PDA

View Full Version : Charles Barkley destroys Rockets GM Morey and analytical nerds.



Longhornfan1234
02-11-2015, 01:58 PM
The Rockets sucked for a long time, so they went out and paid James Harden a lot of money; they got better," Barkley said on the TNT postgame broadcast. "Then they went out and got Dwight Howard; they got better. ...

"The NBA is about talent," Barkley continued. "All these guys who run these organizations who talk about analytics, they have one thing in common -- they're a bunch of guys who have never played the game, and they never got the girls in high school, and they just want to get in the game."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2asGeItzGWM



:clap:

Tony_Starks
02-11-2015, 02:01 PM
I almost fell off the couch watching that! Barkley nailed it, and it was Morey who fired the first shot at Barkley btw....

InRoseWeTrust
02-11-2015, 02:02 PM
^ yeah. Not that I'm taking sides (because I'm not and really don't have a dog in the fight), but Morey definitely fired the first shot here.

cmellofan15
02-11-2015, 02:13 PM
Here's Morey's tweet after chuck said they were one of the worst defenses in the league

"Best part of being at a TNT game live is it is easy to avoid Charles spewing misinformed biased vitriol disguised as entertainment"

not taking sides but it seems like Chuck only proved Morey right here by spewing a bunch of nonsense.

lakerfan85
02-11-2015, 02:15 PM
Analytic guru's coming in 3,2,1..

SlimKid
02-11-2015, 02:18 PM
I've always thought Morey came off as an egotistical d***, but man, that was hard to watch. Chuck is the new Skip Bayless.

Hangin n Wangin
02-11-2015, 02:18 PM
Cool.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 02:19 PM
As closed minded as Barkley sounds, he specifically said defense

Whatever your opinion on offense, whether you think analytics are valuable or fail to account for diminishing returns, it's almost impossible to account for defense.

/harden

Sadds The Gr8
02-11-2015, 02:22 PM
It was both funny and stupid. This analytics vs archaic debate has gotten so dumb at this point. Both sides come across as dickheads and so holier than thou...

Using stats and eye test aren't mutually exclusive people. YOU CAN USE BOTH!!!!!!!!!!!

Htownballa1622
02-11-2015, 02:26 PM
Barkley got butthurt to Daryl saying he spewed nonsense.

Charles said rox and phoenix had the two worst defenses while we really have the number 7 defense.

Btw. Every team uses analytics so he's an idiot to say it doesn't mean anything.

Longhornfan1234
02-11-2015, 02:26 PM
Mightybone is on suicide watch.

Verbal Christ
02-11-2015, 02:27 PM
Pffff hahaha Barkley made himself look like a goddamn fool im LOLing til it hurts. Hes not smart enough to carry an educated argument so he goes to the jocks v nerds card! R U Serious? OMG

So much fail in his tirade. I think Les Alexander should just mail him the check for the 4 or 5 million bucks Barkley thinks he's owed and pay this chump off already.

He used the Spurs as an example as to why analytics dont work? Cringe worthy.

You know what, I think Charles Barkley is actually ...... ThuglifeJ!!! Dun Dun Duuuuunnnnn ... it all makes so much sense now. LOL

Htownballa1622
02-11-2015, 02:31 PM
Mightybone is on suicide watch.

I assure you he's not. What i find funny is which guys in here agree with charles.

Sactown
02-11-2015, 02:34 PM
Just a reminder Charles Barkley is the guy that they had to explain that "their there and they're" Are all different and spelled differently.. He had no clue..

JLynn943
02-11-2015, 02:35 PM
Charles is usually entertaining and occasionally insightful, but usually he's a blowhard who thinks he knows the league better than he does. In reality though, his knowledge outside of big market and successful teams is very limited. He knows the star players that everyone should know, but he's pretty clueless with the rest.

Goose17
02-11-2015, 02:38 PM
I haven't watched this yet (at work) but before this thread falls apart into bickering I'll say this;

Anyone who thinks stats are all there is to this game are just as ignorant as people who think stats have no place in the game.

These advanced stats and analytic in general do have their place in the game and they do hold a lot of value. But you have to remember a lot of these stats are still in their infancy. You can measure how often a guy goes right instead of left but the stat doesn't tell you if the player is being shaded to the right. You can measure by % how well a player shoots but you can't see how many of those shots were on bad or good catches, you can't see how many of those shots were against bigger, faster, smaller, slower defenders etc. You have to apply the information correctly as well.

I appreciate the stats but I don't put as much value into them as some people on here might. I mean people talk about the "Key or 3" theory and dislike the mid range game. This is foolish to me, surely you just try and take the best shot available? The Spurs shot a lot of mid range when winning a chip. Is anyone going to tell Dirk that his mid range game was a negative in 2011? The biggest problem with the "Key and 3" theory assumes that both shots are equally open which isn't the case in real life.

Everything has value you just have to apply it appropriately. And remember that it's still early in the analytic world, there's more to come, the best will rise to the top and the rest (PER etc) will be forgotten about.

Conclusion; Using just analytics and nothing else is using them wrong. Ignoring analytics completely is also wrong. You can't use math and not watch games and you can't watch games and not do the math. An informed decision is one made by someone who looks for ALL the available information before making their conclusion. This isn't an either or. It's not one or the other. Analytics is a tool which can be very useful in the right hands, but it's just one tool, not the entire toolbox.




As for Barkely, dude is a dinosaur stuck in his ways. People are afraid of what they don't understand, simple fact in life. The quote you provided is hilarious, the thought that there are "math geeks" and "sports guys"... someone can't be both? Bosh is both. As are many other players. Hell, I sucked at math at school but I like the stats and appreciate them. I also play the game and have done most of my life. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Why perpetuate these jock/nerd stereotypes? This isn't high school. I won't judge until I've seen the video but based on that quote he just seems ignorant.

TrueFan420
02-11-2015, 02:38 PM
Barkley is a twaat and a fool... he keeps his job by being out-there so to speak.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 02:46 PM
Just a reminder Charles Barkley is the guy that they had to explain that "their there and they're" Are all different and spelled differently.. He had no clue..

The guy said pay attention to talent and leave math out of it

Let's bring English into it :bla:

Sandman
02-11-2015, 02:47 PM
Barkley is a twaat and a fool... he keeps his job by being out-there so to speak.

Pretty sure math & english did not get Barkley either of his last two jobs

Wade n Fade
02-11-2015, 02:48 PM
Charles Barkley doesn't have perspective on how to build a team. Heck, he doesn't offer much analysis either.

Sactown
02-11-2015, 02:49 PM
The guy said pay attention to talent and leave math out of it

Let's bring English into it :bla:

I'm just saying is it a surprise that a man of Charles Barkley's intellect would even begin to understand advanced analytics?

It would be much easier to to reinforce your argument if you even knew the basis of what you're dismissing ...

Sandman
02-11-2015, 02:50 PM
I'm just saying is it a surprise that a man of Charles Barkley's intellect would even begin to understand advanced analytics?

It would be much easier to to reinforce your argument if you even knew the basis of what you're dismissing ...

Am I dismissing analytics or am I dismissing criticism of Charles Barkley?

valade16
02-11-2015, 02:55 PM
Who here thinks Houston's defense is the 7th best in the league?

JLynn943
02-11-2015, 02:58 PM
I haven't watched this yet (at work) but before this thread falls apart into bickering I'll say this;

Anyone who thinks stats are all there is to this game are just as ignorant as people who think stats have no place in the game.

These advanced stats and analytic in general do have their place in the game and they do hold a lot of value. But you have to remember a lot of these stats are still in their infancy. You can measure how often a guy goes right instead of left but the stat doesn't tell you if the player is being shaded to the right. You can measure by % how well a player shoots but you can't see how many of those shots were on bad or good catches, you can't see how many of those shots were against bigger, faster, smaller, slower defenders etc. You have to apply the information correctly as well.

I appreciate the stats but I don't put as much value into them as some people on here might. I mean people talk about the "Key or 3" theory and dislike the mid range game. This is foolish to me, surely you just try and take the best shot available? The Spurs shot a lot of mid range when winning a chip. Is anyone going to tell Dirk that his mid range game was a negative in 2011? The biggest problem with the "Key and 3" theory assumes that both shots are equally open which isn't the case in real life.

Everything has value you just have to apply it appropriately. And remember that it's still early in the analytic world, there's more to come, the best will rise to the top and the rest (PER etc) will be forgotten about.

Conclusion; Using just analytics and nothing else is using them wrong. Ignoring analytics completely is also wrong. You can't use math and not watch games and you can't watch games and not do the math. An informed decision is one made by someone who looks for ALL the available information before making their conclusion. This isn't an either or. It's not one or the other. Analytics is a tool which can be very useful in the right hands, but it's just one tool, not the entire toolbox.




As for Barkely, dude is a dinosaur stuck in his ways. People are afraid of what they don't understand, simple fact in life. The quote you provided is hilarious, the thought that there are "math geeks" and "sports guys"... someone can't be both? Bosh is both. As are many other players. Hell, I sucked at math at school but I like the stats and appreciate them. I also play the game and have done most of my life. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Why perpetuate these jock/nerd stereotypes? This isn't high school. I won't judge until I've seen the video but based on that quote he just seems ignorant.

Great post. Too many people don't understand that there needs to be a balance.


Charles Barkley doesn't have perspective on how to build a team. Heck, he doesn't offer much analysis either.

I hope some team (other than the Kings) gives him the opportunity to be a GM like he supposedly wants. He's going to learn the hard way that it isn't as simple as he thinks it is.

JV35
02-11-2015, 03:02 PM
I wouldn't say he "destroyed" them. He just stated the obvious and said what most people think about "stats nerds".

rhino17
02-11-2015, 03:03 PM
Its pretty clear Barkley doesn't watch basketball anymore, he is completely off base on almost everything nowadays. Shaq contributes more than him at this point

Listening to the 3 idiots discuss "analytics" when clearly none of them even know what it is, was hilarious.

Also, Chuck has had a personal vendetta against the Rockets since he retired, he has ripped on them from day 1 at TNT becuz he thinks Les Alexander owes him millions of dollars

Htownballa1622
02-11-2015, 03:14 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS5b4ZJ_J3o#t=84

LOL.

Charles is losing it before our eyes.

JasonJohnHorn
02-11-2015, 03:28 PM
Charles Barkley, meet the Atlanta Hawks.

Yes... it is about talent... of course, but it is about chemistry, and efficiency and advance stats can give you a great indication.

Iverson was talented. Marbury was talented. Doesn't mean they will win. I've seen any number of guys who have talent that are detriments to their win, or can win, but can't win at a high level. And in most instances, they stats tell you that early in their careers.


