The 2014-2015 NBA Season Thread. Lock It Up Please: The Golden State Warriors Are The Champions

[big j 33]

And let's not unfairly judge analytics and "stat nerds" as weirdos who never watch basketball and just plug in numbers.

You see some of the breakdowns done by Grantland or a variety of great websites out there? The screenshots and gifs and play by play analyzing? They watch A TON OF BASKETBALL and then can use advanced metrics to further evaluate and understand the game. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Black of white.

In short, there's room for advanced stats in the NBA. It's just a fact. Some traditional stats that people will still use and point to are flawed and outdated. Advanced stats in this regard are clearly better and more relevant. So if you're going to use stats, use them correctly. Then, if you want to watch the game and use the "eye test", then go ahead, just know that your eyes can lie and the eye test isn't a 100% infallible measure. Neither are analytics... so why not use both in an effort to enjoy and evaluate the game more accurately?

 

[youngwolf]

I love analytics in basketball. I need to know the speed in which players run and how it correlates to the in-arena temperature by the start of the 3rd quarter.

Didnt advanced stats have d fish as the best defender in the league

Ppl just create these things just to seem like they know more about the game than they actually do

Stat nerds also said Lebron was a better shooter than Steph.

 

[offset pow clow]

Because the eye test doesn't tell you the entire story all of the time. Duh.

So we have to know where a player is more efficient from on which parts of the court because......


I see no use in it, its just something extra to do

 

[lawdog1]

I don't really pay close attention to advanced stats, but I don't dismiss them either. If teams want to use them for scouting, etc., that's cool with me, as long as they don't rely on that exclusively. What I don't like is when people act like certain things only could have been figured out through advanced analytics when they're actually pretty common sense concepts. For example, 3 is more than 2, so if the conversion rates for 3 pointers and mid-range shots are roughly the same, generally speaking a team is probably better off shooting a 3.

 

[grandtheftbike]

And let's not unfairly judge analytics and "stat nerds" as weirdos who never watch basketball and just plug in numbers.

too late.... pmatic

 

[pmatic]

Maybe it's because he's tucked away in Portland or maybe because he's Wes ******* Matthews, but I'm surprised this hasn't picked up:

"I'm never going to be the type that gets gaudy numbers to make an All-Defensive team," said Matthews before getting to his case.

"Do I think I'm All-Defense? Absolutely. I think I'm the best two-way two-guard in the NBA. But I feel like we need to be a good defensive team within the scheme of the game. We're not out there gambling, trying to reach and get steals. That would put us in a bind if I don't get it," Matthews said.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/oct/13/blazers-matthews-enters-final-year-of-his-contract/

 

[trueprada]

 

[shoeking2101]

So we have to know where a player is more efficient from on which parts of the court because......


I see no use in it, its just something extra to do

You're missing the point, and since I kind of started this analytics talk last night, maybe I didn't state it clearly enough

If you're a fan that wants to dive deeper into what is actually happening on the floor beyond what you're watching, then advanced stats and analytics are great for that. It offers a unique, different and sometimes alternative take on what it is that you are actually watching.

However, if you are comfortable with just taking what you see as final, then that's fine to. As a fan, that's your right. You, like all of us, are simply fans. We don't get paid for this. So from that standpoint, it is unnecessary, and "something extra." But by that respect, any stat can be labeled as something extra if we only care about what we're watching.

But to dismiss it as being junk, stupid, unnecessary, etc. is just flat out ignorant. You have NBA teams, coaches, NBA personel, scouts, assistants, stat departments, that see a huge need for it. The Spurs use it. The Heat use it. They've combined for the league's last 4 NBA championships. There is a need for it, but maybe not for the casual fan and if you choose not to dive that deep into the numbers and behind what you're seeing, then that's fine. But do not say it's unnecessary and has no need and is stupid and what not, because that's flat out wrong. The teams you watch use this **** to help make better decisions about their teams and players every single day.

 

[do work son]

Keep it simple. Why do I need al this data backing up what my eyes see? This isn't baseball where the game is so intricate and you need as much data as possible.

because the eye test is subjective to whoever's eyes we're using.

Because the eye test doesn't tell you the entire story all of the time. Duh.

So we have to know where a player is more efficient from on which parts of the court because......


I see no use in it, its just something extra to do

because if you know where they are most efficient, you know where to not let them get the ball defensively? if X player is horrible taking a dribble to the left then shooting, but spectacular with a dribble to the right then shooting, which way are you going to force him?

or when someone says X is a better shooter than Y, because X has a higher FG% than Y, but doesn't tell you that X takes shots within 10 feet and Y takes shots between 16-25 feet. standard FG% doesn't differentiate.

 

[Arthur Shelby]

View media item 1219798

That Snoop & Iggy argument went left so fast

 

[victor page]

The Exum comments in here remind me a lot of the MCW comments last year around this time.

