far the focus has been on my one point, and a valid point I feel about a comment made by a GM.....


Well, it's because you came off as dismissing the article. You may not have outright said it but that's the impression a lot of us got. And we have been posting discussion about it, but also replying to your post.

"Intangibles" is nothing new but the article, and the discussion, alludes to more. You "getting it" before us laymen isn't what this is about; we all get it, it's not news to us either! It does springboard into other discussions too, like Stutter's post which was cool.

Like another poster said, Isiah brought in Marbury based on gaudy #s for the most part. The NBA awards players on these gaudy #s, as do owners. Again nothing new, but why do they continue to act like so. And speaking of Gay, that looked painfully lopsided in Memphis' favor but would Gay be enough to put them over the top anyway? Or any better? He doesn't seem anything special in the "intangibles" dept.. and this coming from me, a UConn superfan. In terms of value yea, Rockets still got ripped, not going to defend them to that extent.



well forgive me, and I apologize if I come off as condescending and cocky...that is not the intent. I can assure you of that.. but I remember when a former poster in here, blueseats and I had this discussion regarding marbury vs nash.. He made some great points regarding the way nash plays as opposed to marbury and his 20/8 career average... he pointed out things that didn't show up on the stat sheets, Like nash's ability to quickly initiate the offense and how it led to better ball movement and more assists as opposed to marbury's domination of the ball on offense... It was an intense discussion, but many of the points that are discussed in this article has been touched on quite a bit... I think a lot of people realize the empty stats of some of these guys, this is why I had many post on why a team like the wizards would have been better by replacing arenas with a more efficient pass first PG instead of arenas..... A lot of these points I agree with. Nothing new here, but I sure didn't mean to rain on anyones parade here... so my apologies if I did... I was simply trying to point out how a lot of GM's make mistakes overusing stats and just out thinking themselves. I took his(morey's) quote as an example of such.. nothing more...
Image
User avatar
frogfood
Suspended
Posts: 6,333
And1: 1,609
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Location: the spice mines of kessel
     

Re: OT Article about efficiency on the basketball court 

Post#40 » by frogfood » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:43 pm

TKF wrote:

well forgive me, and I apologize if I come off as condescending and cocky...that is not the intent. I can assure you of that.. but I remember when a former poster in here, blueseats and I had this discussion regarding marbury vs nash.. He made some great points regarding the way nash plays as opposed to marbury and his 20/8 career average... he pointed out things that didn't show up on the stat sheets, Like nash's ability to quickly initiate the offense and how it led to better ball movement and more assists as opposed to marbury's domination of the ball on offense... It was an intense discussion, but many of the points that are discussed in this article has been touched on quite a bit... I think a lot of people realize the empty stats of some of these guys, this is why I had many post on why a team like the wizards would have been better by replacing arenas with a more efficient pass first PG instead of arenas..... A lot of these points I agree with. Nothing new here, but I sure didn't mean to rain on anyones parade here... so my apologies if I did... I was simply trying to point out how a lot of GM's make mistakes overusing stats and just out thinking themselves. I took his(morey's) quote as an example of such.. nothing more...


I suppose at it's core you're right. If people are just dawning on the "selfish" PG with high assist totals
then they're way late.

Also, Marbury's PER has always been higher than Nash when you compare their primes. Right there you can tell that Hollinger's formula is pretty bunk. I suppose there really is no way to quantify a player's worth considering all the intangibles that go beyond the #s unlike VORP in baseball which is pretty close.

edit: I actually think 2006-2007 was one of Marbury's finest years as a player.

Return to New York Knicks