Barkley has a point, in regards to talent, but looking at stats and watching what is going on on the floor, are both key elements to evaluating the game.


If you WATCH Allen Iverson, your mind will be blown. The way he handles the ball, breaks down defenders and gets to the hole. WOW!!! It almost makes you forget that he misses as many shots as he does. Sure, he is EXTREMELY talented, and there are so few people who could break down and get around defenders the way he did, so the eye test tells you: THIS GUY IS A PHENOM! His FG%, however, lets you know: THIS GUY NEEDS SOME WORK!!! That's not even an advance stat.

The game is changing. It is different than when Chuck and Kenny were playing. As Kenny notes, he only took 82 3's in his first five years, because at the time 3's weren't a big part of the game (they'd onl been introduced a few seasons before he started).

Now they are a HUGE part of the game. With less possessions, guys who look like weak rebounders at only 8 or 9 boards a game, actually look like better rebounders than guys who got 12 a game 30 years ago. The davance stats show you stuff like that.


It is about a balanced approach to the game. You need to look at both.

dalton749
02-11-2015, 03:31 PM
analytics only tell half the story
demar derozan as an example, advanced stats in almost every category mark him as one of the worst rotational player on the raptors, but there isnt a team in the league that wouldnt get better with him
without him this season the raps looked like a mediocre team, with him theyre a legitimate threat

theres no sure-fire way to account for the presence of a guy just being there, the amount of attention they draw, their ability to impact the game outside of statistics, iq and leadership etc. that make a team function

all of those things come together with the production to form talent, which is why chuck has a point to his nonsense

Sandman
02-11-2015, 03:32 PM
Charles Barkley, meet the Atlanta Hawks.

Yes... it is about talent... of course, but it is about chemistry, and efficiency and advance stats can give you a great indication.

Iverson was talented. Marbury was talented. Doesn't mean they will win.

The Hawks put together their roster entirely based on analytics. They do not have a scouting department, a GM or a coach.

I'm curious why/how this is an indictment of Marbury or Iverson too. Iverson may not have won a title but he won many playoff series.

Marbury never won anything but does this come down to analytics or the fact he was probably never a top 20 player and never played with one?

And while we're at it... Marbury and Iverson have won more playoff series than the Atlanta Hawks. They've never won anything either.

Chuck specifically cited defense & he's right.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 03:33 PM
analytics only tell half the story
demar derozan as an example, advanced stats in almost every category mark him as one of the worst rotational player on the raptors, but there isnt a team in the league that wouldnt get better with him
without him this season the raps looked like a mediocre team, with him theyre a legitimate threat

theres no sure-fire way to account for the presence of a guy just being there, the amount of attention they draw, their ability to impact the game outside of statistics, iq and leadership etc. that make a team function

all of those things come together with the production to form talent, which is why chuck has a point to his nonsense

I think the bottom line is the analytics do not tell you who can play defense or win a 1o1 matchup.

D-Leethal
02-11-2015, 03:39 PM
I prefer to talk hoops, skillsets, systems, and what actually happens on the court but I am not blind to the proper utilization of analytics. To say "advanced stats are useless" is just as bad a guys like IndyRealist who think Mason Plumlee is a better offensive player than Nik Vucevic because advanced stats tell them so.

In short, Chuck is a moron and giving a bad name to skeptics such as myself who are against irresponsible usage of the stats more than the stats themselves.

I still believe there will NEVER be an all-encompassing stat that properly illustrates a players impact on winning basketball games, regardless of whatever math formula you want to suggest does that. But to suggest they have no place in the game is just stupid.

Sactown
02-11-2015, 03:39 PM
I think the bottom line is the analytics do not tell you who can play defense or win a 1o1 matchup.

Yes they can.. analytics can tell you the when players try to score on Roy Hibbert they are far less likely then say Kevin Love, as it will show that their EFG% will plummet.. or that Tyson Chandler isn't a great defender when playing 15 feet or further away from the basket..

They can also tell you how effective a player is on any given spot during any given play or Iso...

They don't tell you everything but they can tell you those...

I would honestly say the thing you can't tell with analytics is fit or change in roll...

Can Kevin love be as efficient as 3rd option compared to a first option.. is someone's defensive rating exaggerated because of the players around him and things of that nature..

Sactown
02-11-2015, 03:40 PM
I prefer to talk hoops, skillsets, systems, and what actually happens on the court but I am not blind to the proper utilization of analytics. To say "advanced stats are useless" is just as bad a guys like IndyRealist who think Mason Plumlee is a better offensive player than Nik Vucevic because advanced stats tell them so.

In short, Chuck is a moron and giving a bad name to skeptics such as myself who are against irresponsible usage of the stats more than the stats themselves.

I still believe there will NEVER be an all-encompassing stat that properly illustrates a players impact on winning basketball games, regardless of whatever math formula you want to suggest does that. But to suggest they have no place in the game is just stupid.

I agree with this. There is no end all be all stat and your eyes can be deceived .. best to use both

cmellofan15
02-11-2015, 03:41 PM
As closed minded as Barkley sounds, he specifically said defense

Whatever your opinion on offense, whether you think analytics are valuable or fail to account for diminishing returns, it's almost impossible to account for defense.

/harden

He specifically said "analytics don't work at all"

Denverbronco007
02-11-2015, 03:42 PM
Barkley has Zero championships. He needs to not talk. Period. Only a fool would say such incredulous things. Shaq can talk whatever cause he has the rings to back it up, he's a winner. Barkleys comments we're harsh considering he never won ****

jerellh528
02-11-2015, 03:46 PM
You can better gauge a player's abilities by scouting their play and never looking at their stats more than you could by just looking at their statistics and never having seen them play, but it takes some of both to make a proper judgement. You can't just look at one or the other and make a sound call. There's a reason why the top collegiate statistical players aren't drafted 1st all the time or even drafted at all.

Goose17
02-11-2015, 03:48 PM
So I watched the video. I disagree with Barkleys opinion on analytics (see my last post).

But what I found interesting was how misinformed he is, he reeled off a bunch of teams who have won chips or are very good and said "they didn't have analytics".

One of those teams was San Antonio, who have employed Gabe Farkas as their Director of Analytics since 2012, he was the assistant to the director for a few years before that. The Spurs have an entire analytic department.

He also mentioned Chicago who do have an analytic department, they call it "The Basketball Operations and Analytic department"

He then mentioned the Miami heat, which is hilarious as they have one of the most well funded Analytic departments in the league (last I heard). Riley is a huge fan of analytics and started his department around 2004. They even have their own personal software writer who is based in L.A and Bob Chaikin was brought in by Spoelstra to lead their analytic department and he's still there to this day. Apparently him and Bosh are/were pretty close.


Great examples Barkley... smh.

Ariza's Better
02-11-2015, 03:57 PM
What I gathered from that video is that according to Barkley, only stupid people play in the NBA thus he is calling himself stupid thus making his opinion irrelevant because he is stupid.

CluTcH_c1tY
02-11-2015, 04:02 PM
As much as hoop fans argue about analytics and it's place in the sport Barkley is just hating on the Rockets once again. This guy finds any little thing to nit pick about Houston. Get over your vendetta and do your job properly for once or have TNT replace him since he doesn't contribute much of any value to their pregame and post games shows.

Greg.
02-11-2015, 04:03 PM
Barkley also made the argument that analytics don't work and uses the example of the Rockets trading for Harden saying they weren't good until they got their "superstar". The analytics were what pointed to Harden being a star, not whatever Barkley uses. Barkley hated the trade for Houston and hated the contract we gave him but now he uses that as an example of analytics not working. Not the first time he's done a complete 360. In about 3 weeks he went from calling Josh Smith the worst player in the NBA and the reason the Rockets would suck to being the Rockets second best player and praising him

Sandman
02-11-2015, 04:11 PM
Yes they can.. analytics can tell you the when players try to score on Roy Hibbert they are far less likely then say Kevin Love, as it will show that their EFG% will plummet.. or that Tyson Chandler isn't a great defender when playing 15 feet or further away from the basket..

They can also tell you how effective a player is on any given spot during any given play or Iso...

They don't tell you everything but they can tell you those...

I would honestly say the thing you can't tell with analytics is fit or change in roll...

Can Kevin love be as efficient as 3rd option compared to a first option.. is someone's defensive rating exaggerated because of the players around him and things of that nature..

This is what I'm getting at, all attempts on Kevin Love are not the same. Is he playing center or PF? If he's playing PF, is he flanked by an equally poor defender at C like Pekovic? Even though it is a 1o1 matchup it is the culmination of everything else going on off-ball.

Tyson Chandler has typically been the anchor of a zone defense. Getting Chandler out of the post is something coaches gameplan for. If you can pull Tyson out of the post it probably means you have a center that can shoot jumpers. I guarantee you Tyson will be a better defender 15 feet out than in the post if the player he is guarding is Dwight Howard. Analytics say shooting mid range jumpers [especially centers] is highly inefficient, but if you take Chandler out of the post other parts of your offense can become more efficient. Side note: the stats also won't tell you that Dwight Howard becomes much less effective vs. players that can match his size and athleticism. They might tell you he is not as effective vs. Tyson Chandler, but you have to make the inference yourself that you might be able to throw any athletic big man at him.

Iverson is the classic example of an inefficient chucker. As inefficient as he might have been, its not like you can just give the ball to Aaron McKie or Dekembe Mutombo and expect their averages to be a constant. Take Kyle Korver or Steve Novak -- these guys shoot 45% from the 3 but if you give them the ball with 24 seconds on the clock and ask them to create their own shot its not going to happen.

I'm not trying to say analytics are useless, they are a very useful tool. I like what Avery Johnson said a few years back -- the analytics can tell you your most efficient rotations and help you see things you may not notice. I see them more as diagnostic tools, like a manager looking at ROI or debt ratios. I think they tell you more about the effectiveness of your system rather than how to run your system -- which is kind of like what you said about roles. It is when you look at the numbers independent of the team that you start going down a slippery slope.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 04:12 PM
He specifically said "analytics don't work at all"
He also said they're nerds that can't get girls, there's a good amount of butthurt between Chuck and Morey

Slug3
02-11-2015, 04:13 PM
Barkley has kind of checked out from the show ever since Shaq got on bored. I use to enjoy Charles, but now he just ramble on sometimes about nothing, and then when him and Shaw go at it, Shaq doesn't bring anything positive to the show and just talks about rings as his rebuttal to everything.

Verbal Christ
02-11-2015, 04:14 PM
http://i58.tinypic.com/14xe6gx.jpg

thats why Chuckster is mad, he couldnt touch the trophies!!

