So Micheal Wilbon believes 'blacks' as he termed it, don't care about analytics.

I read it, and can't say that regular black folk are any more or less disposed to adding stats to their daily conversations than regular folk of other races.

What I do know is that him citing Draymond Green's lack of understanding about stats as evidence is laughable especially when one of the faces of the stats movement, Shane Battier, is black.

Another thing about Draymond, his comment about not taking long-two's makes no sense. When did you ever see him take a long two? He literally either sets up for the three or works in the paint. If he does that "by feel", fine. But that only proves that you can incorporate statistically favorable actions into your game without "thinking" about it.

Also, LOL @ the potshot at Dwight at the end

 

Dumbest thing i've read in a while. Does he really not know the answer for that or is he just trolling?

 

Well, even though "blacks" is always a sensitive subject in the PC era, you wouldn't have to take this statement so literal and get offended by some casual observation.

When ppl say "don't" it almost always mean they "don't tend to", it is a generalization. It doesn't mean "no blacks ever", it can simply mean it's not as popular among blacks than it is among others. I can at least understand this observation, even agreeing with it.

You can see the same in academics. How popular is math among blacks versus among whites and Asians? How many math majors by African American students? Hard facts you can google or research. It is not a "better or worse" statement, it is just an observation. Ain't nothing wrong if you don't like math bro.

 

Lol, that was the exact sentence I was going to point to.

It was also what made me realize what I already knew anyway... this isn't some kind of journalistic fact finding mission. It's an article, trying to get hits, doing so by being reactionary in nature.

I happened to catch the second half Wilborn's interview on LeBatard's show this morning, and it was equally moronic.

The idea that someone - as he attributes to Shaun Livingston - just won't use "advanced" analytics, but is interested in knowing when someone is a good or bad free throw shooter and other such stats/tendencies (which are stats over time) is again, equally moronic.

Or the idea that someone doesn't think about whether he is behind the three point line or one step inside because in the moment its too fast to decide I need to take a step back - as he attributes to Green - is again, equally moronic. Of course players factor this in. You can see it with your eyes. Nobody takes jumpers right in front of the 3 point line anymore. Moreover, you can actively see within given plays in a game players purposefully go back for 3s instead of long 2s. Because apparently those african americans can figure it out.

Not to mention the multitude of other players who do use the more advanced varieties of it, including Lebron.

The reason for the backlash against advanced analytics is because older school guys can't understand it. they think the process is some math geek making up numbers that are too hard to figure out, and completely ignoring other things like chemistry, fit, relationship, etc. Which, of course, isn't true. Advanced analytics seem to me to be used by executives, coaches, and players in the exact same way as "regular" analytics. A useful tool to consider, among various other factors.

 

Holy Jesus...that was brainless even for ESPN's standards...

 

How many presenters at the sports analytics conference have been black (and argued a pro-stats position)?

What percentage of analysts around the league are black?

 

I didn't catch the show, so thx for summarizing. Anyways, it doesn't seem he's saying players do not understand what's a better shot, he just said they "don't care" right?

While the examples cited above still sound moronic, I can see how some players who love chucking long 2s still love those long 2s despite the analytics era. Some may have eventually warmed up to it or be convinced by others' success.

Still, when Battier was on the rockets, I remember him saying he's like the only guy who seriously read the 10page reports handed out by the analytics team. It's not that easy to digest especially when you are primarily focused on physical trainings. And if you hear a brief from a staff, it'd be less convincing versus personally studying those stuffs. So it is totally normal to "not care" imo, unless you are personally kinda interested in the subject.

In this regard, my previous post can still apply. It all comes down to whether you like this stuff or not. If you don't personally study it, you may be just hearing babbles from the management in a diluted form and when don't strongly believe it, it may have less impact on being applied on your habit or changing your instincts.

You're right about the hits-whoring industry, catchy myth gets hits, sensible analysis don't. C'est la vie.

 

I don't think he's wrong. The allegation feels wrong. He lumps a ton of people together with his label of "blacks," but people who would socially self-identify have a definite aversion to the language of analytics, as it's currently presented. I've tried and failed miserably.

 

I haven't but that sounds like a fascinating read.

This article is anti-intellectual garbage. There is no evidence that black people are less analytical than non-blacks. That a black man should write it is even more bewildering.

 

Pretty sure he was an English major

 

but it can also impact your next paycheck. if you don't want to adapt to what all the people handing out contracts think is efficient or valuable, your next paycheck might be smaller. even if you personally don't think the metrics are the right thing to focus on. i'm sure we all have things at our jobs that we focus on because the company focuses on it.

or it could affect whether you get a head coaching job, because you say you don't want to take into consideration what the people who do the hiring want to take into consideration.

analytics isn't unique to basketball. it's going to be adopted even more strongly in the future. not adopting it could hold a person back.

i'm not exactly sure what wilbon's motivation is in writing this, aside from the fact i know he doesn't like analytics. but white or black, ignoring analytics is probably going to get more and more detrimental to your career so i'm not sure any person is benefitted by ignoring it.

 

He should study gay Asians' propensity for using analytics.

 

I can't believe I fell for that click bait.

It seems like blacks and "old white people" aren't using sports analytics because those are the people in the middle of basketball operations. This same dynamic exists in many other career paths. The operations teams believe they know "what's really going on" (and many times they do) and the engineering/business/office guys are reducing them to numbers.

Wilbon's comments about blacks in barbershops etc. is so idiotic. How many of you guys are having in depth analytics based debates away from the internet? I doubt the average white guy is discussing adjusted plus-minus at the water cooler.

It has nothing to do with race.

Also, regarding the employment discussion he had with Elhassan...a STEM major working at a professional sports team is actually not that attractive. You'll toil away for years earning pennies until maybe you get the opportunity to prove yourself at one of the handful of high responsibility positions. Even if you're really good, your chances of becoming Daryl Morey are quite low.