Top to bottom profile on the team's use of Analytics

[dockingsched]

So recent events have put a pretty glaring spotlight on the lakers and their implementation of advanced stats.

First things that came to mind were Scott famously mocking 3pt shooting as something that doesn't win in the playoffs, Jim Buss stating that he developed his own statistical model, and lastly the lakers being the only team never to send a basketball person to the annual Sloan Confeence at MIT.

Two other things that came to mind that are probably worth another look at.

One is Zach Lowes league wide ranking of teams adoption of analytics where the lakers ranked near the botTom

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12331388/the-great-analytics-rankings#!Bottom10

The other is a very detailed look at the Lakers and how each level of management has implemented analytics, it's really worth the time to read.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12375351/nba-los-angeles-lakers-stuck-stone-age

The ultimate question it leaves you with is are the Lakers truly second to none in analytics and have all these staffers hard at work that nobody knows about.... Or is the rest of the NBA right in saying that there is no evidence and thus highly unlikely they use stats to an acceptable level?

[lake_show]

Could be I'm not as read up on analytics as the next guy but don't see the hype.

I strongly agree with Madsen on this case. In that second article he tells you that analytics can be useful in figuring out where or how you can strategize to get an extra win here or there (which is huge) but that analytics isn't going to reinvent the wheel.

By nature all players are flawed. Jeremy Lin knowing that he struggles shooting 3's off the dribble, or shooting from the left wing are great information but it doesn't change who he is a player.

I don't remember any team making a bunch of moves based off analytics and being wow'ed by what they've put together.

Houston for example, who's a team that is big into analytics:
Harden trade - analytics? Nope, everyone would trade for Harden if they could.

Dwight signing - analytics? Nope, everyone would sign Dwight if they could

Asik trade - analytics? Nope, everyone knew it was a waste to have him and Dwight play next to each other.

Josh Smith signing - analytics? Maybe, maybe not. A lot of people would've taken a shot a Josh with the scenario he was in (non analytics). However, he could've been exactly what they were looking for analytic, even though I wouldn't call him a perfect fit, because....

Chandler Parsons FA - analytics? Letting Chandler Parsons go, who played really well in their system, because you were focused on Josh Smith... was that analytics? If so, I wasn't blown away by this move. It hasn't looked like a grandiose move to me.

I think analytics can serve a huge purpose in the league, but I think people are over hyping it's use. They heard HOU came into the LMA meeting with an analytics packet and LAL didn't so this just gives all the haters a chance to attack the Lakers. Whether analytics makes sense in this scenario or not doesn't matter. What matters is whether haters get an opportunity to bash the Lakers or not.

[andyhop]

The fact that the Lakers don't have the biggest analytics department in the league is really amazing to me. You have a perfect opportunity to put the big market money to use in a way that doesn't impact your cap and don't use it.

[lake_show]

How many guys do you really need doing analytics? 3... maybe... doing full-time jobs, with Madsen over seeing them.

I wouldn't be pissed if they had 2, with Madsen as their third.

People are really over hyping this whole analytics thing.

[TyCobb]

The fact that the Lakers don't have the biggest analytics department in the league is really amazing to me. You have a perfect opportunity to put the big market money to use in a way that doesn't impact your cap and don't use it.

Agreed. We should have the best facilities, most departments, best doctors, etc. However, it almost feels like they don't because they are so afraid that their 'hand' (playing card reference) will be shown.

[andyhop]

The fact that the Lakers don't have the biggest analytics department in the league is really amazing to me. You have a perfect opportunity to put the big market money to use in a way that doesn't impact your cap and don't use it.

Agreed. We should have the best facilities, most departments, best doctors, etc. However, it almost feels like they don't because they are so afraid that their 'hand' (playing card reference) will be shown.

Here in Australia they have introduced a soft cap with a luxury tax on non player spending in the AFL (aussie rules) to try and rein in the spending by the rich clubs who were employing in some cases twice as many coaches as some of the poorer clubs to try and equalize the competition.

[dockingsched]

I think analytics can serve a huge purpose in the league, but I think people are over hyping it's use. They heard HOU came into the LMA meeting with an analytics packet and LAL didn't so this just gives all the haters a chance to attack the Lakers. Whether analytics makes sense in this scenario or not doesn't matter. What matters is whether haters get an opportunity to bash the Lakers or not.

Thank you for the detailed post. My question would be that accepting the premise that there is a perception around the league that the Lakers are behind the times in cutting edge analysis, should the Lakers be changing their approach? Does this negative reputation have real negative consequences similar to the reports from the Aldridge meeting? Should the Lakers keep the status quo?

