Kobe on Advanced Analytics: "The Game is about Momentum and Pace"

[freethedevil]

If analytics was the be all and end all then the Rockets would’ve dominated this decade and won at least ONE CHAMPIONSHIP.

Warriors use analytics as much as the rockets do. Take an l.

I smoke Ls.

Weed's better.

[AussieRules]

Warriors use analytics as much as the rockets do. Take an l.

I smoke Ls.

Weed's better.

Weed is L, I don’t hold ‘em I smoke ‘em

[fianchetto]

He has a point that analytics and advanced stats are not the end all be all. But check this list of MVP players. The common theme I listed is they are all around .550 TS% or better except Iverson. TS% listed is for the year they won it. I don't think it is a accident that the year Kobe won his, was also his 2nd most efficient season.

The ones who won multiple MVP's were all above the .550 thresh hold. Another thing that stood out is how many of these MVPs have never won a Championship. Quite a few of course are still playing.

TS% .644 2018-19 Giannis Antetokounmpo
TS% .619 2017-18 James Harden
TS% .554 2016-17 Russell Westbrook
TS% .669 2015-16 Stephen Curry
TS% .638 2014-15 Stephen Curry
TS% .635 2013-14 Kevin Durant
TS% .640 2012-13 LeBron James
TS% .605 2011-12 LeBron James
TS% .550 2010-11 Derrick Rose
TS% .604 2009-10 LeBron James
TS% .591 2008-09 LeBron James
TS% .576 2007-08 Kobe Bryant
TS% .589 2006-07 Dirk Nowitzki
TS% .606 2005-06 Steve Nash
TS% .632 2004-05 Steve Nash
TS% .547 2003-04 Kevin Garnett
TS% .564 2002-03 Tim Duncan
TS% .576 2001-02 Tim Duncan
TS% .518 2000-01 Allen Iverson
TS% .578 1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal

I don’t think it’s that shocking that efficient scorers were voted MVP... doesn’t say anything about the game itself other than people think efficient scorers are good. MVP is subjective after all

[Doctor MJ]

Not sure if there was ever a topic on this, the interview is not new, but Kobe was asked about advanced analytics and the modern game about 8:45 of this interview:

Watch on YouTube

The quote about advanced analytics is:

I think it has a place in the game. I don't think it gives the full answer of why things happen, and how to create momentum. The game really is about momentum, and who can control momentum, more so than numbers. There's the emotion of the game. Who can dictate tempo and pace. Those things are the most important, because those things actually win games.

Numbers look good, and can kind of tell you a story. But the true story lies in the tempo and pacing of the game.

Of course it's not possible to quantify what he is talking about (and that's the point he is making), but intuitively I feel like what he is saying makes sense. Numbers tell part of the story, but they will never tell the full story. It's why you can't say one player is greater than another purely by looking at the numbers (whether simple box score numbers or advanced analytics). I like his point that the numbers can tell a story, but not the whole story. I think some people lose track of this sometimes.

Thoughts?

This is why you cannot use the numbers without proper context. Like on/off, for example.

Pretty sure in the end we decided who wins the game based on numbers. Scoreboard baby.

Momentum is very important...because it has the potential to affect the scoreboard.

Re: numbers without proper context. Absolutely agree that that's what you want to avoid. Disagree if you're implying those who making use of numbers in the +/- family aren't also considering context.

[mtron929]

I'm not quite sure this has anything to do with analytics. If you've dictated pace to advantage yourself and create momentum... then your team's going to end up having better numbers/analytics. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.

There's a lot that analytics can't read, but it's not a reason to stop using it. Not knowing everything doesn't mean you shouldn't use any knowledge.

Also, discussion would be boring without analytics :
"I think X is better."
- No Y is better!
-You're wrong! I watched him play and he isn't!
- I watched him play and he is!"

But along this line of reasoning, what isn't analytics?

[freethedevil]

I smoke Ls.

Weed's better.

Weed is L/

It's not tho.

[Buzzard]

He has a point that analytics and advanced stats are not the end all be all. But check this list of MVP players. The common theme I listed is they are all around .550 TS% or better except Iverson. TS% listed is for the year they won it. I don't think it is a accident that the year Kobe won his, was also his 2nd most efficient season.

The ones who won multiple MVP's were all above the .550 thresh hold. Another thing that stood out is how many of these MVPs have never won a Championship. Quite a few of course are still playing.

