Charles Barkley gives that ether to NBA Analytics nerds

[UpAndComing]

2:00




Talk to em Chuck

 

[Mʀ2ᴋDᴇᴇᴢ]

 

[BigMoneyGrip]

He’s talking to Morey

 

[phillycavsfan]

Chuck is an idiot. Kenny got it right, you can't understand stats if you don't have context.

 

[UpAndComing]

Chuck is an idiot. Kenny got it right, you can't understand stats if you don't have context.

I'm sure in "a proper context" BJ Armstrong had a better plus minus than Micheal Jordan

 

[phillycavsfan]

I'm sure in "a proper context" BJ Armstrong had a better plus minus than Micheal Jordan

It depends on who BJ was guarding or who was guarding him. Also who was on the floor when BJ was playing and the general pace of the offense. You won't really know if BJ having a better plus minus than MJ means anything until you know that.

A player scoring 20 points in a game may not be all that great depending on context. It's good if it took 12 shot attempts to get the 20 points, but bad if it took 25.

Another example, watching a game you'd know that Steven Adams grabbing 10 boards is a whole lot more helpful than Westbrook grabbing 10 boards. Mainly because Russ can't get those boards without Adams boxing out.

 

[TrebleMan]

Hero Ball Is Awful, Except When It Works, Because Then It’s the Best

Look at this shyt. Seven seconds left — an eternity, really — and coming out of a timeout! The best action the vaunted Showtime Lakers can come up with is Magic pounding the ball for three seconds, driving into a triple-team (consisting of two of the best shot-blockers in the league that season, plus Larry Bird), and throwing up a low-percentage, midrange shot. Meanwhile, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the league’s all-time leading scorer, whose skyhook is considered even today to be one of basketball’s most devastating offensive weapons, stood wide open, six feet from the hoop. An abomination. Yes, they would go on to win the title, but that’s beside the point.

Perhaps no other player has done more damage to the ideal of efficient basketball than Michael Jordan. His title-winning shot in Game 6 of the 1998 Finals against the Jazz is everything wrong with the pre-analytics NBA. An iso, over dribbling, which leads to an uncalled offensive foul, ending in a long 2. Even worse, shots like this from MJ inspired a raft of not-as-good gunners over the years, including Analytics Antichrist Kobe Bryant, who played self-righteous, spotlight-hogging basketball for nearly 20 years on his way to five NBA titles. Terrible.

Be that as it may, even if there were an effect that imbued players with powers approximating a custom video-game setting, leading to offensive explosions that caused all of those watching to involuntarily convulse like Joe Cocker at Woodstock, does that excuse the selfishness of hero ball? Or excuse that such magical events would surely inspire countless others, in driveways and playgrounds and gyms, to follow in the footsteps of these remorseless gunners? Why not inspire players to play the smart odds? It’s disappointing because an elite team like the Warriors should know better than to derail their offense just to give the ball to a player who’s hotter than a house on fire on the slopes of an erupting volcano on a planet whose sun just went nova.

Thank heavens these kind of plays are finally behind us.

 

[ROFL_GUY]

Chuck is an idiot. Kenny got it right, you can't understand stats if you don't have context.

 

[Ya Sinning Mane]

that gif crazy.lmfao.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[NatiboyB]

fukk some analytics