Instead of stalling, why won't you tell us what kind of software you use in analyzing statistics and coming to your conclusions? It's a real easy and simple question to answer.
Software? Do you really think that I have my own statistical formula? The reasoning behind the book and video links, was so that maybe you could understand a few common points when it comes to advanced statistics. 1. Advanced statistics are so relatively new, that the NBA does not track the majority of the information. Most of it is tracked by the teams themselves, the teams that see it as an advantage. 2. These statistical formulas will NOT be released to the public easily, because of the competitive advantage they have created. These books will not give you the ENTIRE formula, but they will give you a taste, and put you on the right path when looking at how a guy like Battier can have such a positive impact on the game. An impact comparable to a top flight player. If you do not believe Daryl's word, or other authors that light Shane as a sort of poster child for advanced statistics, what am I to do?
I sincerely hope you don't think this is about Shane Battier anymore. It's about you insinuating your superiority by citing "advanced statistics" that Mr. Brown here apparently couldn't grasp, where in reality you know nothing of the actual statistics, but possess a plethora of knowledge in relation to what authors and crafty wizard GMs have told you about said "advanced statistics". For this to come to a peaceful conclusion, you must both acknowledge your differences. Knote32, you choose to believe what you've read on moneyball and advanced statistics, and as such you value Battier more than Kwame, who will remain a skeptic until the actual statistics/algorithms/etc. are released. IN CONCLUSION: You'll never change the other party's opinion. As evidenced by countless threads on Clutchfans, our posters are stubborn and arrogant. YOU. WILL. NOT. WIN. No matter how well thought-out and flawless you may think your argument is. This friendly message has been brought to you by tinman, living proof that no matter how much you shred an argument, people will not concede on the interwebs.
It's not grasping the actual formula of advanced statistics, it is acknowledging that they are there, and that Daryl Morey is putting them to good use in determining productivity and value. (Battier being his first target) Daryl Morey doesn't make basketball decisions without having the numbers to back it all up, as you all know. The value of Shane Battier or Kyle Lowry is significantly different to a GM like Daryl. Has he not proven his effectiveness yet? TBD in the next few months/years I guess...
Right, which is subjective in the end. This means people are free to agree and disagree on the relative effectiveness of whatever statistics Morey may or may not be using...after all, you haven't seen them for yourself right? So how do you know he's using them? All you've heard is PR from the Rockets organization, and while I personally don't doubt he is utilizing them you can see where skepticism might arise. This brings me back to my original point: it's not about whether you two agree on Morey's methods, it's about you insinuating that you knew more than him.
Oh really? Then why would you make a statement like this: Now "it's not about grasping" the actual formula, because you have no evidence to support this statement? Lol, your "argument" is so fallacious that I don't think you even know what you're talking about at this point. You're making yourself look sillier and sillier. This is exactly why he's a charlatan. Look at the post above that I quoted. Now he's claiming "it's not about grasping" the actual formulas, but it's about acknowledging their existence, lol. Classic signs of a person who doesn't know what they're talking about.
Yes. As far as advanced boxscores go, Shane Battier is the poster boy. Every link I presented goes into great detail of the tremendous value of Shane Battier, statistically. This is a key point when dealing with a person that compares Shane Battier to Matt Barnes or Mike Pietrus, or believes he is overvalued as a player. This is not only a stupid suggestion, it is infantile, If you are a student of the game.
You're the one that needs to learn how to read. Once again, here's what YOU said: Either provide us with these advanced statistics that, according to you, demonstrate that Battier puts up comparable numbers to all-stars or admit you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Stop being a fraud and either put up or shut up.
here's a better idea. Why don't you prove that you know more than Daryl Morey. You say it's on him to prove his knowledge of advanced stats, but actually its more on you to prove that the stats are flawed. Because Morey has been proven and repped by credible people many times over, while you have not. If you disagree with Morey (by disagreeing with a Morey believer then you disagree with Morey by proxy), then you need to show your advanced knowledge and how it would be superior to Morey's. But of course we all know you won't do that. You are being an argumentative twit solely for the sake of being an argumentative twit. Every forum has one, and it's you.
