PDA

View Full Version : What does Advanced Stats tell you?



nickdymez
11-26-2012, 05:47 PM
This forum is really the only place I've seen where advanced stats hold pretty much 85% of the weight when critiquing a player. So I ask, what do you really use them for? To compare players, or to get a better understanding of a players individual game?

nickdymez
11-26-2012, 05:48 PM
lol. I know somone is going to have a field day with the tittle. Oh well...

AddiX
11-26-2012, 05:52 PM
In psd it tells you what you want them to tell you.

It's only a matter of time before minny fans flood this thread showing us why advanced stats prove love is better than all time greats.

There's a place for them, but thru are incredibly overrated on psd, this isn't baseball.

Chronz
11-26-2012, 05:53 PM
They tell me facts. You should learn how to use them, that way you dont have to bug me so often.

And how many boards do you visit because PSD is actually one of the places where less statistical analysis gos on IMO. I will admit alot of people misuse them tho.

nickdymez
11-26-2012, 05:56 PM
They tell me facts. You should learn how to use them, that way you dont have to bug me so often.

And how many boards do you visit because PSD is actually one of the places where less statistical analysis gos on IMO. I will admit alot of people misuse them tho.

I dont talk to you about **** really. I dont know where your going with this comment.

JasonJohnHorn
11-26-2012, 05:56 PM
I dunno... I know advance stats say Rodman was the best rebounder ever, but I also know that Wilt averaged 25 rebounds a game and Rodman never did that... lol. But Rodman played less minutes and also played when there were generally fewer possessions in a game, especially for hte defensive minded teams he played for like the Bulls and the Pistons.

They help a little, but need to be taken in context obviously. I'm not an advance stat expert so... I'm not really married to them.

jmoney85
11-26-2012, 06:03 PM
I was once an advanced stats hater but I came around.

SteveNash
11-26-2012, 06:05 PM
Advanced stats tell me that advanced stats are highly flawed.

mightybosstone
11-26-2012, 06:07 PM
Advanced stats are a very nice basis to start a discussion about the effectiveness and production of NBA players, but they cannot be the entire argument. For example, David Robinson is second in career WS/48 and fourth in career PER, but I doubt anyone on this forum would put him in their top 10 all-time or say he was a better player than Shaq or Hakeem, both centers from the same era. Why? Because he was never the man on a championship team and he got dominated by Hakeem in the playoffs.

You have to have context for your numbers. Also, suppose you had a player from the 50s who posted great numbers or a player who only plays 15 minutes a game in today's NBA posting great numbers. Are those guys both better than someone like Kobe, who traditionally has not posted phenomenal advanced statistics? Of course not.

And yet any doubter of advanced statistics will sit there and scream until they're horse that advanced statistics are pointless or void of legitimacy. I don't understand why. Someone far smarter than any of us sat down and found a way to combine a player's production into a single number that is easy to reference. Why shouldn't we at least consider that as part of any NBA discussion?

mightybosstone
11-26-2012, 06:07 PM
Advanced stats tell me that advanced stats are highly flawed.

How? I would love to hear someone explain to me how advanced statistics are flawed.

xnick5757
11-26-2012, 06:10 PM
TS% and eFG% when used together tell you how efficient a shooter is

ORB%, DRB%, TRB% tells you what percentage of rebounds a player gets when he is on the floor

USG% tells you what percentage of plays used a specific player when he was on the floor

PER measures offensive production, and is readjusted every year so that the league average is 15


there's nothing really advanced about them, other than the fact they are newer than what are called the "traditional" stats

Chronz
11-26-2012, 06:12 PM
I dont talk to you about **** really. I dont know where your going with this comment.

The thread where the guy admitted he didn't realize that what he was seeing wasn't reality. I used stats to inform him of the facts and that his eyes were lying to him. You showed up to deny the validity of my claim. After that post a few other posters chimed in to correct you. You never responded.

Its happened like that a few other times, I guess you dont bug me but you definitely show up, add your little anti-stat post (regardless of the context of its use) and then leave.


At the least can you stop saying I have a crew?

nickdymez
11-26-2012, 06:15 PM
Advanced stats are a very nice basis to start a discussion about the effectiveness and production of NBA players, but they cannot be the entire argument. For example, David Robinson is second in career WS/48 and fourth in career PER, but I doubt anyone on this forum would put him in their top 10 all-time or say he was a better player than Shaq or Hakeem, both centers from the same era. Why? Because he was never the man on a championship team and he got dominated by Hakeem in the playoffs.

