good stuff. great player, ironically a great advanced stat player, incredibly insightful views on the game. occasionally he is wrong.
it's quite likely barkley hasn't really taken any time or made any effort to understand what he's criticizing-- a critique i can make to many posters. i can imagine someone during that conference raising that as a possibility: "chuck have you ever taken the time to learn about analytics?" i know i would. he'd probably insult/joke it away but ideally he would actually become intrigued by the material, although there is no obligation to do so. he does just fine without analytics.
one thing jumped out was his inability to make the connection between having great advanced stats and making others better. namely when coaches make their players better it means making them more efficient and better at maintaining offensive cohesion for the team. so in spite of the fact that both jordan and bryant had very high usage rates, they still found ways to keep their teammates involved, as represented by their assist rates (not individual assists but assists generated while they were on the floor). so even i was surprised to see that a ballhog and chucker like bryant actually had pretty good sharing habits, which is counterintuitive.
the triangle made those bulls teams more efficient if only because the system is meant to curtail chucking by creating more opportunities to share the ball. the big three on miami were all concerned with becoming more efficient, and san antonio is the epitome of efficiency.
As much as i dislike Barkley for a variety of reasons he does tend to be brutally honest which i like more than others who dont speak their mind. I agree he does dislike the Knicks BUT he has actually made fair points about us the past 10 ears even though he goes too far with the hate
Barkley is the last person I'd go to for a rundown on analytics in sports
It's ironic because many people at the time thought Morey badly overpaid Harden.
Morey shouldn't let himself get dragged into this kind of argument though where Barkley gets a platform on national TV and Morey just gets a one sentence tweet.
as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
StarksEwing1 wrote:As much as i dislike Barkley for a variety of reasons he does tend to be brutally honest which i like more than others who dont speak their mind. I agree he does dislike the Knicks BUT he has actually made fair points about us the past 10 ears even though he goes too far with the hate
I think the franchise would be in a far better condition had the organization listened to Barkleys and Reggie Millers of the world
Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Look at their situation, though. They were set up to be built for a decade around Yao Ming and Tracey McGrady and then both went down with injuries.
The Rockets are just one team with one approach to analytics, though. There are only two teams in the league (both at the bottom) without analytics experts now. It's hard to gain much of an advantage through the analytics right now because almost all the teams are using them.
SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Would you describe acquiring James Harden as only a marginal improvement? I think I still have the thread on his signing bookmarked on my home computer. Almost everyone here thought it was overpaying for a limited player.
Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Would you describe acquiring James Harden as only a marginal improvement? I think I still have the thread on his signing bookmarked on my home computer. Almost everyone here thought it was overpaying for a limited player.
Morey overpays for all of his players..How did Lin and Asik work out?
holfresh wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Would you describe acquiring James Harden as only a marginal improvement? I think I still have the thread on his signing bookmarked on my home computer. Almost everyone here thought it was overpaying for a limited player.
Morey overpays for all of his players..How did Lin and Asik work out?
*all*? It's hard to take that seriously.
I don't know how a .700 team with the 13th highest payroll qualifies as overpaying. Dolan paid more for this sub .200 team.
He's just one GM using analytics though. There are a couple others using them more effectively and with better luck too. The Magic and Hornets are the only ones still stuck in the basketball stone age.
Bonn1997 wrote:holfresh wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Would you describe acquiring James Harden as only a marginal improvement? I think I still have the thread on his signing bookmarked on my home computer. Almost everyone here thought it was overpaying for a limited player.
Morey overpays for all of his players..How did Lin and Asik work out?
*all*? It's hard to take that seriously.
I don't know how a .700 team with the 13th highest payroll qualifies as overpaying. Dolan paid more for this sub .200 team.
He's just one GM using analytics though. There are a couple others using them more effectively and with better luck too. The Magic and Hornets are the only ones still stuck in the basketball stone age.
Morey is the only GM in this league that authored contracts paying 4 players this year at least 14.6 mil per..
holfresh wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:holfresh wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Would you describe acquiring James Harden as only a marginal improvement? I think I still have the thread on his signing bookmarked on my home computer. Almost everyone here thought it was overpaying for a limited player.