"As Dave Berri observed in response to a similar claim back in November 2007 if you understand the statistics correctly they say Battier is very good. Stats say that Battier is an efficient scorer with his modest number of shots, and that his net possessions numbers resulting from steals and turnovers are very good. Battier also appears to be, as best as one can tell, an excellent on-the-ball perimeter defender. This last bit really is an aspect of the game that conventional statistics don’t do a good job of capturing, but certain statistical systems—including Wins Produced—indicate that Battier is a valuable player." 1A. The Rockets could not pay another superstar. 1B. "We went looking for nonsuperstars that we thought were undervalued." 2. "Daryl Morey came up with a list of 15, near the top of which was the Memphis Grizzlies’ forward Shane Battier." Do you think DM might have had a pretty solid formula to come up with that list? What we can see with the statistics available. 1. "On defense, although he routinely guards the N.B.A.’s most prolific scorers, he significantly reduces their shooting percentages." 2. "He somehow improves the defensive efficiency of his teammates." 3."In its crude form, plus-minus is hardly perfect: a player who finds himself on the same team with the world’s four best basketball players, and who plays only when they do, will have a plus-minus that looks pretty good, even if it says little about his play. Morey says that he and his staff can adjust for these potential distortions — though he is coy about how they do it — and render plus-minus a useful measure of a player’s effect on a basketball game." 4. "A good player might be a plus 3 — that is, his team averages 3 points more per game than its opponent when he is on the floor. In his best season, the superstar point guard Steve Nash was a plus 14.5. At the time of the Lakers game, Battier was a plus 10, which put him in the company of Dwight Howard and Kevin Garnett, both perennial All-Stars. For his career he’s a plus 6. “Plus 6 is enormous,” Morey says. “It’s the difference between 41 wins and 60 wins.” He names a few other players who were a plus 6 last season: Vince Carter, Carmelo Anthony, Tracy McGrady." 5. "Per 48 minutes the average small forward posts a Win Score of 7.3. Except for Battier’s rookie season he has bested this average his entire career. Let me repeat this point. Win Score, a measure based entirely on box score statistics, tells us that Battier is above average." 6. "If we delve into the numbers we can see why. First of all, although Battier doesn’t shoot much, he is an efficient scorer. And the aforementioned regression is quite clear on this point. Shooting efficiency matters in the NBA. Or to put it another way, inefficient shooting definitely hurts a team’s chances to win." TS%=558 eFG%=524 7. "When we look at steals and turnovers we see another area where Battier helps. For a typical small forward, if we subtract turnovers from steals we get -1.1. In other words, typically a player will commit more turnovers than he will get steals. Battier, though, is not a typical player. Steals minus turnovers for Battier in his career is 0.2. This is a 1.3 swing in possessions for Battier in his career." Unfortunately... 1. "There are other things Morey has noticed too, but declines to discuss as there is right now in pro basketball real value to new information, and the Rockets feel they have some." 2. "What he will say, however, is that the big challenge on any basketball court is to measure the right things. The five players on any basketball team are far more than the sum of their parts; the Rockets devote a lot of energy to untangling subtle interactions among the team’s elements. To get at this they need something that basketball hasn’t historically supplied: meaningful statistics." Career WS/48 Lebron James= 0.224 Shawn Marion= 0.165 Paul Pierce= 0.164 Andrei Kirilenko= 0.161 Kevin Durant= 0.142 Corey Maggette= 0.134 Richard Jefferson= 0.132 Gerald Wallace= 0.131 Shane Battier= 0.127 Carmelo Anthony= 0.125 Tayshaun Prince= 0.120 Luol Deng= 0.118 James Posey= 0.108 Ron Artest= 0.100 Caron Butler= 0.092 Mickael Pietrus= 0.087 Matt Barnes= 0.086 Raja Bell= 0.085 Aaron Afflalo= 0.085 Bruce Bowen= 0.086 Stephen Jackson= 0.071 Rudy Gay= 0.065 Shane Battier has blown the roof off of the WS, ORtg, DRtg, OWS, DWS and TOV% compared to other "similar" Small Forwards. If you take a close look at ALL of these ratings and stats, you will notice that Shane ranks very favorably, and his 7 million begins to look like a fair contract compared to players around him. It's not like he has been on stacked teams his entire career either.
