Interesting article for those who like "Moneyball"
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:37 pm
by KennyGreen
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/28/sport ... 0&emc=eta1
not sure if this article has been posted but I know there are many here on the board who like stats and their application to running a hoops team...I loved the book Moneyball and looks like the tenants and theories of Billy Beane's work are now making their way into the NBA...it's about time I say...
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:24 pm
by Chocolate City Jordanaire
Thanks for posting what was a very interesting read, KennyGreen!
Stats and their application is as close as I could ever hope to get to running a team.
I will say that approach works in fantasy basketball (in three leagues I'm currently 1st, 1st, and 3rd.). But that's just fantasy ball, not reality ... Little did I know there is a bonafide stat geek with no high-level basketball background already running an NBA team.
Morey, the Houston GM is living my dream! The article shed a bit of light on how GMs evaluate at a team level.
Whatever revelations Morey has found for assessing players, they remain proprietary for now. But at the team level, he said, there are four statistics that are now widely accepted as indicative of a team
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:25 pm
by ZonkertheBrainless
The difference is that in baseball there were some perfectly good stats that people were collecting but ignoring. In basketball all the informative data on defense is missing, so you have to pay some schmuck to go out and collect it, and you'll never have enough data that way to do a really good analysis.
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:30 pm
by Chocolate City Jordanaire
Kev, Zonker called you a schmuck.
Just kidding and having fun with something that is a bit controversial. Some teams will pay for defensive stats and others won't.
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:33 pm
by ZonkertheBrainless
I should say, you'll never have enough data until you have data from each team for several years...
Although if you're one of the teams that has data that no other team has and that data is useful you've got a competitive advantage...
How's that for backpedaling, Kev?
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:36 pm
by Chocolate City Jordanaire
KennyGreen, what that article really made me think about is for many seasons before this one, the Wizards with Haywood on the court were much better in those four categories.
Another competing thought, Ernie Grunfeld's done a great job using continuity and what would appear to me to be the opposite approach. He's a basketball guy who really looks at the chemistry side of the equation.
EG doesn't have the mess of a roster with all that talent that Morey has (but Morey did inherit that).
I will be curious to see if Morey survives Battier for Gay.
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:59 pm
by KennyGreen
I hear you CCJ regarding the Grunfeld approach...I definately think you need to blend the stats/quant work w/ the good old fashioned scouting in the hoops world as opposed to the pure quant approach that some organizations take in baseball...Battier for Gay? I just don't see that one working out well for Houston...while I love Battier's all around game and work ethic I too think Gay will develop into a superstar...