Goose17
02-11-2015, 04:16 PM
Barkley has kind of checked out from the show ever since Shaq got on bored. I use to enjoy Charles, but now he just ramble on sometimes about nothing, and then when him and Shaw go at it, Shaq doesn't bring anything positive to the show and just talks about rings as his rebuttal to everything.

I like Shaq, but they only need one giant comic relief guy. Barkley needs to go. Bring on Grant Hill.

Tony_Starks
02-11-2015, 04:17 PM
Barkley has Zero championships. He needs to not talk. Period. Only a fool would say such incredulous things. Shaq can talk whatever cause he has the rings to back it up, he's a winner. Barkleys comments we're harsh considering he never won ****

Shaq agreed with Barkley tho......

Sandman
02-11-2015, 04:19 PM
I like Shaq, but they only need one giant comic relief guy. Barkley needs to go. Bring on Grant Hill.

Barkley vs Shaq is priceless though

Shaq: I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the Knicks win the eastern conference

Chuck: That better be a big *** limb

Shaq: Its enough to hold your big ***, Charles

mike_noodles
02-11-2015, 04:22 PM
Poor TNT. They're loyal to a fault with some of these ex-NBA guys. What a foolish thing for Charles to say.

tp13baby
02-11-2015, 04:24 PM
Analytics work. You have to scout talent obviously. But to say analytics don't work is absolutely stupid.

The thing is with analytics is sometimes the outcome results in a small sample, and you can't use stats. That's where you analyze talent. You can be an extremely efficient player and that helps so much for a long period of time, but championships can come down to very few plays and small sample sizes can deviate more.

Analytics is good for a season but when it comes down to games and plays like the playoffs you need the talent.

astrosmaniac
02-11-2015, 04:47 PM
Who here thinks Houston's defense is the 7th best in the league?

when Dwight is healthy? absolutely, arguably better.

Then again, if you take away one of the leagues best interior defenders from any team and their production is going to drop off.

houstonfan
02-11-2015, 04:51 PM
Who here thinks Houston's defense is the 7th best in the league?

With Howard they certainly are a top 10 or even top 5 defense. Without him, they are a bottom half defensive team. I feel like if Chuck would've just said "without Dwight, the Rockets are awful defensively." None of this would be talked about.

torocan
02-11-2015, 05:00 PM
Hrm, isn't this the guy that went on PTI, and when asked if Harden is a foundational player said...


I do not. I do not see him like that for the simple fact (that) being an instant offense off the bench, when they’re going to give you the ball every time and you’re the dominant scorer, it won’t work like that when you’re in a traditional offense.

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=8577913

If I recall Morey's comments regarding Harden were...


We feel like James Harden is a player we can build around. He’s an elite offensive player, a complete player. I still think he’s an underrated player,” said Morey the day after the trade. “He’s absolutely someone that, when they see him step into the role of a star with the Houston Rockets, people are going to realize just how good he is.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8570173/houston-rockets-gm-calls-james-harden-foundational-player

Yes, clearly Morey just went out and got talent. How exactly did he know that Harden was a foundational player when so many people though that Morey had made a terrible mistake? (Don't make me dig up the original Harden thread...) I'll give you a hint... it starts with 'A' and ends with 'lytics'.

And really, saying that Analytic teams don't win the championship? The Heat, Dallas and Spurs all heavily used analytics in their organization.

The Heat...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/miamiheat/post/_/id/4356/how-advanced-stats-changed-chris-boshs-game

The Spurs...

http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2013/sloan-sports-analytics-conference-2013-0304

Dallas...

http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2014/09/23/cuban-ramps-up-roster-analytics-push/

As for this season, the current leaders GSW, Memphis and Atlanta all use analytics aggressively.

Memphis hired Hollinger and fired Hollins over a dispute over the use of analytics. 39-13 with 3rd best record in the NBA.

GSW has been a leader in analytics for years. They were one of the first teams to install SportsVu. Currently 41-9, currently their best record ever.


Golden State Warriors at the forefront of NBA data analysis

By Rusty Simmons
Updated 8:58 am, Sunday, September 14, 2014

During a panel discussion at the Sports Analytics Innovation Summit last week in San Francisco, a member of the Chicago Bulls’ leadership stopped midstream in a conversation about his team’s advances and offered unprompted praise of the Warriors’ strides.

More and more often, the Warriors are being recognized for being on the cutting edge of analytics technology, and it’s not by accident.

“We always want to be pioneers, first-adopters, because we believe that having the most information gives us the best chance of making the right decisions,” said Warriors assistant general manager Kirk Lacob, who often spearheads the team’s analytics staff. “I don’t understand anyone who says, 'I don’t like analytics,’ because they’re basically saying, 'I like to just guess.’ Analytics doesn't mean stats; it means using information or data to make informed decisions.”

http://www.sfgate.com/warriors/article/Golden-State-Warriors-at-the-forefront-of-NBA-5753776.php

Atlanta has embraced analytics with Danny Ferry saying it has been critical to their process. Currently 41-10, their best record ever.


Here’s where Ferry’s history with the Spurs becomes important. Yes, Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, and Gregg Popovich were the driving forces behind multiple San Antonio championships, but an invaluable tool that allowed them to maintain such longevity was/is analytics.

“Well over the last year and a half since I’ve been here,” Ferry opined, “we’ve started to implement more of an area that uses statistical data probably more than has been in the past.”

Now, the previous administrations weren’t armed crusaders against analytics, accosting their users and labeling them as “NERDS!” They simply didn’t use them and that was their biggest mistake.

“The analytics part,” said Ferry, “is an important part of [the NBA] now and you’re at a big disadvantage if you don’t use it.”

http://hawkshoop.com/the-ferry-transition/

Analytics isn't everything, but saying that it has no impact and that no championship team has ever won using analytics is patently false. The last 4 championship were won by teams that are aggressive consumers of analytics (Heat x 2, Dallas and The Spurs).

Analytics are a tool to help teams make decisions. Good analytic teams will derive methodically sound and useful information. Poor analytic teams will derive flawed and tangential information. Good management will use that tool wisely. Bad management will use them poorly or not at all.

And the close minded will pretend that nothing good ever came out of a computer.

FOBolous
02-11-2015, 05:01 PM
You know you're on the wrong side of a debate when Charles Barkley is the "leader" you rally around.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 05:13 PM
Hrm, isn't this the guy that went on PTI, and when asked if Harden is a foundational player said...



http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=8577913

If I recall Morey's comments regarding Harden were...



http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8570173/houston-rockets-gm-calls-james-harden-foundational-player

Yes, clearly Morey just went out and got talent. How exactly did he know that Harden was a foundational player when so many people though that Morey had made a terrible mistake? (Don't make me dig up the original Harden thread...) I'll give you a hint... it starts with 'A' and ends with 'lytics'.

And really, saying that Analytic teams don't win the championship? The Heat, Dallas and Spurs all heavily used analytics in their organization.

The Heat...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/miamiheat/post/_/id/4356/how-advanced-stats-changed-chris-boshs-game

The Spurs...

http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2013/sloan-sports-analytics-conference-2013-0304

Dallas...

http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2014/09/23/cuban-ramps-up-roster-analytics-push/

As for this season, the current leaders GSW, Memphis and Atlanta all use analytics aggressively.

Memphis hired Hollinger and fired Hollins over a dispute over the use of analytics. 39-13 with 3rd best record in the NBA.

GSW has been a leader in analytics for years. They were one of the first teams to install SportsVu. Currently 41-9, currently their best record ever.



http://www.sfgate.com/warriors/article/Golden-State-Warriors-at-the-forefront-of-NBA-5753776.php

Atlanta has embraced analytics with Danny Ferry saying it has been critical to their process. Currently 41-10, their best record ever.



http://hawkshoop.com/the-ferry-transition/

Analytics isn't everything, but saying that it has no impact and that no championship team has ever won using analytics is patently false. The last 4 championship were won by teams that are aggressive consumers of analytics (Heat x 2, Dallas and The Spurs).

Analytics are a tool to help teams make decisions. Good analytic teams will derive methodically sound and useful information. Poor analytic teams will derive flawed and tangential information. Good management will use that tool wisely. Bad management will use them poorly or not at all.

And the close minded will pretend that nothing good ever came out of a computer.

Jesus tapdancing christ, you're going to give credit to analytics for the HEAT championships?

Get real

lakerfan85
02-11-2015, 05:13 PM
Barkley has Zero championships. He needs to not talk. Period. Only a fool would say such incredulous things. Shaq can talk whatever cause he has the rings to back it up, he's a winner. Barkleys comments we're harsh considering he never won ****

So he's not allowed to have an opinion because he never won a championship in the NBA?? Should posters in the forum say the same about you when you state your opinion?

SPURSFAN1
02-11-2015, 05:16 PM
Charles is an idiot and everyone one of those teams he said uses analytics. Analytics is there to refine your team. It's there so you understand what to improve on. Anyone agreeing with him is also an idiot.

ink
02-11-2015, 05:20 PM
I haven't watched this yet (at work) but before this thread falls apart into bickering I'll say this;

Anyone who thinks stats are all there is to this game are just as ignorant as people who think stats have no place in the game.

These advanced stats and analytic in general do have their place in the game and they do hold a lot of value. But you have to remember a lot of these stats are still in their infancy. You can measure how often a guy goes right instead of left but the stat doesn't tell you if the player is being shaded to the right. You can measure by % how well a player shoots but you can't see how many of those shots were on bad or good catches, you can't see how many of those shots were against bigger, faster, smaller, slower defenders etc. You have to apply the information correctly as well.

I appreciate the stats but I don't put as much value into them as some people on here might. I mean people talk about the "Key or 3" theory and dislike the mid range game. This is foolish to me, surely you just try and take the best shot available? The Spurs shot a lot of mid range when winning a chip. Is anyone going to tell Dirk that his mid range game was a negative in 2011? The biggest problem with the "Key and 3" theory assumes that both shots are equally open which isn't the case in real life.

Everything has value you just have to apply it appropriately. And remember that it's still early in the analytic world, there's more to come, the best will rise to the top and the rest (PER etc) will be forgotten about.

Conclusion; Using just analytics and nothing else is using them wrong. Ignoring analytics completely is also wrong. You can't use math and not watch games and you can't watch games and not do the math. An informed decision is one made by someone who looks for ALL the available information before making their conclusion. This isn't an either or. It's not one or the other. Analytics is a tool which can be very useful in the right hands, but it's just one tool, not the entire toolbox.




