There are a lot of interesting articles of late coming about in response to Michael Lewis's recent piece. I can understand if some (particularly those who aren't interested in this topic) would like them all to be lumped into a single thread. But I thought this piece by Kevin Pelton of Basketball Prospectus was deserving of its own. It's titled "Battier and the Boxscore: Learning more about the Game". http://basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=562 For people that are interested in the new wave of statistics that NBA teams are using to evaluate teams and players, this is a great read. It gives a little more background information on the numbers and type of analytical thinking Michael Lewis wrote about in his article. I always enjoy reading Pelton's stuff, and this is one of his best. [rquoter] ... Over time, adjusted plus-minus becomes more useful as patterns start to emerge. In this case, the numbers show Battier to consistently have a positive impact, on average about five points per 100 possessions. That's along the same lines as indicated by Morey. Critics of Lewis' article have taken him to task for giving Battier credit for Houston's turnaround between 2005-06 and 2006-07, when he was new to the team, given the Rockets were much better in 2004-05 before being plagued by injury the following season. They've also been dubious of Battier's role in the Grizzlies' development into a playoff contender, and in Houston's 22-game winning streak last season. In truth, Lewis' description of Battier--"every team he has ever played on has acquired some magical ability to win"--was surely hyperbole. However, Lewis could have said, equally poetically and entirely accurately, that Battier's teams have possessed a magical tendency to play better when he is on the floor. We Value What We Count All in all, the box score seems fairly innocuous. So why does it trouble Morey so? Without presuming to speak for him, I suspect Morey's disdain starts with this simple but crucial reality: What is tracked, what can be counted, tends to be valued. For years, the easiest things to count in basketball were points, rebounds and assists. As recently as the early 1970s, they along with shooting statistics and personal fouls were the only things tracked by the NBA for individual players. Inevitably, points, rebounds and assists emerged as basketball's version of baseball's "triple crown" stats. One irony Lewis never specifically pointed out in his piece was that his description of Battier sounds, in many respects, like the ideal role player. He knows what his team needs him to do, happily accepts it without complaint and by any measure executes it effectively. Battier's former coaches--three of whom (Hubie Brown, Mike Fratello and Jeff Van Gundy) happen to be prominent television analysts--rave about him as a player and a teammate. This is not a case of statistical analysis invalidating conventional wisdom. If anything, with Battier the numbers are amplifying the old maxims about the value of defense and team play. ... [/rquoter]
I liked this part: [rquoter] A point made effectively and repeatedly by True Hoop's Henry Abbott is that, especially in basketball, the statistical "revolution" is not so much about using numbers as it is about using the right numbers. As it turns out, points, rebounds and assists don't tell the entire story. That's certainly true for Battier, whose career numbers (10.1 points per game, 5.1 rebounds per game, 1.8 assists per game) are eerily similar but slightly worse than those of the immortal Darius Miles (10.4 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.9 apg).[/rquoter] That's a pretty good example of why "fantasy" type stats are so lacking in explaining the value of a player. Shane Battier and Darius Miles can't be any more different.
les' quote is even more mind boggling. not bashing on les, but as a fan it would be a sigh of relief if the owner of my favorite team has a grasp on the basketball game separate the box score.
You have to put this in the context of the trade that we pulled to get Battier. We traded a lottery pick for him, a pick that ended up getting Rudy Gay. That's a lot to give up for a career 10 pt a game scorer.
A lottery pick is a lot to give up. But you need to know what you're getting in return, and "10 pt a game scorer" is not an adequate description of Battier -- something Les and many Rockets fans did not understand.
Is Rudy Gay that much better really? He scores about 18 a game on a really bad team and plays poor defense. I know a lot of people can't see passed this lottery pick, but the proof is in the pudding my friend. You win with Battier. He's our version of the junkyard dog.
