Charles Barkley just went OFF on the analytics community

[HOoopCityJones]

RIP PER :biggums:

[HurricaneKid]

RIP PER :biggums:

LOL at PER being analytics.

And he completely humiliated himself. Ended his tirade by talking about how Memphis wasn't analytics. Which was stupid on a grammatical level and far worse in a literal level. Memphis has done more with analytics than any other team with the possible exceptionof Houston.

[navy]

LOL at PER being analytics.

And he completely humiliated himself. Ended his tirade by talking about how Memphis wasn't analytics. Which was stupid on a grammatical level and far worse in a literal level. Memphis has done more with analytics than any other team with the possible exceptionof Houston.
Rudy Gay was traded and the rest is history.

[oh the horror]

The nerds are all collectively planning on boycotting Charles I'm sure.

[CavaliersFTW]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :applause:

[kennethgriffin]

can someone quote charles or upload it.

[CavaliersFTW]

can someone quote charles or upload it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2asGeItzGWM

dude just savaged Darryl Morey and the entire analytics community on National Television :roll:

[kennethgriffin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2asGeItzGWM

dude just savaged Darryl Morey and the entire analytics community on National Television :roll:

hollinger/abbott f*cking destroyed.. only thing that woulda made it better is if he actually mentioned per

[Eric Cartman]

2 things were said:

The NBA is about TALENT.

Nerds created analytics to feel included cause they have no talent.

[Heavincent]

Henry Abbott on suicide watch.

[blacknapalm]

LOL at PER being analytics.

And he completely humiliated himself. Ended his tirade by talking about how Memphis wasn't analytics. Which was stupid on a grammatical level and far worse in a literal level. Memphis has done more with analytics than any other team with the possible exceptionof Houston.

this.

i like chuck but this is one of those instances where i almost completely disagree w/ him. analytics have been proven to work. morey might not be the best example but the spurs are another big proponent of analytics and drafting/trading for players based off it. i think they've had pretty good success, no?

this is just an archaic thought process by chuck, not embracing the value of what works now and living in the past. guys like kennedy, lowe and nate duncan have shown us the value of analytics. it has grown much more than showing shot charts, but shots defended at the rim, shots assisted, ppp, tracking lineup changes, etc.

ppl citing PER and such are using outdated data...analytics have gone much deeper than that in an effort to reflect more real game impact. how is knowing shot tendencies and knowing a player likes going a certain direction a bad thing?

all successful baksetball teams are using analytics these days. you can't completely rely on them and anyone who does is naive and one of those 'stat geeks', but they are definitely a factor and help in figuring out player strengths/weaknesses and whether they fit into your scheme.

you use talent evaluations and help support it with analytics, not the other around. you rely more on analytics simply when x player has limited PT and game film.

was his rant entertaining in a way? sure, but i def disagree

[KNOW1EDGE]

As usual, I whole heartedly agree with Chuck.

Analytics is bullshit made up by math nerds. That sh1t has no bearing on basketball.

PER, +/-, all that sh1t is just numbers that don't really matter when it comes down to beating your opposition.

It is literally something that smart people made up to try and feel important in sports

Chuck :bowdown:

[CavaliersFTW]

realgm all on suicide watch right now

[kennethgriffin]

barkley shoved his c*ck down abbot/stein/hollinger/simmons/espns throats

period

all those guys who never even picked up a ball voting for mvps and deciding whos who can all s*ck a big fat d*ck with charles barkleys name on it


bill russell doesnt even have a top 100 PER all time career... so go figure

[blacknapalm]

"no good teams gives up 118 points"

yet his suns team that gave up 118 points 11 times in the RS went to the finals

lolwut? oh and citing spurs as not using analytics...bad form. they're one of the teams that are most into it. again, his thoughts are archaic. he's like an old congressman talking about the internet in 2000.

[HOoopCityJones]

Look of course analytics has it's place within the game, especially within the last 8 years or so, it's really taken off. They even landed Hollinger's ass a job he shouldn't even be qualified for traditionally, strictly speaking in terms of experience as an executive of Basketball operations. But even he has to admit to his faults as the numbers don't always lead to results, he thought trading Rudy Gay for Prince was the right move at the time, they get a Team guy who is a hard nose defender and he can knock down some shots, but if anything the move set them back, imo he corrected this mistake with the trade for Jeff Green.

But what needs to be hammered home more than anything is that they aren't the end all be all and the game was just fine without them before, if not better off. People act like there haven't been some legendary ass teams constructed thoughout history just based off of eye test alone, call it what you want, but it's true what Chuck said and I'm glad he put it the way he did.

This league is based on talent, not numbers. All of the stats in the world wouldn't do shit for Lebron if he didn't have that God given talent to go along with it.

[Hotlantadude81]

"no good teams gives up 118 points"

yet his suns team that gave up 118 points 11 times in the RS went to the finals

lolwut? oh and citing spurs as not using analytics...bad form. they're one of the teams that are most into it. again, his thoughts are archaic. he's like an old congressman talking about the internet in 2000.

He is like a Rush Limbaugh if Rush Limbaugh was entertaining.

[HOoopCityJones]

"no good teams gives up 118 points"

yet his suns team that gave up 118 points 11 times in the RS went to the finals

lolwut? oh and citing spurs as not using analytics...bad form. they're one of the teams that are most into it. again, his thoughts are archaic. he's like an old congressman talking about the internet in 2000.

But they lost though. :confusedshrug:

Chuck is speaking from the standpoint of a career loser. He's overqualified if anything. :lol

[Hotlantadude81]

Look of course analytics has it's place within the game, especially within the last 8 years or so, it's really taken off. They even landed Hollinger's ass a job he shouldn't even be qualified for traditionally, strictly speaking from experience as an executive of Basketball operations. But even he has to dmit to his faults as the numbers don't always lead to results, he thought trading Rudy Gay for Prince was the right move at the time, they get a Team guy who is a hard nose defender and he can knock down some shots, but if anything the move set them back, imo he corrected this mistake with the trade for Jeff Green.

But what needs to be hammered home more than anything that they aren't the end all be all and the game was just fine without them before, if not better off. People act like there haven't been some legendary ass teams constructed thoughout history just based of eye test alone, call it what you want, but it's true what Chuck said and I'm glad he put it the way he did.

This league is based on talent, not numbers. All of the stats in the world wouldn't do shit for Lebron if he didn't have that God given talent to go along with it.

Holllinger's stats suggests that the Clippers are the 3rd best team in the league. That is bullshit.

[el_locoteee]

As usual, I whole heartedly agree with Chuck.

Analytics is bullshit made up by math nerds. That sh1t has no bearing on basketball.

PER, +/-, all that sh1t is just numbers that don't really matter when it comes down to beating your opposition.

It is literally something that smart people made up to try and feel important in sports

Chuck :bowdown:

What will young afro-americans look to, Neil deGrasse Tyson or Charles Barkley?

Charles Barkley the Sarah Palin of Basketball commentators.

Charles once said that the afro-americans community need more doctor, lawyer, scientists instead of more athletes or musicians but who cares are the end they all smart people trying to feel important, while dumb is cool.

[navy]

Look of course analytics has it's place within the game, especially within the last 8 years or so, it's really taken off. They even landed Hollinger's ass a job he shouldn't even be qualified for traditionally, strictly speaking in terms of experience as an executive of Basketball operations. But even he has to dmit to his faults as the numbers don't always lead to results, he thought trading Rudy Gay for Prince was the right move at the time, they get a Team guy who is a hard nose defender and he can knock down some shots, but if anything the move set them back, imo he corrected this mistake with the trade for Jeff Green.

.
This is just wrong. They didnt care about Prince, the goal was to get Rudy Gay away and it worked to perfection. The team was better for it.

[HOoopCityJones]

Holllinger's stats suggests that the Clippers are the 3rd best team in the league. That is bullshit.

Clippers look good vs the middle tier Teams and lower, I haven't seen them play dominate ball against the real competition throughout the league. They struggle with a first year squad like The Cavs and they should hold an advantage because of chemistry alone, yet they stay looking stagnant.

[KNOW1EDGE]

What will young afro-americans look to, Neil deGrasse Tyson or Charles Barkley?

Charles Barkley the Sarah Palin of Basketball commentators.

Charles once said that the afro-americans community need more doctor, lawyer, science guys instead of more athletes or musicians but who cares are the end they all smart people trying to feel important, while dumb is cool.

Do you think Chuck wants to be a role model?

Ever see his old commercials? Clue: He stated he is not a rile model.

