PDA

View Full Version : When judging players by box score/stats



jerellh528
08-23-2013, 11:40 PM
Is it more accurate to use stats to judge the effectiveness/greatness of NBA, NFL, or MLB players?

jerellh528
08-23-2013, 11:41 PM
I think i've noticed nba people are intrigued by stats the most

MTar786
08-24-2013, 12:08 AM
yeah they are. which leads them to not appreciate seeing what the players can do. its funny because in the nba its like this

player a is known as a better shooter than everyone on the court
player b has a better shooting percentage year (which can be based on lots of things. like obviously player a would be more heavily guarded) (but that wont show up on the stat sheet)

in all the fans eyes player b will now somehow be known to them as a better shooter.

its actually sad how sheepish basketball fans are

Hawkeye15
08-24-2013, 01:40 AM
I would never judge an NBA player by boxscore stats.

jerellh528
08-24-2013, 01:49 AM
I would never judge an NBA player by boxscore stats.

Not sayin just box score stats, any kind of stat. Im just wondering why nba is so much more enamored with them? are stats more telling in the nba than the other major sports?
It's kinda like if your team acquires a player nobody really heard of or hears about, more nba fans I know google his stats and say something like "he shot 39% from 3 last year, he should be able to space the floor." Most nfl fans in the same situation google footage of him and are like "shows good burst and vision through the first level of defense, should help us out on the goal line."

abe_froman
08-24-2013, 02:48 AM
I think i've noticed nba people are intrigued by stats the most

you've never had any interest in baseball have you? never heard anyone talk about it,visited mlb forums?

jerellh528
08-24-2013, 03:06 AM
you've never had any interest in baseball have you? never heard anyone talk about it,visited mlb forums?

Not really, that's the point of this thread. To discuss the impact of stats amongst the major sports. Do they put more stock into stats? If so, why do you think so and is it warranted?

Hellcrooner
08-24-2013, 04:19 AM
Neither.
But people do.
I guess thats why soccer never becomes too big in Usa, cause there are barely stats and they wouldnt really be any easy or effective to apply, bad luck, you have to watch the game to ses if a soccer player is good.

Well, that applies for any sport, but there are those who beleie Basket can be explained in a Sheet of **** PAPER.

Shlumpledink
08-24-2013, 04:48 AM
I don't think many nba people really follow stats, it is more of an internet thing, or maybe a couple talking heads focus on it. I think basketball has far too many variables in it to adequately be expressed through statistics, especially the ones in a box score.

MLB is the stats sport. It is ridiculous how specific stats are getting, and how accurate they can be.

Goose17
08-24-2013, 10:19 AM
Who the hell judges a player by the box score?

Heatcheck
08-24-2013, 10:54 AM
they are a tool for analyzing a player. cant be overlooked, cant live and die by them either.

IndyRealist
08-24-2013, 10:54 AM
I think i've noticed nba people are intrigued by stats the most

Intrigued? Yes. Because basketball is the new frontier of sports economics.

Baseball's been quantified for years and at this point everyone accepts that it is measurable. This is, in fact, the EXACT same fight baseball had during the Moneyball movement. People who didn't understand the math would go on about how "my eyes are better than any stats" and "it's a team sport, you can't factor it down to a single player" and all other sorts of nonsense you're hearing about basketball now. If the stats they use in baseball NOW were just introduced in the last 5 years, you'd still be hearing this noise, even though everyone accepts them as valid. I suspect you STILL hear this kind of talk in sports bars all around the country. "Well I played minor league catcher for years, and I didn't need any stat to tell me....blah blah blah"

But no one accepts that basketball is measurable (in fact, moreso than baseball), because it's NEW. So they trot out their tired, retired baseball rhetoric and simply reword it for basketball. All NBA teams employ a statistics department. Some are more successful at it than others. But the reason it's not common knowledge is because teams are leery of giving up their competitive advantage. In 5 to 10 years, when the current crop of execs and coaches start retiring, you'll start hearing anecdotes about how George Karl HATED the Kawhi Leonard pick, yet the Nuggets knew he was going to be great because of the analysis they did. Or how the resident statistician warned Jordan not to pick Bismack Biyombo but MJ blew him off, saying that Biyombo would be the next Hakeem.