Is the production we'd get from Rudy Gay that much different from what we're getting currently from Von Wafer? Von's a great athlete, very good in transition, good shooting off the dribble and from beyond the arc, not quite as productive a rebounder. But per-minute, Von's "box score" production isn't that different -- a 14.4 PER versus a 14.9 PER for Rudy. Von doesn't get more minutes on this team, and he's obviously behind Battier in Adelman's depth chart, because of the mistakes he makes on defense. Well, Rudy Gay isn't known for being a great defender either. Rudy's stats look great because he's playing nearly 20 more minutes a game. But I think if Von played on the Grizzlies and they gave him 37 mpg, he'd put up some nice looking numbers as well.
For no particular reason I will try to restate your thread using MoreySpeak. We aquired a player who plays a good all around game with an emphasis on defense and track record for making the team play as a more cohesive unit. We gave up a player who has shown himself to be one dimensional, which is the ability to score a lot of points on a disorganized team.
My point exactly. Rudy Gay is not a star, he is an average player. Battier is an average player on offense, and a great defender. Who's to say if we had Gay right now that he would do that much better than say a Von Wafer. I am glad that trade was made and would do it again, giving the chance.
Just curious, why?? He has always put a competitive team out there, not afraid to trade anyone, and actively supports them with out being intrusive.
I've been known to bash Battier and its not cause I don't like the guy, its because when its money time, he disappears. Now we can sit here and say he's a role player, but rol players add what's missing to the stew. Is it their job to always score 20 or grab 15 rebs? No, but when the stars are struggling and the team needs something in the playoffs, that's when the role players need to step up. When Yao went down last yr and Rafer was out, it shouldve been battier to step up and become more forceful in the offense and in the game. He didn't and there isn't a excuse for that. Instead, scola, bobby jackson and brooks had to step or or try. Look at guys like posey, haslem, powe,rondo, and guys like that stepping up and supplying the team with points,rebounds, assist, blks or whatever. That's what role players do especiallly since the rox gave up a LOTTO pick for him. They can crunch the numbers and try to come up with magical formulas, but all I know is he's been terrible in the playoffs no matter how u cut it.
You have a point, but the whole team has struggled in the playoffs it seems like. I really hope we can get over the hump this year.
No one keeps stats of how many times a player gets back on defense, instead of coming up empty going for offensive boards, complaining to officials, gambling for steals at midcourt and not recovering, contesting every shot instead of watching. There wasnt a single stat of Jamario Moon breaking away free a dunk except his 2 points, but that play said a lot to people. Forgetting Battier's draft position and what he was dealt for, sometimes dont understand how a big 7 foot center getting 4.5 points and 5 boards a game with .6 blocks is doing his job cuz he has a mean look on his face. But a small forward with the same approach gets criticized for not being dyamic enough.
I wish there were a good way to quantify defensive value. Everything is always focused on offensive production, but fans often forget that two points prevented is just as good as two points scored. Not just Battier, but people who take defense very seriously ... have value is that is as real as points scored, if not more, but unrepresented in the box score. Similarly, other facets such as being able to space the floor properly ... if a player is able to do this, it means the offense as a whole flows much better. There are many things that really do make a difference in whether or not a team wins that are not represented by points/rebounds/assists. But it's very popular to mock this concept because it's so against the "common sense" of basketball fans. I like the similarity drawn in baseball, where the traditional statistics such as wins for pitchers, and batting average for hitters don't really map into actual wins that well.
That's why we traded for Artest. You keep expecting, or actually keep deriding Battier for his inept offense. You never got it through your head that's not his strong point. Why keep hammering on this? I criticize Battier for being a statue on offense at times and not knocking down the open 3 ball, but I'm not going to keep wondering to myself "Why can't Battier score so many points tonight?" Plus I actually notice his contributions on defense, both individually and help defense. Role players come in many shapes and sizes. Each role players have different roles. Just because Battier doesn't fit your ideal role player doesn't mean he's not fulfilling his role on the team. Rudy Gay = overrated