TS% .644 2018-19 Giannis Antetokounmpo
TS% .619 2017-18 James Harden
TS% .554 2016-17 Russell Westbrook
TS% .669 2015-16 Stephen Curry
TS% .638 2014-15 Stephen Curry
TS% .635 2013-14 Kevin Durant
TS% .640 2012-13 LeBron James
TS% .605 2011-12 LeBron James
TS% .550 2010-11 Derrick Rose
TS% .604 2009-10 LeBron James
TS% .591 2008-09 LeBron James
TS% .576 2007-08 Kobe Bryant
TS% .589 2006-07 Dirk Nowitzki
TS% .606 2005-06 Steve Nash
TS% .632 2004-05 Steve Nash
TS% .547 2003-04 Kevin Garnett
TS% .564 2002-03 Tim Duncan
TS% .576 2001-02 Tim Duncan
TS% .518 2000-01 Allen Iverson
TS% .578 1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal

I don’t think it’s that shocking that efficient scorers were voted MVP... doesn’t say anything about the game itself other than people think efficient scorers are good. MVP is subjective after all

It might say something else to, I am pretty sure everyone of them will be in the HOF. Only things I found shocking were the ones who were not as efficient as I would have thought; and then Curry, Harden, and Nash being so much more efficient than the rest of the MVP Guards.

[Ripp]

I think pre-analytics NBA thought is really interesting and is undervalued by blog boys all the time. Being dismissive and smart-alecy about the mental aspects of the game when you've never played NBA ball isn't more empirical; it's actually less responsible because you're actively dropping qualitative information that can either be quantified, be used to interpret the numbers, or both.

Kobe's approach to the game was deception. He would start off by imposing his will and getting the defense to react a certain way, and then do the opposite to throw them off. He would do this in something as small scale as a single move, or across possessions, or across games within a playoff series. He would be very informed by film and scouting reports, focusing on tendencies and less on local optima.

It seems to me the dominant school of thought now is to do the most locally optimal thing per possession. It's definitely less of a mental/emotional calculation and more of just referring to data and basically executing a simple min-max. But I think winning is largely a separate experiential skillset, based on very minute details. That's something Kobe loves talking about.

A "locally optimal" strategy is probably near-optimal for basketball, since temporarily ignoring things like fatigue, it isn't clear that following some other strategy actually improves long-term reward at the cost of short-term reward.

For certain games like chess, you definitely cannot be short-sighted otherwise you'll win the battle but lose the war.

But for basketball, you want to try to win each possession (again, temporarily ignoring fatigue).

[GeorgeMarcus]

Not sure if there was ever a topic on this, the interview is not new, but Kobe was asked about advanced analytics and the modern game about 8:45 of this interview:

Watch on YouTube

The quote about advanced analytics is:



Of course it's not possible to quantify what he is talking about (and that's the point he is making), but intuitively I feel like what he is saying makes sense. Numbers tell part of the story, but they will never tell the full story. It's why you can't say one player is greater than another purely by looking at the numbers (whether simple box score numbers or advanced analytics). I like his point that the numbers can tell a story, but not the whole story. I think some people lose track of this sometimes.

Thoughts?

This is why you cannot use the numbers without proper context. Like on/off, for example.

Pretty sure in the end we decided who wins the game based on numbers. Scoreboard baby.

Momentum is very important...because it has the potential to affect the scoreboard.

Re: numbers without proper context. Absolutely agree that that's what you want to avoid. Disagree if you're implying those who making use of numbers in the +/- family aren't also considering context.

He didn’t like that I posted the on/offs of the Nets last year (with a minutes qualifier) even after I stated outright that bench players having positive on/offs does not mean they are better than starters with negative on/offs. What I did deduce however is that, for a team with an average point differential of -0.1, negative on/offs imply the starters were worse than an average starting unit. Also that depth was a big part of their success. There was plenty of context in the thread.

[fianchetto]

He has a point that analytics and advanced stats are not the end all be all. But check this list of MVP players. The common theme I listed is they are all around .550 TS% or better except Iverson. TS% listed is for the year they won it. I don't think it is a accident that the year Kobe won his, was also his 2nd most efficient season.

The ones who won multiple MVP's were all above the .550 thresh hold. Another thing that stood out is how many of these MVPs have never won a Championship. Quite a few of course are still playing.