On a tangent, this is really the whole story of the Nuggets post-Melo. Someone, somewhere will write a memoir about how the Nuggets succeeded in spite of George Karl, not because of him. The Nuggets gave Karl exceptional player after exceptional player, and Karl did everything he could to F it up. They had to trade away his favorite players to get him to play the correct lineup. And when they succeeded, Karl got all the credit despite being against it the whole time. Does this not read EXACTLY like the script of Moneyball? Coach of the Year, my arse.

IndyRealist
08-24-2013, 10:58 AM
I don't think many nba people really follow stats, it is more of an internet thing, or maybe a couple talking heads focus on it. I think basketball has far too many variables in it to adequately be expressed through statistics, especially the ones in a box score.

MLB is the stats sport. It is ridiculous how specific stats are getting, and how accurate they can be.

People said the same thing about baseball 10 years ago.

Chronz
08-24-2013, 11:28 AM
I dont understand the question. What is it your asking us because I cant compare to other sports when I dont study them in depth the way I do BBALL.


Neither.
But people do.
I guess thats why soccer never becomes too big in Usa, cause there are barely stats and they wouldnt really be any easy or effective to apply, bad luck, you have to watch the game to ses if a soccer player is good.

Well, that applies for any sport, but there are those who beleie Basket can be explained in a Sheet of **** PAPER.

I think it has more to do with the fact that we like to see some scoring here in murica. And stats in soccer are also improving from what my cousins tell me.

Hellcrooner
08-24-2013, 12:06 PM
I dont understand the question. What is it your asking us because I cant compare to other sports when I dont study them in depth the way I do BBALL.



I think it has more to do with the fact that we like to see some scoring here in murica. And stats in soccer are also improving from what my cousins tell me.

You can take some stats out of it if you want, like Yards run or good passes/failed passes, or assists or goals, or goals conceded, and probably go advanced with goals scored/taken with this or that line up.
But since soccer is more of a TEAM effort than other sports the relevance of indiviudal stats would be debatable.

ztilzer31
08-24-2013, 12:12 PM
I don't think many nba people really follow stats, it is more of an internet thing, or maybe a couple talking heads focus on it. I think basketball has far too many variables in it to adequately be expressed through statistics, especially the ones in a box score.

MLB is the stats sport. It is ridiculous how specific stats are getting, and how accurate they can be.

This. It's getting to the point that stats tell the whole story in baseball. It's not even close. Basketball is in a distant second because half the stats in football are crap. The tackle stat is the biggest joke in sports.

D-Leethal
08-24-2013, 12:22 PM
For individual players its baseball by a landslide. Baseball is a team sport but when you break it down its a series of individual matchups. Basketball is not. Basketball stats will always be sketchy when your judging individuals because so much of an individuals success is determined by the guys he has around him.

JasonJohnHorn
08-24-2013, 12:30 PM
I don't follow other sports much, but I gotta say, it seems like in baseball the stats are the best way to judge players.

In basketball, a player's productions depends on who he plays with, who many minutes he gets, and who his coach is. A guy like Ray Allen, for example, is a top-ten shooting guard in the league, but his averages don't suggest that because he plays behind Dwyane Wade so he doesn't get as many minutes. One could argue that his per36 stats should, but this is not always the case. If you are the best shooting guard in the game, and you also play on a team with the best small forward and a top-ten power forward, then your usage wil go down. You defence will be as good, your percentages may be as good, but you don't get as many shots and you don't handle the ball as much as you would if you were playing with lesser talent. Playing with great players dilutes your stats.

If you are the number one option on a team, say like Kevin Martin was the last few years before going to OKC, defences focus on you, so it is harder to score. His percentages take a big hit, but when he gets to a team where defences have to focus on somebody else, his percentages jump up by a significant rate. He was just as good the other season, but statistically looked less efficient.


In baseball though, things are more consistent (though what pitcher you are playing against can influence your batting average), so it is easier to judge based on stats.