Chuck also stated blacks need less ball players and rappers, and more docs, scientists etc etc

[HOoopCityJones]

This is just wrong. They didnt care about Prince, the goal was to get Rudy Gay away and it worked to perfection. The team was better for it.

Bullshit. They thought it'd make them better and it hasn't. Paint it how you want but before the Gay trade, they were knocking the likes of San Antonio outta the Playoffs. All taking away Gay did was make Gasol more reliable , so I see the positives, but don't act like they didn't expect to get better by getting rid of Gay and adding Prince.

Why else just all of a sudden go after another pure scorer then?

[navy]

Holllinger's stats suggests that the Clippers are the 3rd best team in the league. That is bullshit.
His model takes mainly into account scoring margin, which is usually the best predictor of success.

The clippers have the second best starters in the league, so its not surprising. And no, I dont think they are the third best team in the league.

[RoseCity07]

LOL at PER being analytics.

And he completely humiliated himself. Ended his tirade by talking about how Memphis wasn't analytics. Which was stupid on a grammatical level and far worse in a literal level. Memphis has done more with analytics than any other team with the possible exceptionof Houston.

Except the roster is nearly identical to the roster they had before Hollinger got there. I know because I checked a few days ago.

[CavaliersFTW]

I remember reading some ridiculously lengthy analytics "report" equipped with color charts and everything that said if Curry took something like 20-25 3's a game his team would be virtually unbeatable but that the coaches/league probably would never "let" him try it because it's such a revolutionary concept :oldlol:

Some hipster from grantland probably wrote that shit in a starbucks and really believed he was on to something as if NBA talent hasn't already figured out how to best be effective :roll:

[el_locoteee]

He is like a Rush Limbaugh if Rush Limbaugh was entertaining.

no good teams gives up 118 points :roll: :eek: :eek: :eek: \

Golden State
115 vs Lakers twice
127 vs OKC
113 vs Houston
114 vs Mavs
126 Vs Atl

Atlanta
122/110Regulation vs Hornets
126 vs Toronto
115 vs NOLA
116 Vs GS

:eek: :eek: :eek:

[navy]

Bullshit. They thought it'd make them better and it hasn't. Paint it how you want but before the Gay trade, they were knocking the likes of San Antonio outta the Playoffs. All taking away Gay did was make Gasol more reliable , so I see the positives, but don't act like they didn't expect to get better by getting rid of Gay and adding Prince.

Why else just all of a sudden go after another pure scorer then?

It clearly made them better, what are you talking about? Rudy Gay was a black hole making 16 million a year. Every indication from statistics to record showed that they were better off with a literal scrub in Prince than Gay.

Jeff Green isnt an overpaid black hole like Rudy was. And Rudy Gay was a good defender in Memphis. I wouldnt call him a pure scorer.

[Hotlantadude81]

His model takes mainly into account scoring margin, which is usually the best predictor of success.

The clippers have the second best starters in the league, so its not surprising. And no, I dont think they are the third best team in the league.

They have the team (other than their weak bench) on paper, but they're missing something.... Chemistry and heart.

[Milbuck]

realgm all on suicide watch right now
Was just gonna post this, word for word. God damn. Got a nice coincidence chub going right now.

[Al Thornton]

They have the team (other than their weak bench) on paper, but they're missing something.... Chemistry and heart.

lol

[HurricaneKid]

Except the roster is nearly identical to the roster they had before Hollinger got there. I know because I checked a few days ago.


Are you for serious? You think Hollinger was the first analytics specialist on the team?

Man you really dont know much.

[HOoopCityJones]

It clearly made them better, what are you talking about? Rudy Gay was a black hole making 16 million a year. Every indication from statistics to record showed that they were better off with a literal scrub in Prince than Gay.

Jeff Green isnt an overpaid black hole like Rudy was. And Rudy Gay was a good defender in Memphis. I wouldnt call him a pure scorer.

You're talking about off the court shit and I'm talking on the court plain and simple. If they would've traded for say, Avery Bradley maybe i'd agree but the fact they went after the scorer of the bunch tells me they miss having a guy that can create his own shot over a Team first defender.

Which makes my point even further , if Gay was already a good defender for you then you're basically downgrading for cap purposes , but I don't think thats the case , Prince and Gay are like night and day when it comes to the kind of player they both are. Hollinger thought he was being cute by getting rid of the Gunslinger as his first move as the shot caller and in back fired in my opinion, if you don't think so ,thats cool too.

[navy]

You're talking about off the court shit and I'm talking on the court plain and simple. If they would've traded for say, Avery Bradley maybe i'd agree but the fact they went after the scorer of the bunch tells me they miss having a guy that can create his own shot over a Team first defender.

Which makes my point even further , if Gay was already a good defender for you then you're basically downgrading for cap purposes , but I don't think thats the case , Prince and Gay are like night and day when it comes to the kind of player they both are. Hollinger thought he was being cute by getting rid of the Gunslinger as his first move as the shot caller and in back fired in my opinion, if you don't think so ,thats cool too.
Except it didnt backfire. There is no indication that the team was better with Rudy Gay. It's no surprise that Toronto traded him next. He hurts your team.

[tpols]

word up.. most advanced stats are bullshit.

[tpols]

Was just gonna post this, word for word. God damn. Got a nice coincidence chub going right now.

:lol

[el_locoteee]

[QUOTE]The San Antonio Spurs were one of the first NBA teams to hire a statistical analyst and an applications developer. They employed these personnel assets along with any technological investments, at least initially, on assisting with player acquisitions. The general philosophy of the organization from a personnel side has been to buy low and sell high

[HOoopCityJones]

Except it didnt backfire. There is no indication that the team was better with Rudy Gay. It's no surprise that Toronto traded him next. He hurts your team.

If you trade away the the guy you traded Gay for, for someone who's basically a poor man's James Harden, you've given in. Are you seriously gonna try to argue Green isn't an upgrade from Prince and offers the same scoring benefits as Gay? You even started this by saying the Grizz won by getting rid of Gay for a relative scrub in Prince. :biggums:

What part of the Grizzlies took a step back by getting rid of Gay don't you get? The Jeff Green acquisition clearly tells the tale. But like I said if you don't see it that way, that's cool.

[Heavincent]

I remember reading some ridiculously lengthy analytics "report" equipped with color charts and everything that said if Curry took something like 20-25 3's a game his team would be virtually unbeatable but that the coaches/league probably would never "let" him try it because it's such a revolutionary concept :oldlol:

Some hipster from grantland probably wrote that shit in a starbucks and really believed he was on to something as if NBA talent hasn't already figured out how to best be effective :roll:

This is what's wrong with the analytics community. All they understand are numbers and graphs. Unfortunately for them, the game is not played on paper. There are a million factors that make most of these advanced metrics pretty much useless.

It's just not something we need in basketball. It's a simple game. I don't need a bunch of charts and graphs to know Steph Curry is a great shooter. I just roll my eyes when I see articles that look like the author was trying to figure out some advanced calculus equation. It's ****ing basketball dude.

I do like Zach Lowe, even though he sometimes uses advanced metrics, but he also uses a bunch of gifs and video footage to make his points (eye test).

[houston]

chuck telling the truth

[navy]

If you traded away the the guy you trade Gay for, for someone who's basically a poor man's James Harden, you've given in. Are you seriously gonna try to argue Green isn't an upgrade from Prince and offers the same scoring benefits as Gay? You even started this by saying the Grizz won by getting rid of Gay for a relative scrub in Prince. :biggums:

What part of the Grizzlies took a step back by getting rid of Gay don't you get? The Jeff Green clearly tells the tale. But like I said if you don't see it that way, that's cool.
No because you arent looking at it the right way.

Rudy Gay = Negative
Prince = No impact
Green = Positive

As an individual talent, Rudy Gay is the best. When it came to the team he was clearly the worse.

[blacknapalm]

If you trade away the the guy you traded Gay for, for someone who's basically a poor man's James Harden, you've given in. Are you seriously gonna try to argue Green isn't an upgrade from Prince and offers the same scoring benefits as Gay? You even started this by saying the Grizz won by getting rid of Gay for a relative scrub in Prince. :biggums:

What part of the Grizzlies took a step back by getting rid of Gay don't you get? The Jeff Green acquisition clearly tells the tale. But like I said if you don't see it that way, that's cool.

should the pistons have not gotten rid of josh smith? gay was hurting memphis in a similar fashion

[T_L_P]

Firstly, PER isn't even an advanced stat any more, let alone a metric.

But the kinds of analytics teams use is quite different to the stuff must of us here read.

Teams aren't looking at the RAPM data and basing their acquisitions off that. It's more Synergy-type stats. How players perform on certain areas of the floor, their tendencies, whether or not they are effective in Pick-n-Roll situations, etc.

