Granted, basketball stats have alot more of a dependency on the other players on the floor than baseball. That just means that the analysis is more complicated, but still possible. Here's a Morey quote on some of the stats that he evaluates. You'll notice that the 'ground truth' stat takes into consideration which 10 guys are on the floor at a particular time. This analysis is alot more than simply computing a stat and picking guys that excel in that area. What are some of the statistics he studies? "Efficient use of possessions is an undervalued, under-appreciated thing relative to just a guy who scores," he said. "Is he using those possessions efficiently? That's a key thing that's undervalued." And? "The unit that is what I'd call 'ground truth' in the NBA is measured another way. There's a player on the floor with four other players, and he's facing an opposing group of five. While those 10 guys are on the floor, they're playing a mini-game for the time they're on the floor. Who won? "What created them winning and losing? Maybe they created extra possessions through turnovers or rebounding." Maybe it's one or two players being part of the varied lineups throughout an entire game that is more responsible for success than a box score would show. Maybe a player some people see as valuable really isn't. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/justice/rockets/3796565.html
Here's another reason I hate the $Ball moniker. Here we find that moneyball connotes a particular system of analysis. To limit data-driven analysis to a particular methodology when it hasn't been thoroughly established as a solid indicator of quality or performance is foolish. I doubt very seriously that Morey limits himself to the "winval" approach that Dallas uses. And I doubt that Dallas does the same. So what is moneyball and what isn't? Maybe my bias regarding the moneyball term is because it defies a good definition and when you do try to define it you find that it misleads people in respect to the nature of rational data-driven analysis (and how wide and broad of a field of knowledge it is). One more comment about the above. I'm not sure what is meant by "using stats efficiently". Though I would disagree with the phraseology (which says something altogether different) I think the intent is that more insight is exctracted out of stats than looking at traditional boxscores only. Gaining more insight by studying and analyzing the observable and measurable is exactly what data-driven analysis is all about and the ways and means you might do this extend way beyond what is connoted in this statement as to what moneyball comprises of.
Multi-variate, multi-regression analysis are methodologies used in real world applications for the similar purpose of analyzing things when there are inter-related dependencies.
I disagree woth you cause The Mavs would be nuch better team with Nash on it right now. If I remember correctly the Mavs went to the Western Conf Finals bakc in 2003 with Nash and lost to San An. This year they just happened to beat their nemesis in a game 7 and move on to get destroyed in the Finals. To me that is not a major improvement. Tell do you seriously think the Mavs would have lost in the finals with Nash and the new arrivals of Howard, Devin Harris, Dampier and Diop. Replace the Mavs current Roster with Nash and you might be looking a real dynasty type team. Jason Terry is a great player but not ELITE level like Nash. Now my real question to you is. What is the COST OF REPLACING NASH and how does that play into the Money ball decision of letting Nash go? I mean Terry was at 8 mil for 2 years but now his new contract is longer than Nash's and worth much more money. How does that play into Moneyball when the replacement ends up costing more than the orginal and considering (Nash > Terry)???
so your are declaring that moneyball has the advantage....without even knowing whether every team has a moneyball analyst assisting the GM. And even if each team doesn't, isn't your statement very declarative to your point. imo, your statement seems nothing more that an assumption. Am I misreading something?
Here is just my 2 cents. The so-called moneyball is simply a more sophisticated way of scouting. On top of just watching a guy play, it considers a lot more objective factors, stats, data, etc. For what I understand, the analytical approach of player evaluation is not "just about stats." It factors in things like psychological make-up, etc. So instead of just asking around people who know a player, "Does this kid work hard?" you put in psychological tests. Instead of just watching tapes, you analyze statistics that measure impact on certain type of lineup, type of teammates, etc. I don't know why people are so negative about having a more sophisticated system of player evaluation. As I have pointed out before. When Tom Landry started using computers to aid his coaching decisions, the purists thought he it was just some sort of gimmick. Now, I don't know if any college coach, let alone professional, that doesn't use computers.
Kyle Korver is another moneyball type move. TE to a team way over the cap, for a player that justifies his salary and fits a team need.
its not hard to evaluate players. no matter how sophisticated scouting becomes, teams will always miss on players on players like dwayne wade, steve nash's will be undervalued till they get in systems that best use their talent. all of this moneyball, no team has won a championship and dallas is the only team that effectively uses from what I see. talent and hard work, its not hard to spot. this isn't rocket science, no pun intended. coach's have always valued players like shane battier, chuck hayes, etc. teams are built on chemistry, not stats. ask the rockets that won championships, and the rockets that treaded water during the francis years.
Hmmm. I apologize if this has been discussed already, but you guys may be on to something. Look at the moves we made this offseason, then look at 82games.com's fair salary rating. Dumped: Stromile Swift: $1.94 fair salary, $5.0 actual salary David Wesley: $1.96 fair salary, $5.1 actual salary Keith Bogans: $.86 fair salary, $.9 actual salary Richie Frahm: $.04 fair salary, $.2 actual salary Rick Brunson: $.09 fair salary, $.4 actual salary Jon Barry: $.12 fair salary, $1.8 actual salary Traded for/Retained: Chuck Hayes: $2.46 fair salary, $.2 actual salary Shane Battier: $10.54 fair salary, $4.9 actual salary Kirk Snyder: $3.78 fair salary, $1.4 actual salary Lost out on/Looking to sign/Rumored to deal for: Mike James: $9.62 fair salary, $3.4 actual salary John Lucas III: $.08 fair salary, $.1 actual salary Kyle Korver: $4.42 fair salary, $3.6 actual salary Marcus Banks: $1.05 fair salary, $1.7 actual salary (maybe this is why we haven't signed him yet) Flip Murray: $.36 fair salary, $.9 actual salary (see Banks above) Scott Padgett: $.24 fair salary, $1.7 actual salary (ditto) Damon Jones: $2.51 fair salary, $3.6 actual salary (ditto) Jared Jeffries: $2.32 fair salary, $2.4 actual salary Others still out there + players we need to move: Chris Wilcox: $1.54 fair salary, $2.8 actual salary Al Harrington: $3.56 fair salary, $6.9 actual salary Juwan Howard: $.85 fair salary, $5.9 actual salary (yikes!) Ryan Bowen: $.21 fair salary, $.9 actual salary (what a surprise...) EDIT: Added Jeffries
