Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

hoopsanalyst.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 106 posts

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#11

Post by jamesaguilar »

GBond wrote: post #9
zheng wrote: post #5

What surprises me most about this story isn't that it happened, but that people still are surprised it works. A data-driven approach will always be better than picking people by how good they "look", etc. Human scouts are biased, make mistakes, and miss plays. Statistics don't lie. The one catch is of course how you analyze those statistics makes all the difference.

Not surprised that most experts(NBA & DI school scouts) don't embrace this because it is easier and safer to go with the typical archetype as opposed to raw stats. Its "human nature" safe in the sense most people will not question if you go with the established archetype. It also devalues the current process of scouting. An apt quote from the movie Moneyball: "I know you've taken it in the teeth out there, but the fi…

Erm, as I understand it most NBA organizations have significant statistics/economics departments. I don't think the practice of going by looks or things of that nature is dominant any more except for sports pundits trying to rationalize events after they have happened.

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#14

Post by bretthopper »

Just some background for those not familiar with "Lin-sanity":

- He was a great college player at Harvard but wasn't drafted.

- He was cut by 2 NBA teams before the Knicks picked him up.

- He was probably the 4th point guard on the Knicks depth chart.

- The Knicks have been terrible this year and are currently without their 2 best players (Amare Stoudamire and Carmello Anthony)

- The Knicks have now won 4 straight games with Jeremy Lin playing big minutes (including 3 starts).

- The 89 points he scored in his first three starts (including Friday) got him a historical distinction. They are the most scored by an NBA player in his first three starts since the NBA-ABA merger 1976-77.

- Everyone loves him.

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#15

Post by marknutter »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #11
GBond wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not surprised that most experts(NBA & DI school scouts) don't embrace this because it is easier and safer to go with the typical archetype as opposed to raw stats. Its "human nature" safe in the sense most people will not question if you go with the established archetype. It also devalues the current process of scouting. An apt quote from the movie Moneyball: "I know you've taken it in the teeth out there, but the fi…

Erm, as I understand it most NBA organizations have significant statistics/economics departments. I don't think the practice of going by looks or things of that nature is dominant any more except for sports pundits trying to rationalize events after they have happened.

Yeah, but how often do they go with the statistics vs. their gut feeling?

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#16

Post by marknutter »

michael_dorfman wrote: post #3

Wouldn't it be more noteworthy if we weren't able to find one analyst who predicted Lin? With the number of amateur analysts, and the number of players, you'd think that its likely there's a web page somewhere plugging every prospect.

That doesn't really detract from the accomplishment. The numbers don't lie. To me it's clear that despite Lin's strong numbers, he wasn't given a chance until now because he didn't fit the archetypal NBA player mold.

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#17

Post by ShabbyDoo »

corin_ wrote: post #7
michael_dorfman wrote: post #3

Wouldn't it be more noteworthy if we weren't able to find one analyst who predicted Lin? With the number of amateur analysts, and the number of players, you'd think that its likely there's a web page somewhere plugging every prospect.

Reminds me of that classic scam of sending out sports (or anything else) predictions to a huge mailing list, and basically AB testing in such a way that after a little time there are at least x% who think your success rate is incredible.

Yeah. Done historically by stockbrokers making cold calls. Every week, "Now, don't put your money with me just yet. Here's what I'm putting my clients into this week. Just watch Stock XYZ this week to see what happens." If you pick three highly volatile stocks every week, make a lot of calls, and drop the prospects to whom you have given "bad" advice, you'll end-up with a decent sized set of potential clients who think you are a god.

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#18

Post by jimmybot »

corin_ wrote: post #7
michael_dorfman wrote: post #3

Wouldn't it be more noteworthy if we weren't able to find one analyst who predicted Lin? With the number of amateur analysts, and the number of players, you'd think that its likely there's a web page somewhere plugging every prospect.

Reminds me of that classic scam of sending out sports (or anything else) predictions to a huge mailing list, and basically AB testing in such a way that after a little time there are at least x% who think your success rate is incredible.

How is this anywhere the same?

In a scam, you don't have any way of making any future correct predictions--it's just random. This analyst has a reasoned system that can be tested against past players and against future prospects. Sure, there's going to be someone out there that picks Jeremy Lin. But the trick is, can you correctly identify players who are already known to be good based on their college stats, make the right call on Jeremy Lin, and go forward and continue to make good calls on draft prospects?

I'm not saying this sabermetrician generally makes good calls; I haven't looked. But dismissing his call as the result of a series of Bernoulli trials is completely missing the point.

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#19

Post by jimmybot »

jcliff85 wrote: post #12
minouye wrote: post #8

How is he calculating RSB40? I'm guessing its some sort of weighted average of rebounds, steals, and blocks but I can't find a solid definition.

(Rebounds + Steals + Blocks) / (40 mins)

I know what you mean, but technically, it's: (Rebounds + Steals + Blocks) * (40 mins) / (minutes played)

Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago

#20

Post by hyperbovine »

zheng wrote: post #5

What surprises me most about this story isn't that it happened, but that people still are surprised it works. A data-driven approach will always be better than picking people by how good they "look", etc. Human scouts are biased, make mistakes, and miss plays. Statistics don't lie. The one catch is of course how you analyze those statistics makes all the difference.

While it's true that sport scouting has traditionally under-relied on data, I wouldn't be so quick write the entire profession off entirely in favor of spreadsheets. Statistics can certainly be made to lie (cf. the book, "How to lie with statistics"), and there are a lot of aspects of human performance that are difficult to quantify. Performance under pressure is the first thing that comes to mind--reliably sinking a buzzer-beating three-pointer is a harder and more valuable skill to possess than just being a good shooter from beyond the line. You could try to quantify "performance under pressure", but a good scout will pick that up intuitively and probably do a better job of it. As always, the truth lay somewhere in the middle; a combination of both data and human input seems to be the best course.
Post reply on HN