:oldlol: at Charles mentioning the Spurs. They've been using analytics for a long time, and it's clearly worked.

[Heavincent]

http://allthingsd.com/20130523/analytics-is-not-a-strategy/

The Spurs draft good players because they have scouts who can recognize talent and a coach who maximizes said talent. Period.

[andremiller07]

Chuck is spot on :applause:

[HOoopCityJones]

should the pistons have gotten rid of josh smith? gay was hurting memphis in a similar fashion

It's totally not the same thing and you know it. the Grizz were constantly in the playoff mix before getting rid of Gay, in my opinion their core guys all just needed more experience , but they proved they could even beat a tough Spurs team in a 7 game series during his tenure there. I don't see how that even compares to Josh Smith chucking away threes with potential All-Star big men in the post.

Are we gonna act like Gay undermined ZBo and Gasol now? :biggums:

I'll give you Toronto , he was taking away from their game because he thought he was the man over Lowry, but as a second or third option, he wasn't that bad.

I think you're reaching with that comparison.

[HOoopCityJones]

No because you arent looking at it the right way.

Rudy Gay = Negative
Prince = No impact
Green = Positive

As an individual talent, Rudy Gay is the best. When it came to the team he was clearly the worse.

Yet they were better with him. :confusedshrug:

[dunksby]

Firstly, PER isn't even an advanced stat any more, let alone a metric.

But the kinds of analytics teams use is quite different to the stuff must of us here read.

Teams aren't looking at the RAPM data and basing their acquisitions off that. It's more Synergy-type stats. How players perform on certain areas of the floor, their tendencies, whether or not they are effective in Pick-n-Roll situations, etc.

:oldlol: at Charles mentioning the Spurs. They've been using analytics for a long time, and it's clearly worked.
The problem with people like Barkley is that they think these are made up numbers by nerds while the numbers just tell the story of what players/teams themselves have done on the floor. If a stat says that Player A hits 68% of his hook shots, it is a direct result of that said player's performance on the court, nobody assigned that number to Player A, Player A is directly responsible for that number. Now how you interpret that number and put into context is another matter, but it doesn't change the fact that that number is valid whether one thinks Player A has a bad/average hook shot or not.

[navy]

Yet they were better with him. :confusedshrug:
They werent.

[blacknapalm]

The Spurs draft good players because they have scouts who can recognize talent and a coach who maximizes said talent. Period.

and they use analytics and have been for a long time listen, no one is saying the eye test doesn't work and to just dismiss it. they're just saying analytics can help support it and vice versa. it's archaic to think otherwise, period


It's totally not the same thing and you know it. the Grizz were constantly in the playoff mix before getting rid of Gay, in my opinion they all just needed more experience , but they proved they could even beat a tough Spurs team during his tenure there. I don't see how that even compares to Josh Smith chucking away threes with potential All-Star big men in the post.

Are we gonna act like Gay undermined ZBo and Gasol now?

I'll give you Toronto , he was taking away from their game because he thought he was the man now, but as a second or third option, he wasn't that bad.

I think you're reaching with that comparison.

i just thought of the most recent similar example. smith was probably worse, but yes, gay took shots away from zbo and gasol with some of his iso ball. this was also when zbo was younger and more dominant. gay was also TO prone, especially on the break. he just played selfishly at times and i thought his D was overrated. he was hurting memphis, period. he's found better schemes since then and has improved so i'll give him that much. he wasn't the player he is now that he was in memphis

[HOoopCityJones]

The Spurs draft good players because they have scouts who can recognize talent and a coach who maximizes said talent. Period.

No, no. The first thing Pop asked about Kawhi was how his advanced metrics were. Danny Green too. I'm sure his stats told a story of hidden treasures. I give the Spurs credit for their scouting and development of players more than statistical acumen.

By now everyone in the league uses advanced statistics one way or another, but it's just the whip cream on the sundae so to speak. Salt and Pepper on the steak. It's not what they're using as the make or break tool to evaluate talent like the analytic guy wants you to believe.

[blacknapalm]

Firstly, PER isn't even an advanced stat any more, let alone a metric.

But the kinds of analytics teams use is quite different to the stuff must of us here read.

Teams aren't looking at the RAPM data and basing their acquisitions off that. It's more Synergy-type stats. How players perform on certain areas of the floor, their tendencies, whether or not they are effective in Pick-n-Roll situations, etc.

:oldlol: at Charles mentioning the Spurs. They've been using analytics for a long time, and it's clearly worked.


The problem with people like Barkley is that they think these are made up numbers by nerds while the numbers just tell the story of what players/teams themselves have done on the floor. If a stat says that Player A hits 68% of his hook shots, it is a direct result of that said player's performance on the court, nobody assigned that number to Player A, Player A is directly responsible for that number. Now how you interpret that number and put into context is another matter, but it doesn't change the fact that that number is valid whether one thinks Player A has a bad/average hook shot or not.

these two get it :rockon:

[andremiller07]

Yet they were better with him. :confusedshrug:
The only times they advanced past the first round was without Rudy....they beat the Spurs the year he was injured during the playoffs.

[bigkingsfan]

It doesn't work for us. :oldlol:

http://www.nba.com/kings/crowdsourcing-analytics-point-nik

[Mr Feeny]

The only times they advanced past the first round was without Rudy....they beat the Spurs the year he was injured during the playoffs.

Shhhh you're making too much sense. Let him spout his garbage and believe in his own drivel.

[HOoopCityJones]

The only times they advanced past the first round was without Rudy....they beat the Spurs the year he was injured during the playoffs.

No shit? Good to know. Coulda sworn he was in that series though. :facepalm

[HOoopCityJones]

Shhhh you're making too much sense. Let him spout his garbage and believe in his own drivel.

How about that Job?

[andremiller07]

No shit? Good to know. Coulda sworn he was in that series though. :facepalm
Nah thankfully for the Grizz he wasn't

[Mr Feeny]

Nah thankfully for the Grizz he wasn't

Yup. Pretty much. He has no idea what he's talking about.

[T_L_P]

Slightly unrelated, but Barkley has become so immature as of late.

He was cool a couple of years ago, but all he and Shaq do now is threaten to fight each other.

Pretty embarrassing for a 50 year old man.

--

Also, you gotta love the people talking about the eye test here. Before modern analytics that's all there was, and those very eyes said Hakeem wasn't even the best big man of his era, yet all of you in this thread would put him in or around your top 10 players ever.

Sam Presti is a champion of the analytics movement and he has a track history of great drafting.

Fact: he was the one who fell in love with Tony Parker. Pop didn't see anything in him, and even slightly regretted the pick after TP's rookie season. There's the eye test for you (Parker is overrated, but he was certainly worth the 29th pick, even when he was a youngster).

Again, the analytics you guys are criticising is stuff you haven't even seen. :oldlol:

[HOoopCityJones]

Yup. Pretty much. He has no idea what he's talking about.


Tbf he's spot on and you're the idiot. If Kobe shared the ball, they would have made the playoffs with a better seed AND he wouldn't have run himself into the ground resulting in his injury.


2012–13 5.6 6.0 1.4 .3 27.3

You do tho? :oldlol:

You a ****ing joke breh.

[sportjames23]

realgm all on suicide watch right now


:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Clifton]

Anyone who would need "analytics" to know that Rudy Gay (or Joe Johnson) is the kind of player who brings down a team and not up, or that a 3 off a pass is better than a long 2 off the dribble, or that off-ball movement creates better shots than crossovers do, has no instinct for the game, and is useless to lead or design a team.

People have forgotten the basic fundamentals every high school coach used to teach. So now they have recently rediscovered teamwork and some kinds of extra-statistical impact. Great. They have yet to figure out that you can't just buy chemistry. They have yet to figure out that a mutual willingness to sacrifice money to keep a team together is essential for a team to perennially contend. And with the soulless players at the top of our game today (Lebron, Durant, Griffin) they still haven't rediscovered the value of old fashioned grit.

[Doranku]

Slightly unrelated, but Barkley has become so immature as of late.

He was cool a couple of years ago, but all he and Shaq do now is threaten to fight each other.

Pretty embarrassing for a 50 year old man.

--

Also, you gotta love the people talking about the eye test here. Before modern analytics that's all there was, and those very eyes said Hakeem wasn't even the best big man of his era, yet all of you in this thread would put him in or around your top 10 players ever.

Sam Presti is a champion of the analytics movement and he has a track history of great drafting.

