[Excerpt] - Michael Lewis Chapter on Morey/Rockets

Dorsey was a 2nd rounder. not much of failure in it.

 

Certainly makes sense. And again, points to how little human touch was involved. Yes, ultimately you might be able to come up with a model that is REALLY good. But still, as you continue to look for flaws, etc., that human touch has to be there.

I mean I get DM was young in the game, but how do you "overlook" the fact that Dorsey was 24 years old in college?

And, of course, we still can't really gauge whether or not Morey has got his model to a better point anyway. His draft performance seems to be basically the same. Above average... but not great. Hidden gems, but bad misses in retrospect. Brooks/Landry came the year before Dorsey, so before the model changes. I'm sure he tweaks it every year, but since Dorsey we have successes of Budinger, PPat, Morris, Parsons, Capela, Dekker, Harrel. We have misses of Morris (hit and miss given who he passed on), Lamb (yes, he was traded, but don't recall that being known when drafted, and ultimately hasn't lived up imo), Royce White, TJones, Furkan, Nick Johnson. Pass on this year's guys. Think I left out 2008 picks of Jermaine Taylor and Sergio Llull, which I guess would be more apt as misses... BUT...

A lot of the misses are fine. Most of these guys were late picks and you can't nail them all.

Maybe DM should have a couple of models depending on point in the draft... maybe he does. He's never picked higher than 12th, and his picks 12th-18th include RWhite, TJones, PPat, MMorris, JLamb, SDekker. It's not horrible but not great, and made worse by the fact that Morris was chosen over Kawhi, White was chosen over better picks, TJones fizzled out.

I think its clear he's an above average GM and evaluator of talent/draft, but has flaws to his approach and isn't a top 5 guy.

 

DM drafting undersized players every year was a constant running joke of the BBS, I recall.
That's finally changed the last few years... for the better - Capela, Dekker (great size as a SF), Harrell, Onuaku, Qhou...

 

Got it. It's nice that he recognizes its limitations. Although interesting in that while he recognized it early on, he was nonetheless color blind to its problems. Again, even if you think your model is the bees-knees, how do you overlook Dorsey's age?

And still, the biggest questions to me remain overall success. This paragraph really stands out the most.

In Morey’s ten years of using his statistical model with the Houston Rockets, the players he’d drafted, after accounting for the draft slot in which they’d been taken, had performed better than the players drafted by three-quarters of the other NBA teams. His approach had been sufficiently effective that other NBA teams were adopting it. He could even pinpoint the moment when he felt, for the first time, imitated. It was during the 2012 draft, when the players were picked in almost the exact same order the Rockets ranked them. “It’s going straight down our list,” said Morey. “The league was seeing things the same way.”

Basically what i think. Definitely above average, but also definitively not in the grouping of "the best" teams/GMs.

As a fan, I want the best. Get better DM!!

 

Who is playing Morey in the Moreyball Movie? Jonah Hill?

 

DeAndre Jordan looked like trash in college, was a cancer, and didn't even start. Dorsey was strong, fast and agile. No biggie.

 

At the time, I thought Dorsey could be a good pick. He looked real good in the Final Four with Memphis. Took me about as long as it did Morey to realize that he wasn't—i.e., two games.

 

I wonder if the tweaks he probably made to the model after drafting Royce White have impacted us in the years since then. If you program the model to minimize risks as much as possible, you're going to miss all those risky guys who DON'T flame out. What would Morey's current model would have thought of Allen Iverson, considering his felony conviction while still in high school?

 

The issue with models is that the initial data is generally from a scout, and as such can sku the reliability of the end result.

For instance a contested shot - if someone is within 2 feet maybe scout A counts that as contested while Scout B says...got to be challenging the shot for it to be contested - so both enter data that varies, the model needs to hold up.

I believe some of the newer models have data driven inputs, IE there is an algorithm that tracks players on the court and you derive the data from that.

All fascinating stuff.

DD

 

I am just wondering what the secret model Morey is using. Could a model replace good old scouting?

 

I would think that the initial data would be tech-acquired, from those systems in place in each arena to track player and ball movement. Those systems can tell contested shots from non-contested, though you're right in that there might be some leeway in the definition of "contested."

But you can't trust a model if you're going to populate it with subjective opinions that may or may not be accurate (even the best scouts don't get everything right). So you start with pure data, where there is nothing to interpret. The player either dribbles from x to y or he doesn't. That's the pure data half of your model. Then you can add the subjective stuff from scouts and determine how much weight you want to give it. But I would be shocked if Morey & Co. don't have things set up to treat those two categories as distinct.

 

I had the same impression of Hassan Whiteside. As much as we poopoo missing out on those guys, the hit rate is exceedingly limited and dependent entirely on the motivation of the individual player to become a better player than he was in college. That sort of thing is impossible to predict.

 

Morey brought in a lot of guys like Whiteside (including Whiteside) who needed time, like Lin (before Linsanity), Dragic, Lowry, Covington, Ish Smith, Steven Adams, etc... I don't fault him for giving up on those players, I applaud him for finding them and giving them a sniff.

 

Probably my favorite part of the whole chapter is when Morey starts talking about how he forces his draft team to confront their bias before a draft. He lists any possible bias that could skew their opinion, and they try to figure out how to avoid it. It specifically mentions hindsight bias as one of the worst. It is almost impossible to look at what you felt/knew/saw in the past in an objective way after it has been skewed by what you learned later.

The other thing I loved was that he told his draft team that they are not allowed to compare players unless they are different races. You can only compare white players to other non-white players, etc. Morey is a thoughtful dude.

 

Here is an excerpt from the Slate article:

Morey was reassured by Alexander’s social fearlessness, and the spirit in which he operated. “He asked me, ‘What religion are you?’ I remember thinking, I don’t think you’re supposed to ask me that. I answered it vaguely, and I think I was saying my family were Episcopalians and Lutherans when he stops me and says, ‘Just tell me you don’t believe any of that ****.’”
I like Les.

 

I have a feeling this article will be posted many times over the next few months....and next year, too...and the next.

I think you blew it with the Title. You should have gone with Slate's title Basketball's Nerd King like the new Thread did.

 

actually I think sticking "DMo" in the title somewhere is the hot new marketing gimmick. Still worth a try I suppose.

 

Good find. It always baffled me why Morey would sign Dorsey back, when we all already knew that he sucked.

 

That's the quote I picked, as well.

It kinda points to Morey really wanting Bogut ... a dirty, cheat player like himself who surely shined on statistical models as well

btw: welcome to the original thread from last week for this book excerpt. I copied you here.