Word....the nerds are invading the NBA

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

To me advanced statistics won't be worth anything until they can measure a big man's defensive impact accordingly:

shots adjusted, passes deflected/intercepted, blocks and pockets picked on both perimeter/frontcourt players, points allowed through mis-rotation or being directly scored upon, how many times he's in isolation either in the post or perimeter, how many times he effectively plays help defense + the # of different attackers in one play he limits, how many times he has to deal with funneled attackers, how many times he has to deal with his man + stunt'n and helpin on teammate's man, how many times his hedging allows his teammate to recover, how many times he's successful at breaking up/guarding pick and rolls, how many times he closes out on pick and pops, how many times he forces players to a bad spot on the floor, how many times he boxes out offensive players when in the paint, how many times he aids defenders, how many times his direct opposite scores on him, how many times he shrinks space in the paint, how many times he traps perimeter players, how many times he forces the attacker into a bad decision, how many times he's inactive on the defensive end etc etc.

And they find a formula that can accurately calculate all that into an individual performance-stat for that player.

 

[phillycavsfan]

The only stupid people I see, are those content with not winning a championship. I'm sorry, but I play to win.

You're just making my point. As if advanced stats isn't used to help a team win a championship.

 

[#1 pick]

Money ball don't tell you how a team will fit but then again, some of these nerds actually know the game like the one who works for the Blazers.

 

[#1 pick]

To me advanced statistics won't be worth anything until they can measure a big man's defensive impact accordingly:

shots adjusted, passes deflected/intercepted, blocks and pockets picked on both perimeter/frontcourt players, points allowed through mis-rotation or being directly scored upon, how many times he's in isolation either in the post or perimeter, how many times he effectively plays help defense + the # of different attackers in one play he limits, how many times he has to deal with funneled attackers, how many times he has to deal with his man + stunt'n and helpin on teammate's man, how many times his hedging allows his teammate to recover, how many times he's successful at breaking up/guarding pick and rolls, how many times he closes out on pick and pops, how many times he forces players to a bad spot on the floor, how many times he boxes out offensive players when in the paint, how many times he aids defenders, how many times his direct opposite scores on him, how many times he shrinks space in the paint, how many times he traps perimeter players, how many times he forces the attacker into a bad decision, how many times he's inactive on the defensive end etc etc.

And they find a formula that can accurately calculate all that into an individual performance-stat for that player.

My nikka, this was a hell of a post.

 

[phillycavsfan]

To me advanced statistics won't be worth anything until they can measure a big man's defensive impact accordingly:

shots adjusted, passes deflected/intercepted, blocks and pockets picked on both perimeter/frontcourt players, points allowed through mis-rotation or being directly scored upon, how many times he's in isolation either in the post or perimeter, how many times he effectively plays help defense + the # of different attackers in one play he limits, how many times he has to deal with funneled attackers, how many times he has to deal with his man + stunt'n and helpin on teammate's man, how many times his hedging allows his teammate to recover, how many times he's successful at breaking up/guarding pick and rolls, how many times he closes out on pick and pops, how many times he forces players to a bad spot on the floor, how many times he boxes out offensive players when in the paint, how many times he aids defenders, how many times his direct opposite scores on him, how many times he shrinks space in the paint, how many times he traps perimeter players, how many times he forces the attacker into a bad decision, how many times he's inactive on the defensive end etc etc.

And they find a formula that can accurately calculate all that into an individual performance-stat for that player.

This is like saying science experiments are worthless until they find a cure for cancer.

 

[triplehate]

To me advanced statistics won't be worth anything until they can measure a big man's defensive impact accordingly:

shots adjusted, passes deflected/intercepted, blocks and pockets picked on both perimeter/frontcourt players, points allowed through mis-rotation or being directly scored upon, how many times he's in isolation either in the post or perimeter, how many times he effectively plays help defense + the # of different attackers in one play he limits, how many times he has to deal with funneled attackers, how many times he has to deal with his man + stunt'n and helpin on teammate's man, how many times his hedging allows his teammate to recover, how many times he's successful at breaking up/guarding pick and rolls, how many times he closes out on pick and pops, how many times he forces players to a bad spot on the floor, how many times he boxes out offensive players when in the paint, how many times he aids defenders, how many times his direct opposite scores on him, how many times he shrinks space in the paint, how many times he traps perimeter players, how many times he forces the attacker into a bad decision, how many times he's inactive on the defensive end etc etc.

And they find a formula that can accurately calculate all that into an individual performance-stat for that player.

Those new cameras literally track all of what you just mentioned right now

TrueHoop TV: Protecting the rim, in stats - TrueHoop Blog - ESPN

 

[tremonthustler1]

I go eye test 100% of the time. I've never been swayed by stats after seeing a player perform live. I only go with stats when I rarely watch the player or team play. The reason this works is because my opinions on teams and players from the eye test usually coincides with what the stats would say.