Fact: he was the one who fell in love with Tony Parker. Pop didn't see anything in him, and even slightly regretted the pick after TP's rookie season. There's the eye test for you (Parker is overrated, but he was certainly worth the 29th pick, even when he was a youngster).

Again, the analytics you guys are criticising is stuff you haven't even seen. :oldlol:

Why the f*ck are you bringing up drafting to support analytics? You think these hermits' analytical formulas based on college/international play are somehow applicable in determining who the best pick is for an NBA team?

[Mr Feeny]

[QUOTE=HOoopCityJones]2012

[Mr Feeny]

Why the f*ck are you bringing up drafting to support analytics? You think these hermits' analytical formulas based on college/international play are somehow applicable in determining who the best pick is for an NBA team?That's kind of the point, yeah.

[tontoz]

Barkley should check the standings. After Morey started the Rockets lost both of their franchise players (Tmac and Yao) to injury yet he has never had a losing record despite playing in the west.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of GMs that were former players that have completely sucked. The Wizards GM is one of them.

[AussieG]

Stats are good at explaining what happened after the fact. It can be good to track certain things like if a player is shooting better, or turning it over more. Problem is, people put too much stock into them. A simple example is thinking a player MUST be a better rebounder because he averages 11 rebounds a game, compared to another player who averages 9. Or a player MUST be a good defender because he averages 2 steals or blocks per game.

Advanced stats are pretty meaningless. There is a certain knowledge or instinct from watching the game that numbers or stats can't give.

Stats have their value and can help with minor things, like tweaking or understand certain things but they aren't the fundamental of what makes a player or team good or bad.

Stats are like music theory. You can have some nerd describe in every detail what notes Jimi Hendrix is playing and why but he wouldn't be able to create the same thing himself. It can be very sterile and stale and isn't the same thing.

The music exists either way. The music doesn't need labels to exist. The theory and over analysis is just labels used to describe or communicate the ideas.

A basketball team can have 50 plays and can call them play 1, play 2, play 3, or they can call them.. box iso, post up, high pick and roll.. it doesn't matter.. either way the play will be the same.

Basketball is very similar to music in that it's very much in the moment and flowing.

People try to use stats to predict the future and it doesn't work that way. In the course of a game you'll see lots of silly examples like if a team is leading at the end of one quarter they usually win, or if they hit 5 threes in a quarter they will win etc.

Every game is a dynamic yet to be determined thing. Stats can't predict the improvisation (or luck) that happens in the moment. They can only explain what happened after it already happened.

In basketball (and most sports) stats lie all the time. Some players look bad on paper but are great players, and others look great on paper but are weak or overrated.

[Anaximandro1]

2 things were said:

The NBA is about TALENT.


Sure, but great players have zero ability to evaluate talent, more often than not.

[SugarHill]

Why the f*ck are you bringing up drafting to support analytics? You think these hermits' analytical formulas based on college/international play are somehow applicable in determining who the best pick is for an NBA team?
Yes?

[AussieG]

Barkley should check the standings. After Morey started the Rockets lost both of their franchise players (Tmac and Yao) to injury yet he has never had a losing record despite playing in the west.

Meanwhile there have been plenty of GMs that were former players that have completely sucked. The Wizards GM is one of them.

But you have no way of knowing how much of that has to do with analytics.

I can say for Memphis, that they were on a big upward slope before Hollinger came along and am pretty confident that they would be as good as they are without any advanced stats.

Numbers on a page are not what makes Memphis good. Memphis is good because they players are highly coachable, the core of Conley, Gasol, Z-Bo etc and how they have had continuity and developed together. And that have great chemistry together and the skills to play their roles properly. And defend well with a high effort each game. No superstar egos or slacking off. They are physical and tough night in and night out. If advanced stats help.. it's a minor tweak.. not the fundamental reason of why they are good. Not sure with Houston but it's probably a similar thing.

IMO studying game tape when each game ends, or studying the opponent in advance before the next game probably helps more than any numbers or stats.

[YouGotServed]

Yes?

lmfao

[HOoopCityJones]

Usage rate you absolute pillock:lol
Steve Nash didn't get to even touch the ball. Their offense was out of sync and he managed to f up with Howard, Nash, Gasol and Artest on the same team:lol

Meanwhile Lebron leads Boobie Gibson to the finals.:applause:

Steve Nash broke his leg. He was not in the physical condition to run an offense, especially when he was in and out of the line up due to the injury. Why even bother trolling about something so obvious? :confusedshrug:




Yes, very impressive, If only everyone could play Eastern Conference trash throughout the first and sometimes even second round for most of their playoff career is truly a sight to behold. :applause:

I still remember his histortic battles with the Gilbert Arenas led Wizards. Stuff of legend really.

[fpliii]

lol Chuck gonna Chuck.

[R.I.P.]

Then there is the matter of having different tracking staff in every arena. Chris Paul got an assist every time he inbounded the ball under his own basket and the Hornets scored on the other end. Rebounds, steals, blocks, block attempts. Everything besides shooting is influenced by how well these guys operate. Some might be asked to pad stats for one player to increase his trade value or to decrease his re-signing value by giving his rebound or steal to another player.

My God we have watched refs master the art of not fouling out players by assigning fouls to players with less fouls like they have a goddamn counter in their head.

[IGOTGAME]

Firstly, PER isn't even an advanced stat any more, let alone a metric.

But the kinds of analytics teams use is quite different to the stuff must of us here read.

Teams aren't looking at the RAPM data and basing their acquisitions off that. It's more Synergy-type stats. How players perform on certain areas of the floor, their tendencies, whether or not they are effective in Pick-n-Roll situations, etc.

:oldlol: at Charles mentioning the Spurs. They've been using analytics for a long time, and it's clearly worked.

Oh the same shit thats been discussed in scouting reports for years. Oh how revolutionary.

[ralph_i_el]

The people that rail the hardest against analytics are the ones that don't actually have any idea what type of data these teams are using. And it's not PER :roll:

teams use tracking cameras that take 25 shots over the entire floor every second and feed all that info into a database. Teams are starting to adopt body monitors that track the players vital functions (heart rate/breathing/body temperature). This is the stuff that gives you an advantage.

Last season I read an article that said the raptors use a program that takes the sportsvu footage, and layers to positions on the floor where the players SHOULD be to produce the lowest opponent PPP (points per possession) so the players can watch footage and see where they WERE on each player, and where they SHOULD be (theoretically)

Is Chuck really saying that's a disadvantage? Anyone can tell you what kid can shoot and who's a great athlete. Advanced stats are just the way that teams get an edge in a world full of great scouting

[atljonesbro]

Barkley has always been an idiot. Just an old man who doesn't wanna get with the times. He has little no no understanding of analytics too. How can we expect him to understand analytics when he can barely complete a sentence without sounding like a complete dumbass?

[HOoopCityJones]

The people that rail the hardest against analytics are the ones that don't actually have any idea what type of data these teams are using. And it's not PER :roll:

All of that shit falls under the same tent pole for most folks. Only the uber stat geeks around here seem to be getting all tingled in the butthole over it.

[ralph_i_el]

All of that shit falls under the same tent pole for most folks. Only the uber stat geeks around here seem to be getting all tingled in the butthole over it.
http://www.stats.com/sportvu/sportvu.asp
check out this site and tell me it doesn't turn you into a bit of a stat geek.

edit: wrong site, lemme find the right one:http://stats.nba.com/tracking/ here we go


so many interesting things on that site. check this out http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/player/possessions/ Blake Griffin has the 6th most touches of all the players in the league, but his actual time of possession is only between 30-50% of the guys with similar amounts of touches. That tells me that he's been a big part of the playmaking in the clippers offense, but he moves the ball quickly (not that you'd miss this fact if you watched the clippers play).

[Darius]

Wow a number of people on ISH as dumb as charles.

Using analytics and having good talent aren't mutually exclusive.

Analytics are a simply a tool to identify and maximize talent.

NBA is still primarily a star driven league but finding the right players to put around the stars is what separates mediocre teams from good/great ones.

Results speak for themselves. The best teams in the league have embraced the extra edge using analytics gives them.

[Rake2204]

I think Barkley likely understands there's use to be found in analytics.

However, my guess is he does not feel great about the over-emphasis of such statistics in many cases, particularly when those doing the emphasizing may have a reduced or limited history to the game of basketball.

It seems there are at least two perceived sides (key word "perceived"). One side thinks the other is making all their basketball decisions by just looking at advanced analytics and trying to make mathematical deductions. The other side believes the old folks can't get with the times.

Ultimately, I think there's a middle ground to be had, and both sides could likely use each other in finding success. It's potentially offensive for players who've lived the game to have folks with a severely reduced history trying to come in and reduce it all to a numbers thing. Conversely, it'd be silly to flat out ignore all numbers.