As for Barkely, dude is a dinosaur stuck in his ways. People are afraid of what they don't understand, simple fact in life. The quote you provided is hilarious, the thought that there are "math geeks" and "sports guys"... someone can't be both? Bosh is both. As are many other players. Hell, I sucked at math at school but I like the stats and appreciate them. I also play the game and have done most of my life. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Why perpetuate these jock/nerd stereotypes? This isn't high school. I won't judge until I've seen the video but based on that quote he just seems ignorant.

Great post.

tredigs
02-11-2015, 05:21 PM
Should've made a public poll stating, "do you agree with Chuck? Yes/No".

Would have been an easy way to clump together an ignore list.

Lloyd Christmas
02-11-2015, 05:30 PM
Chuck is the best. He never fails to get a group of people to take the bait.

ClutchTime
02-11-2015, 05:32 PM
Barkley always has something to say. He's still upset after that 1994 Conference Semi-finals loss to us in 7 games.

Hawkeye15
02-11-2015, 05:32 PM
This has got to be the first time Barkley has ever spewed nonsense in his entire life.......

Sandman
02-11-2015, 05:35 PM
Barkley always has something to say. He's still upset after that 1994 Conference Semi-finals loss to us in 7 games.

Yup, he was so bitter that he grabbed 30 boards in his Rockets debut in 1996. I can't believe he would try to sabotage yall like that.

Tony_Starks
02-11-2015, 05:41 PM
Should've made a public poll stating, "do you agree with Chuck? Yes/No".

Would have been an easy way to clump together an ignore list.

So true because after all we should all have the same opinion....

torocan
02-11-2015, 05:48 PM
Jesus tapdancing christ, you're going to give credit to analytics for the HEAT championships?

Get real

Well, since you asked...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/miamiheat/post/_/id/4356/how-advanced-stats-changed-chris-boshs-game


After a recent practice, Chris Bosh explained why you’re seeing him set up on the right side of the offense more this season.

“They took my numbers from last year and [they said] I sucked on the left side,” Bosh said with a smile.

“So they said, ‘Stay over there.’"...

Spoelstra says this isn’t the first time he’s used advanced stats to organize his offense. He did it last season with Jermaine O’Neal, sending the big man to the left side of the floor after seeing the numbers.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/miamiheat/post/_/id/15523/it-all-starts-with-lebron-james


Take, for instance, the first round of the postseason against the Knicks. While sitting at his locker prepping for his matchup against the New York Knicks' Carmelo Anthony, Battier pored over a packet of data that explained how to exploit Anthony’s tendencies. James walked into the locker room, saw Battier studying reports and sat down next to him to find out more.

From there, Battier showed James the hard numbers on why letting Anthony take 20-foot jumpers, no matter how good he was at them, made the Knicks worse because it was an inefficient play. Battier spoke like an accredited "stat geek," using terms such as points per possession, efficiency and marginal value. James gobbled it all up. Just like that, the reigning MVP became a student of analytics.

“People grossly underestimate LeBron’s basketball intellect,” Battier said. “There are a lot of guys who are able to think about the game but they can’t move their legs fast enough to do what their brain is telling them. LeBron puts it all together, and the greats do that. Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, they all do that.”

Is it the only factor? Of course not. However, Analytics was one of the driving forces in how the Heat shaped their offensive sets and their defensive decision. Those are decisions that wouldn't have even been considered in the absence of Analytics.

Enough to make the difference between being a champion or not? Who knows. Contributed? Most definitely.

tredigs
02-11-2015, 06:16 PM
So true because after all we should all have the same opinion....

Any stans who reject the concept of something they don't even understand have no place in the argument. I don't even think Chuck understands what he's arguing.

Rocktiros
02-11-2015, 06:16 PM
I'm not surprised Barkley went off the way he did. Dumb people always respond with anger to things they don't understand. Keep fighting the good fight, Morey!

Chronz
02-11-2015, 06:17 PM
You can better gauge a player's abilities by scouting their play and never looking at their stats more than you could by just looking at their statistics and never having seen them play, but it takes some of both to make a proper judgement. You can't just look at one or the other and make a sound call. There's a reason why the top collegiate statistical players aren't drafted 1st all the time or even drafted at all.not to pick on you because there's so much fail here that I'll eventually get to.....but....

Comments like this expose how little you understand the quant world. Do you even roughly understand the methodology behind teams draft raters. Because if you ignored their play entirely and just let the computer decide the best prospects, it actually does better than historical precedence. And tbh, you'd have a much easier time getting a job within the nba with a quant background than not.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 06:23 PM
Well, since you asked...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/miamiheat/post/_/id/4356/how-advanced-stats-changed-chris-boshs-game



http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/miamiheat/post/_/id/15523/it-all-starts-with-lebron-james



Is it the only factor? Of course not. However, Analytics was one of the driving forces in how the Heat shaped their offensive sets and their defensive decision. Those are decisions that wouldn't have even been considered in the absence of Analytics.

Enough to make the difference between being a champion or not? Who knows. Contributed? Most definitely.

Sorry for being a prick with my response, just think w/ the talent & circumstances surrounding that team its hard to point to anything but LeBron and friends. IMO you might as well talk about the type of car Spoelstra drove

BUT.. I suppose that's Chuck's fault for saying they can never get chicks and it'll never work. Its in every organization in some capacity, big or small. I think there's a valid criticism in there about defense. There's obviously some underwear riding high on both Morey and Barkley with the personal attacks.

Sandman
02-11-2015, 06:25 PM
not to pick on you because there's so much fail here that I'll eventually get to.....but....

Comments like this expose how little you understand the quant world. Do you even roughly understand the methodology behind teams draft raters. Because if you ignored their play entirely and just let the computer decide the best prospects, it actually does better than historical precedence. And tbh, you'd have a much easier time getting a job within the nba with a quant background than not.

his post was way off the deep end, you gotta look at the stats, even if just to see how many shots the guy misses. There are plenty of guys that can look great and create their own shots that just chuck bricks

Tony_Starks
02-11-2015, 06:44 PM
So true because after all we should all have the same opinion....

Any stans who reject the concept of something they don't even understand have no place in the argument. I don't even think Chuck understands what he's arguing.

Why does he have to be a "Stan" though? A Stan of who? Whose to say what he understands or doesn't, why can't he just generally disagree with the importance placed on analytics without having to be some kind of unintelligent fool?.....

Goose17
02-11-2015, 06:48 PM
Why does he have to be a "Stan" though? A Stan of who? Whose to say what he understands or doesn't, why can't he just generally disagree with the importance placed on analytics without having to be some kind of unintelligent fool?.....

Unintelligent is not the right word. Misinformed is better.

How can you respect someones opinion when they refuse to use all of the information available to them to form an opinion/decision? Ignoring additional information (see; facts) when making a judgement on a team, player or anything really (basketball related or not) is up to the individual. But you can't do that and then expect people to believe you have made a well informed decision.

If you want to do that it's on you but it's no different than Chronz saying he's never watching a game again and then relying completely on stats. When forming an opinion you look at everything (that is readily available) relating to the subject

xnick5757
02-11-2015, 07:01 PM
regarding defense, SportsVU is working on that and its pretty cool

stuff like this "defensive/offensive alignment relative to ball location", that you wouldn't be able to accurately tell 100% with just the "eye test"

Tony_Starks
02-11-2015, 07:11 PM
Why does he have to be a "Stan" though? A Stan of who? Whose to say what he understands or doesn't, why can't he just generally disagree with the importance placed on analytics without having to be some kind of unintelligent fool?.....

Unintelligent is not the right word. Misinformed is better.

How can you respect someones opinion when they refuse to use all of the information available to them to form an opinion/decision? Ignoring additional information (see; facts) when making a judgement on a team, player or anything really (basketball related or not) is up to the individual. But you can't do that and then expect people to believe you have made a well informed decision.

If you want to do that it's on you but it's no different than Chronz saying he's never watching a game again and then relying completely on stats. When forming an opinion you look at everything (that is readily available) relating to the subject


I can respect his opinion because its just that. It doesn't make him wrong or the advanced stat guys right. I think we can all agree his stance on analytics is extreme but that doesn't mean there was no truth to what he said. He brought out how Morey is the analytics guru but yet he's added the best talent available at every opportunity. Thats not analytics its common sense. Morey also got J Smooth who the stat geeks have hated literally for years, according to analytics he shoots the most dreaded inefficient shot....the long two.

So Barkley does have some points, I can't just summarily dismiss him as misinformed because he's not going with the current trend.

FlashBolt
02-11-2015, 07:16 PM
Lmao, Barkley is a complete fool for this. I love listening to him because he's damn entertaining but the stuff that he spewed is completely inaccurate and insulting. He's partially right because stats don't mean EVERYTHING due to many inconsistencies, but to say it doesn't mean anything? Eye test my ***. Your stats usually follow your level of play. Imagine if we didn't record anything and just went off eye test. Do you know how difficult it would be to even measure anything? It's like using a measuring cup vs not using a measuring cup. Sure, you could go by the eye test but the functionality of that measuring cup is what makes it more precise. Bulls were the best defenders a couple of years ago. This year they aren't. Their DRTG and OPP PPG clearly show that they aren't great defenders. Teams went from "I don't want to play the Bulls because it will be physical and tough to score", to, "Let's play the Bulls because their defense isn't that great anymore.".

Goose17
02-11-2015, 07:19 PM
So Barkley does have some points, I can't just summarily dismiss him as misinformed because he's not going with the current trend.

It's not about trends or agreeing with everyone. It's about looking at EVERYTHING before making a decision. That is literally the definition of an informed decision. By ignoring anything you are making a misinformed decision.

Chronz
02-11-2015, 07:26 PM
I can respect his opinion because its just that. It doesn't make him wrong or the advanced stat guys right. I think we can all agree his stance on analytics is extreme but that doesn't mean there was no truth to what he said. He brought out how Morey is the analytics guru but yet he's added the best talent available at every opportunity. Thats not analytics its common sense. Morey also got J Smooth who the stat geeks have hated literally for years, according to analytics he shoots the most dreaded inefficient shot....the long two.

So Barkley does have some points, I can't just summarily dismiss him as misinformed because he's not going with the current trend.
that's just It, he was wrong on harden to begin with. Both on his own evaluation of that talent and what it took for the rox to acquire him. If you're extreme to this degree, ur ignorant. Look at all his hyperbole+ subjectivity.