Morey overpays for all of his players..How did Lin and Asik work out?
*all*? It's hard to take that seriously.
I don't know how a .700 team with the 13th highest payroll qualifies as overpaying. Dolan paid more for this sub .200 team.
He's just one GM using analytics though. There are a couple others using them more effectively and with better luck too. The Magic and Hornets are the only ones still stuck in the basketball stone age.
Morey is the only GM in this league that authored contracts paying 4 players this year at least 14.6 mil per..
and if he was in the Hornets-Magic stone age, he'd be making better decisions? Do you have a point that actually relates to the subject of this thread?
bully comments by a jock.
he's the star sport player on campus making fun of the non athlete.
good job chuck...but hey, you ain't no role model.
Morey's plan the past two offseason have been: Sign Josh Smith to a near max deal (Detroit saved him), signed Melo! Sign Chris Bosh! Sign any big FA! He's the patron saint of analytics, but even he knows analytics can only get you so far.
My main problem with them (actually I have a few), is:
a) they are self perpetuating: Player A is a great player because of his analytics stats, and the proof is their analytic stats.
b) the advocates make out they are scientists and that their opinion based on them is more scientific. In reality they are just as biased as anyone else- they pick and choose the stats that suit their argument and ignore context. I like arguing with people and hearing their opinions, but it annoys me when they pretend they are being objective.
c) there is no such thing as an objectively good player- it all depends on what you value, it's all subjective. Do you like flashy play, streaky play? Toughness? Defense? Volume shooting, efficient shooting? rebounding? Intangibles? Clutch players? Analytics people try to dictate what players we need to like, when really it's all personal preference. You like efficiency, great, personally I like a bit of grit and an edge to my players. Both are perfectly valid.
smackeddog wrote:Morey's plan the past two offseason have been: Sign Josh Smith to a near max deal (Detroit saved him), signed Melo! Sign Chris Bosh! Sign any big FA! He's the patron saint of analytics, but even he knows analytics can only get you so far.My main problem with them (actually I have a few), is:
a) they are self perpetuating: Player A is a great player because of his analytics stats, and the proof is their analytic stats.
b) the advocates make out they are scientists and that their opinion based on them is more scientific. In reality they are just as biased as anyone else- they pick and choose the stats that suit their argument and ignore context. I like arguing with people and hearing their opinions, but it annoys me when they pretend they are being objective.
c) there is no such thing as an objectively good player- it all depends on what you value, it's all subjective. Do you like flashy play, streaky play? Toughness? Defense? Volume shooting, efficient shooting? rebounding? Intangibles? Clutch players? Analytics people try to dictate what players we need to like, when really it's all personal preference. You like efficiency, great, personally I like a bit of grit and an edge to my players. Both are perfectly valid.
Morey is just one guy. The "proof" would be if it helps teams win. I'll go out on a limb here and say that in our life-times I doubt there will ever be another championship team without an analytics department.
Unless you're arguing that teams should go back to the non-analytics stone age, I doubt you're making a point anyone here would disagree with.
smackeddog wrote:Morey's plan the past two offseason have been: Sign Josh Smith to a near max deal (Detroit saved him), signed Melo! Sign Chris Bosh! Sign any big FA! He's the patron saint of analytics, but even he knows analytics can only get you so far.My main problem with them (actually I have a few), is:
a) they are self perpetuating: Player A is a great player because of his analytics stats, and the proof is their analytic stats.
b) the advocates make out they are scientists and that their opinion based on them is more scientific. In reality they are just as biased as anyone else- they pick and choose the stats that suit their argument and ignore context. I like arguing with people and hearing their opinions, but it annoys me when they pretend they are being objective.
c) there is no such thing as an objectively good player- it all depends on what you value, it's all subjective. Do you like flashy play, streaky play? Toughness? Defense? Volume shooting, efficient shooting? rebounding? Intangibles? Clutch players? Analytics people try to dictate what players we need to like, when really it's all personal preference. You like efficiency, great, personally I like a bit of grit and an edge to my players. Both are perfectly valid.