[Dr.J4ever]

Wow a number of people on ISH as dumb as charles.

Using analytics and having good talent aren't mutually exclusive.

Analytics are a simply a tool to identify and maximize talent.

NBA is still primarily a star driven league but finding the right players to put around the stars is what separates mediocre teams from good/great ones.

Results speak for themselves. The best teams in the league have embraced the extra edge using analytics gives them.

This.

So does this mean if you're into analytics, you didn't get to date anyone in high school?:lol

Really, I usually like Chuck a lot because he keeps it real with his opinions and he's very funny, but he probably just doesn't understand what analytics really means. I'm pretty sure that if someone sat down with him and described it in detail and Chuck had an open mind, he would grow to appreciate it.

Just to add to the topic, you really need both analytics and the eye test in today's NBA. If I had to choose what's more important, of course the eye test would be more important. Bar graphs, advanced stats, and PERs are all great and help in determining weaknesses and strengths of teams and players, but a good observer can see this things as well in a way computers and stats can never understand.

[Dr.J4ever]

Wow a number of people on ISH as dumb as charles.

Using analytics and having good talent aren't mutually exclusive.

Analytics are a simply a tool to identify and maximize talent.

NBA is still primarily a star driven league but finding the right players to put around the stars is what separates mediocre teams from good/great ones.

Results speak for themselves. The best teams in the league have embraced the extra edge using analytics gives them.

Exactly.

76ers GM Sam Hnkie, a known disciple of analytics, has been in player development mode for 1.5 years now with the understanding that it is only with stars and superstars that ultimately lead to NBA titles.

We may have that guy in Embiid, and we are drafting another potential star in 2015. Hopefully a Dario Saric can also be a star, but we will see.

The point is even analytics understands the need for stars and/or difference makers in order to find significant success in the playoffs.

Analytics only help us understand the game better and SUPPLEMENTS what our own experience and eyes tell us.

[jzek]

Baseball managers, players, etc. all laughed at Sabermetrics, too. Now every team is using it.

[kshutts1]

I remember reading some ridiculously lengthy analytics "report" equipped with color charts and everything that said if Curry took something like 20-25 3's a game his team would be virtually unbeatable but that the coaches/league probably would never "let" him try it because it's such a revolutionary concept :oldlol:

Some hipster from grantland probably wrote that shit in a starbucks and really believed he was on to something as if NBA talent hasn't already figured out how to best be effective :roll:
This quote is from page 2, so I am, as usual, coming late to the party...

However, I'm never sure if you're trolling Cavs, but the thinking of "....as if NBA talent hasn't already figured out how to best be effective..." is so wrong in so many ways.

The game is about change and exploits. If we never search for ways to improve (if we always assume the talent has figured it out), then the game will never change, the game will never improve.

Why continue on with the status quo? Challenge the status quo. Maybe it IS right, and you'll look like a fool. But what if it's not? And you look like a genius?

[Mr Feeny]

Steve Nash broke his leg. He was not in the physical condition to run an offense, especially when he was in and out of the line up due to the injury. Why even bother trolling about something so obvious? :confusedshrug:




Yes, very impressive, If only everyone could play Eastern Conference trash throughout the first and sometimes even second round for most of their playoff career is truly a sight to behold. :applause:

I still remember his histortic battles with the Gilbert Arenas led Wizards. Stuff of legend really.

Awww so we agree that Lebron can beat Detroit by himself and lead the likes of Gibson to the finals? Cool. Let's Stay on topic.

Barkley is off base here...

[Mr Feeny]

Wow a number of people on ISH as dumb as charles.

Using analytics and having good talent aren't mutually exclusive.

Analytics are a simply a tool to identify and maximize talent.

NBA is still primarily a star driven league but finding the right players to put around the stars is what separates mediocre teams from good/great ones.

Results speak for themselves. The best teams in the league have embraced the extra edge using analytics gives them.

This is the best post in the entire thread. Finally. Someone go gets it:cheers:

[AussieG]

The people that rail the hardest against analytics are the ones that don't actually have any idea what type of data these teams are using. And it's not PER :roll:

teams use tracking cameras that take 25 shots over the entire floor every second and feed all that info into a database. Teams are starting to adopt body monitors that track the players vital functions (heart rate/breathing/body temperature). This is the stuff that gives you an advantage.


If there is any advantage, it's a small one. If analytics or advanced nerd stats were so important, Bill Gates would be MVP of the NBA.

There is such thing as information overload. Too much information.

They can discuss tendencies or percentages and they can even anticipate based off of known habits of a player but during the game in the moment, the players have enough to think about without weighing up advanced stats. A lot of basketball is reactionary and improvised, which means no thinking at all. You just react. Muscle memory.

To think too much is to be a step slow and behind the 8 ball.

Even the players with the best basketball IQ's aren't rocket scientists. It's all relative.

Chemistry with teammates and executing and playing with high energy is a thousand times more important than tracking vital functions.

[ProfessorMurder]

It clearly made them better, what are you talking about? Rudy Gay was a black hole making 16 million a year. Every indication from statistics to record showed that they were better off with a literal scrub in Prince than Gay.

Jeff Green isnt an overpaid black hole like Rudy was. And Rudy Gay was a good defender in Memphis. I wouldnt call him a pure scorer.

It doesn't take analytics to figure out that Rudy Gay sucks though... Especially for that contract.

[3ball]

teams use tracking cameras that take 25 shots over the entire floor every second and feed all that info into a database. This is the stuff that gives you an advantage.


Mechanical eyes instead of real ones - how can that be better?

These are the same cameras that confirmed what the eye test told us years ago - the Lebron (and harden) is the only wing player that dominates the ball as much or more than starting point guards.




That tells me that he's been a big part of the playmaking in the clippers offense, but he moves the ball quickly (not that you'd miss this fact if you watched the clippers play).


Your summary of Blake Griffin was the most basic assessment of a player's game that is worse than even the most basic eyetest - You're super-proud of something that dumbs down the most basic of eyetests.
.

[Ca$H]

LOL. I hate all the skinny jeans wearing, virgin, analytics fakkits on this forum.

[3ball]

All of the stats in the world wouldn't do shit for Lebron if he didn't have that God given talent to go along with it.


More important than the stats and eyetest is understanding how the game works and plays - otherwise, you won't be aware that all coaches in previous eras foolishly ran offenses that positioned players close to the rim, which activated Rule 2b (http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html) in the Illegal Defense Guidelines - this rule allowed defenders to paint-camp if their man was in the paint already, or within 3 feet of either side of the paint.

The legal paint-camping, coupled with higher physicality, hand-checking and no spacing, made it just as hard to score in previous eras as today's era.

Without awareness of these things, the spacing-enhanced passing ability and at-rim percentages of today's players gets overrated compared to previous eras.. Btw, Lebron is an average (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10588886&postcount=304) two-footed leaper, so he doesn't have elite ability off both one and two legs... that would be the next level up (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10571152&postcount=176) from where he is.
.

[AlphaWolf24]

Barkley saying what people who actually played competitive basketball have been saying for years....

Advanced stats are worthless for the game of basketball...this is not Baseball.....to much movement and rhythm to use advanced stats

[Eric Cartman]

Barkley saying what people who actually played competitive basketball have been saying for years....

Advanced stats are worthless for the game of basketball...this is not Baseball.....to much movement and rhythm to use advanced stats

AlphaWolf you are in the right here, if I may add, the general public like stats, it's information that is easily understandable, and with it comes a perceived knowledge gained, making them feel more intelligent with perceived wisdom higher than the general public that just watches the game and does the eye test with basic stats to boot .Additionally, you can play with the stats, compare, contrast all sorts of different ways. It's a trivial way for fans to interact with the game, maybe like NFL fans do with fantasy football.

It's the reason that sports science guy still has a job, hell, for all I know john brenkus actually invented analytics.

[ralph_i_el]

Mechanical eyes instead of real ones - how can that be better?

These are the same cameras that confirmed what the eye test told us years ago - the Lebron (and harden) is the only wing player that dominates the ball as much or more than starting point guards.


Your summary of Blake Griffin was the most basic assessment of a player's game that is worse than even the most basic eyetest - You're super-proud of something that dumbs down the most basic of eyetests.
.

How can mechanical eyes be better? Are you ****ing kidding me? They permanently record the exact position of every player...25 times a second. Your brain can't do that. Can you tell me where LeBron was 2 minutes and 30 seconds into the 2nd quarter of a game two months ago? The computers can.

I wasn't summarizing Blake Griffins game. I was using quantitative evidence to describe one facet of his game.