[lake_show]

I think analytics can serve a huge purpose in the league, but I think people are over hyping it's use. They heard HOU came into the LMA meeting with an analytics packet and LAL didn't so this just gives all the haters a chance to attack the Lakers. Whether analytics makes sense in this scenario or not doesn't matter. What matters is whether haters get an opportunity to bash the Lakers or not.

Thank you for the detailed post. My question would be that accepting the premise that there is a perception around the league that the Lakers are behind the times in cutting edge analysis, should the Lakers be changing their approach? Does this negative reputation have real negative consequences similar to the reports from the Aldridge meeting? Should the Lakers keep the status quo?

I guess looking at it that way then I do agree that the negative reputation does have real world negative consequences.

I don't agree that there were or are any numbers we could've given LMA in our first meeting that would be relevant in us signing him. Just like I think HOU might've given LMA some fun and interesting numbers to look at but I don't it impacts their chances of signing him.

But... Yes, I guess I agree. Not having those numbers does impact us negatively.

[rand0m]

The lakers don't need to be the rockets but they do need some changes in this department (among others). Whether or not you believe in the impact of analytics, looking more like a dinosaur to the rest of the world doesn't do any good for our reputation. Personally I believe it can have a significant impact on how a roster is assembled, performs & even how quickly it can come together (outside of a good coaching staff of course), especially now that it's much harder to just buy talent. It also made me cringe hearing about how much the FO tried to sell the city and non-basketball opportunities. I know we don't have much to sell otherwise but it's another example of how outdated their thinking has been. How important is where you play in today's world, especially to a player that wants to focus on ball and be a winner? If you are talented and marketable you'll get endorsements. You'd think we'd sell our talented youth and future plans a little more to players that are actually interested in winning.

[mcscotty]

I bet the basketball analytics in Vegas are better than the NBA. Coming from the world of finance, I don't put much stock into any of it.

[aaron_gray]

Do you honestly believe a lack of advanced statistical analysis is the reason that Aldridge spurned the Lakers?

[ak7]

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/22/sports/la-sp-lakers-layoffs-20110723

[Doormatt]

Do you honestly believe a lack of advanced statistical analysis is the reason that Aldridge spurned the Lakers?

It doesn't matter whether you believe that or not. Honestly it doesn't even matter whether you believe analytics are valuable or not either. What's important here is that the Lakers should have one of the best analytic departments in the league given our size, stature and wealth - but apparently we don't. Obviously it's important to some players, and when there is literally zero downside, why shouldn't we have one of the best?

[rand0m]

Do you honestly believe a lack of advanced statistical analysis is the reason that Aldridge spurned the Lakers?

Nope not at all. But it's just another aspect that makes the organization look either outdated or inept. Just like the purging of everything PJ (article above) doesn't instill much confidence in our brand to move in the right direction. Especially since it has been a downward trend since. Of course it didn't help we hit a slew of bad luck (injuries, inevitability of rebuilding, stern, etc...) but the perception is still a negative one regardless of why.

[aaron_gray]

Do you honestly believe a lack of advanced statistical analysis is the reason that Aldridge spurned the Lakers?

It doesn't matter whether you believe that or not. Honestly it doesn't even matter whether you believe analytics are valuable or not either. What's important here is that the Lakers should have one of the best analytic departments in the league given our size, stature and wealth - but apparently we don't. Obviously it's important to some players, and when there is literally zero downside, why shouldn't we have one of the best?

I honestly doubt any one team's statistical analysis trumps any other team's by a large margin. The perceived difference is most likely due to one team ponying up to journalists more than others. If there was a surefire way to improve one's team with no downside, than that path would already have been pursued.

[rand0m]

Do you honestly believe a lack of advanced statistical analysis is the reason that Aldridge spurned the Lakers?

It doesn't matter whether you believe that or not. Honestly it doesn't even matter whether you believe analytics are valuable or not either. What's important here is that the Lakers should have one of the best analytic departments in the league given our size, stature and wealth - but apparently we don't. Obviously it's important to some players, and when there is literally zero downside, why shouldn't we have one of the best?

I honestly doubt any one team's statistical analysis trumps any other team's by a large margin. The perceived difference is most likely due to one team ponying up to journalists more than others. If there was a surefire way to improve one's team with no downside, than that path would already have been pursued.

You may very well be right. But they are starting to look like the stubborn old man that refuses to change the approach yet expects the results to change. Embracing analytics (even if it's only a part of the game plan) shows a willingness to adapt to an evolving nba. What's the downside to that?