(a) is not a self-perpetuating or circular statement. all statistics do is illuminate what we see. now, if you don't have the ability to see, then maybe you use stats as a crutch. but for those who do see, analytics help confirm what we intuit to be the case. you're statement would have validity if it were true that players are being evaluated sight-unseen. this is patently false.
(b) not so much scientists but mathematicians. i agree that you can "pick and choose" stats, but the deeper question is how valid the stats are in the first place. i have a personal bias against those stats that try to cram too many variables into their formulae. PER is one that comes to mind, which is why i don't rely on it to confirm what i intuit to be the case. science has one thing always going for it: it gathers empirical evidence, concocts a theory, tests the theory, and if the theory passes the test, the theory turns into a valid "law." good scientists are always willing to abandon a theory when disproved. neil degrasse tyson stressed that very process in the reboot of "cosmos" last year.
(c) winning is objective. everything is dictated by that, unless you are james dolan. he doesn't care about winning otherwise we would not have been the laughingstock of the nba for 15 years.
Bonn1997 wrote:smackeddog wrote:Morey's plan the past two offseason have been: Sign Josh Smith to a near max deal (Detroit saved him), signed Melo! Sign Chris Bosh! Sign any big FA! He's the patron saint of analytics, but even he knows analytics can only get you so far.My main problem with them (actually I have a few), is:
a) they are self perpetuating: Player A is a great player because of his analytics stats, and the proof is their analytic stats.
b) the advocates make out they are scientists and that their opinion based on them is more scientific. In reality they are just as biased as anyone else- they pick and choose the stats that suit their argument and ignore context. I like arguing with people and hearing their opinions, but it annoys me when they pretend they are being objective.
c) there is no such thing as an objectively good player- it all depends on what you value, it's all subjective. Do you like flashy play, streaky play? Toughness? Defense? Volume shooting, efficient shooting? rebounding? Intangibles? Clutch players? Analytics people try to dictate what players we need to like, when really it's all personal preference. You like efficiency, great, personally I like a bit of grit and an edge to my players. Both are perfectly valid.
Morey is just one guy. The "proof" would be if it helps teams win. I'll go out on a limb here and say that in our life-times I doubt there will ever be another championship team without an analytics department.
Unless you're arguing that teams should go back to the non-analytics stone age, I doubt you're making a point anyone here would disagree with.
I'm not Pol Pot!
And I do listen to what some analytics are saying- they soured me on guys like Evan Turner, Reggie Jackson, Rondo, Lance etc.
Bonn1997 wrote:holfresh wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:holfresh wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:as someone that has studied advanced statistics -- I could not agree any more. I think you can improve teams with advanced analytics. I think building one based off an equation is DUMB. Definitely agree that analytics is a way for smart guys to get in the game. Or so other people think their opinion is more important... "give me a break." indeed
No one uses just one equation.
All those teams Barkley mentioned are spending millions on analytics experts though.
again, it is a great way to make marginal improvements to a team. To Barkley's point, the Houston teams built entirely on analytics were completely pedestrian
Would you describe acquiring James Harden as only a marginal improvement? I think I still have the thread on his signing bookmarked on my home computer.
Almost everyone here thought it was overpaying for a limited player.
Morey overpays for all of his players..How did Lin and Asik work out?
*all*? It's hard to take that seriously.
I don't know how a .700 team with the 13th highest payroll qualifies as overpaying. Dolan paid more for this sub .200 team.
He's just one GM using analytics though. There are a couple others using them more effectively and with better luck too. The Magic and Hornets are the only ones still stuck in the basketball stone age.
Morey is the only GM in this league that authored contracts paying 4 players this year at least 14.6 mil per..
and if he was in the Hornets-Magic stone age, he'd be making better decisions? Do you have a point that actually relates to the subject of this thread?
Wasn't you who introduced the topic of Morey overpaying players?
