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

31–40 of 106 posts

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

#31

Post by dmbass »

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.

I would expect a complete statistical approach to work great for a sport like baseball where a team is exactly the sum of its players (i.e. most play is individual), but basketball it seems like basketball has so many other factors because you need all 5 players to work together to be effective. A weak player can bring everyone else down and a strong one inflate everyone else's stats. But maybe that just makes the statistics that matter more complex.

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

#32

Post by bilbo0s »

Hmm...

I looked into his stats because I don't pay much attention to the Knicks.

At any rate I think Jeremy Lin is definitely going to have a good deal of trouble succeeding long term. There are a number of concerns there, but by far the biggest is TOs. In each game he's played, he has had the most TOs of any player. You can coach that away but one of two things will happen, his FGs will go up and his ASSTs will go down, or his ASSTs will go up and his FGs will go down. What you want, for a lot of reasons that most of you probably already know, is for the latter to happen. What seems to be happening is the former. There is a reason it is called a Point Guard. That needs to be fixed or other coaches will definitely take advantage of it when it counts.

You say, "well no problem...when Stoudemire and Anthony get back the problem will ameliorate." It may. I don't know. I would have to revisit his stats at that time. If I had to bet, I would bet that it will get better. But other young PGs struggle with the same issue...to the detriment of their teams in my opinion.

I guess what I am saying is that success in basketball, as measured in rings, requires stats optimized for balance and flexibility rather than strength. When Jason Williams finally got to Miami he was a more balanced PG. IIRC, during the 2006 finals he averaged 12 points and 7 ASSTs. Critically, at that point in his career TOs were under control. Jason Williams peaked at, somewhere around 3.5 a game. Jeremy Lin is averaging twice that at least. Not good. And consider, Jason Williams could make some of that up on the back end with steals. Not so much with Jeremy.

So I can see why a lot of statisticians would look at Jeremy Lin and say,"...well with my personnel...I'll have to pass on this guy." Of course if we scour the web we will find one guy who rated him highly, that is the nature of the beast. But there are a lot of good reasons that a lot of good scouts did not rate him highly. And most strategists probably see a lot of those reasons every time he plays.

All that said, Jason Williams, after initially playing a lot like Jeremy, achieved a REALLY good ASST/TO rating. If it wasn't THE highest...it was close. But again, that's the 12 points 7 ASSTs Jason Williams, which is what you want in a PG if you want to get to a ring.

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

#33

Post by mousa »

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.

NBA media and fans are much much more resistant to empirical stuff than baseball. I think it's because the appeal of the game is more about emotions and hype than baseball. There's this feeling that things can't be captured in the numbers, but what they use instead is so inferior for judging players. I mean the Knicks acquired Carmelo Anthony at the cost of all the efficient players on the team. All of the stats guys were very skeptical the media blared on and on about how they would be contenders and they were terrible until this undrafted rookie came along.

Another example, what I've found interesting reading some of the NBA statisticians blogs is this argument about "clutch". Most fans and media insist that Kobe Bryant, a player who shoots a lot of shots at the end of games and makes spectacular shots sometimes is the best closer in the game. Meanwhile almost all statistical evidence points to Chris Paul, a player who runs boring routine plays down the stretch, as by far the best closer in the league in terms of actually winning close games.

Until the NBA stats can predict winners like baseball, the public will always go by the "look." The teams themselves however, are almost all hiring statisticians now.

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

#35

Post by mousa »

dmbass wrote: post #31
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.

I would expect a complete statistical approach to work great for a sport like baseball where a team is exactly the sum of its players (i.e. most play is individual), but basketball it seems like basketball has so many other factors because you need all 5 players to work together to be effective. A weak player can bring everyone else down and a strong one inflate everyone else's stats. But maybe that just makes the st…

They have been getting much more complex. For example many stat geeks have been trying to make one that takes the +/- stats (how well the team does when the player is on the floor in terms of point difference per 100 possessions) and adjusting it based on the +/- of the teammates and opponents that have shared the floor with them. It's definitely more challenging than baseball, but there are a lot of interesting things to try.

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

#36

Post by noelwelsh »

I love Jeremy Lin as a player and I really hope he succeeds. However, it must be said: Four games does not a statistically significant sample make. Read the NBA Playbook breakdown of his game:

http://nbaplaybook.com/2012/02/08/a-look-at-jeremy-lin/

In summary, he isn't good going left or shooting from distance. So far he hasn't played an elite defensive team. The true test will come if he can sustain his performance over the season and against good defence. Let's hope he does it!

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

#37

Post by stakecounter »

bilbo0s wrote: post #32

Hmm... I looked into his stats because I don't pay much attention to the Knicks. At any rate I think Jeremy Lin is definitely going to have a good deal of trouble succeeding long term. There are a number of concerns there, but by far the biggest is TOs. In each game he's played, he has had the most TOs of any player. You can coach that away but one of two things will happen, his FGs will go up and his ASSTs will go d…

In response to the turnovers, I want to mention that there are a couple reasons for that.

The first is that he's playing PG and has to handle the ball a lot more than anyone else on the team right now. Combined with his minutes, that's generally going to give you more TO's just because of the amount of time with the ball and the probability of a player of his skill level losing it (although this point doesn't account for other PG's who average way fewer TO's).

Second, he's just started to play a ridiculous amount of minutes over the past week and hasn't had enough time to refine himself yet. Did you watch the first couple weeks of games this season? Because of the lockout this year, there were almost no preseason games and it showed. Turnover rates were extremely high for pretty much every team, so I'm inclined to think that Lin can get his turnovers down throughout the rest of the season assuming they keep playing him.

My last point is a pretty obvious one, but he's still young. A few more years of experience and I expect to see turnovers go down. I watched his 38 point game last night, and while he played pretty amazing, he did have moments where he looked confused and flustered when running the offense.

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

#38

Post by GigabyteCoin »

jimmybot wrote: post #19
jcliff85 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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

I think he meant that more as an english statement than a mathematical one. It is indeed the number of rebounds, steals and blocks PER 40 minute interval.

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

#39

Post by ncavig »

stakecounter wrote: post #37
bilbo0s wrote: post #32

Hmm... I looked into his stats because I don't pay much attention to the Knicks. At any rate I think Jeremy Lin is definitely going to have a good deal of trouble succeeding long term. There are a number of concerns there, but by far the biggest is TOs. In each game he's played, he has had the most TOs of any player. You can coach that away but one of two things will happen, his FGs will go up and his ASSTs will go d…

In response to the turnovers, I want to mention that there are a couple reasons for that. The first is that he's playing PG and has to handle the ball a lot more than anyone else on the team right now. Combined with his minutes, that's generally going to give you more TO's just because of the amount of time with the ball and the probability of a player of his skill level losing it (although this point doesn't account…

I agree. Generally with smart basketball players, there TO's go down as they get familiar with the pace and level of play. A comment struck me the other day by an announcer, Lin has never played against 7 footers before. Whether that's true or not, he may have seen a few while at Harvard, but to consistently play against these behemoths has got to be a new feeling. Regardless of skill, it'll still take time to get use to the size and style of the NBA.

What I love about Lin is he is a smart player and a smart person. It's not a surprise to him that he's turned the ball over. Guess what he'll be working on in the future.

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

#40

Post by oinksoft »

bilbo0s wrote: post #32

Hmm... I looked into his stats because I don't pay much attention to the Knicks. At any rate I think Jeremy Lin is definitely going to have a good deal of trouble succeeding long term. There are a number of concerns there, but by far the biggest is TOs. In each game he's played, he has had the most TOs of any player. You can coach that away but one of two things will happen, his FGs will go up and his ASSTs will go d…

somewhere around 3.5 a game. Jeremy Lin is averaging twice that at least

In his first four games of real time, he's averaging 4.25 turnovers, 8 assists, and 28.5 points per game. Deron Williams, a premier point guard in his prime, and playing with talent about on par with Lin's right now, is averaging 8.4 assists and 4.22 turnovers per game.

The turnovers might be a touch high, but there wasn't a moment in last night's game where I thought, "oh, this guy's just taking way too many risks." He seems quite solid.

And any fool watching these games knows that Lin's no Jason Williams.

Post reply on HN