The NBA’s Statistical Revolution
NBA March 25th. 2009, 4:45pm
Sorry, can’t get into it. No matter how many salient points John Hollinger makes, we still can’t fully buy into it. We’ll probably regret this in two years, and we’ll all get a chuckle out of it. (Told you so you stupid blogger!) We know baseball has become a stats-drive sport – but for the most part, that’s a one-on-one situation, nothing like the team game of the NBA. Do we really need a stat like PER to let us know that LeBron’s insane season is comparable to Jordan’s legendary 87-88 campaign? You can put numbers on reams of paper and this remains a purely subjective debate.
Looking at this season’s PER stats, Jameer Nelson (20.70) is marginally better than Deron Williams (20.69). And that means … what exactly? Deron Williams has played most of this season without AK-47 and Carlos Boozer. How difficult were the opponents in the 42 games Nelson played in before his season ended? Would someone attempt to enter a debate that Nelson had a better season prior to his injury, than Williams? Does PER take into account the Olympics? The fact that Williams came into the preseason a little portly?
Marreese Speights, a rookie from Florida on the 76ers, is 30th in PER (19.64). He plays 15 minutes a game. Here are a few players he’s ahead of: Paul Millsap (19.23), Chauncey Billups (19.14), Nene (18.89), and LaMarcus Aldridge (18.78). We’d take David Lee (18.83) on our team in a heartbeat at PF over Speights.
Take Jason Kidd. Why has he suddenly become a deadly three-point shooter at his advanced age? Because he isn’t carrying an offense or taking contested shots with the shot clock winding down like he had to in Jersey, that’s why. In Dallas, all he has to do is distribute the ball and shoot … when he’s open. Now look at poor Dwyane Wade. He misses 70% of his threes — the only blemish on his MVP résumé — because his teammates stink, which means he has to hoist one or two contested, beat-the-clock bombs each game.
Wade misses 70 percent of his three’s … because he’s never been a good 3-point shooter. This is actually his best season shooting the three in his career. He’s attempted nearly as many three’s this season (236) as he did in his first five seasons, combined (330). Is that because he no longer has Shaq or because a) the team has a new coach (team scoring up over the last two years) or b) coming off two injury-plagued seasons, he decided that contorting his body in the lane 20 times a night probably isn’t good for wear and tear, and adding a three-point shot to the arsenal could prolong his career by a few seasons?
Don’t Deny NBA Stat Geeks the Truth (ESPN)
39 Responses to “The NBA’s Statistical Revolution”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
March 25th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
In Daryl Morey I trust.
March 25th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics, 90% of the time.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
The best thing the bball stats revolution did was break things down on a per-possession basis.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
PER is just the tip of the iceberg. just because it doesn’t tell the whole story doesn’t mean it’s not part of it. stats are here to stay in the NBA and no fuddy-duddying is going to change that.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
I just haven’t been able to get past John Hollinger’s picture.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I agree with TBL. What I like about basketball is the open-ended element of arguments, because it is so free-flowing. Also, I don’t know how they are going to account for the fact that it is much harder to average 15 points per game playing 40 minutes a game, than have a per/48 mins average of 20 ppg coming off the bench as the energy guy for ten minutes a game.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
among the best party scenes in movie history: Superbad. When the heroes show up with the beers, it’s so on
March 25th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Do you know what PER is or its flaws? (also, what about Standard Deviation, are the people behind Speights even so at a significant level?)
If someone hits 1-2 3 pointers (50%!!!!) are they are great shooter? Any stat has flaws.
But you can at least acknowledge the fact they there are better stats to be using. You still use Points Per Game when talking about teams offense or defense when you know Points Per Possession exists.
PER, Wins Produced, Win Shares, etc all have positives and negatives and over time they will evolve.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Speights doubles his minutes and im guessing he’s less effective
March 25th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I admire the use of stats in basketball (and baseball, too, for that matter), but I really only get into it with the NFL. DVOA and DYAR are very fun to break down, if only because T.O.’s catch percentages always suck and reveal how overrated he is.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
All stats have their place in sports, and I think there is a pretty good balance in the NBA. I think PER has a place in the NBA, but it shouldn’t be the end all.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Stats are here to stay, sure, that doesn’t mean any normal fan needs to care. I’ve never liked baseball but I hate it even more now that every discussion ends with people whipping TITS and FLOGS and POO around to support their silly arguments.
Does PER and DVOA exist and maybe have some meaning, sure, but for the vast majority of people its ignored, not discussed, and you can be a normal fan and not give two shits about them.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
PER clearly has its problems, but it is a step in the right direction. We have not gotten anywhere near perfect basketball statistics yet. That doesn’t mean that these intermediary steps don’t tell us something new. And it doesn’t mean they aren’t important steps for getting us to where we ultimately want to go.
March 25th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
This sums it up. Why would you want to guess? How about run through tons of data and see what happens when players get more minutes.
Now I am not saying that is the final answer, but you better disprove with something better than a guess or a hunch.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Where exactly is that?
