Blazers Management & Sports Analytics

[Minstrel]

Disagree. Lots of these stats, when translated to real time NBA instances and trades..don't really apply.

Based on what, do they not really apply?

You can't quantify team chemistry with a statistic really or how well players play together. There are probably some weird +/- stats, but when you try to apply them in the real world...they just won't really work out like you expected. Too many variables from game to game.

You're being very vague. If this is just a longer way of saying, "I don't understand the numbers and am not willing to devote the time to do so," that's perfectly fair. Everyone's allowed to enjoy basketball the way they want to. But you're making assertions without any reasoning or examples. Many teams use advanced statistics in their evaluations, so I fail to see how they don't really apply to the practice of team-building.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Based on what, do they not really apply?



You're being very vague. If this is just a longer way of saying, "I don't understand the numbers and am not willing to devote the time to do so," that's perfectly fair. Everyone's allowed to enjoy basketball the way they want to. But you're making assertions without any reasoning or examples. Many teams use advanced statistics in their evaluations, so I fail to see how they don't really apply to the practice of team-building.

I just don't believe you can use obscure statistics to plan a basketball team. I think evaluating players as people and not numbers is more valuable.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Again, why is win% an obscure stat? Why is overall wins an obscure stat? I say that points and rebounds that do not lead to wins are an obscure stat. If you play fantasy basketball - they are great, if you play real basketball team wins and team losses are the most important stat. Anything else is secondary.

Stats should be used as data points to help arrive at a conclusion not yet determined, or as a tool by which theories and hypotheses can be tested, refined, confirmed, or rejected.

The data are not worthless. The conclusion may be worthless, but the data have value.

Many teams use advanced statistics in their evaluations, so I fail to see how they don't really apply to the practice of team-building.

Stat geeks unite!!

 

[espn_hall_of_famer]

It's a good conference.

Good posts maxiep, you're closer to the target than you realize.

 

[maxiep]

It's a good conference.

Good posts maxiep, you're closer to the target than you realize.

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and again.

 

[andalusian]

People know what Rebounds and Points are. Win Share per 36 minutes...wtf is that.

So what. People understand Newtonian physics as well - this does not make Quantum mechanics irrelevant.

There is a difference between what is true and what is easy to understand. It is easy to understand that Zach scores a lot and rebounds a lot. It is also true that the deficiencies in his game are so big that these two easy to digest stats do not really translate to meaningful contributions in basketball games.

A non-stat geek will say something like: They shoot too many jumpshots, they need to attack the rim more as a casual observation.

... and we have seen that this is nonsense - because the numbers show that the Blazers are not as jumpshot happy as people claim, and the numbers show that offense is not their problem - it's defense, despite the fact that numbers like "points against" show them as among the best in the league - but when you actually look at pace - you see that it is bullshit.

A stat geek will go off on a long tangential about non-related numbers pulled out of their ass that just confuses.

There is nothing easier to understand than team success in basketball. If you do not understand that - you are following the wrong sport.

 

[andalusian]

And my point is a trained monkey could get a 3.0 at KU.

I will take your word for it.

 

[BGrantFan]

Stat geeks unite!!

If stat geeks carried cards, I'd be a card-carrying Stat Geek. I luuurrrvveee me some stats.

 

[andalusian]

Don't "they" usually say that point differential is a better indicator of team performance than just straight win%? If that's the case, then let's look at LA and Zach's on/off court numbers.

I think you are confusing two types of data - the on/off numbers can also be related to who you have replacing you - if Zach's replacement in Memphis is ? (I do not know who it is, honestly, but I think Memphis's bench is supposed to be one of the worst in the league) - where LMA was often replaced by respectable bench players (Outlaw, Dante, Howard) - then the on/off numbers are less relevant. I suspect that point differential makes a lot more sense when talking about teams as a whole for comparison sake than pure on/off numbers - if you do not actually consider who is the "replacement" that comes in for you when you are off...

When LA is on the court, the team is 3.6 points better than opponents (per 100 possessions). When he's off the court, the team is 3.7 points better. Overall, his presence has virtually no impact on team point differential.

Who is replacing him and who is playing against the Blazers when he goes out is a consideration as well. I also think that Win% is a lot less volatile than on/off numbers - since a big blow-out or smack-down can distort on/off numbers - but will be much less of an issue when displayed in the Win% column. Win% rewards consistency a lot better than on/off, for the record.

When Zach is on the court, his team is 0.4 points better than their opponents. When he's off the court, his team is 3.8 points worse. Without him, the Grizz are not good; with him, they're at least mediocre.

And yet, these numbers do not translate well to wins...

It is a conundrum, for sure.

 

[hasoos]

ZBO = All Star. He's played like one this year and we could use a player like him right now. We got zilch for him and Aldridge has not improved THAT much. ZBO is more valuable because he can rebound and has much better low post game.

And the Reason ZBO has not reached the playoffs is he's been on bad teams, he is not the cause of the bad teams.

Bullshit. I have watched Zbo play plenty of times this year. He is still Zbo of old. He still doesn't run the court on defense, he still jacks up every shot he can, and he still doesn't rebound on the defensive end of the court, and he still jaws at the ref rather than playing defense when he doesn't get a call. If you want that on your team great. Go watch Memphis.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

he still jaws at the ref rather than playing defense when he doesn't get a call. If you want that on your team great. Go watch Memphis.

To be fair, Brandon Roy has been doing that a lot this year too.

 

[Minstrel]

Ah, the ZBo Wars. How I've missed them. I fought them in my youth, but now I've grown too old. Wars are for the young.

 

[andalusian]

Make Love (Kevin), not ZBo.