LakersEaglesLA
02-11-2015, 07:29 PM
I don't usually agree with Charles but in this case he nailed it.. Intangibles, heart, determination, killer instinct, leadership, teamwork, work ethic, personality and talent are all they way athletes are accurately measured... Sorry Geeks

FlashBolt
02-11-2015, 07:32 PM
I also don't understand how this Morey is into statistics and has a pure analytic mind is coming from. Stats/being analytical is one trait that EVERYONE should have. In the business world and in any metric that involves numbers. The moment you throw that away and say, well, let's just use our eyes and gut instinct, you're going to be the first to fall. Look throughout history and you'll find that it's true. And Shaq is a fricking idiot. This is the same guy who always talks about how Dwight never gets 25/12 but then all of a sudden, he's not analytical? Shaq is honestly the worst analyst I've ever seen. He talks about his stats all the time.. is he stupid?

FlashBolt
02-11-2015, 07:33 PM
I don't usually agree with Charles but in this case he nailed it.. Intangibles, heart, determination, killer instinct, leadership, teamwork, work ethic, personality and talent are all they way athletes are accurately measured... Sorry Geeks

That's what we call physical/characteristic traits. That's certainly one part but is that everything? What if you can't rebound/score/pass but you had all of the abilities above?

Shlumpledink
02-11-2015, 07:36 PM
Analytics work, just not how Barkley understands them.

But he is right, people were talking about the genius of Morey when he made those back loaded deals which meant he ended up overpaying for guys. That was overblown, but he is obviously smart for spending money on getting Harden and Howard.

LakersEaglesLA
02-11-2015, 07:51 PM
That's what we call physical/characteristic traits. That's certainly one part but is that everything? What if you can't rebound/score/pass but you had all of the abilities above?

I did include Talent if you didn't read that part

mRc08
02-11-2015, 07:53 PM
The only sport I truly believe analytics are valuable are baseball. The reason is you can take player x, move him to team y, and he still is basically playing by himself. Sure switching leagues, batting order, or even who is hitting in front of you matters, but at the end of the day baseball is kind of an individual sport (at least hitting). So i do believe in analytics there, but in basketball so much of a players stats is depending on the team. What is there role? Minutes? Are they a first, second, third option? Etc. They are literally all playing together cohesively at all times, there is no individual aspect to the game really. So in basketball im kinda meh on analytics, though it can be useful in other sports.

Edit: I will say that analytics are useful in bball when gauging how well a player is currently playing, or how well they played in the past. I would not, however, rely on them to predict a players production for the reasons mentioned above. There are some really good offensive and defensive advanced stats, but I wouldn't use them as a predictive measure when assembling a team.

Jamiecballer
02-11-2015, 08:02 PM
Charles is hilarious. Sometimes he makes a lot of sense. And sometimes he says things that set basketball back to caveman times. I'll let you decide which one this is.

tredigs
02-11-2015, 08:05 PM
Why does he have to be a "Stan" though? A Stan of who? Whose to say what he understands or doesn't, why can't he just generally disagree with the importance placed on analytics without having to be some kind of unintelligent fool?.....

I don't even understand how you can be "against analytics". They're any variation of different stats that represent what players are doing on the court. "Star players win". Lol well no ****, Charles. The analytics agree with that too. It is hilarious to me that he used the Spurs as an example though. They have one top 10 draft pick on their team, and he was drafted like 20 years ago. They're probably the best example of using analytics to best orchestrate their roster + offense into the machine that it is, always going for the highest% shot possible (corner threes, layups, FTs and staying away from contested mid-range jumpers). This style was adopted by most top teams, but it wasn't always that way. Kerr's system of cuts/screens/movement that is predicated on transition layups + 3's in comparison to Mark Jackson's half-assed iso system is a great year to year example of this. If Chuck was more into analytics, he'd discover that the "jump shooting Warriors" are also #3 in the NBA in points in the paint. He's a 100% eye-test guy, and that's fine if you have 5 sets of eyes and unlimited time to watch every NBA game. Unfortunately for him that's not the case, and you see the result from time to time (love Chuck, but he's just an idiot sometimes).

JEDean89
02-11-2015, 08:10 PM
He's like the Bill O'Reilly of sports, trying to convince everyone that Christmas is a secular holiday and that Christianity isn't a religion. The fact is that analytics are beyond important in all the major sports and pretty much every facet of life. Business Analytics have become everything, there is no reason why advanced stats shouldn't be taken into account. There was once a day where PPG was the dominant stat. Now we have dissected a players PPG to get more meaning out of it. We take FG and 3pt percentage into account. We used to just look at FG%, now we have true shooting, which takes trips to the FT Line and 3pt% into account. I mean the fact is that all analytics does is to dig deeper into statistics and to take large data sets to notice trends. It's why steals have become such an important metric. There is a strong correlation between steals and how good a player ends up (I think this should be called the Ricky Rubio effect). Chuck should stick to talking about in game stuff, the X's and O's. Anyone denying the analytics movement in the year 2015 is a ****ing moron. If this was 10 years ago, okay. But this **** is standard nowadays. Everyone uses it!

nyyfan4life
02-11-2015, 08:38 PM
I think I might have gotten dumber listening to Chuck's (and the rest of the TNT crew) anti analytics rant. I don't think the guy actually understands the concept of advanced metrics at all. He's entertaining at times but incredibly misinformed.

IndyRealist
02-11-2015, 09:07 PM
The anti-stats crowd is putting up Charles Barkley as an enlightened hero? I think that's a win for analytics.

It's easy to criticize other people's decisions, because when you're proven wrong nobody remembers or cares what you said anymore (unless you're DeMarcus Cousins). Especially in retrospect, oh "OBVIOUSLY they went out and got Harden, that was a no brainer!" I remember plenty of experts and PSDers alike saying that there was no way Harden was a #1, that he was a product of being on the floor with Westy and Durant, that he was easily replaceable, etc. The THUNDER, which last I checked was staffed with professionals, passed on his contract extension FOR KENDRICK PERKINS.

Even still, stars are relatively easy to pick out. Lebron is obviously good to anyone with eyeballs. Where analytics come in? Trevor Ariza, for half the money of Chandler Parsons. If you don't recognize that as the quintessential Moneyball exploit-market-inefficiencies moment, then you're not paying attention.

zn23
02-11-2015, 09:26 PM
Destroy? Hardly. He just made himself look like a bigger fool. Not that anyone has ever accused Barkley of being smart.

mightybosstone
02-11-2015, 09:26 PM
Here's Morey's tweet after chuck said they were one of the worst defenses in the league

"Best part of being at a TNT game live is it is easy to avoid Charles spewing misinformed biased vitriol disguised as entertainment"

not taking sides but it seems like Chuck only proved Morey right here by spewing a bunch of nonsense.

:nod:

I've always actually enjoyed Barkley's antics, because he's honest and he speaks his mind. But he just proved Morey completely right by acting like an idiot on national television and overreacting to a Tweet. His points were terrible, petty and totally misguided. And while I actually think Morey should have do himself a favor and keep these kind of opinions out of the media, he pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one.

Mell413
02-11-2015, 09:31 PM
I don't think he destroyed anyone. He just made himself look dumb. Analytics certainly have their place.

sixer04fan
02-11-2015, 09:34 PM
I don't think he destroyed anyone. He just made himself look dumb. Analytics certainly have their place.

+1

Totally disagree with the thread title. Barkley embarrassed himself here. But it's all in the name of entertainment, whatever.

Jeffy25
02-11-2015, 09:36 PM
I mean.....would someone expect Barkley to say anything of value any way?


Good player, awful broadcaster/game personality.

Jeffy25
02-11-2015, 09:38 PM
Harden was a 6th man when he acquired him....or is that just simply forgotten because it was expected that he would be good?

Chronz
02-11-2015, 09:52 PM
Anyone remember Chuck fueding with Cuban?

Chronz
02-11-2015, 09:56 PM
The anti-stats crowd is putting up Charles Barkley as an enlightened hero? I think that's a win for analytics.

It's easy to criticize other people's decisions, because when you're proven wrong nobody remembers or cares what you said anymore (unless you're DeMarcus Cousins). Especially in retrospect, oh "OBVIOUSLY they went out and got Harden, that was a no brainer!" I remember plenty of experts and PSDers alike saying that there was no way Harden was a #1, that he was a product of being on the floor with Westy and Durant, that he was easily replaceable, etc. The THUNDER, which last I checked was staffed with professionals, passed on his contract extension FOR KENDRICK PERKINS.

Even still, stars are relatively easy to pick out. Lebron is obviously good to anyone with eyeballs. Where analytics come in? Trevor Ariza, for half the money of Chandler Parsons. If you don't recognize that as the quintessential Moneyball exploit-market-inefficiencies moment, then you're not paying attention.
did you catch. kenny's eye test/memory fail him when recalling how many 3s he shot?
And that's him forgetting his OWN CAREER. Yet we're suppose to believe these guys on nothing but conjecture? I heart Kenny but I'll gas on that

KB24PG16
02-11-2015, 10:21 PM
does anyone here believe the rockets will a championship this year?

zn23
02-11-2015, 10:24 PM
does anyone here believe the rockets will a championship this year?

They're certainly contenders.

Jeffy25
02-11-2015, 10:46 PM
did you catch. kenny's eye test/memory fail him when recalling how many 3s he shot?
And that's him forgetting his OWN CAREER. Yet we're suppose to believe these guys on nothing but conjecture? I heart Kenny but I'll gas on that

He said he took 82 3's in his first five seasons.....or about 7 times that many


These are former players. They aren't classically trained to be good broadcasters.



Joe Morgan was the Charles Barkley of baseball. He made so many mistakes on his 'memory' of his career. He also thought guys like Ryne Sandberg were better than him, and there is no ****ing way that is true. Morgan crushes Sandberg at every level (peak, durability, bat, glove, speed, all of it). But Morgan is convinced Sanberg was better. It's one thing to be humble, it's another thing to not know the game like you think you do.

Just because you played professionally before, doesn't make you an expert on the game. There are a lot of appeals to authority with guys like this. That just because they played before, they must be experts, or the smartest guys in the sport. And we know this isn't the case. Baseball has fundamentally proven that former players make horrible General Managers as a whole, and have even stopped using former good players as managers. Today's managers were fringe level players, or guys that barely ever played. About 70% of GM's never even played college baseball, and the one's that did play professionally, have effectively driven their teams into the ground except for Billy Beane of the A's....he's the only exception.


We just know that these guys aren't the smartest in regards to their own sports any longer.

Is Gretzky the greatest coach? Is Jordan the best at player evaluation? No. Just because you have the physical ability to be very effective at the sport, and know how to train to be better and improve your game, doesn't mean you have the games IQ and know how to most effectively improve a team.

Tony_Starks
02-11-2015, 10:50 PM
does anyone here believe the rockets will a championship this year?

They're certainly contenders.