TS% .644 2018-19 Giannis Antetokounmpo
TS% .619 2017-18 James Harden
TS% .554 2016-17 Russell Westbrook
TS% .669 2015-16 Stephen Curry
TS% .638 2014-15 Stephen Curry
TS% .635 2013-14 Kevin Durant
TS% .640 2012-13 LeBron James
TS% .605 2011-12 LeBron James
TS% .550 2010-11 Derrick Rose
TS% .604 2009-10 LeBron James
TS% .591 2008-09 LeBron James
TS% .576 2007-08 Kobe Bryant
TS% .589 2006-07 Dirk Nowitzki
TS% .606 2005-06 Steve Nash
TS% .632 2004-05 Steve Nash
TS% .547 2003-04 Kevin Garnett
TS% .564 2002-03 Tim Duncan
TS% .576 2001-02 Tim Duncan
TS% .518 2000-01 Allen Iverson
TS% .578 1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal

I don’t think it’s that shocking that efficient scorers were voted MVP... doesn’t say anything about the game itself other than people think efficient scorers are good. MVP is subjective after all

It might say something else to, I am pretty sure everyone of them will be in the HOF. Only things I found shocking were the ones who were not as efficient as I would have thought; and then Curry, Harden, and Nash being so much more efficient than the rest of the MVP Guards.

HOF is subjective too though

[Pennebaker]

Not sure if there was ever a topic on this, the interview is not new, but Kobe was asked about advanced analytics and the modern game about 8:45 of this interview:

Watch on YouTube

The quote about advanced analytics is:

I think it has a place in the game. I don't think it gives the full answer of why things happen, and how to create momentum. The game really is about momentum, and who can control momentum, more so than numbers. There's the emotion of the game.Who can dictate tempo and pace. Those things are the most important, because those things actually win games.

Numbers look good, and can kind of tell you a story. But the true story lies in the tempo and pacing of the game.

Of course it's not possible to quantify what he is talking about (and that's the point he is making), but intuitively I feel like what he is saying makes sense. Numbers tell part of the story, but they will never tell the full story. It's why you can't say one player is greater than another purely by looking at the numbers (whether simple box score numbers or advanced analytics). I like his point that the numbers can tell a story, but not the whole story. I think some people lose track of this sometimes.

Thoughts?

Kobe is defensive as usual and not using his brain again. Momentum, tempo and pace are all numbers.

I don't think Kobe even properly understands what the analytics effort is about - quantifying what was previously thought of as absolutely unquantifiable i.e. scientifically exploring amorphous terms like "emotion" and "assassin". Trying to get to truth, essentially.

I suspect Kobe will always argue that there are some facets that can never be explained because that's what protects him and his inefficient game and his fragile ego.

In other words, Kobe's game is built for ignorance and he looks worse and worse the closer we get to truth, so he doesn't want to go there.

[Buzzard]

I don’t think it’s that shocking that efficient scorers were voted MVP... doesn’t say anything about the game itself other than people think efficient scorers are good. MVP is subjective after all

It might say something else to, I am pretty sure everyone of them will be in the HOF. Only things I found shocking were the ones who were not as efficient as I would have thought; and then Curry, Harden, and Nash being so much more efficient than the rest of the MVP Guards.

HOF is subjective too though

What is your point? That TS%, MVP, and HOF does not mean anything because two of them are subjective. If so just say that and stop being so verbose. I can barely keep up with the dialogue.

[fianchetto]

It might say something else to, I am pretty sure everyone of them will be in the HOF. Only things I found shocking were the ones who were not as efficient as I would have thought; and then Curry, Harden, and Nash being so much more efficient than the rest of the MVP Guards.

HOF is subjective too though

What is your point? That TS%, MVP, and HOF does not mean anything because two of them are subjective. If so just say that and stop being so verbose. I can barely keep up with the dialogue.

I made my point in the first post man. MVPs and HOF are often voted on based on stats. So it’s no surprise that those at the top of the stats are voted for most often. That, on its own, doesn’t mean the stat is effective. Hope that explains my point better.

And that doesn’t mean I think TS is bad

[bon]

He has a point that analytics and advanced stats are not the end all be all. But check this list of MVP players. The common theme I listed is they are all around .550 TS% or better except Iverson. TS% listed is for the year they won it. I don't think it is a accident that the year Kobe won his, was also his 2nd most efficient season.

The ones who won multiple MVP's were all above the .550 thresh hold. Another thing that stood out is how many of these MVPs have never won a Championship. Quite a few of course are still playing.

Soo what exactly are you trying to say with this post

[Buzzard]

He has a point that analytics and advanced stats are not the end all be all. But check this list of MVP players. The common theme I listed is they are all around .550 TS% or better except Iverson. TS% listed is for the year they won it. I don't think it is a accident that the year Kobe won his, was also his 2nd most efficient season.

The ones who won multiple MVP's were all above the .550 thresh hold. Another thing that stood out is how many of these MVPs have never won a Championship. Quite a few of course are still playing.