If you don't understand the immense potential of the Sportsvu system then you're either an idiot or willfully ignorant.

[ralph_i_el]

If there is any advantage, it's a small one. If analytics or advanced nerd stats were so important, Bill Gates would be MVP of the NBA.

There is such thing as information overload. Too much information.

They can discuss tendencies or percentages and they can even anticipate based off of known habits of a player but during the game in the moment, the players have enough to think about without weighing up advanced stats. A lot of basketball is reactionary and improvised, which means no thinking at all. You just react. Muscle memory.

To think too much is to be a step slow and behind the 8 ball.

Even the players with the best basketball IQ's aren't rocket scientists. It's all relative.

Chemistry with teammates and executing and playing with high energy is a thousand times more important than tracking vital functions.

The analytics aren't for the players:facepalm It's for the coaches and GM's

What is so difficult to understand about this. Having more information in a competitive field is ALWAYS an advantage.

[3ball]

How can mechanical eyes be better? Are you ****ing kidding me? They permanently record the exact position of every player...25 times a second. Your brain can't do that. Can you tell me where LeBron was 2 minutes and 30 seconds into the 2nd quarter of a game two months ago? The computers can.

I wasn't summarizing Blake Griffins game. I was using quantitative evidence to describe one facet of his game.

If you don't understand the immense potential of the Sportsvu system then you're either an idiot or willfully ignorant.
it's not even close to the eye test.

the eye test can notice things the machine can't... plain and simple - the machine can count... that is all.

[triangleoffense]

classic debate of baseball stat geeks vs baseball talent scouts, except that basketball is less of numbers game than baseball so chuck is completely right, just said it in his usual d1pshit manner.

[ralph_i_el]

it's not even close to the eye test.

the eye test can notice things the machine can't... plain and simple - the machine can count... that is all.

yup, so now you just need to be able to watch and remember every single player in every single game at the same time without forgetting anything.

Or you could just hop on sportsvu and isolate every play where "Player X did Action Y" and watch them all back to back to discover their tendencies. The computer can tell you the expected PPP of any action.

Analytics don't supplant the "eye test". The supplement it. The teams that have embraced anayltics over the past few seasons have generally thrived.

analytics isn't "James Harden's TS% is so high! Better give him the ball!"
It's: "James Harden is in PnR situations an average of XX times a game, XX% of the time he drives away from the screen, XX% of the time when he goes right he'll pull-up whereas when he goes left he pulls up XX% of the time. His team is achieving X.XX PPP when he handles the ball in the PNR" And that's just the light stuff. Teams can create silhouettes to play over their game footage that shows the exact positioning that the computer says is the "optimal position" in terms of opponents PPP.


I don't love basketball for the stats. The reason I fell in love with the game is the idea that every man on the court effects the play of their teammates and opponents. I love how different team compositions can create completely different effects on offense. I love chemistry.

That doesn't mean I'm blinded to the substantial value of analytics. That's like saying "Why bother with market analytics, we'll just invest in all the best companies!" Statistical analysis picks up patterns that the eye test will miss.

[3ball]

The teams that have embraced anayltics over the past few seasons have generally thrived.


another misnomer that's become part of the narrative for the nerds - ALL teams have embraced it..

and again, there's a million pieces of information an eye test can notice that the machine can't... the machine can only count.. that is all

[ralph_i_el]

another misnomer that's become part of the narrative for the nerds - ALL teams have embraced it..

and again, there's a million pieces of information an eye test can notice that the machine can't... the machine can only count.. that is all

"The Machine" lets you use your own eyes more effectively by compiling and organizing more information than your brain can remember.

The sportsvu cameras can calculate an individual player's gravity! As in how much they shift the defense towards them as they move around the court. That's insanely cool! No human can accurately follow how the movements of all 5 offensive players effect the movements of all 5 defensive players simultaneously.

If all teams have embraced it, that means 30 front offices think it will be competitively useful...but I guess you know better. Which team do you run again?

[Dr.J4ever]

yup, so now you just need to be able to watch and remember every single player in every single game at the same time without forgetting anything.

Or you could just hop on sportsvu and isolate every play where "Player X did Action Y" and watch them all back to back to discover their tendencies. The computer can tell you the expected PPP of any action.

Analytics don't supplant the "eye test". The supplement it. The teams that have embraced anayltics over the past few seasons have generally thrived.

analytics isn't "James Harden's TS% is so high! Better give him the ball!"
It's: "James Harden is in PnR situations an average of XX times a game, XX% of the time he drives away from the screen, XX% of the time when he goes right he'll pull-up whereas when he goes left he pulls up XX% of the time. His team is achieving X.XX PPP when he handles the ball in the PNR" And that's just the light stuff. Teams can create silhouettes to play over their game footage that shows the exact positioning that the computer says is the "optimal position" in terms of opponents PPP.


I don't love basketball for the stats. The reason I fell in love with the game is the idea that every man on the court effects the play of their teammates and opponents. I love how different team compositions can create completely different effects on offense. I love chemistry.

That doesn't mean I'm blinded to the substantial value of analytics. That's like saying "Why bother with market analytics, we'll just invest in all the best companies!" Statistical analysis picks up patterns that the eye test will miss.

:applause:

[HurricaneKid]

yup, so now you just need to be able to watch and remember every single player in every single game at the same time without forgetting anything.

Or you could just hop on sportsvu and isolate every play where "Player X did Action Y" and watch them all back to back to discover their tendencies. The computer can tell you the expected PPP of any action.

Analytics don't supplant the "eye test". The supplement it. The teams that have embraced anayltics over the past few seasons have generally thrived.

analytics isn't "James Harden's TS% is so high! Better give him the ball!"
It's: "James Harden is in PnR situations an average of XX times a game, XX% of the time he drives away from the screen, XX% of the time when he goes right he'll pull-up whereas when he goes left he pulls up XX% of the time. His team is achieving X.XX PPP when he handles the ball in the PNR" And that's just the light stuff. Teams can create silhouettes to play over their game footage that shows the exact positioning that the computer says is the "optimal position" in terms of opponents PPP.


I don't love basketball for the stats. The reason I fell in love with the game is the idea that every man on the court effects the play of their teammates and opponents. I love how different team compositions can create completely different effects on offense. I love chemistry.

That doesn't mean I'm blinded to the substantial value of analytics. That's like saying "Why bother with market analytics, we'll just invest in all the best companies!" Statistical analysis picks up patterns that the eye test will miss.

Great post.

What Chuck said was patently stupid. We aren't talking about PER folks. We are talking about maximizing the strengths of your team and the weaknesses of your opposition to give you the optimal results based on personnel. Does that mean the 76ers are going to beat the Warriors if they utilize analytics? Of course not. But if they can improve their offensive efficiency by 1-2 baskets a game, that is a massive and meaningful addition.

We are well beyond shot charts and have moved to shooting percentages closely guarded, PnR with ball/ roll man ppp, tendencies, etc. We now study the impact of 2-3-4-5 man data sets. Who do you play well with vs who cannibilizes your strengths, etc.

Being against analytics is just dumb. Its saying "I'm better than you, I don't need to figure out what you do or how you do it". "I don't need to maximize the team's collection of skill sets".

[T_L_P]

yup, so now you just need to be able to watch and remember every single player in every single game at the same time without forgetting anything.

Or you could just hop on sportsvu and isolate every play where "Player X did Action Y" and watch them all back to back to discover their tendencies. The computer can tell you the expected PPP of any action.

Analytics don't supplant the "eye test". The supplement it. The teams that have embraced anayltics over the past few seasons have generally thrived.

analytics isn't "James Harden's TS% is so high! Better give him the ball!"
It's: "James Harden is in PnR situations an average of XX times a game, XX% of the time he drives away from the screen, XX% of the time when he goes right he'll pull-up whereas when he goes left he pulls up XX% of the time. His team is achieving X.XX PPP when he handles the ball in the PNR" And that's just the light stuff. Teams can create silhouettes to play over their game footage that shows the exact positioning that the computer says is the "optimal position" in terms of opponents PPP.


I don't love basketball for the stats. The reason I fell in love with the game is the idea that every man on the court effects the play of their teammates and opponents. I love how different team compositions can create completely different effects on offense. I love chemistry.

That doesn't mean I'm blinded to the substantial value of analytics. That's like saying "Why bother with market analytics, we'll just invest in all the best companies!" Statistical analysis picks up patterns that the eye test will miss.

:applause:

[mehyaM24]

game footage > analytics, but you need both.

jordan fans specifically are notorious for parroting "mj >>> insert" hyperbole, but when pressed with data and facts, ones that DONT back up their mj faith, they literally go ghost.

its important to use both simply because people make up shit..