Let things play out. Preseason games aren't exactly the proper examples to pull out the "I don't get the hype" comments.

 

[MajinZuub]

Elfrid is about to be a beast. That's all.

 

[lawdog1]

Wade 2.0.

Awwsome, man -- this is not meant to be a criticism, because I think positivity is a wonderful thing, especially in the snarky, cynical age we're currently living in, but I am seriously wondering - are there any players you don't like?

 

[rck3sactown]

mgrand explained it better than I could. FG% doesn't tell the whole story, so there's more ADVANCED stats to accurately reflect a player's shooting.

Plus I already gave an example with something like rebounding. Traditional rebound stats just tell you how many rebounds a player grabs per game, but doesn't reflect the pace of their offense (more shots = more opportunities for rebounds), or FG% (lower % equals more missed shots and more rebound opportunities). So something like Rebounding % tells you the % of rebounds a player gets while he's on the floor.

Advanced stats are useful when traditional stats don't tell the whole story.

And again, no one is saying you have to subscribe to EVERY SINGLE advanced metric out there... but there are some basic ones that make a lot more sense than traditional ones.

And JRS, because what one person's eye test tells them might not be the same as what yours tells you. You might see a player and say "He's a great scorer, he shoots it well and can hit from anywhere on the floor" because you saw him one game hit a variety of jumpers or score from the post. When in reality, that's not really how he plays. That on average, he might be a worse shooter than you think or see. That he really isn't that efficient from a certain spot on the floor despite what your eyes tell you.

In simplest terms, because the eye test is subjective. I'm not going to swear up and down that "numbers never lie" and can't be misleading or misconstrued, because they can be... but what's the harm in having the data and numbers to backup what your eyes tell you? If everyone is so great at judging and evaluating, then the numbers should back it up, right?

You're the best.

 

[jpzx]

Eloquently put, Big J.

 

[johnnyredstorm]

When your eyes lie it's because of a bias, not enough film on the matter, or the player is a **** that doesn't care about reaching his potential. It's good to have a balanced approach in analysis, but man, I really don't care about analytics. If you watch the game long enough, and study it enough, you see what needs to be seen.

 

[a-friend]

Kobe's quote on FirstTake is as real as it gets..if you don't respect him, it's because if his off the court court case and his ego. Dude keeps it real though.

"Listen: business is business. I think people get that confused very easily in understanding that players should take substantially leas than their market value in order to win championships."

 

[a-friend]

And every time I get three pages of analytic talk I get an education.

4 hours later I've forgotten what it is.

4 days later it comes up again I have three new pages to remind me again what it is.

Good things the guys who understand it don't mind letting you know how versed they are in it by posting on and on about it.

 

[mgrand15]

The Exum comments in here remind me a lot of the MCW comments last year around this time.

Let things play out. Preseason games aren't exactly the proper examples to pull out the "I don't get the hype" comments.

Yeah. Exum came out of HS where he played against weak competition. People really expected him to light up FIBA against grown men? Or light up the preseason? He's showing flashes and that's all the Jazz expected at this point.

 

[lawdog1]

Yeah. Exum came out of HS where he played against weak competition. People really expected him to light up FIBA against grown men? Or light up the preseason? He's showing flashes and that's all the Jazz expected at this point.

Well said. And "flashes" in the NBA are pretty damned good when you're talking about a 19 year old kid.

 

[wavycrocket]

Bill Simmons has been low key hating in Exum for a while now lol. Every time he gets a chance...he goes in.

With that being said...I'm not too high on him. But he seems like a nice prospect, good kid with a solid foundation. I can see why he's highly thought of.

But in that draft thread people were acting like he was Kobe/Penny and ready to play now lol

 

[lawdog1]

I don't follow him that closely, but based on some stuff I remember reading in here, doesn't Simmons have a pretty questionable track record as a talent evaluator? I seem to recall him being really high on people that didn't pan out.

 

[clyde the glide]

because the eye test is subjective to whoever's eyes we're using.
because if you know where they are most efficient, you know where to not let them get the ball defensively? if X player is horrible taking a dribble to the left then shooting, but spectacular with a dribble to the right then shooting, which way are you going to force him?

or when someone says X is a better shooter than Y, because X has a higher FG% than Y, but doesn't tell you that X takes shots within 10 feet and Y takes shots between 16-25 feet. standard FG% doesn't differentiate.

you can find out a players habits, strengths/weaknesses just by watching them.  all the numbers just unnecessarily overcomplicates thing.

 

[trueprada]

 

[ny mavurs]

But in that draft thread people were acting like he was Kobe/Penny and ready to play now lol

Can't believe people on here were saying that

From what I've seen Exum has a great burst of speed and can improve fast in other areas of his game.

I think he'll log in serious minutes in a team's rotation for a long time