Soo what exactly are you trying to say with this post

I was hoping you and others could infer something on your own. I concluded that most MVP Players are very efficient and think a low ball efficiency for a good offensive player is around a .550 TS%.

[CodeBreaker]

Not sure if there was ever a topic on this, the interview is not new, but Kobe was asked about advanced analytics and the modern game about 8:45 of this interview:

Watch on YouTube

The quote about advanced analytics is:

I think it has a place in the game. I don't think it gives the full answer of why things happen, and how to create momentum. The game really is about momentum, and who can control momentum, more so than numbers. There's the emotion of the game.Who can dictate tempo and pace. Those things are the most important, because those things actually win games.

Numbers look good, and can kind of tell you a story. But the true story lies in the tempo and pacing of the game.

Of course it's not possible to quantify what he is talking about (and that's the point he is making), but intuitively I feel like what he is saying makes sense. Numbers tell part of the story, but they will never tell the full story. It's why you can't say one player is greater than another purely by looking at the numbers (whether simple box score numbers or advanced analytics). I like his point that the numbers can tell a story, but not the whole story. I think some people lose track of this sometimes.

Thoughts?

Kobe is defensive as usual and not using his brain again. Momentum, tempo and pace are all numbers.

I don't think Kobe even properly understands what the analytics effort is about - quantifying what was previously thought of as absolutely unquantifiable i.e. scientifically exploring amorphous terms like "emotion" and "assassin". Trying to get to truth, essentially.

I suspect Kobe will always argue that there are some facets that can never be explained because that's what protects him and his inefficient game and his fragile ego.

In other words, Kobe's game is built for ignorance and he looks worse and worse the closer we get to truth, so he doesn't want to go there.

5 championships protect him

[bon]

He has a point that analytics and advanced stats are not the end all be all. But check this list of MVP players. The common theme I listed is they are all around .550 TS% or better except Iverson. TS% listed is for the year they won it. I don't think it is a accident that the year Kobe won his, was also his 2nd most efficient season.

The ones who won multiple MVP's were all above the .550 thresh hold. Another thing that stood out is how many of these MVPs have never won a Championship. Quite a few of course are still playing.

Soo what exactly are you trying to say with this post

I was hoping you and others could infer something on your own. I concluded that most MVP Players are very efficient and think a low ball efficiency for a good offensive player is around a .550 TS%.

But since a lot of those guys didn't win a championship (like you said) in the end it doesn't matter all that much.. right?

[whitehops]

I've added in the brackets the league average TS% and the difference in percentage between the MVP and league average TS%.

TS% .644 2018-19 (0.560, +0.084) Giannis Antetokounmpo
TS% .619 2017-18 (0.556, +0.063) James Harden
TS% .554 2016-17 (0.552, +0.002) Russell Westbrook
TS% .669 2015-16 (0.541, +0.128) Stephen Curry
TS% .638 2014-15 (0.534, +0.104) Stephen Curry
TS% .635 2013-14 (0.541, +0.094) Kevin Durant
TS% .640 2012-13 (0.535, +0.105) LeBron James
TS% .605 2011-12 (0.527, +0.078) LeBron James
TS% .550 2010-11 (0.541, +0.009) Derrick Rose
TS% .604 2009-10 (0.543, +0.061) LeBron James
TS% .591 2008-09 (0.544, +0.047) LeBron James
TS% .576 2007-08 (0.540, +0.036) Kobe Bryant
TS% .589 2006-07 (0.541, +0.048) Dirk Nowitzki
TS% .606 2005-06 (0.536, +0.070) Steve Nash
TS% .632 2004-05 (0.529, +0.103) Steve Nash
TS% .547 2003-04 (0.516, +0.031) Kevin Garnett
TS% .564 2002-03 (0.519, +0.045) Tim Duncan
TS% .576 2001-02 (0.520, +0.056) Tim Duncan
TS% .518 2000-01 (0.518, 0.000) Allen Iverson
TS% .578 1999-00 (0.523, +0.055) Shaquille O'Neal

so none of the MVPs in that list have shot below league-average efficiency, though the vast majority shoot considerably better than league average.

[Buzzard]

Soo what exactly are you trying to say with this post

I was hoping you and others could infer something on your own. I concluded that most MVP Players are very efficient and think a low ball efficiency for a good offensive player is around a .550 TS%.

But since a lot of those guys didn't win a championship (like you said) in the end it doesn't matter all that much.. right?

You must have concluded its mostly the inefficient who are the primary catalyst to winning championships. Interesting concept.

[IgorK]

Analytics are great for analysis, which comes after the game has concluded.

Or before the next game...

Analytics won't win you the next game.