[lake_show]

I bet the basketball analytics in Vegas are better than the NBA. Coming from the world of finance, I don't put much stock into any of it.

Same here. I also come from the world of finance.

However, I do see some value in it, but not to the extent that people are hyping it.

[Tee212]

this term "Analytics" is used more than hashtags this week i swear. the last 10 years of free agency this term was never used on social media or espn lol.

[lake_show]

It's all hype. The same reason there is so much talk about analytics this year is the same reason there was a ton of "no one wants to play with Kobe" talk last year.

Because it generates clicks and it sells papers.

Some of those articles were actually using the fact that Lebron signed with the Cav's as their justification.

No Lebron signed with CLE because he wasn't going to sign with anyone else aside from MIA

If the Lakers don't sign LMA this year, they'll use analytics as their proof. It makes a ton of money, and generates a ton of clicks. Doesn't have to be right, just has to be successful.

[john248]

The Lakers do need to buy into analytics as soon as possible. It wasn't until this year that the Lakers finally sent a representative to the MIT Sloan Conference where they were the last team in doing so. It's unknown why they were resistant and continue to be thusfar given they have more resources and a bigger budget than any other team out there. It should be noted that visually scouting may not tell the entire story. It should also be noted that statistics/information without visual confirmation is useless.

Analytics is just information. It doesn't have to be limited to "advanced" stats or stats of random things. Simply put, there's more data that is being logged right now to where it's pretty much breaking down everything a player is doing, and such data is available for every player.

For instance, Shane Battier was at the MIT conference this year, and it was nice to get a former player's perspective about his use of analytics. He was the player who defended both Carmelo and Kobe the best and made them inefficient (in Melo's case) and less efficient (for Kobe...am I biased?). Now there will be those who will be dismissive of this and say, well if Battier just played against those guys or watched film, he'd do just as well. Maybe he does, but in actuality, we'd never know. But what we do know is that on top of the film and visual scouting reports, there was additional stats that helped him defend the best wing players in the league and be hugely successful at it. When Morey hands Battier a report about Melo or Kobe, and it says the player is less successful going left than going right, that helps a player. If it says that in a situation, this player does this move X% of the time, that helps the defender. Now will every player in the league be as smart as Battier and be able to use and understand what's given? Probably not. But there are plenty of players this is useful too.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3kCO-6afdQ[/youtube]

Obviously this can also help in a team context and can be specific to the roster. So we just all gone done watching the NBA Finals and watched the Warriors pass up open lay ups for the 3PT shot. I'm not talking just a pull up either. It's Draymond Green being alone 2 feet away from the hoop, in transition, having enough court vision to see Klay at the corner, then just passing it out. Then he grabs the rebound and throws it again to Klay for the assist. This may make sense to you in hindsight, but it runs counter to what we're all used to watching. Sam Gelfand and Pat Usund are credited for a lot of what GSW does. I think JVG mentioned it on the air at the time with the other announcer talking about analytics. I also believe that such a strategy such as this came from them too. Obviously such a strategy works because Klay or Curry are out there. Would it work with Clarkson or Lin? Obviously not.

Basically, they're just looking for any advantages that they can get. Starting Draymond Green isn't a random either. Kerr, like Popvich, played a lot of line-ups during the season where they can look at how each line-up has done so long as a significant number of minutes are played. Once it became apparent that Bogut was being played off the floor, a change needed to be made. The obvious information is that the top 5 line-ups GSW has put out there features Curry, Green, and Klay. But one of the top 5 line-up also had Curry, Green, Klay, Barnes...and Iggy. (82games.com) So a lot of these decisions are thought out, and the available information is gained as the season goes on since Kerr did play a variety of line-ups.

The Lakers didn't really need it because Phil Jackson was here. When you have a coach like Phil and Pop, you're already so way ahead of the game. These guys already understand the importance of ball movement and flow of the game. Hell, it's what the triangle is all about. They both knew that having a stretch 4 was important before "stretch 4" was even a thing where both had Robert Horry on their roster, and Phil knew to use Kukoc more and had Horace Grant knocking down mid-range shots before. Having a couple 3 point shooters was always important. In the above clip, D'Antoni admits the Spurs played better small ball than his Nash led Suns. At least, this is why I think the Lakers haven't caught on. That and there's just too much arrogance with the Lakers. Which is crazy since the Spurs with Pop are into analytics as RC Buford has sat in on the MIT panel before.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66hx0idb3vw[/youtube]

The Lakers don't play like a team where analytics matters. Byron has said as much, and it made him look like a total fool. Byron looks just completely out of touch when he's calling Jordan Hill and Carlos Boozer isolations coming out of time outs.