[ShawkFactory]

Barkley saying what people who actually played competitive basketball have been saying for years....

Advanced stats are worthless for the game of basketball...this is not Baseball.....to much movement and rhythm to use advanced stats
They are not worthless. At all.

Advanced stats, when applied correctly, absolutely have their place in the game. The problem arises when people who have faulty knowledge of other areas of the game utilize them as the sole basis of analysis. Professional scouts typically don't do this. Stans on message boards with certain agendas do.

I also can't help but notice a trend here. Kobe guys hate the advanced stats, Lebron guys love it. As is the case for most things regarding those two guys, the ideal falls somewhere in the middle.

[PejaTheSerbSnip]

game footage > analytics, but you need both.

jordan fans specifically are notorious for parroting "mj >>> insert" hyperbole, but when pressed with data and facts, ones don't back up their mj faith, they go ghost.

its important to use both simply because people make up shit..

Lol, all fan groups do that.

Be that as it may, analytics don't exactly contradict the "MJ as GOAT" narrative. BPM, PER, WS and WP all sing his praises, so to speak. He might not be the unanimous GOAT but hes absolutely on the short list, if we go purely by the metrics.

As for the topic at hand, lol, Chuck still thinks the Rockets owe him money. Biggest misrepresentation of analytics ive ever seen. Found it especially funny how he cited the Spurs as an organization that runs their team in ways that starkly contrast the analytics movement. Couldn't be further from the truth.

[3ball]

"The Machine" lets you use your own eyes more effectively by compiling and organizing more information than your brain can remember.

The sportsvu cameras can calculate an individual player's gravity! As in how much they shift the defense towards them as they move around the court. That's insanely cool! No human can accurately follow how the movements of all 5 offensive players effect the movements of all 5 defensive players simultaneously.

If all teams have embraced it, that means 30 front offices think it will be competitively useful...but I guess you know better. Which team do you run again?


i realize now why you guys value stats so much - you'd be lost without them.

i'm telling you the human eye notices things a machine can't - and it goes right over your head, because you can't fathom what those things could possibly be.

that's pretty sad... :facepalm

[ralph_i_el]

i realize now why you guys value stats so much - you'd be lost without them.

i'm telling you the human eye notices things a machine can't - and it goes right over your head, because you can't fathom what those things could possibly be.

pathetic bud... pathetic.. :facepalm

stick to talking about the old rule books. I can't remember the last time you provided any real insight

[3ball]

stick to talking about the old rule books. I can't remember the last time you provided any real insight
i got prometheus to admit that lebron is the only wing (with harden) to dominate the ball more than starting PG's...

and i got him to admit that paint-camping used to be legal.

that's pretty good if you ask me.

[3ball]

stick to talking about the old rule books. I can't remember the last time you provided any real insight


But hey look, more important than the stats and eyetest is understanding how the game works and plays - otherwise, you won't be aware that all coaches in previous eras foolishly ran offenses that positioned players close to the rim, which activated Rule 2b (http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html) in the Illegal Defense Guidelines - this rule allowed defenders to paint-camp if their man was in the paint already, or within 3 feet of either side of the paint.

The legal paint-camping, coupled with higher physicality, hand-checking and no spacing, made it just as hard to score in previous eras as today's era.

Without awareness of these things, the spacing-enhanced passing ability and at-rim percentages of today's players gets overrated compared to previous eras..

Btw, Lebron is an average (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10588886&postcount=304) two-footed leaper, so he doesn't have elite ability off both one and two legs... that would be the next level up (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vBc395dSg4) from where he is.

[ralph_i_el]

But hey look, more important than the stats and eyetest is understanding how the game works and plays - otherwise, you won't be aware that all coaches in previous eras foolishly ran offenses that positioned players close to the rim, which activated Rule 2b (http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html) in the Illegal Defense Guidelines - this rule allowed defenders to paint-camp if their man was in the paint already, or within 3 feet of either side of the paint.

The legal paint-camping, coupled with higher physicality, hand-checking and no spacing, made it just as hard to score in previous eras as today's era.

Without awareness of these things, the spacing-enhanced passing ability and at-rim percentages of today's players gets overrated compared to previous eras..

Btw, Lebron is an average (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10588886&postcount=304) two-footed leaper, so he doesn't have elite ability off both one and two legs... that would be the next level up (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vBc395dSg4) from where he is.

You got rekt. No need to spam about it.

Why wouldn't Lebron dominate the ball? Notice how well it's worked out for him? He started dominating the ball again and the Cavs went on a huge win streak

[MiseryCityTexas]

Barkley's just saying this crap because he still has a personal biased issue with the Rockets organization till this day smh.

[JohnnySic]

That was great. Stat nerds should stick to fantasy sports.

[Eric Cartman]

It's funny that guys say analytics is valuable and has it's place in the game, yet they can't give out not even ONE example where analytics helped out with something that scouts couldn't evaluate based on talent and the eye test.

The Rudy Gay example is ridiculous, of course he was a slight negative with all his chucking, I don't need graph and alot of numbers to understand that, well if I was a moron and got a hard on for statistics and numbers, sure, but I have eyes and a functioning brain that can determine that.

[kshutts1]

It's funny that guys say analytics is valuable and has it's place in the game, yet they can't give out not even ONE example where analytics helped out with something that scouts couldn't evaluate based on talent and the eye test.

The Rudy Gay example is ridiculous, of course he was a slight negative with all his chucking, I don't need graph and alot of numbers to understand that, well if I was a moron and got a hard on for statistics and numbers, sure, but I have eyes and a functioning brain that can determine that.
Analytics will never see something that the eye test will not. But analytics/computers more easily/quickly pick up on habits.

I could be wrong on the player, but I'm 95% confident that Phil Jackson told either Kobe or Jordan (I think it was Kobe) that their shooting % was significantly higher on one portion of the court... and it happened to be the area the player shot from the least.
Reason I think it was Kobe is because the end result was the player changed their game.

So.... analytics just told a player about a habit he had that he was unaware.

[UK2K]

Barkley is a joke.

I've already posted two examples today.

[tontoz]

If you trade away the the guy you traded Gay for, for someone who's basically a poor man's James Harden, you've given in. Are you seriously gonna try to argue Green isn't an upgrade from Prince and offers the same scoring benefits as Gay? You even started this by saying the Grizz won by getting rid of Gay for a relative scrub in Prince. :biggums:

What part of the Grizzlies took a step back by getting rid of Gay don't you get? The Jeff Green acquisition clearly tells the tale. But like I said if you don't see it that way, that's cool.


You obviously dont realize this but Green's salary is less than half of Gay's.

[HomieWeMajor]

Them nerds on RealGM losing their damn minds . Caught feeling like the bitches they are.

[brantonli]

i realize now why you guys value stats so much - you'd be lost without them.

i'm telling you the human eye notices things a machine can't - and it goes right over your head, because you can't fathom what those things could possibly be.

that's pretty sad... :facepalm


could you give an example what a human eye can noice that a machine can't?

You realise you can just programme the software/machine to notice that particular thing right? Cameras have gotten pretty good nowadays, if you've noticed, and so has the software that analyses it. And worst come to worst, you can just rewatch that footage yourself.

[Dro]

yup, so now you just need to be able to watch and remember every single player in every single game at the same time without forgetting anything.

Or you could just hop on sportsvu and isolate every play where "Player X did Action Y" and watch them all back to back to discover their tendencies. The computer can tell you the expected PPP of any action.

Analytics don't supplant the "eye test". The supplement it. The teams that have embraced anayltics over the past few seasons have generally thrived.

analytics isn't "James Harden's TS% is so high! Better give him the ball!"
It's: "James Harden is in PnR situations an average of XX times a game, XX% of the time he drives away from the screen, XX% of the time when he goes right he'll pull-up whereas when he goes left he pulls up XX% of the time. His team is achieving X.XX PPP when he handles the ball in the PNR" And that's just the light stuff. Teams can create silhouettes to play over their game footage that shows the exact positioning that the computer says is the "optimal position" in terms of opponents PPP.


I don't love basketball for the stats. The reason I fell in love with the game is the idea that every man on the court effects the play of their teammates and opponents. I love how different team compositions can create completely different effects on offense. I love chemistry.

That doesn't mean I'm blinded to the substantial value of analytics. That's like saying "Why bother with market analytics, we'll just invest in all the best companies!" Statistical analysis picks up patterns that the eye test will miss.
:applause:

Not sure how anyone is really arguing this.....