You have to have context for your numbers. Also, suppose you had a player from the 50s who posted great numbers or a player who only plays 15 minutes a game in today's NBA posting great numbers. Are those guys both better than someone like Kobe, who traditionally has not posted phenomenal advanced statistics? Of course not.

And yet any doubter of advanced statistics will sit there and scream until they're horse that advanced statistics are pointless or void of legitimacy. I don't understand why. Someone far smarter than any of us sat down and found a way to combine a player's production into a single number that is easy to reference. Why shouldn't we at least consider that as part of any NBA discussion?

Good post. As for the last paragraph. Just because someone is far smarter than us, doesn't mean you have to agree with a formula they create. I understand them for the most part, but i just think they are better served in baseball..

Chronz
11-26-2012, 06:16 PM
How? I would love to hear someone explain to me how advanced statistics are flawed.

Because all stats are inherently flawed. What people need to understand is that APBR Metrics were created for a reason, the purpose was to improve our limited statistics. They have achieved that in spades, so if your the type who doesn't use stats, so be it but the people who defend the use of antiquated metrics (like Dymez) but oppose the use of superior metrics are the guys who need to jump on the trolly.

Either use stats or dont use stats, but if your going to use them, the least you could do is catchup on the stats the league your watching emphasizes in its business.

nickdymez
11-26-2012, 06:17 PM
The thread where the guy admitted he didn't realize that what he was seeing wasn't reality. I used stats to inform him of the facts and that his eyes were lying to him. You showed up to deny the validity of my claim. After that post a few other posters chimed in to correct you. You never responded.

Its happened like that a few other times, I guess you dont bug me but you definitely show up, add your little anti-stat post (regardless of the context of its use) and then leave.


At the least can you stop saying I have a crew?

lol, my bad man, internet profiling at its finest on my part.

Quinnsanity
11-26-2012, 06:22 PM
Here's my take:

Baseball: nearly everything. It's an almost entirely individual sport, so advanced stats can tell you pretty much everything you need to know about a player other than their effect on the locker room.

Basketball: can tell you how a player performs in any individual aspect of the game, but can't measure what you really mean to the team because basketball is such a team-reliant sports.

Football: Individual advanced stats mean nearly nothing, team advanced stats are useful.

rickshaw
11-26-2012, 06:22 PM
They tell you who is actually doing something better, not who "looks" like they are doing something better. They help with comparing different eras.

I'll put it this way. I know plenty of people who went from "just watching the games and knowing" and looking at traditional stats (PPG, RPG APG mainly), and now use advanced stats to help form their opinions. I've never seen someone who has an understanding of advanced stats decide that just watching the games and looking at traditional stats is a better way to do it. Though most people on PSD have an opinion formed and only use the stats that agree with their opinion most of the time.

bagwell368
11-26-2012, 06:26 PM
One big thing that more folks could agree with then some other topics here is this:

I'm an East Coast guy. Not including playoffs I might watch a lower tier West Coast team 3-4 times a year.

If I want to figure out what a guy is about that I don't see much, than advanced stats tell me qualitatively and quantitatively much more then "standard stats" - perhaps 4x more.

On example familiar to me is Rondo. He plays far better on national TV than local TV, if you only see him nationally then you'd be one of the people convinced he's a top 5 PG. If you look at his games (> 80%) like I do you know that he has NEVER cracked the top 4 PG's in any full season he has played - despite the fanciful utterances of his fans in and out of Boston (he was #4 about 4 years ago). His MVP votes the past two years represent mad cow disease on behalf of the voters, not any fact.

Chronz
11-26-2012, 06:27 PM
I just think they are better served in baseball..

There isnt a single person on the planet who would claim otherwise, never has been, never will be.

Chronz
11-26-2012, 06:30 PM
Here's my take:

Baseball: nearly everything. It's an almost entirely individual sport, so advanced stats can tell you pretty much everything you need to know about a player other than their effect on the locker room.

Basketball: can tell you how a player performs in any individual aspect of the game, but can't measure what you really mean to the team because basketball is such a team-reliant sports.

Football: Individual advanced stats mean nearly nothing, team advanced stats are useful.