Contending for first team to go fishing.....

LA_Raiders
02-11-2015, 10:54 PM
Lol funny

FOBolous
02-11-2015, 10:59 PM
does anyone here believe the rockets will a championship this year?

i believe the Rockets has a better chance than the Lakers ;)

mightybosstone
02-11-2015, 11:02 PM
does anyone here believe the rockets will a championship this year?

What does that have to do with anything? Whether a team wins a championship or not does not mean they aren't contenders. If you have the fourth best record in the entire league and the third best record in your conference, you are absolutely a contender.

Greg.
02-11-2015, 11:07 PM
Harden was a 6th man when he acquired him....or is that just simply forgotten because it was expected that he would be good?

Well expected by everyone but Barkley...

IndyRealist
02-11-2015, 11:41 PM
does anyone here believe the rockets will a championship this year?

They -could-. Winning a championship requires a lot of lucky breaks that are simply out of your control. Predictions are nonsense, you're just basically playing the odds.

tredigs
02-11-2015, 11:53 PM
They -could-. Winning a championship requires a lot of lucky breaks that are simply out of your control. Predictions are nonsense, you're just basically playing the odds.

This is a pretty asinine statement.

You're going to need some breaks, sure, but by and large the best team going into the post-season wins. The Rockets will absolutely not be winning the title, I don't care if they have an exceptionally "lucky" run.

YesMcCann
02-11-2015, 11:59 PM
He's right. Analytics in basketball are nearly useless. It's arrogant to think that which can't be quantified can be quantified.

DaBear
02-12-2015, 12:00 AM
Barkley proves again that he's an idiot. I get that analytics don't tell the whole story. That's not the intention. To say analytics are crap just proves Barkley has no ****in clue what he's talking about.

IndyRealist
02-12-2015, 01:13 AM
This is a pretty asinine statement.

You're going to need some breaks, sure, but by and large the best team going into the post-season wins. The Rockets will absolutely not be winning the title, I don't care if they have an exceptionally "lucky" run.

The majority of the time, yes. But there are upsets in almost every round of the playoffs. The NBA had to change the first round format from 5 to 7 games because there were too many upsets. And there are what-ifs every year. San Antonio went into the playoffs in 2012 ROLLING everybody and sleepwalking through the first 2 rounds only to lose 4 straight in the WCF after being up 2-0. Westbrook goes down in 2013 and OKC is done. Lance Stephenson's head explodes and the clear cut favorite in the first half of last season becomes an afterthought.

And frankly, plenty of people see a team advance so they assume they are the better team retrospectively when, going into the series, it was significantly more of a question. Just like how, now, Barkley is saying that trading for and maxxing out Harden was a no brainer.

Luck is a huge factor in a 7 game series. Quite a bit has to break just right for any team to hoist the trophy, not just the Rockets.

tredigs
02-12-2015, 02:08 AM
The majority of the time, yes. But there are upsets in almost every round of the playoffs. The NBA had to change the first round format from 5 to 7 games because there were too many upsets. And there are what-ifs every year. San Antonio went into the playoffs in 2012 ROLLING everybody and sleepwalking through the first 2 rounds only to lose 4 straight in the WCF after being up 2-0. Westbrook goes down in 2013 and OKC is done. Lance Stephenson's head explodes and the clear cut favorite in the first half of last season becomes an afterthought.

And frankly, plenty of people see a team advance so they assume they are the better team retrospectively when, going into the series, it was significantly more of a question. Just like how, now, Barkley is saying that trading for and maxxing out Harden was a no brainer.

Luck is a huge factor in a 7 game series. Quite a bit has to break just right for any team to hoist the trophy, not just the Rockets.

I mean, you can't play more than 7 games - that's a fairly decent sample size to regulate luck and find the best team winning (or at least a team that's close enough to have some 'luck' tip them over the edge). In football, luck does play a large role in winning a trophy. Much less so in basketball, though (I'd argue it has less luck involved in winning a title then every sport, actually). And it's why no >3 seeds win NBA titles.

Chronz
02-12-2015, 02:20 AM
I mean, you can't play more than 7 games - that's a fairly decent sample size to regulate luck and find the best team winning (or at least a team that's close enough to have some 'luck' tip them over the edge). In football, luck does play a large role in winning a trophy. Much less so in basketball, though (I'd argue it has less luck involved in winning a title then every sport, actually). And it's why no >3 seeds win NBA titles.
Not trying to pick sides because this is beyond my realm but IIRC, there was a study on what a decent sample size would be, it was in excess of 25 games or more.

I think every season has its own identity, when >3 seeds (or >3SRS) do win theres usually an extenuating factors that prevented said team from having the same sort of success.

sixer04fan
02-12-2015, 02:37 AM
You certainly need some luck to win a championship in the NBA, no matter how great of a team you are. Gotta stay fortunate with health, and sometimes you just need the ball to bounce a certain way or a ref to make or miss a certain call.

But luck plays a much smaller role in the NBA than it does in football, hockey, and baseball. With 4 rounds of 7 game series, and hundreds of possessions and scoring opportunities per game, the law of averages plays out to an infinitely greater extent than in other sports, which neutralizes most luck in the equation. This gives the better team (or team with the more favorable matchups) the best chance possible to beat the worse team.

In the NFL, it's one game, do or die, with only several good scoring chances per game. The margin of error for the better team is much smaller and anything can happen. In baseball, it's a 7 game series, but there are even fewer scoring chances in the game than in football. Same goes with the NHL to a lesser extent, with only a few goals scored per game.

This is why 8 seeds NEVER win championships in the NBA, but wildcard teams can win it much more frequently in the NFL or MLB. And why lower seeds advance a lot more in the NHL as well.

If the NBA playoffs had 1 game series, or if there were only 10 baskets scored per game, it'd be a different story.

tredigs
02-12-2015, 02:48 AM
Not trying to pick sides because this is beyond my realm but IIRC, there was a study on what a decent sample size would be, it was in excess of 25 games or more.

I think every season has its own identity, when >3 seeds (or >3SRS) do win theres usually an extenuating factors that prevented said team from having the same sort of success.

Well, it's as good of a sample size as we can realistically hope for; for me it's rare that I walk away from a playoff series thinking the better team lost (expectations going into it are one thing, but actually seeing it pan out h2h with coaching schemes finely tuned is another).

And yeah >3 seeds, they just don't win... it's only happened twice. One was Bill's Celtics pulling the 4 seed his final season as player/coach (just looked the team up and even they had the #2 SRS in the league), and the other was the Rox as the 6 seed because they didn't trade for Clyde until later on in the year. Also their first round against the Jazz was probably their toughest matchup and I'm pretty sure they were 5 game series then.

PatsSoxKnicks
02-12-2015, 03:03 AM
Any stans who reject the concept of something they don't even understand have no place in the argument. I don't even think Chuck understands what he's arguing.

He clearly doesn't because the teams he mentioned are heavy in their use of analytics. In fact, going down the list of playoff teams, a lot of them use analytics, some heavily-
1 Atlanta clearly uses analytics- Neil Paine of 538 used to consult with them. Dan Rosenbaum is also there. They're pretty clearly heavy on analytics.
2- Toronto clearly uses analytics, Zach Lowe had a piece on them and someone I know knows an analytics guy there
3- the Bulls do, tho the extent to which they use it is a bit unknown. At least to me.
4- the Cavs do. Their director of analytics is Jon Nichols and Alamar used to be there.
5- Washington- Joe Sill used to consult with them and may still. But I'm honestly not sure how much they use it.
6- Milwaukee- Very heavy in the use of analytics. From the top all the way down. Probably can't really expand on it because I don't want to say anything I'm not supposed to.
7- Charlotte- Definitely use analytics. Have a team of about 3-4 people and an intern.
8- Miami- Obviously someone mentioned Chaikin earlier. Works with Spo.

1- Golden State- mentioned earlier and fwiw, Steph Curry- the possible future MVP- was using Vantage Sports as an analytics service last season. He was a fan. (discontinued I think because Vantage moved away from player clients)
2- Memphis- has Hollinger. And they've had guys even before Hollinger. Though he's obviously got the most power out of analytics folks who've been in Memphis.
3- Portland- they have an analytics staff I believe. Ryan Parker is one of their analysts.
4- Houston- obviously. Though probably not as big an analytics staff as people think but they are obviously heavy on it's use.
5- Dallas- Roland Beech is their analytics guy who sits on the bench with the Coach for lineups etc. Have a large staff from what I've heard. Tons of people.
6- Clippers. They have an analyst from what I've heard. That's all I know though. But with Ballmer there, I'm sure it'll grow.
7- Spurs. Gabe Farkas as someone mentioned is their director of analytics. Also know someone else whose consulting for them. They've had a long history of analytics which is easy to see if you do some research.
8- Phoenix. J.E. used to consult with them. Also, heavy in the use of analytics.
9- OKC. Also use analytics. I'm forgetting whose there now but Alamar used to be there.

Anyways, yeah thats almost all the teams in the playoffs with analytics people. Obviously the use varies from team to team. Some are really heavy in their use. Some less so (the Clippers probably being one).

And the list doesn't stop there. Ironically, the teams who are probably lightest in their use of analytics are 2 of the worst teams in the NBA- the Lakers and Knicks (though they do have someone, highly doubt anyone listens to him tho).

PatsSoxKnicks
02-12-2015, 03:10 AM
Sorry for being a prick with my response, just think w/ the talent & circumstances surrounding that team its hard to point to anything but LeBron and friends. IMO you might as well talk about the type of car Spoelstra drove

BUT.. I suppose that's Chuck's fault for saying they can never get chicks and it'll never work. Its in every organization in some capacity, big or small. I think there's a valid criticism in there about defense. There's obviously some underwear riding high on both Morey and Barkley with the personal attacks.

You're severely underestimating the progress made on the defensive end. I'm assuming you have no clue about the different er for lack of a better term- scouting metric companies out there. Data on defense has gotten a TON better. I would try not to speak on things you aren't familiar with...

Though fwiw, a lot of the defensive data is just being gathered in the last year or two. It's very new. Teams are exploring. Obviously defense isn't at the level of offense yet. But it's not as far behind as you make it seem.

PatsSoxKnicks
02-12-2015, 03:29 AM
Also, in reading this thread, a lot of people don't seem to understand what analytics are. It doesn't say anything. It's the use of data and trying to further your understanding of the game. I bet if the term research was used instead, people wouldn't have as big of an issue. That's really what it is.

And no one working in NBA departments uses one number metrics. They aren't concerned with that (that's not going to help them win games at all). I think the biggest area for the use of analytics is the draft and lineup optimization. Who fits well with who. Will a player I trade for fit with who I have on the team etc. That type of stuff.

