Stat geeks versus Street Knowledge

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Who do you trust more.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/13972/the-state-of-basketball-analysis

Does it feel a little bit cultural? Sometimes I feel like basketball is the realm of the jocks, some of who object to nerds elbowing their way into the conversation.

You say cultural. I say territorial. But I think those kinds of labels are not helpful.

There are quants who used to be jocks. There are jocks who could be quants. It’s a matter of opening your mind. Think what Billy Beane did in baseball! He was a baseball guy who was open to a new way of looking at things. Or [Nuggets vice president of basketball operations] Mark Warkentien. He’s been in basketball for a long time, but he’s willing to listen, which allows you to incorporate more information into the process.

It’s an interesting time. Just a couple of weeks ago, I looked at teams that have stats people integrated into the decision process. (Boston, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Oklahoma City, Portland and I may have included Orlando -- I’m not certain what they do exactly.) It was seven or eight teams. They had won 60% of their games, and that’s counting Houston, which has only won half their games because they’re missing Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady wasn’t playing.

The teams that don’t have quants won 40-some percent. And it was pretty linear … the more or less they had someone integrated into their decision making, the more or less they were at the extremes of winning and losing.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I find it interesting that KP is a "culture" guy who's also better at the cold hard stats game than Trader Bob was. It's like the best of both worlds, seriously.

 

[FeloniusThunk]

A lot of businesses are facing this change. In the company where I work, there are a lot of old-school media people, and they are (badly) struggling with the gradual move to data-based decisions. Now they have lost a lot of control, because experimentation can yield stats that contradict their beliefs - even long-held, industry wisdom beliefs. The same is happening in basketball and other sports. The coaches, GM's, etc. are going to claim to "just know" or "obviously see" some things that will be demonstrated wrong or likely wrong. The better ones will adapt and learn, and others will fall by the wayside over time (look at the media types - how well are most newspapers doing again?).

 

[Sug]

A lot of businesses are facing this change. In the company where I work, there are a lot of old-school media people, and they are (badly) struggling with the gradual move to data-based decisions. Now they have lost a lot of control, because experimentation can yield stats that contradict their beliefs - even long-held, industry wisdom beliefs. The same is happening in basketball and other sports. The coaches, GM's, etc. are going to claim to "just know" or "obviously see" some things that will be demonstrated wrong or likely wrong. The better ones will adapt and learn, and others will fall by the wayside over time (look at the media types - how well are most newspapers doing again?).

There can be huge flaws with both approaches, and the best method is moderation. You can make data look like anything you want really, and there is certainly something to be said to having a hunch. In fact it is the "feeling" that drives the data collection in most cases. The key is to have a synergy between the two where they work well together. The people, organizations, countries, etc that can do that will have the most success.

I think the advanced stats demonstrate a great deal creativity and vision, and as a result we can assume they will lead to innovation. The reference to Billy Bean is a good example, because the moneyball approach certainly has merits. We are in the middle of a sea change in the NBA in terms of approach to player evaluation. Look at the Bulls of the early 90's, they were ahead of the curve for sure. Don't get me wrong MJ was the best ever in my mind, but they put the right people around him for sure. They were specialists, and I have to believe that there was some data mining going on when they signed some of those players. Time will be the best judge for this story without a doubt. There is something to be said for taking emotion off the table when it comes to analysis, and yet there is a place for it when it comes to player evaluation. I am glad KP is a big part of this conference.