Its part of the reason why I love basketball. It makes for so much more interesting analysis, not as easy as MLB, not as many variables as the NFL.

elledaddy
11-26-2012, 06:35 PM
Jack Taylor outscored the entire other team 138 - 104. I bet his advanced stats proves he wasnt efficient though. I bet Melo could do the same thing but his win shares prolly would not be that good and he'd get trashed on here. :rolleyes:

mightybosstone
11-26-2012, 06:43 PM
Because all stats are inherently flawed. What people need to understand is that APBR Metrics were created for a reason, the purpose was to improve our limited statistics. They have achieved that in spades, so if your the type who doesn't use stats, so be it but the people who defend the use of antiquated metrics (like Dymez) but oppose the use of superior metrics are the guys who need to jump on the trolly.

Either use stats or dont use stats, but if your going to use them, the least you could do is catchup on the stats the league your watching emphasizes in its business.

Well, that was sort of my point. No statistic is perfect, which means advanced stats like WS and PER are just as valid as the antiquated per game numbers. Anyone who points out a flaw in an advanced stat could just easily point out even more flaws in points or rebounds per game.

Money_23
11-26-2012, 06:51 PM
advanced stats can only take you so far. They can't tell you the context, which is a huge part of ..... everything.

JasonJohnHorn
11-26-2012, 06:55 PM
Advanced stats are a very nice basis to start a discussion about the effectiveness and production of NBA players, but they cannot be the entire argument. For example, David Robinson is second in career WS/48 and fourth in career PER, but I doubt anyone on this forum would put him in their top 10 all-time


David Robinson is in my top ten. Hakeem is ahead of him, but I have Robinson ahead of Shaq. Shaq was more dominant, but Robison was the more skilled player, and I believe a much better defender than Shaq. Shaq was great at man-to-man defence, because he had the body to keep the opposing post player from backing in with their back to the basket, and Shaq was bad at picking up guys flying to the basket from the wing, but Robinson certainly was very good at that. I heard Rodman attack Rodinson for his defence and claim that Robinson was overrated defensively. I wouldn't agree with Rodman based on what I have seen of David Robinson, but I do respect Rodman's opinion a lot.

Robinson was an amazing shot blocker, Shaq wasn't, Robinson was a great all-around scorer, Shaq didn't have Robinson's range. Robinson also got a lot of steals and was a really good passing center (though Shaq got better at passing once he got to LAL).

I watched both guys play in their prime, and like I said, Shaq was more dominant, but I think Shaq would concede that Robinson was the more talented player of the two.


But yeah...advance stats can be misleading.

BULLSFAN0810
11-26-2012, 06:59 PM
Advanced stats do nothing if you really watch ball and comprehend it. You can look at advanced stats as a tool that tells you effectiveness in certain areas, any use to determine who is actually the better player is foolish, because the status leaves out mental capacity and all its intangibles... And any real hooper and basketball head knows basketball is mostly mental.

BULLSFAN0810
11-26-2012, 07:02 PM
David Robinson is in my top ten. Hakeem is ahead of him, but I have Robinson ahead of Shaq. Shaq was more dominant, but Robison was the more skilled player, and I believe a much better defender than Shaq. Shaq was great at man-to-man defence, because he had the body to keep the opposing post player from backing in with their back to the basket, and Shaq was bad at picking up guys flying to the basket from the wing, but Robinson certainly was very good at that. I heard Rodman attack Rodinson for his defence and claim that Robinson was overrated defensively. I wouldn't agree with Rodman based on what I have seen of David Robinson, but I do respect Rodman's opinion a lot.

Robinson was an amazing shot blocker, Shaq wasn't, Robinson was a great all-around scorer, Shaq didn't have Robinson's range. Robinson also got a lot of steals and was a really good passing center (though Shaq got better at passing once he got to LAL).

I watched both guys play in their prime, and like I said, Shaq was more dominant, but I think Shaq would concede that Robinson was the more talented player of the two.


But yeah...advance stats can be misleading.
:clap:

BULLSFAN0810
11-26-2012, 07:15 PM
One big thing that more folks could agree with then some other topics here is this:

I'm an East Coast guy. Not including playoffs I might watch a lower tier West Coast team 3-4 times a year.

If I want to figure out what a guy is about that I don't see much, than advanced stats tell me qualitatively and quantitatively much more then "standard stats" - perhaps 4x more.

On example familiar to me is Rondo. He plays far better on national TV than local TV, if you only see him nationally then you'd be one of the people convinced he's a top 5 PG. If you look at his games (> 80%) like I do you know that he has NEVER cracked the top 4 PG's in any full season he has played - despite the fanciful utterances of his fans in and out of Boston (he was #4 about 4 years ago). His MVP votes the past two years represent mad cow disease on behalf of the voters, not any fact.