[HOoopCityJones]

You obviously dont realize this but Green's salary is less than half of Gay's.

I was referring to impact within a Teams system, but thats neither here nor there at this point.

[tontoz]

I was referring to impact within a Teams system, but thats neither here nor there at this point.


Getting the same impact at half the price = win

[HOoopCityJones]

Getting the same impact at half the price = win

Hell, I'm not saying Green is a bad move. I think Prince was.

[tontoz]

Hell, I'm not saying Green is a bad move. I think Prince was.


Prince sucks. Their main motivation was obviously getting rid of Gay.

[HOoopCityJones]

Prince sucks. Their main motivation was obviously getting rid of Gay.

Obviously.

[Jasper]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/charles-barkley-doesnt-love-analytics-but-analytics-sure-love-him/

this is something the geeks' can chomp on :lol :lol

Barley ahead of Malone and Duncan in efficience..... :pimp:

ANALYTICS thatttttttt....

[meat]

i realize now why you guys value stats so much - you'd be lost without them.

i'm telling you the human eye notices things a machine can't - and it goes right over your head, because you can't fathom what those things could possibly be.

that's pretty sad... :facepalm

Uhh,, these machines you talk about. They're video cameras right? And that machine you watch games on. A TV? Because they kind of show you what your eyes would see if you were there ... without actually being there. Am I confused or are you talking about some other kind of "machine"?

[longtime lurker]

Barkley is wrong again on this subject, just like 99% of the subjects he speaks out on. He needs to just shut his mouth because analytics certainly aren't crap. That being said, any team with a slavish devotion to them like Morey has will go no where.

[Artillery]

Bullshit. They thought it'd make them better and it hasn't. Paint it how you want but before the Gay trade, they were knocking the likes of San Antonio outta the Playoffs. All taking away Gay did was make Gasol more reliable , so I see the positives, but don't act like they didn't expect to get better by getting rid of Gay and adding Prince.

Why else just all of a sudden go after another pure scorer then?

Memphis' record against the Spurs with Gay playing:

1-3 - 2007
1-3 - 2008
0-4 - 2009
2-2 - 2010
0-4 - 2012
1-2 - 2013
-------------
5-18 - Total

:oldlol: citing Gay like he was a difference maker when he never even played the Spurs in the playoffs.

Memphis got beatdown in 2013 compared to 2011 because Duncan/Ginobili were actually healthy. Not to mention, SA was no longer trotting out mediocre frontcourts. In 2011, they had injured TD, midget Blair, and ancient McDyess. In 2013, they had healthy TD, Splitter, Diaw. They also upgraded their SF from a worthless player in Richard Jefferson to an impactful defender/rebounder in Kawhi Leonard.

[WallIn]

Can he pronounce Valanciunas doe.

The real question.

[UK2K]

I love the Oklahoma City trade. I think that trade made them better. I

[christian1923]

Great Players + Good coaching = Championships

Not analytics.

[HOoopCityJones]

Memphis' record against the Spurs with Gay playing:

1-3 - 2007
1-3 - 2008
0-4 - 2009
2-2 - 2010
0-4 - 2012
1-2 - 2013
-------------
5-18 - Total

:oldlol: citing Gay like he was a difference maker when he never even played the Spurs in the playoffs.

Memphis got beatdown in 2013 compared to 2011 because Duncan/Ginobili were actually healthy. Not to mention, SA was no longer trotting out mediocre frontcourts. In 2011, they had injured TD, midget Blair, and ancient McDyess. In 2013, they had healthy TD, Splitter, Diaw. They also upgraded their SF from a worthless player in Richard Jefferson to an impactful defender/rebounder in Kawhi Leonard.

Yes, we've actually covered this already.

But since these little "Aha" moments at ISH seem to be the most excitement in your life i'll just say bravo. :applause:

[Eric Cartman]

[QUOTE=UK2K]I love the Oklahoma City trade. I think that trade made them better. I

[Euroleague]

While he is right and these stat morons like Morey are a complete joke......

can Barkley even spell analytic?

[bigkingsfan]

Memphis' record against the Spurs with Gay playing:

1-3 - 2007
1-3 - 2008
0-4 - 2009
2-2 - 2010
0-4 - 2012
1-2 - 2013
-------------
5-18 - Total

:oldlol: citing Gay like he was a difference maker when he never even played the Spurs in the playoffs.

Memphis got beatdown in 2013 compared to 2011 because Duncan/Ginobili were actually healthy. Not to mention, SA was no longer trotting out mediocre frontcourts. In 2011, they had injured TD, midget Blair, and ancient McDyess. In 2013, they had healthy TD, Splitter, Diaw. They also upgraded their SF from a worthless player in Richard Jefferson to an impactful defender/rebounder in Kawhi Leonard.

What's Pau Gasol record with Griz in the playoffs? He went to the Lakers and won two rings. Analytics dat. :oldlol:

[Eric Cartman]

What's Pau Gasol record with Griz in the playoffs? He went to the Lakers and won two rings. Analytics dat. :oldlol:

Analytic nerds after going through their 50 graphs and stat tables:

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/loss_for_words.gif



:roll: :roll:

[Artillery]

Yes, we've actually covered this already.

But since these little "Aha" moments at ISH seem to be the most excitement in your life i'll just say bravo. :applause:

Just driving the point home. You insisted that the Gay trade was a bad move(and continued to do so even after you were proven wrong). When you post stupid shit, don't be surprised when people call you a moron.

[Artillery]

What's Pau Gasol record with Griz in the playoffs? He went to the Lakers and won two rings. Analytics dat. :oldlol:

Being coached by Phil Jackson can make a hell of a difference. Just look at Pau's decline in LA after PJ left in 2011.

[HOoopCityJones]

Just driving the point home. You insisted that the Gay trade was a bad move(and continued to do so even after you were proven wrong). When you post stupid shit, don't be surprised when people call you a moron.

Go get some coochie my ni99a you seem lonely as ****. :cheers:

[bigkingsfan]

Being coached by Phil Jackson can make a hell of a difference. Just look at Pau's decline in LA after PJ left in 2011.
He had better stats while in Memphis.

[YouGotServed]

Go get some coochie my ni99a you seem lonely as ****. :cheers:

You were wrong, period. No need to get personal. Take your L and move on.

[HOoopCityJones]

You were wrong, period. No need to get personal. Take your L and move on.

Take what L? If anything that happened hours ago when I admitted I was mistaken, when corrected by another poster. Which I'm sure your Pu$$y ass read before getting to this point in the convo, just like your boy. Co signing ass Ni99a. :lol

Just face it , you faggits wanted some attention , plain and simple. This is my thread, you move the fucc on. :confusedshrug:

[Artillery]

You were wrong, period. No need to get personal. Take your L and move on.

Even in the face of massive bukkakes, dude just wipes his eyes and asks for more

[HOoopCityJones]

Even in the face of massive bukkakes, dude just wipes his eyes and asks for more

I don't take this as seriously as some of you lol. I admit when I'm wrong. :pimp:


You just being a ho ass ni99a, plain and simple. Go find your kicks some where else sweety.

[YouGotServed]

Take what L? If anything that happened hours ago when I admitted I was mistaken, when corrected by another poster. Which I'm sure your Pu$$y ass read before getting to this point in the convo, just like your boy. Co signing ass Ni99a. :lol

Just face it , you faggits wanted some attention , plain and simple. This is my thread, you move the fucc on. :confusedshrug:
http://i.minus.com/ibovNT1owp74ik.gif

Take your L and move on bro.

[HOoopCityJones]

You read that post in less amount of time it took you to post that Gif. :lol

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/1093529/c-mon-son-o.gif

[gts]

http://allthingsd.com/20130523/analytics-is-not-a-strategy/

interesting read thanks... Kind of goes to show the use of the numbers when used correctly in the Spurs case


With the passing of Dean Smith this is a good time to bring up the fact that Smith was a math major turned coach... He has been quoted saying he'd have been a math teacher if he wasn't a coach...

He brought the numbers game to basketball in the form of analytics, he was using points per possession in the late 50's long long before it was the go to stat in every coaches toolbox... Numbers have a very important place in the game

Numbers and eye test are both important as long as they are used in the right context.. too many people not involved with the game use them improperly

by and large most advanced stats are to judge players on one team playing in the same system.. too often as witnessed here we see guys using advanced stats to compare players from different teams using different systems and worse across eras

Barkely is right in many ways because too many people in the media and fanbases are running around quoting numbers that have no actual bearing on the conversation and as we've seen some teams rely way too much on analytics to make decisions and not enough on their own scouts

[gts]

He had better stats while in Memphis.

did he?