The few times the stats say someone is good but I've seen them play and I know they're not good, I got with my eyes. For example, stats say Kevin Love is a beast. I watch him play and I don't think he's very good. Thus, I'll go with my eyes that he's barely an above average player than the superstar his stats say he is.

That's where the eye test burns you though. He's not barely above average. The eye test shouldn't indicate that to you. He's not as godly as his stats would indicate, but he's far from average. You shouldn't be concluding "average" when you see him.

 

[Swagnificent]

That's where the eye test burns you though. He's not barely above average. The eye test shouldn't indicate that to you. He's not as godly as his stats would indicate, but he's far from average. You shouldn't be concluding "average" when you see him.

never been impressed with him at the slightest

I'd take David West over him. Thats how low he's in the PF pecking order to me. Blake Griffin is another dude who I find overrated statistically compared to when I watch him play.

 

[OG Talk]

N1ggas fear what they can't understand. Hate what they can't conquer. I guess it's just the fury of man.

 

[snoopy98_prtlnd]

just creating jobs out chea

 

[HacksawJimThuggin]

I don't really see how it's a bad thing at all. It's a far more accurate evaluation (nowhere near perfect, however) of a player's performance.

Like many have said, it's already happened in baseball. Baseball fans/GMs would look at a guy's RBI's, batting percentage, and HR's and think those were the end all be all of evaluating a player. The advanced stats brought context to those numbers.

It's the same with basketball. Fans still look at PPG to tell you how good someone is on offense. Or blocks/steals to figure out what kinda defender someone is. This doesn't take any context into account such as how many shots they take, how many shots they affect on defense, etc.

It's happening in football too with Pro Football Focus. Context is being brought to stats so it's not just oh, receiver A is better than receiver B because he had more yards and catches.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

This is like saying science experiments are worthless until they find a cure for cancer.

Meanwhile, you got quackery type metrics like 'true shooting %' with Tyson Chandler as #1 .

My nikka, this was a hell of a post.

 

[superunknown23]

No excuse for players dressing like nerdy hipsters though

 

[phillycavsfan]

Meanwhile, you got quackery type metrics like 'true shooting %' with Tyson Chandler as #1 .

If you interpret that stat correctly, it shouldn't be a problem. Chandler's TS% is high because he doesn't take threes, his FG% is outstanding (near 65%), and he doesn't hurt you from the free throw line (69%). It doesn't mean he's one of the best scorers in the NBA; he's just a highly efficient scorer. It's all about the interpretation.

OTOH, Kevin Durant's TS% is high because he's currently averaging 50/40/90. It's safe to say he's one of, if not, the best scorers in the NBA.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

If you interpret that stat correctly, it shouldn't be a problem. Chandler's TS% is high because he doesn't take threes, his FG% is outstanding (near 65%), and he doesn't hurt you from the free throw line (69%). It doesn't mean he's one of the best scorers in the NBA; he's just a highly efficient scorer. It's all about the interpretation.

OTOH, Kevin Durant's TS% is high because he's currently averaging 50/40/90. It's safe to say he's one of, if not, the best scorers in the NBA.

That stat is all types of bullshyt. I feel like smack'n anybody's head that uses it.

It ain't an advanced metric, it isn't even a measure of a player's shooting percentage, much less TRUE shooting percentage. It's a warped measure of points per shot and leaves you with cases where a player may have a lower standard FG% than another, but has a higher TS% because more points are generated through the denom' of a 0.44 FTA and that every missed shot is valued the same (3pt missed shots are valued the SAME as 2pt missed shots but 3pt made shots are valued MORE than 2 pt made shots).

James Harden = 45 FG%
Chris Paul = 48 FG%

James Harden = 60.7 TS%
Chris Paul = 59.3 TS%

Because Harden has a higher FGs/FTAs ratio per game (and makes a fair amount of those free throw attempts) and a higher 3pt% and makes than Paul, it inflates his TS%. It leaves you with a total contrast of a picture that's closer to reality of their actual shooting percentages:

Chris Paul =

At rim - 69%
3ft to 10ft - 51%
10ft to 16ft - 50%
16ft to 3pt - 46%
3pt - 33%
FT - 89%

James Harden =

At rim - 62%
3ft to 10ft - 33%
10ft to 16ft - 37%
16ft to 3pt - 36%
3pt - 36%
FT - 85%

I'm all for more information to be used as further insight into the game, but not when it's used to insult my intelligence. The TS% metric has as much use as a 'boxing out rebound percentage' metric, that has a steals off inbound passes built into its formula.