True:clap:

mamba24
11-26-2012, 07:28 PM
advanced stats tell me nash is statistically speaking the best defensive pt guard the lakers have haha... Also that luke walton should be an all star lol...

Chill_Will_24
11-26-2012, 07:29 PM
What is the best site to utilize?

Hawkeye15
11-26-2012, 07:32 PM
Jack Taylor outscored the entire other team 138 - 104. I bet his advanced stats proves he wasnt efficient though. I bet Melo could do the same thing but his win shares prolly would not be that good and he'd get trashed on here. :rolleyes:

he didn't cross half court to play defense in the 2nd half. That team is known for having 3 players run the second penetration or a shot goes up, essentially playing with 2 defenders.

Fact is, advanced stats tell us facts regarding a players production. When used by themselves to try and paint a picture, you can trap yourself quickly. But they are very telling, far more so then a box score, or the human eye.

But, again, you need to use them in context. The best combination is that of a person who has played the sport, watched the sport, and studied advanced statistics.

Hawkeye15
11-26-2012, 07:34 PM
Advanced stats do nothing if you really watch ball and comprehend it. You can look at advanced stats as a tool that tells you effectiveness in certain areas, any use to determine who is actually the better player is foolish, because the status leaves out mental capacity and all its intangibles... And any real hooper and basketball head knows basketball is mostly mental.

False. The most brilliant basketball minds have started to incorporate stats in with their opinions. If you don't use them, you are not understanding everything in today's NBA.

IndyRealist
11-26-2012, 07:34 PM
One big thing that more folks could agree with then some other topics here is this:

I'm an East Coast guy. Not including playoffs I might watch a lower tier West Coast team 3-4 times a year.

If I want to figure out what a guy is about that I don't see much, than advanced stats tell me qualitatively and quantitatively much more then "standard stats" - perhaps 4x more.

On example familiar to me is Rondo. He plays far better on national TV than local TV, if you only see him nationally then you'd be one of the people convinced he's a top 5 PG. If you look at his games (> 80%) like I do you know that he has NEVER cracked the top 4 PG's in any full season he has played - despite the fanciful utterances of his fans in and out of Boston (he was #4 about 4 years ago). His MVP votes the past two years represent mad cow disease on behalf of the voters, not any fact.
That's a perfect example of why people use advanced stats. They don't tell you as much context as actually watching the games, but they tell you a heck of a lot more than the traditional boxscore. And as I'm so fond of saying, you didn't watch all the games. It's physically impossible. And even if you did, you can not possibly remember every second of every game.

What you're doing is forming vague impressions as things go by faster than you can process them and then focusing in on events with a high level of excitement (dunks, blocks, buzzer-beaters, etc) to affirm your vague impressions. There are l l independent variables on the court at the same time, 10 players and the ball. You weren't paying attention to all of them, and neither are the players (which is why they always seem to be surprised by backdoor plays). Thing is, if those events don't follow your vague impressions, then you disregard them as an abberation. You've already made up your mind based on your limited ability to perceive what's going on in the game. It's called confirmation bias.

And before you trash everything I wrote and tell me how you noticed everything that happens in a game, did you notice that the 1's in the paragraph above aren't 1's, they're L's?

Zefflin
11-26-2012, 07:35 PM
Here's my take:

Baseball: nearly everything. It's an almost entirely individual sport, so advanced stats can tell you pretty much everything you need to know about a player other than their effect on the locker room.

Basketball: can tell you how a player performs in any individual aspect of the game, but can't measure what you really mean to the team because basketball is such a team-reliant sports.

Football: Individual advanced stats mean nearly nothing, team advanced stats are useful.

:clap:

asandhu23
11-26-2012, 07:36 PM
In psd it tells you what you want them to tell you.

It's only a matter of time before minny fans flood this thread showing us why advanced stats prove love is better than all time greats.

There's a place for them, but thru are incredibly overrated on psd, this isn't baseball.

Pretty much Hawkeye15.

Hawkeye15
11-26-2012, 07:36 PM
I will say, among certain players fans, those players either produce stat lovers, or stat haters. For instance, LeBron fans love advanced stats. Kobe fans do not. Love fans love advanced stats, Melo fans do not. And so on...

Hawkeye15
11-26-2012, 07:37 PM
Pretty much Hawkeye15.

when have I ever made that claim?