Bowling and golf are perfect for judging on stats (though the wind can impact your game).


Team sports like basketball, hockey and football are jsut too hard to gauge purely by stats because you depend on your teammates.

Chronz
08-24-2013, 12:31 PM
You can take some stats out of it if you want, like Yards run or good passes/failed passes, or assists or goals, or goals conceded, and probably go advanced with goals scored/taken with this or that line up.
But since soccer is more of a TEAM effort than other sports the relevance of indiviudal stats would be debatable.

They wouldn't be useful to fans thats for sure, but I heard they can accurately predict injuries just by looking at how many miles a player typically runs. Or something like that.

ManRam
08-24-2013, 12:51 PM
I think i've noticed nba people are intrigued by stats the most

You've never talked to a baseball fan I'm guessing.

Baseball and stats go together like bacon and eggs.


This thread has a right answer, and that answer is baseball.

Chronz
08-24-2013, 12:56 PM
In basketball, a player's productions depends on who he plays with, who many minutes he gets, and who his coach is. A guy like Ray Allen, for example, is a top-ten shooting guard in the league, but his averages don't suggest that because he plays behind Dwyane Wade so he doesn't get as many minutes. One could argue that his per36 stats should, but this is not always the case. If you are the best shooting guard in the game, and you also play on a team with the best small forward and a top-ten power forward, then your usage wil go down. You defence will be as good, your percentages may be as good, but you don't get as many shots and you don't handle the ball as much as you would if you were playing with lesser talent. Playing with great players dilutes your stats.

If you are the number one option on a team, say like Kevin Martin was the last few years before going to OKC, defences focus on you, so it is harder to score. His percentages take a big hit, but when he gets to a team where defences have to focus on somebody else, his percentages jump up by a significant rate. He was just as good the other season, but statistically looked less efficient.I don't follow other sports much, but I gotta say, it seems like in baseball the stats are the best way to judge players.
You're doing it wrong, you always take usage+efficiency into consideration, you dont just ignore 1 one season and the other for another season. They go hand in hand, its the relationship you want to focus on. There is no exact science to it because players aren't machines and skillsets can interfere but thats what you try to focus on. Its called a players "skill curve". A guy like Pau followed the expected change in that relationship nearly to a Tee when he arrived in LA.

PS. Ray Allen is not the guy you think he is anymore bro



In baseball though, things are more consistent (though what pitcher you are playing against can influence your batting average), so it is easier to judge based on stats.

I would agree that baseball would be the easiest to dissect but what do you mean by things are more consistent? From what I've heard (key word being heard, not assessed) was that baseball players see a greater variance in their production than NBA players. So what do you mean by consistent?



Team sports like basketball, hockey and football are jsut too hard to gauge purely by stats because you depend on your teammates.

I wouldn't lump them altogether. Basketball is clearly easier to assess statistically. Seems that way to me anyways. I would lump Football as the hardest.

b@llhog24
08-25-2013, 07:15 PM
I think i've noticed nba people are intrigued by stats the most

That's because you only frequent the nba forum. Baseball in terms of statistical analysis is where it's at.

bearadonisdna
08-25-2013, 08:12 PM
Stats are simply a way of recording game results. Unless u can or care to watch every game they are probably necessary for evaluation in almost every sport.

IndyRealist
08-26-2013, 03:30 AM
Stats are simply a way of recording game results. Unless u can or care to watch every game they are probably necessary for evaluation in almost every sport.

Even if you could watch all 1230 games in a season, not including the post season, you still wouldn't be able to remember it all with any clarity. And even if you could watch it all, and could remember it all, you would STILL give disproportionate weight to memories with emotional attachments (buzzer beaters, highlight dunks, your favorite player, etc). If you could watch it all, and remember it all, AND properly filter any emotional bias you might have, you'd be a computer.

jerellh528
08-26-2013, 04:22 AM
That's because you only frequent the nba forum. Baseball in terms of statistical analysis is where it's at.

I frequent the nba, nfl, and wrestling forums most. I admit I don't know much at all about baseball, baseball stats or the baseball forum.