From what I seen in playoff stats, most players seem to underperform. Players tend to have lower FG% and more turnovers. The playoffs seem to have better defense.
So, what type of knowledge/insight constitutes real basketball smarts? Are you suggesting that there are things that are inherently impossible to quantify, that can only be understood by with basketball smarts? I agree (and so does Morey, if he's to be believed in his interviews) that stats can't be the only thing you rely on, and there are practical limitations. Some balance needs to be struck between the "basketball smarts" you talk about and using objective data.
Morey agrees with yah, read the article. Kenny Smith had some criticisms and the GM concurred. He isn't denying the traditional approach just adding an under explored statistical dimension that looks beyond the traditional box score. really nice piece fritz145!
Daryl would definitely be the first to tell you stats alone don't tell the whole story. It's not about pitting the objective vs. the subjective, but rather, finding the perfect combo of the two. This is still very much a work in progress. The sabermetricians in baseball still have so many things thay haven't been able to quantify. So when you consider that stat analysis in basketball is still in its infancy, and that the game has so many more layers than baseball, you realize that there's still a LONG way to go in this area. And General Thade, I will do my best to dumb things down from now on. No more gargantuan words from me, I promise. J.C.F.
It's the fine line between balancing the two that people don't understand. At least most casual NBA fans. There is a lot of times that you can quantify a person's contribution on the court... ie Tmac or Yao... but there are just as many times that you can't, from a box score, indicate what a player means to his team when he's on the court... ie Battier or Chuck. The thing that I think Morey is able to do is quantify those "intangibles" that everyone hates. Hollinger also tries to find ways to make those stats that aren't visible to a person reading the stat line understandable to the common fan. The so called "moneyball" isn't something set in stone at this point, at least it doesn't seem that way to me. I can't see a situation in which it wouldn't evolve and grow just like every other type of mathematical analysis. The more I read about this stuff the more interested I become in the process of it Whereas someone like Kenny Smith looks at it from a "expert" point of view and says, you can't quantify what I did on the court. Someone should do his PER or +/- to see what his projected value was during his career... maybe a years with and years without Hakeem analysis would be good. LOL
As promised, here are some of the outtakes from my feature on Daryl Morey (it's mostly stuff from Daryl, but I threw in a few interesting quotes from Billy Beane and CD as well): http://blogs.houstonpress.com/ballz/2007/11/outtakes_daryl_morey_couldve_b.php Thank you very much for reading, and by all means feel free to pass along your honest thoughts, opinions, suggestions, critiques, etc. anytime. JCF
Love it, fritz! The extra quotes are great, too. Morey may have been the biggest offseason acquisition of all. Of course, he could turn right around and make some horrible mistakes, too, and then we'll all rue the day. That's a lesson you'll have to learn here, too, fritz... with great, interesting articles like this, clutchfans will love you. Turn in a critique... your name will be mud!
Oh, trust me, Hippieloser, I know the laws of the messageboard jungle. I realize my work won't be so widely embraced if/when I say anything remotely critical about the Rockets. In the journalism game, you're lucky if 50% of the people like what you have to say. 100% just isn't going to ever happen, especially when the coverage is negative. I knew this all along, but that idea was reinforced when I started writing about the Texans (go figure). Having said that, I appreciate the honest, immediate, no-holds-barred feedback you can receive in communities like this. I think as long as it doesn't get too personal and as long as one's skin is not too thin, it can provide a great forum for some healthy give-and-take. Plus, I welcome the chance to have real fans tell me what they want to hear/read about. That comes in handy during a long season. I know my writing won't be universally liked all the time. I'm sure there will be moments when it's ripped to shreds. But my goal is exactly the same as it was for the Morey feature: that is, to entertain, stimulate and inform the reader with a MAJOR emphaisis on being factually accurate. Yes, there will be speculation on occasion, but I will always do my best to ensure that any speculation is supported by the facts. JCF
Yeah good article, but I am not convinced of Morey until I see Kobe in a rocket jersey playing along side of Yao and McGrady.
If that is the case, I am sure Morey will not be a god anymore, he would be the person who sold his soul to the devil.
Excellent article! Probably one of the best insider articles I've read, and definitely the best I've gotten from this site!
fritz145: Great article indeed! I lurk on the Texans message boards as well and appreciate the Houston Press articles you've brought up there . Durvasa: good find! Very interesting that Morey did work on applying the pythagorean method to basketball . I was toying last season with a way to project team ORtg and DRtg based on variances in player production in order to project win/loss using the pythagorean method but alas I didn't get very far in the process!