Addix.......cmon now.

AddiX
11-26-2012, 07:39 PM
Nah hawk eye has pretty much converted all minny fans to eff and advanced stats lovers.

Don't take it personal hawkeye, but it's true.

asandhu23
11-26-2012, 07:40 PM
when have I ever made that claim?

Addix.......cmon now.

Too bad PSD is only limited to past 500 posts. If i had access to whole of PSD database, i would find where exactly you say that.

It was in the days Love was rebounding like a maniac after the 30-30 game

IndyRealist
11-26-2012, 07:47 PM
Well, that was sort of my point. No statistic is perfect, which means advanced stats like WS and PER are just as valid as the antiquated per game numbers. Anyone who points out a flaw in an advanced stat could just easily point out even more flaws in points or rebounds per game.

That's not really true. Stats tell you exactly what they're MEANT to tell you. It's our imperfect understanding of those stats that lead to flaws. PPG tells you how many points someone averaged each game. It does not tell you if that person is a good scorer, which is what people interpet it to mean. +/- tells you how well a team did when a certain player was on the floor. What it does NOT tell you is how much impact that one player had, but that's how people interpet +/-. If someone misinterprets a stat, then that doesn't mean the stat is flawed, it means the person needs a better understanding of what the stat actually says.

JLynn943
11-26-2012, 07:56 PM
Advanced stats are interesting and can be useful, but context is essential for using and interpreting them and evaluating a player. I doubt basketball will ever get to the point that baseball is at, but that happens when one is such an individual-oriented sport. Far too often people will only take one side of the spectrum on advanced stats when it comes to basketball though and ignore the other part.

Chronz
11-26-2012, 08:00 PM
What is the best site to utilize?

Mine

Hawkeye15
11-26-2012, 08:01 PM
Nah hawk eye has pretty much converted all minny fans to eff and advanced stats lovers.

Don't take it personal hawkeye, but it's true.

converted? No. Not even close. Get used to is. Casual fans have started embracing them at a higher and higher rate by the year, same as analysts, media, and coaching staffs.

Hawkeye15
11-26-2012, 08:02 PM
Too bad PSD is only limited to past 500 posts. If i had access to whole of PSD database, i would find where exactly you say that.

It was in the days Love was rebounding like a maniac after the 30-30 game

I have made the claim he will go down as one of the greatest rebounders in history, for sure. I also think he will go down as an all time great player. Where in the order, I have no idea. Top 50 maybe? 70? 20?

Up to him, I just see the player, and the numbers.

TopsyTurvy
11-26-2012, 08:07 PM
My point of contention is the definition of "advanced stats," as commonly taken - PER, TS%, etc. which are nothing more than basic metrics painting an individualized picture (not very relevant in a team game).

When I hear advanced stats, I think social network analysis describing behavior on a floor (including passing nodes, shooting, and defensive weaknesses), shooting 'spray' charts (they exist and tell you much more than a simple shooting %), and advanced rebounding analytics.

These examples quantify "basketball IQ," yet give you much more predictive power than other metrics.

Robbw241
11-26-2012, 08:09 PM
It takes out the bias.

da ThRONe
11-26-2012, 08:22 PM
It great for prospective, but lousy for context.

Which gives it some use, but shouldn't be the end all be all.

PurpleJesus
11-26-2012, 08:26 PM
They can tell you a lot about a players value, and how he would play on another team, but as other people said, they dont tell you everything. Advanced stats made OKC trade for Kenrick Perkins, and give him a fat contract.

bucketss
11-26-2012, 08:37 PM
it tells you what bias blind homers don't want to hear.

dee279
11-26-2012, 08:42 PM
It tells me a whole lot of advanced stuff that not advanced stats doesnt tell me.

Sactown
11-26-2012, 09:10 PM
Assists you in finding someones production given their specific role. They can tell you how someone rebounds when they're on the court, or what percent of plays he turns over the ball, or tells you how effective he shoots from different areas. There are flaws in all statistics and it is wise to use more than just one statistic to back an argument, but there has to be more substance as well.

PLAYERS FAN
11-26-2012, 09:33 PM
Is not Dirk consider better than Bird, because of advance stats? If it doesn't factor in hockey assists, is it really advance?

bucketss
11-26-2012, 10:45 PM
Is not Dirk consider better than Bird, because of advance stats? If it doesn't factor in hockey assists, is it really advance?

ugh no.