IndyRealist
02-12-2015, 08:00 AM
Also, in reading this thread, a lot of people don't seem to understand what analytics are. It doesn't say anything. It's the use of data and trying to further your understanding of the game. I bet if the term research was used instead, people wouldn't have as big of an issue. That's really what it is.

And no one working in NBA departments uses one number metrics. They aren't concerned with that (that's not going to help them win games at all). I think the biggest area for the use of analytics is the draft and lineup optimization. Who fits well with who. Will a player I trade for fit with who I have on the team etc. That type of stuff.

Last night Mark Jackson recalled in his first year coaching that their analytics guy quoted +/- to him in suggesting a specific player to play. And Mark points out the obvious flaw in +/-, that the guy was only ever in the game with the starting unit, so they inflated his +/-. This serves to highlight how misunderstanding of metrics leads to poor decision making, as that is EXACTLY how +/- should not be used. But what this shows is that data and analytics are being used for far more than draft and lineup optimization, even if they're doing it wrong. Analytics are being used to determine what plays to run, what players to play, etc. There's probably headbutting between coaches and the stat geeks on which is correct, but any team running a 3 and paint system at this point is being influenced by the number crunching. And there are a lot of them.

In defense of analytics, I'm guessing that the guy Mark Jackson was talking about was not their head of analytics, nor particularly versed in sports economics. It was probably an intern.

ThuglifeJ
02-12-2015, 12:55 PM
@Houston fans: Serious question - Has anyone who has ever disagreed, disrespected, or criticized anything regarding the Houston Rockets organization.. EVER been right? Just curious because it seems every poster with a Houston sig always needs to comment saying they're wrong or idiots when this happens. Like, ALWAYS.

Maybe it's not always a coincidence...

ThuglifeJ
02-12-2015, 01:00 PM
Anyways theyre both wrong on their stances.. Analytics matter to an extent with a objective view... But they dont mean everything. Barkley is stuck in the 80s.. The calling Morey out and being a dick was hilarious though. Morey is just a narcissistic 'holier than thou' dbag tho. I'm sure he never did get a girl till he had money.


But you know who's a bigger idiot than both? Kenny Smith. Literally THEE biggest bull ******* you can find on a broadcast.

Mantle7
02-12-2015, 01:07 PM
There really is no more debate on the use of analytics in sports, almost every team uses them. Obviously to different degrees but that argument is only for the old grumpy sports writer and the dumbed down fans who still be things should be done as they were in the good old days.

Longhornfan1234
02-12-2015, 02:48 PM
I'll take an athletes opinion over some analytical geek who hasn't played basketball at collegiate or pro level.

Hawkeye15
02-12-2015, 02:50 PM
I'll take an athletes opinion over some analytical geek who hasn't played basketball at collegiate or pro level.

cause the ex players have made such amazing front office decisions when it comes to talent.

Look who the best GM's are now. Take a look around.

Chronz
02-12-2015, 03:17 PM
I'll take an athletes opinion over some analytical geek who hasn't played basketball at collegiate or pro level.
Ill take the smarter decision maker. Who ever that is, but lets not kid ourselves, theres a reason why Morey has been a better decision maker than MJ throughout their management careers. And thats the greatest player of all time vs your every day MIT grad.

sixer04fan
02-12-2015, 03:18 PM
I'll take an athletes opinion over some analytical geek who hasn't played basketball at collegiate or pro level.

I'll take Morey for my GM, you take Barkley. Good luck to you.

Chronz
02-12-2015, 03:26 PM
Anyways theyre both wrong on their stances.. Analytics matter to an extent with a objective view... But they dont mean everything.
Actually you're not understanding their stances. Its only Chuck who takes the extremist all or nothing stance, Morey is actually the one whos qualified to review the data in an objective way. He has never and will never take the stance that they "mean everything".


Barkley is stuck in the 80s..
Its worse than that, hes actually stuck in his own alternate reality. Like JVG and Mark Jackson were alluding to last night, stats have been used for strategic advantages since the 60's.


The calling Morey out and being a dick was hilarious though.
Agreed, I love seeing a grown man make a fool of himself, especially when the ego is as inflated as the Chucksters.


Morey is just a narcissistic 'holier than thou' dbag tho. I'm sure he never did get a girl till he had money.
LOL to be fair, your assessment of him personally despite absolutely no relationship to him makes you a bigger dbag. I bet he got all the poon he needed, see we are both saying worthless ****, at least I admit to being that guy.


But you know who's a bigger idiot than both? Kenny Smith. Literally THEE biggest bull ******* you can find on a broadcast.
Hes literally the only guy (aside from when Shaq wants to be serious) whos breakdown I respect.

Tony_Starks
02-12-2015, 03:49 PM
During the summer they were saying gms didnt like dealing with Morey because he was basically a arrogant jerk. The more I hear from and about him that kindof makes sense.

Hawkeye15
02-12-2015, 03:55 PM
During the summer they were saying gms didnt like dealing with Morey because he was basically a arrogant jerk. The more I hear from and about him that kindof makes sense.

That and he typically rips you off in a trade. But I have heard he is a little arrogant.

Redrum187
02-12-2015, 04:03 PM
That and he typically rips you off in a trade. But I have heard he is a little arrogant.

I love GM's who rip people off. If I was a fan of a team and/or owned my own NBA franchise, I'd hire the biggest rapist (in terms of trade :P) there ever was.

Mark Cuban and Morey would be a match made in heaven!!!!

Tony_Starks
02-12-2015, 04:07 PM
During the summer they were saying gms didnt like dealing with Morey because he was basically a arrogant jerk. The more I hear from and about him that kindof makes sense.

That and he typically rips you off in a trade. But I have heard he is a little arrogant.

Hey the man prevented us from getting stuck with Dwight and gave us a draft pick this year. As far as I'm concerned he is one great helluva guy!!!

valade16
02-12-2015, 04:09 PM
I love GM's who rip people off. If I was a fan of a team and/or owned my own NBA franchise, I'd hire the biggest rapist (in terms of trade :P) there ever was.

Mark Cuban and Morey would be a match made in heaven!!!!

You'd think so but it backfires if you're too arrogant.

The Blazers had Kevin Pritchard who made a number of very good trades (the Portland joke was if someone traded with us they got "Pritch-Slapped") but he was so arrogant eventually nobody wanted to trade with us.

Then he started undermining and complaining about those in the organization and tried to make a power grab and was let go. I don't think it will come to that with Morey, but raping people in a trade only works if people are even willing to listen to you.

Hawkeye15
02-12-2015, 04:11 PM
I love GM's who rip people off. If I was a fan of a team and/or owned my own NBA franchise, I'd hire the biggest rapist (in terms of trade :P) there ever was.

Mark Cuban and Morey would be a match made in heaven!!!!

haha, exactly. Like, if you are in your draft war room, and the phone rings, and its Morey, hang it up, and rip the cord out of the wall before you end up taking his 14th pick from 2 years prior off his hands, just in time to pay him a ton of money..

Chase Budinger and David Kahn, I am looking at you. Hell, he traded us Chandler Parsons, then for more picks, then just bought him back 8 minutes later from Kahn, who was selling away 1st rounders to pay off Rambis's deal. Ughhhhh

Goose17
02-12-2015, 04:12 PM
I'll take an athletes opinion over some analytical geek who hasn't played basketball at collegiate or pro level.

Pat Riley was a player, coach and GM. Who is VERY enthusiastic about advanced stats and analytics. He loves it, he endorses them all the time.

His opinion is worth less than Charles because Charles is a talking head on the dumb dumb box? You listen to dumb dumb. Good dumb dumb likes to dumb dumb, dumb dumb.

Hawkeye15
02-12-2015, 04:12 PM
You'd think so but it backfires if you're too arrogant.

The Blazers had Kevin Pritchard who made a number of very good trades (the Portland joke was if someone traded with us they got "Pritch-Slapped") but he was so arrogant eventually nobody wanted to trade with us.

Then he started undermining and complaining about those in the organization and tried to make a power grab and was let go. I don't think it will come to that with Morey, but raping people in a trade only works if people are even willing to listen to you.

speaking of Kahn again, how awesome was the Portland/Minny war over Batum haha

Hawkeye15
02-12-2015, 04:13 PM
Pat Riley was a player, coach and GM. Who is VERY enthusiastic about advanced stats and analytics. He loves it, he endorses them all the time.

His opinion is worth less than Charles because Charles is a talking head on the dumb dumb box? You listen to dumb dumb. Good dumb dumb likes to dumb dumb, dumb dumb.

yes, best case scenario is an ex player/coach who has embraced and studied advanced metrics. But there aren't many like that.

Goose17
02-12-2015, 04:19 PM
yes, best case scenario is an ex player/coach who has embraced and studied advanced metrics. But there aren't many like that.

There isn't. The background shouldn't matter much though. When it comes to basketball matters is anyone really taking Barkleys opinion over Popovich because Pop never played at any real level (aside from for the air force team) and has only ever been a coach at the pro level?

Most of the best coaches who also played weren't that good when they played, nothing special anyway.

I don't see why people think it has to be one or the other when it comes to analytics vs eye test.

Or why athletes should know so much about the game they played. Look at Jordan, commonly accepted as the best player ever and simultaneously one of the worst decision makers as an owner/manager.

IndyRealist
02-12-2015, 06:48 PM
Thought this was appropriate to the conversation:

Selective analytics
The coaching world has changed a lot in recent years since coaches started using analytics to devise a lot of their schemes. So how does Carlisle incorporate analytics?


“I guess the word would be ‘selectively,’” Carlisle said. “There’s a lot of information available.

“You’ve got to decide what’s important for the particular team you’re having that year. It varies each year as to the things that are most important.”

The point, according to some in the NBA world, is to not lean too heavy on analytics being the be-all and end-all.

“There are tools there that are extremely useful,” Carlisle said. “You just got to make sure you don’t overdo it.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/nba/dallas-mavericks/article9775682.html#storylink=cpy

ThuglifeJ
02-12-2015, 07:12 PM
@Chronz: I hope you mean on the TNT cast...cuz I'd gladly take a Cwebb or numerous guys on nbaTV than Kenny and Shaq breakdowns..

LakersIn5
02-12-2015, 08:40 PM
Morey hasnt won ****. So overated cant even reach the WCF

Raps18-19 Champ
02-12-2015, 10:35 PM
You can use analytics along with talent. Barkley's got it wrong here. Not like Morey says he only uses analytics to build his team anyway. It's pretty stupid though if you don't use a relevant portion of it in any part of basketball.

rhino17
02-12-2015, 10:44 PM
Barkley doesn't understand that the point of analytics is how to utilize the talent you have. Morey's stats show him how to make a guy like Josh Smith a productive player again, put him in places on the court where he excels. It's not complex stuff, Barkley is just a moron.