Basketball isn’t complicated, you watch a team play a few times and you know who can ball and who can’t. Bruce Bowen has a negative PER I believe, yet there isn’t a basketball fan who wouldn’t want him on your team.
A players legacy is largely comprised of playoff moments and championships, with some support from statistics. Baseball is disgustingly dependent on numbers, football and basketball dont suffer from this paralysis.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
lol what? football and basketball don’t suffer from finding out who the best player is? I never knew that.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Basketball isn’t complicated, you watch a team play a few times and you know who can ball and who can’t. Bruce Bowen has a negative PER I believe, yet there isn’t a basketball fan who wouldn’t want him on your team.
But basketball is complicated. Thats why Bruce Bowen can be valuable and yet we can’t find any objective measures to show that. Simple things are easily measured and basketball is not.
Where I would love to see it go is find some measurements which can show that Bruce Bowen is good at what he does. Stats will always only be a part of the equation, but why not try to improve that part?
March 25th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
*buzzer* wrong! try again!
Maybe the 2003 version of Bowen. Maybe.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Yeah, stats are biased against lazy pricks who come into camp overweight.
What?
March 25th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
great link. interesting stuff.
in regard to MS – remember, we’re talking about a rookie who had one year at florida (when his per #s were sick!). my guess is that he falls into that 28% whose stats don’t improve with an extra 5 mins.
is there a link to per stats for, say, first rounders the last few years? sure there are players who had a sick per PROJECTION and didn’t amount to anything
March 25th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
OPIPG = Opposing Players Injured Per Game?
March 25th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
I,for one, welcome our number crunching overlords.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Most first rounders do not amount to anything! (PER also has flaws, but you should be asking does PER project better than something else, like points)
Here is some good work on projections for this years crop
March 25th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
is there a link to per stats for, say, first rounders the last few years? sure there are players who had a sick per PROJECTION and didn’t amount to anything
I don’t think you can use PER this way. My understanding of PER is that it is very context oriented.
They have years an years of data and a fairly constant relative level of play to work with when they translate AAA stats into projected major league stats. I don’t think that kind of thing exists in basketball yet.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
PER translations work better for players coming from Europe into the NBA.
But the quality of play in college is such dogshit that it doesn’t work.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
I watched the game, he made several huge plays that contributed to the Spurs winning, impact measured. But then again I like to watch sports, not read box scores. You can come up with all the fancy stats you want, its no substitute for watching.
Thats why baseball has all these stats, its more fun to do math than to watch baseball.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
coop I didn’t realize you were an NBA scout.
If stats are no substitute for watching, how come in the olden days baseball was littered with first round picks who didn’t work out, and now that number has gone down considerably?
March 25th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Like they say: “Figures don’t lie, but liers can figure.” You can twist and turn stats into any argument you want, which is why I find most of them in all sports useless.
I can use stats to show Chipper is a far superior player than Tony Gwynn, but in reality is that even close to true? Maybe it is I don’t know. But one is a borderline HOFer and the other was a first ballot guy.
March 25th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Chipper’s first ballot. He hit better than Gwynn and played a tougher position (for most of his career).
3rd basemen that hit like Chipper are shoe-ins.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I,for one, welcome our number crunching overlords.
/ Kent Brockman’d
March 25th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
The only thing Gwynn did better than Chipper was he struck out less. And I guess he had a higher batting average (whoop-tee-do)
March 25th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
You’ll have to excuse coop. He insists that Big Ben is an above-average full-game QB.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
I dont even know how to respond to such a ridiculous comment…Kwame Brown?
I couldn’t see his box score, those shiny rings got in the way.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
He played baseball? You’re right that was a good response.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Okay maybe the people I was arguing with were wack, they were appalled I made that argument. I basically said the same thing, Gwynn can hit singles better, stole a few more basees early in his career & had a bigger smile. Oh and talked kind of funny.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
My bad, I thought we were talking about basketball. I’m employed and dont live with my mom, so I dont do baseball.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
FJM style
Congrats on watching “the game”. It probably is a statistically relevant sample of his abilities in hundreds of games he’s played. Did you watch this game with you buddy Confirmation Bias?
But then again I like to watch sports, not read box scores. You can come up with all the fancy stats you want, its no substitute for watching.Watch Sports? I wish I could do that more. Talking about Iverson’s TO% broke my TV though. Maybe if I had said he is such a great scorer…
March 25th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
I think stats are great and all, but like people have said, they can be manipulative. Take Kobe’s clutch shooting % for example. Numerous have people have said that he’s not in the top 10 for 4th quarter scoring. Well for one, it doesn’t take into account that the Lakers don’t play that many close games. Two, and more imporantly, you’re shitting yourself with your stats if you don’t think that the coach, the fans, his opponents, his wife, and his 2 kids don’t know that he’s going to take the last shot, and has a reputation of knocking it down. You can use stats, but stats can’t hide what people see with thier own eyes. Dennis Rodman was one of my favourite players of all time, but other than rebounds, he didn’t do shit statistically. Go figure. Ask Jordan if he was important from 96-98 (esp. against The Mailman!).
March 26th, 2009 at 9:27 am
great post