Guys Leave Please my thread.... im evicting you guys for article #234 (Being boring ) theres a hotel down the road.. please not in public
I'm going to duck in and duck out, but here is my problem with all the battier supporters. In the playoffs when he was a minus 20 for a game or 2 or during the season when he had a bigtime minus score, people started saying its not about +/-. The justification of shane's entire worth to a team has been +/-, but when he sucks in the playoffs, people like to look the other way or jump blame on others. I liked the shane trade at first because i thought he would benefit from playing with tracy and yao. In reality, he got worse and never improved a single aspect of his game and never showed on the road. After the first utah series when guys like harpring were stamping the game, head,alston,and shane wilted. Shane in particula didnt have the high scoring wing to chase, yet he didnt shift that energy to help the rockets overcome some of their offensive shortfalls. There is where my disbelief in advanced stats begin and ends. The human element from a emotional and physical standpoint can't be measured. Clutchness cant be put together like an algebra formula. When guys like sam cassell,robert horry,kenny smith,james posey,stephen jackson and guys like that play above their expectation in a huge playoff game, advanced stats cant explain that. When a so called head case in Jackson leaves indy for a equal talent, yet indy has sucked since he left, that cant be measured. When that same head case in jackson leaves gsw and all of a sudden his new team is in the playoffs for the first time ever and cite his toughness,grit, and swagger as most of the reason, stats cant figure that either. I understand stats are used to put most things on a even,logical, field, but no stat can determine how a guy reacts under pressure.
You've got to be kidding me? You run around in circles like a dog chasing its tail this entire thread. When cornered, you say that the "advanced statistics" are not accessible to us after you make claims based on them. Then you post a bunch of publicly available information. Simultaneously, you tacitly admit that you're ignorant of the quantitative methodology behind these numbers, because you don't know how the Rockets, Morey, or anyone else comes up with these formulas and statistics. Wow, just wow. The funniest part is if you look at the WS you posted, Posey, Pietrus, Barnes, Bell, Bowen, and Afflalo are all up there as well. You're so dishonest it's unbelievable. You implied, as others pointed out, that you were well-versed in these advanced statistics that us average folks can't see with the naked eye. Yet, you haven't posted anything other than publicly available information and a bunch of speculation based on the word's of others. This is charlatanism at its finest.
Maybe knote32 and other blind Battier supporters can attach some sensors to Shane's testicles and see how much they shrink during crunch time. They're already on his nuts so I think they would be the logical candidates to conduct this advanced statistical experiment. My hypothesis is that major shrinkage will occur in the last 2 mins of close games, road playoff games in general, and when Battier sees a picture of Matt Harpring. How about it knote32? Here's your chance to demonstrate to all of us how much of an advanced statistician you are :grin:
I knew I struck a chord. You know you have made it big when you make Kwame's sig, I am honored...:grin: All the while defending Shane Battier, I must be dreaming.
No you didn't strike a chord. I'm just making sure that people who did not have the opportunity to read this thread are aware of your charlatanism and take anything you say with a grain of salt. On the other hand, I've struck a chord with you twice now. First, it was you getting emotional and starting a thread with my name in it that asked who the better defender was - Battier or Bowen. You actually thought you would get an objective answer on this website, lol. Now, my initial comment in this thread, compelled you to respond in an emotional manner again. Subsequently, you started ranting and raving with a bunch of circular nonsense about a subject you clearly know nothing about despite insinuating that you did, which is charlatanism at its finest.
