Limitations of Moreyball: Analysis of the Rockets Clutch Performances

notice how this guy just picks ONE YEAR for Horry.

let's give everyone the whole story and not cherry pick

<PRE>
Season Age Tm Lg Pos G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
1992-93 22 HOU NBA SF 12 12 374 47 101 .465 9 30 .300 20 27 .741 14 48 62 38 18 16 28 30 123
1993-94 23 HOU NBA SF 23 23 778 98 226 .434 34 89 .382 39 51 .765 41 100 141 82 35 20 27 68 269
1994-95 24 HOU NBA PF 22 22 841 93 209 .445 44 110 .400 58 78 .744 40 115 155 76 32 26 25 69 288
1995-96 25 HOU NBA SF 8 8 308 37 91 .407 21 53 .396 10 23 .435 15 42 57 24 21 13 15 29 105
1996-97 26 LAL NBA SF 9 9 279 17 38 .447 12 28 .429 14 18 .778 12 36 48 13 10 7 11 27 60
1997-98 27 LAL NBA PF 13 13 422 39 70 .557 6 17 .353 28 41 .683 34 50 84 40 14 14 18 45 112
1998-99 28 LAL NBA PF 8 0 177 12 26 .462 5 12 .417 11 14 .786 10 26 36 11 6 6 7 29 40
1999-00 29 LAL NBA PF 23 0 618 59 145 .407 17 59 .288 40 57 .702 38 85 123 58 20 19 30 88 175
2000-01 30 LAL NBA PF 16 0 382 32 87 .368 17 47 .362 13 22 .591 30 53 83 31 22 16 18 50 94
2001-02 31 LAL NBA PF 19 14 703 61 136 .449 24 62 .387 30 38 .789 36 118 154 61 33 16 30 66 176
2002-03 32 LAL NBA PF 12 10 373 30 94 .319 2 38 .053 5 9 .556 23 57 80 37 15 12 17 37 67
2003-04 33 SAS NBA PF 10 0 211 20 43 .465 8 22 .364 13 14 .929 25 38 63 9 8 2 10 31 61
2004-05 34 SAS NBA PF 23 0 618 73 163 .448 38 85 .447 30 41 .732 46 79 125 47 21 20 20 53 214
2005-06 35 SAS NBA PF 13 5 224 15 37 .405 6 17 .353 19 26 .731 19 29 48 11 5 9 10 31 55
2006-07 36 SAS NBA PF 18 0 361 25 60 .417 13 37 .351 14 17 .824 16 54 70 29 11 24 14 30 77
2007-08 37 SAS NBA PF 15 0 154 7 36 .194 5 22 .227 4 6 .667 11 21 32 8 5 5 2 34 23
Career NBA 244 116 6823 665 1562 .426 261 728 .359 348 482 .722 410 951 1361 575 276 225 282 717 1939
</PRE>

 

7 rings in 16 playoff seasons...

 

And he never lost a first round series.
never

 

What people ?
These people must never have seen the playoffs.

 

Yeah, I guess when you look at the big picture something really does stand out:

.42% lifetime regular season; .42% playoffs.

So how does this suggest 'clutch'?

It's more a matter of a player being put in 'big situations' performing exactly along the lines of his regular season output. To say he performs like ___ in the clutch is a meaningless distinction. He plays how he plays in all situations when given a large sample size, which, thanks to his many playoff appearances, we actually have.

The 2-of-38 was used to show how he can be just as 'un-clutch' as 'clutch'. He was just fortunate enough to be in a lot of playoff games so we mistakenly attribute to him a quality that really nobody actually possesses.

 

If you don't know that people can get "hot" or "in a zone" or be "clutch", I can guarantee you that you've never played organized basketball past jr high school.

 

lol

Yes I know. I thought he would have understood when we gave the previous examples.

 

People get hot or cold of course. They do not ne essarily do so dependant on the circumstances of a situation.

 

Clutch is essentially the same concept as pressure of high stakes. It's like walking on a balance beam. If the ground is right beneath the balance beam, it would be a breeze to walk over. But if you're 10 stories high, many people will lose the feelings of their leg halfway through the balance beam because of the pressure.

Same with bball, when your shot holds more weight between victory and loss, the pressure applied to the body and mind can mess up balance, strength and decision making. Some people are better at handling these situations than other so they usually take advantage of other people who can't handle it well (HACK A DWIGHT vs HACK ASIK). The media calls it clutch.

 

There's really just no evidence to support this at the professional level other than anomalies like paul molitor or whoever.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1469609

or more detailed here: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.117.3137&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

The 2nd one linked is particularly relevant to those arguing FOR clutch, though only in so much as it is skeptical of previous research rather than providing support for the opposite side.

 

That's why the rest of us care about the other 46 minutes old man.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-8FksMVAdU

We can argue about clutchness, but if you really believe getting hot doesn't exist, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Clutch is all psychological. Probably related to procrastination.

And it affects everyone to some degree.

 

True in my case. But irrelevant in any. In the same way I can guarantee that you don't understand statistics beyond the boxscore level. The thing is, you can swear, tell anecdotes and post videos all you want on, actual studies have found no solid evidence supporting your case. Here is one concerning the "hot hand" looking at three point contests: The "Hot Hand" Myth In Professional Basketball

And if in your opinion three point contests are not the place where someone can get hot, it's full of references to other studies looking at different contexts. Here is a review on the "hot hand" phenomenon in sports. Didn't read it in much detail but, while they're very cautious in their conclusions, it seems that, at least in basketball, the hot hand does not exist.

 

Good attempt! Voice of Aus (VoA) is you dont mind me calling you that, mate.

Many of us, are pretty lazy inputting downin word, but we rather only read

Just a suggestion here, is such a article as your, you might want to have a spinner of "what if" here and there, when you have not completely covered the subject you are discussion and this makes way for you and the readers to understand, fine the writer is going to write base on the "what if" analysis at later stage, but the thought was there in this article.

I'm kinda existed to see how our season goes with our current lineups, it really l0ooks promising and we would have better bonding among the teammates.

cheers.