Some Rockets relevant analysis from Basketballprospectus

Absolutely. Repped.

Maybe we can just appreciate the guys we have instead of constantly overrating/underrating them.

Morey wants to keep Lowry and Brooks. Why bicker about a great 1-2 punch that complement each other's games and, besides that, are great friends?

 

I agree with this Meh.

DD

 

Actually, it IS like the guys that come up with the numbers are watching the games and coaches tape.

That's the whole point of advanced stats, to differentiate between the different "20-10"s. The fact that you used this example to discredit the kind of "stats" discussed in this thread shows your own inability to differentiate between conventional and advanced metrics.

Do you know why magic works? Because the hand is faster than the eye.

When you base all your judgments on what you see, you will be blinded to what is actually there. Advanced statistics seek to bypass the inefficiencies and failures of the human eye, thereby yielding true value. By no means is there a perfect metric, the field is still young and a work in progress. But it sure beats the hell out of "Everyone guns after AB and he only had 2.5 turnovers, HEEEEE'S GREAT!"

 

I don't mean to add to the brooks/lowry debate, but maybe I do hahahha.

Brooks Offense



Lowry Offense



Brooks Defense



Lowry Defense



edit: all stats from synergy sports

 

LOL. Thanks again.

 

meh, i dont think morey watches nearly as much tape or live basketball as say the pro personel guy or the scouts. I think what he does is use the metrics formula like people say,then he takes the input about players from the pro personel guy and makes his decision. The scout,quality control guys,and pro personel guys do so much grunt work is crazy. This isnt to discount or discredit him,its just the truth. Personally,their methods are probably more time effecient.

When breaking down player,plays, and situations from the coaches tape is pretty tedious. Thats why the playoffs are so different vs the regular season.You're looking at the same players and plays. Thats where the adjustments and breaking of tendacies happen.

 

Do you have any actual proof that Morey watches less film than any of the other 29 GMs? Or is that just simply truth. Saying that he watches less tape than the personnel guy or scouts is irrelevant. Any and all other GMs watch less tape than them too. That's why they are the GMs.

 

I think there is increasingly a merging between game film scouting and stats. Sites like Synergy allow you to watch custom video clips of players, filtered by play-type, game situation, and who's on the floor. I think all the people in the Rockets basketball operations upper management, including Morey, make use of it.

 

There is clearly some middle ground where stats and scouts get together.

That is where Morey lives, IMO.

DD

 

cxbby, hollinger and guys like that arent watching rox vs bucks on a wednesday night in december. The gm's dont watch as much tape as the grunts i listed. As usual, the assistants probably watches more than anyone. How do i know? I have a great relationship with my former college coach who was also an assistant in the pros for a few years. He also trained me to take eyes off the ball when watching games which is very difficult to do. I'm not saying this is the blueprint or anything like that, but way beyond advanced stats,per's,and +/-, the eyeball test is still very,very strong. I think the metris narrows down the players and situations.

 

When you take your eye off the ball you can appreciate the guy that cuts through the lane without the ball drawing the defenses attention and opening the wing up for the wide open 15 footer, which is just as important as the pass to the shooter, IMO.

DD

 

Thats what i'm saying, but cxbby somehow brought the other 29 gms into it, lol. I clearly stated the scouts,qc,pro pers, and guys like that are undervalued. Before lindsay left, he offered up landry as a highly rated prospect. Through all of rudy t's faults a success, his scouting of a guy like horry was pretty good. Who would though a 6'10 center in college could become a small forward?

 

Or a 6'3" average speed PG out of Florida would be so good because of his midrange game and change of speeds......

DD

 

now someone just needs to develop an adjusted adjusted +/- that takes into account situations where using adjusted +/- is actually useful.

 

And when that shows up in an uptick in team offensive efficiency over a sample size, we see it in "stats". And when you take that off the ball cutter out and bring in his non-cutting sub, there should be a equal downtick in team offensive efficiency over a sample size. Otherwise, it would either mean his sub was doing something else that helped the team, or that cutting without the ball meant jack.

Either way, this can all be shown quantitatively. If it cannot, then what real value is there?

 

assuming you've built a team with active players, this should always be the case. you aren't replacing a good player with a bad player or a half a log, so in terms of the high level stats the impact of making a single substitution should be minimal unless one player has a vastly different skillset than the other. i think the real learning comes from looking at "how" the scoring gets done, "how" the defending gets done, whether on average additional fouls were committed, whether that player's skillset gaps had to be masked by another substitution at a different position, etc.

 

Lee, the scouts, qc, and pro pers watch more film than the GM, because that is their JOBS. This has nothing to do with whether you are a stats person or film person. They are not undervalued, nor overvalued. They are simply doing what they are paid to do. If Morey watched more film than those guys, then he should just fire the whole staff, since they would be USELESS. This is why I asked whether you thought Morey watched less film than any of the other GMs, because that is the only apples to apples comparison that is relevant to your assertion that "stat guys don't watch film".

 

I'm not quite sure how you can take what you think to be true and then come up with a truth. That's not the way logic works. Still, I think your opinion counts from something.

Still, looking at those stats, there is not a lot I can really answer until I know what the question is. If it's a one on one matchup, I'd probably take Brooks. However, I'd still want more stats because of the rebounding aspect. If my main goal for a PG is defense and spot up shooter, that's a tough call, I can't have the best of both.

I think it would be more interesting to compare Brooks to Blake for the best sport up shooter. Or maybe Lowry to DWill for overall PG skills. Then of course, you need more stats, to get the other aspects of the game. Yes, it's all about who scores the most points, but making your players better can go along way to that goal.

 

Absolutely. But again, all the "how"s can be quantified, just on a much deeper level of statistics/analysis than some in this thread can comprehend.

 

I dont want to derail, but i cant let this go because i'm a battier hater :grin:.

This has been my biggest complaint with shane for awhile. Its not the ppg per se nor the value traded for him, its what you stated about eye off the ball. I cant even count how many times battier has let his defender off the hook. I cant tell posters how many times shane has dropped it to yao and made some of the most useless basketball cuts known to man. Dump it in, jog to the other side,never setting your man up or reading your man, and just go to the other corner. I guarantee if he would pay as much attention to detail offensively as he did defensively, he could get the easiest 12-14 points in his career. The whole time i'm watching this, i'm also looking at the backside which is butt naked.