True but he's talking about the NBA and this issue is directly affecting black coaches and other ethnic groups aren't represented in basketball to that degree. I didn't like the focus on black fans because I've never heard anyone discuss analytics in conversation. He should have focused the piece on the front office vs players/coaches.
Michael Wilbon: Black Folks and analytics don't mix
- Thread starter Alexander The Great
- Start date
True but he's talking about the NBA and this issue is directly affecting black coaches and other ethnic groups aren't represented in basketball to that degree. I didn't like the focus on black fans because I've never heard anyone discuss analytics in conversation. He should have focused the piece on the front office vs players/coaches.
Ms. Elaine
Spoiled Brat
Career numbers are entirely different than season numbers, which was my point.
. You can't use a player or team's numbers in a season (or multiple season) in BB and FB to make an accurate assessment of anything.And yes, 2500 shots is a small sample size.
Slightly off topic but that's why I
whenever people try to compare Curry to Bron. The sample size on the "current" Steph Curry is way too small to consider that nikka the greatest in anything. 
cKondomsucK6
All Star
of course analytics have a place
but teams building there front office around them is the most insane thing I've ever heard of
stats don't account for actually understanding the game
but teams building there front office around them is the most insane thing I've ever heard of
stats don't account for actually understanding the game
<<TheStandard>>
I Am A God
<<TheStandard>>
I Am A God
I was stunned when Wilbon actually wrote this
I used to think it was absurd how clueless most NBA fans are but it's not when you consider who gets paid to go on television to talk about it. People who cover the game can't even grasp these simple concepts.
I used to think it was absurd how clueless most NBA fans are but it's not when you consider who gets paid to go on television to talk about it. People who cover the game can't even grasp these simple concepts.
the Knicks scouting report on MJ from 1998
Exactly!
Sean312
Banned
i like how one black dude can speak for a entire race and its law lmao.
OG Talk
Archived
Yep its been around forever...the Knicks scouting report on MJ from 1998
But just like Trap Music and sneaker culture, the white and Asian hipster element make it seem corny.. It's always been a fundamental part of scouting..
Reality
Make your own luck.
THIS. Thank you. This is a problem w/ some people in the analytics community as a whole too. They sometimes lose the sense of appropriate context needed when evaluating players and/or situations.
Case in point I had a conversation with an analytics guy regarding Seattle's decision to throw on 2nd down in the Super Bowl two years back. He said it wasn't that bad of the decision because that play had been successful whatever percentage of the time in the regular season.
That ignored the fact that it was a slant route that required a pic on a DB, and that if the play went poorly the chances of an interception that loses the superbowl are pretty non-negligible.
That vs. handing the ball to Marshawn, where your chances of winning are still pretty damn good w/out the huge downside if the negative outcome were to occur.
I think metrics as a whole are good but it is damn hard to define a good metric or set of metrics that aren't misleading via lack of context or lack of interpretability. That's one of the things you're taught as a data scientist: that the model that seems to be more accurate in explaining the world isn't always the better one. If it's difficult to explain or interpret, you should pause and reconsider how useful it is.
Career numbers are entirely different than season numbers, which was my point.
And yes, 2500 shots is a small sample size.
Here's a lot of charts based solely on season numbers. Note, for example, how smooth the shooting charts are. If you really couldn't make an accurate assessment, then those shooting charts would be all over the place. But they're smooth as hell - which shows that on both offense and defense, the advanced analytics really are telling you what spots a player likes and (part of) what effect he's having on the game.
Also notice how the defensive shot charts are far more evenly distributed than the offensive shot charts? That shows you're seeing unique individual differences - while a single player on offense is taking his shots best and most frequently from a certain place, the defensive shots show that these choices are clearly different enough across the league that the distributions even out a lot.
Last edited:
Crack Daniels
Under New Management
These are terrible points, anyone with common sense knows you cant just strictly use any stat model traditional or analytics.
Every "anti-stats" person does this...they create these straw men and base all their arguments off of that. All these stats do is help provide context and perspective to the game. There's literally no reason to dismiss them unless you just don't understand them.
TrebleMan
Superstar
At the end of the day nearly everything anybody does can be made into a stat. It's history, it's in the books, it's logged.
There's a great value in analyzing data, one of the reasons why I love using API's.
However, at the end of the day they can only predict based on past data. Numbers can't tell you exactly what's going to happen, only what already has and the likelihood of something that may. People get way too caught up in trying to pass the last part of as fact or certainty, although that's kind of the point when it comes to studying data.
It's a conundrum that needs more emphasis on balance.
As a simple example, look at what your posting data is on this site to the left. Most likely you and anybody else can look at it and determine if you or someone else will make post tomorrow or sometime this week/month. Accuracy increases when considering someone's posting history for the week. Will they post tomorrow? Nobody knows, not even them. Things may happen that will influence their decision to that even they have not taken into account. But can we make a decent guess if they will based on their recent activity? We sure can.
There's a great value in analyzing data, one of the reasons why I love using API's.
However, at the end of the day they can only predict based on past data. Numbers can't tell you exactly what's going to happen, only what already has and the likelihood of something that may. People get way too caught up in trying to pass the last part of as fact or certainty, although that's kind of the point when it comes to studying data.
It's a conundrum that needs more emphasis on balance.
As a simple example, look at what your posting data is on this site to the left. Most likely you and anybody else can look at it and determine if you or someone else will make post tomorrow or sometime this week/month. Accuracy increases when considering someone's posting history for the week. Will they post tomorrow? Nobody knows, not even them. Things may happen that will influence their decision to that even they have not taken into account. But can we make a decent guess if they will based on their recent activity? We sure can.
Last edited:
Deutsche Bank
Some Of My Partners Dope Fiends Ha
Might wanna start using analytics in politics, finance, education, and crime stats instead of fukking sports, but fukk it, right?
gtj1982
Superstar
Don't analytics say Kevin Love is a good defender?
Bernie Madoff
Banned
smh