ThuglifeJ
02-12-2015, 11:13 PM
Getting butthurt over something Barkley said kind of says a lot about you. Barkley has ripped on my favorite teams and players many many times and I just laughed it off or rolled my eyes. I didn't make it a necessity to freak the **** out on PSD no matter how dumb the statement was. Goodness.

PatsSoxKnicks
02-13-2015, 03:50 AM
Last night Mark Jackson recalled in his first year coaching that their analytics guy quoted +/- to him in suggesting a specific player to play. And Mark points out the obvious flaw in +/-, that the guy was only ever in the game with the starting unit, so they inflated his +/-. This serves to highlight how misunderstanding of metrics leads to poor decision making, as that is EXACTLY how +/- should not be used.

Adjusted +/- is being used more often (or really RAPM). Doubt someone would give raw +/- numbers which means Mark Jackson probably didn't understand the stat (and that's a more difficult one to understand). Look up the history on Adjusted +/-. And whoever the stat person is probably would've given an error measurement. Nobody's getting a job as an analytics intern or whatever position without having some knowledge of statistics and so they wouldn't give a number like that without an error measurement (not that you'd communicate it to the coach in that way). (at least the ones I've talked to about the subject)



But what this shows is that data and analytics are being used for far more than draft and lineup optimization, even if they're doing it wrong. Analytics are being used to determine what plays to run, what players to play, etc. There's probably headbutting between coaches and the stat geeks on which is correct, but any team running a 3 and paint system at this point is being influenced by the number crunching. And there are a lot of them.

Obviously- I was including that in lineup optimization. Maybe that wasn't clear. But what players to play is a part of optimizing your lineup. Plays to run is number crunching but they get most of that data from Synergy, SportVu, Vantage, etc. Although I suppose that counts as analytics. But that's kinda outsourced. The analytics people within the teams aren't sitting there and tracking which plays are run and their efficiencies. That stuff is already tracked by Synergy. They get the data and present it to the coach. Doubt that takes up a lot of their time.

In fact, a lot of the time probably goes towards building a database of the stats so you can query etc. Make it a more easily accessible format. Because there's a lot of new data coming in now with SportVu and Vantage.



In defense of analytics, I'm guessing that the guy Mark Jackson was talking about was not their head of analytics, nor particularly versed in sports economics. It was probably an intern.

Mark Jackson probably misunderstood or didn't communicate his story to the media properly. You aren't getting an analytics position if you aren't well versed in stats and programming. And FYI, the last few interns the Rockets hired had PHDs....So yeah, even the internships are highly competitive.

PatsSoxKnicks
02-13-2015, 03:54 AM
You can use analytics along with talent. Barkley's got it wrong here. Not like Morey says he only uses analytics to build his team anyway. It's pretty stupid though if you don't use a relevant portion of it in any part of basketball.

Yeah all of these teams use scouting in conjunction with analytics. I mean honestly, there's a pretty big overlap in a lot of ways. And all of these scouting services make it a point to have video available so you can see with your own eyes.

tredigs
02-13-2015, 06:43 AM
PSK I love you man. Such an intelligent kid.

You'll be running **** quite soon.

Chronz
02-13-2015, 12:35 PM
Getting butthurt over something Barkley said kind of says a lot about you. Barkley has ripped on my favorite teams and players many many times and I just laughed it off or rolled my eyes. I didn't make it a necessity to freak the **** out on PSD no matter how dumb the statement was. Goodness.

I don't see anyone butt hurt. Just people destroying the premise of this thread. You would have a great point had it been started by Rox fans.

Sandman
02-13-2015, 12:38 PM
I don't see anyone butt hurt. Just people destroying the premise of this thread. You would have a great point had it been started by Rox fans.

I thought he meant Morey

Chronz
02-13-2015, 02:00 PM
I thought he meant Morey Oh. got it now.

SportsFanatic10
02-13-2015, 02:21 PM
the only thing he destroyed was what little credibility he had left...what a dinosaur lol

Saddletramp
02-13-2015, 03:27 PM
I thought he meant Morey

Last I checked, Morey doesn't post here. He was absolutely talking about Rockets fans *****ing in here (which none of us were anymore than others who disagree with Barkley). Looks like he was talking straight to rhino.

*****ing about Rockets fans, even when they're not doing anything wrong, is just what he does.

PatsSoxKnicks
02-14-2015, 03:18 AM
PSK I love you man. Such an intelligent kid.

You'll be running **** quite soon.

Thanks lol. Hopefully but unlikely. Had a chance at a few but well have literally no idea whats happening lol so just assuming it's not (one of them is the subject of this thread).

BTW, I'm hoping the Warriors come out of the West. Steph's a beast. Well Warriors or Rockets.

ewing
02-14-2015, 08:59 AM
its all about efficiency

b@llhog24
02-15-2015, 12:43 PM
Gotta love Chuck.

nickdymez
02-15-2015, 03:13 PM
The Rockets sucked for a long time, so they went out and paid James Harden a lot of money; they got better," Barkley said on the TNT postgame broadcast. "Then they went out and got Dwight Howard; they got better. ...

"The NBA is about talent," Barkley continued. "All these guys who run these organizations who talk about analytics, they have one thing in common -- they're a bunch of guys who have never played the game, and they never got the girls in high school, and they just want to get in the game."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2asGeItzGWM



:clap:
I've been saying this for a while. PSD is full of these nerds who think they know basketball because of these stupid *** formulas and they don't know ****. "ws, per" gtfoh. Play ball

omdigga
02-15-2015, 04:53 PM
I've been saying this for a while. PSD is full of these nerds who think they know basketball because of these stupid *** formulas and they don't know ****. "ws, per" gtfoh. Play ball

This isnt a pick up game in the park. This is a multi-million dollar business. If the money was coming out of my pocket, I would want to know what those "nerds" learned from their "stupid *** formulas" before I made my investment.
I agree its not all about the number crunching, but I think it helps to build a better team.

nickdymez
02-15-2015, 05:03 PM
This isnt a pick up game in the park. This is a multi-million dollar business. If the money was coming out of my pocket, I would want to know what those "nerds" learned from their "stupid *** formulas" before I made my investment.
I agree its not all about the number crunching, but I think it helps to build a better team.
Good thing your not in position to run a franchise huh

omdigga
02-15-2015, 05:06 PM
Good thing your not in position to run a franchise huh

i guess i can say the same for you huh

nickdymez
02-15-2015, 05:08 PM
i guess i can say the same for you huh
I guess you can.

IndyRealist
02-15-2015, 05:43 PM
Good thing your not in position to run a franchise huh

It's widely known that every franchise at this point has their own analytics department, who's research is guarded like nuclear passcodes. Those nerds and their formulas are used by coaches to optimize lineups and design plays. Anyone not on board has been run out of the league by now. Why? Because analytics works. Just ask Doug Collins.

nickdymez
02-15-2015, 05:46 PM
It's widely known that every franchise at this point has their own analytics department, who's research is guarded like nuclear passcodes. Those nerds and their formulas are used by coaches to optimize lineups and design plays. Anyone not on board has been run out of the league by now. Why? Because analytics works. Just ask Doug Collins.
That's why the NBA is putting out the worst product in years. Young man. Anybody who's played basketball knows that formulas don't make great teams. I like how you nerds keep bringing up how every team uses them now to justify your nerdy little argument. Spurs were winning without em, winning with em.

lol, please
02-15-2015, 05:49 PM
He is wrong about analytics, they are key in assessing, predicting, and comparing matchups, individual players, and teams. That said, he hit the nail on the head when he said the Rockets are both overrated defensively, and not contenders.

IndyRealist
02-15-2015, 06:23 PM
That's why the NBA is putting out the worst product in years. Young man. Anybody who's played basketball knows that formulas don't make great teams. I like how you nerds keep bringing up how every team uses them now to justify your nerdy little argument. Spurs were winning without em, winning with em.

They're keeping up with the Joneses. Analytics are a competitive advantage, and any team that doesn't use them, or uses them incorrectly, is shooting themselves in the foot. The Spurs were winning without them when no one had an analytics dept. Now they use it to stay on top. Your argument doesn't make any sense. The game changed and the Spurs changed with it. You just haven't.

nickdymez
02-15-2015, 07:20 PM
They're keeping up with the Joneses. Analytics are a competitive advantage, and any team that doesn't use them, or uses them incorrectly, is shooting themselves in the foot. The Spurs were winning without them when no one had an analytics dept. Now they use it to stay on top. Your argument doesn't make any sense. The game changed and the Spurs changed with it. You just haven't.
Whatever. I'm not gonna argue with you, I don't really care. You believe what you want. Basketball Is a sport that has survived without analytics for years. It doesn't even make sense. Baseball I can see. But whatever. Who cares

Htownballa1622
02-15-2015, 07:22 PM
whatever. I'm not gonna argue with you, i don't really care. You believe what you want. basketball is a sport that has survived without analytics for years. It doesn't even make sense. baseball i can see. But whatever. Who cares

so much irony.

nickdymez
02-15-2015, 07:26 PM
so much irony.
You work for the NBA?

rhino17
02-15-2015, 07:30 PM
You work for the NBA?

So if you were a coach, you would find it detrimental to know where your particular players make a higher percentage of their shots, or where an opponent's weakness lies?

Htownballa1622
02-15-2015, 07:34 PM
You work for the NBA?

Nope but clearly you don't either.

You do realize ppg, rpg, apg are forms(albeit simple) of analytics?

Jamiecballer
02-15-2015, 08:49 PM
Intelligence and research aren't useful in basketball. Said no one ever except nickdymes.

IndyRealist
02-15-2015, 09:05 PM
Wow, a whole page of deleted posts.

In reference to, "no one ever credited a championship to analytics":

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/30227/carlisle-pushed-all-of-the-right-buttons

It’s a victory for the data-driven approach that Dallas' coaching staff has taken, starting with Carlisle -- unquestionably the most cerebral and stat-friendly of the league’s 30 head coaches -- and down to director of basketball analytics Roland Beech, the 82games.com founder who joined the Mavs on the bench last season and earned the unofficial title of “first stat geek with a championship ring” with such access to the coaching staff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3jY3TcCqGU

They used analytics to PICK THEIR COACH.

lol, please
02-15-2015, 09:06 PM
Intelligence and research aren't useful in basketball. Said no one ever except nickdymes.
:laugh2: