Great find, GBond. I found it an interesting read. Thanks!
A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
51–60 of 106 posts
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#52Great find, GBond. I found it an interesting read. Thanks! I don't know how to do this, but can someone write a script and test it against the past 4-5 NBA drafts to see how accurately this guy's formula works? It would be really neat to see the results. Anyone up to test it???
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#53Just 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 ga…
If you go by the WP48 stat, Amare is actually the Knicks' second worst player and Carmelo is their 8th best player. Tyson Chandler is by far their best player, and is currently the second best player behind LeBron. http://www.thenbageek.com/teams/nyk
He's also currently ranked 2nd in PER right behind LeBron James who by most metrics is the most dominant player in the NBA. PER is a metric for player efficiency adjusted for pace and time played etc. Pretty nuts.
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#54What 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.
How good are the Oakland A's? Not very. So how successful is the data driven approach really? Isn't accepting a single case like this in the NBA as any kind of proof unscientific?
How good are they? You could try watching the movie,or better yet, read the book. They did well.
Unfortunately for the As (and fortunately for those of us who embrace the statistical analysis of sports) other teams caught up and surpassed their approach. But it's still going on. In every sport. And there is much evidence that it works.
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#55What 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…
>"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"
That's exactly it. People often argue that something or other isn't accounted for, but the statistical methods are sophisticated.
Besides, it's not about being perfect, it's about getting an edge.
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
The baseball equivalent, clutch hitting, has been kicked around in sabermetric circles for almost as long as Bill James has been writing of baseball's flawed stats and biases of pro scouts. The "common wisdom" of sabermetrics (if you can call it such a thing) holds that clutch hitting doesn't exist, but many including James, aren't quite ready to completely write it off.
The common wisdom isn't that clutch hitting doesn't exist. Hindsight reveals that some people perform better in "pressure situations". The issue is that it's unpredictable and seems to be unrepeatable, and hence not applicable to models.
Your example is a good one: name someone who has a "skill" at draining game-winning buzzer-beaters.
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#57What 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 tend to agree with you, hell i'm basically an analyst by trade.
but for the other side of the argument you should check out mark cuban's post http://blogmaverick.com/2010/10/03/building-teams-using-quan...
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#58What 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.
it is true stats don't lie. but there is no replacement for the human judgment of personality and dedication. if it was all about stats, allen iverson would have lead the 76ers to multiple championships. THAT'S the importance of personality! thats the importance of showing up for practice. :)
Actually, a point guard led team winning a championship is rare. It's the reason people watch Rose[Bulls] with suspect. The last time it was done was with Piston during the Bad Boy's era[late 80s, early 90s]. So, although individual accolades accompany Iverson, I doubt anyone would predict him to win multiple championships without significant help[well except the media].
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#59I 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…
So what if he hasn't played against an elite defensive team. That is irrelevant to determine whether or not he will succeed. How many players would do well against an elite defense team? Probably not a lot, otherwise they wouldn't be an elite defensive team. No one is saying that he's going to be another Stockton, Nash, Wade (although Magic Johnson did say that Lin reminded him of Stockton and Nash), and he doesn't n…
You make some good points. Lin has probably already done enough to have a decent NBA career and retire with millions in the bank. However the hype surrounding Lin is that's he more than that. The main point I wanted to make is that four games is not enough data to make that conclusion.
He's certainly lucky to play for D'Antoni, who is just about the only coach in the NBA who'd let a point guard freelance like Lin has. He's also lucky that the Knicks' star players are out so he doesn't have the pressure to just pass them the rock, which wouldn't showcase his skills. It will be interesting to see how Lin plays with Amare and especially Carmelo. We know from Phoenix that Amare is perfectly happy running the pick-and-roll with a good point guard. 'Melo prefers to handle the ball more, so there could be conflict there.
Re: A "Moneyball" statician predicted Jeremy Lin's success 2 years ago
#60I 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…
So what if he hasn't played against an elite defensive team. That is irrelevant to determine whether or not he will succeed. How many players would do well against an elite defense team? Probably not a lot, otherwise they wouldn't be an elite defensive team. No one is saying that he's going to be another Stockton, Nash, Wade (although Magic Johnson did say that Lin reminded him of Stockton and Nash), and he doesn't n…
So what if he hasn't played against an elite defensive team. That is irrelevant to determine whether or not he will succeed.
I think the bigger concern is that our small data sample on Lin's performance is significantly biased in that he has played teams with poor defense at the 1 & 2 (guard positions). Derek Fisher is no defensive All-Star.
I can't verify this, though--haven't done sabremetric research in a while. Doesn't Basketball Prospectus have a section ranking guards on their defensive play?
If the Knicks elite players can get their act together, then Lin only needs to contribute positively in order to maintain a strong career.
This is a non-trivial problem. Conditional on being the offense's #1 option, Lin has played well. How will that change when Melo and Amare return, and he has to set them up? When those guys are healthy, Lin is a #3 option at best (maybe lower, as he has no outside jumper).