• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Blacks and anayltics

RJKarl

Banhammer'd
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
78,116
Reaction score
3,112
Location
HB, CA
Interesting read:

https://theundefeated.com/features/mission-impossible-african-americans-analytics/

"Let’s take the Golden State Warriors locker room, for example. I thought the complete stiff-arming of the statistical revolution might very well be generational. Old black folks don’t, but younger black folks might.

Wrong.

I asked Draymond Green, the Warriors star whose new-age game is constantly being defined statistically, if he engages in any advanced analytics conversation either professionally or personally. His answer was emphatic.

“No. Neither. Professionally, I play completely off of feel. I hear people discussing my game in terms of all these advanced numbers. I have no part of it,” Green said. “Even paying attention to it, from a playing standpoint, would make me robotic and undermine my game. I’m supposed to step back behind the line in real time to avoid taking a ‘bad two’? That’s thinking way too much. I don’t get the fascination at all.”

Green’s teammate Shaun Livingston finds a professional application, but analytics don’t have any play in his vast life as a sports fan.

“I use it as a scouting tool,” he said after a recent Warriors playoff game. “I want to know, defensively, someone’s 3-point shooting tendencies or whether a guy is a bad free throw shooter so that I know when exactly I want to foul him. I use them as an advanced scouting report. When I played for Mike Dunleavy, he was great with the scouting report … So was Erik Spoelstra … and those things were an important part.

(None of these things are new. )

“But in terms of conversations among [black people]? No. Never. Our conversations seem to go the other way, away from data and more toward intangible things. Like impact. There are too many areas where the numbers don’t assess the impact. We tend to talk about sports in those ways. ‘Look at his energy … That guy has skills but he’s soft! … He’s a big game player.’

“I think the analytics are really overrated when it comes to putting a team together. What statistical analysis is going to tell you whether a guy is a good teammate, whether he can lead, whether he has his teammate’s back? Don’t you have to see and figure that stuff out independent of any numbers?”

Later

"If the larger sports world is moving in the direction of analytics and we aren’t, isn’t that dangerous? Are we then talking about a dearth of black professionals in the talent pool being scoured by the white, analytics-driven executives who run teams, leagues and networks?

Is it a coincidence that Nate McMillan, an old-school, pre-analytics player/coach, who was handpicked by old-school, pre-analytics player/coach Larry Bird in Indiana, is the only black coach hired this offseason?

One person who has a unique view of this all is ESPN’s broadcast analyst Amin Elhassan, the Sudanese-born former video coordinator, former scouting coordinator, former assistant director of basketball operations (under Steve Kerr when he was general manager with the Phoenix Suns), who studied engineering at Georgia Tech. All this is to say that Elhassan is a black man who knows — even lives — all forms of analytics. He says he worries that black people are either being excluded or excluding themselves.

“So many front offices are staffed by guys like me, who didn’t play the game, who didn’t come in through the coaching ranks … Don’t tell me that there are no black people who are good at math. There are black people who expert at qualitative analysis,” Elhassan said. “I worry that it becomes a way to exclude. Don’t tell me there aren’t any black people on Wall Street who are passionate about basketball. These people exist. Wall Streeters, people with qualitative analysis backgrounds. I know them. I went to school with them. I just don’t believe that one ethnicity is more predisposed to this than another. You realize, of course, that this is the new gateway into the game … into sports?”

For more than a few moments I felt guilty as hell for hating the intrusion of advanced analytics as much as I generally do. Because even though the reliance on this stuff seems to be a new safe haven for a new “Old Boy Network” of Ivy Leaguers who can hire each other and justify passing on people not given to their analytic philosophies, an entire group of people can’t simply refuse to participate in something as important as this phenomenon. The cynical me can easily make the argument this is a new path to exclusion, intentional or not. Or is it creating an entirely new way of approaching sports that’s reserved for the few?

Well, this organization is strong on advanced analytics and, well, you know … a lot of people just don’t share our organizational philosophy!"

Finally

"My friend Neville Waters, a multiple sports fanatic with an MBA from Georgetown, shook his head when the name Dwight Howard was mentioned. “Teams are going to look at Dwight Howard,” he said, “and through advanced analytics mostly determine they want to give him tens of millions of dollars even though there’s apparently no advanced metric that tells you what the results prove … He’s not a good teammate and is a complete risk to sign …”
 
If you haven't read that article then I really cannot stress enough to not give him a click.

This is one of the worst articles that I have ever read by a professional sportswriter.

The paragraph that really stuck out to me was:

My friend and ESPN colleague J.A. Adande relayed a conversation he had a couple of seasons ago with Stephen Curry when the then-future MVP was transitioning from shooting guard to point guard. Curry told Adande one of the biggest differences he noticed immediately was playing the point took him away from the corners of the court, where he felt most comfortable taking 3-pointers. Curry didn’t cite any numbers, just his comfort level shooting from the corners relative to the top of the arc. Only later, after the shift, did we learn how much better Curry was from the corners. One stat, according to ESPN Stats & Information, assigned Curry some number in excess of 100 for his 3-point sniping from the corners. This tells you just how bogus the exercise is if the “percentage” reports to be greater than 100.

It’s like calculating points per 100 possessions, a very popular go-to stat in NBA circles. Why is that more important than points per 48 minutes, which is the actual time in which an NBA game is played?

Was it offensive efficiency (where 100 is "average")? What was the actual stat? Plenty of stats go above 100 in detailing "efficiency". It's laziness to not include what the actual stat was, and completely disingenuous to the article.

Also, the final statement in the quoted section shows that Michael Wilbon simply doesn't understand the Law of Big Numbers (plain speak: sample size). After reading that sentence there is no reason to even continue to read the article, or even discuss it with him, because it's fruitless, and clear he doesn't understand even basic statistics.

Does he have a golf handicap? What is a better determination of your golf skill? One round, or 20? 20 rounds or 100?
 
Last edited:
Trash article. The Undefeated kinda sucks so far.
 
So players and an executive know less than posters here, interesting.
 
Read it this morning after being urged to by five or six different people. One of the dumbest articles I've read in a long time. I read the last sentence that Doofus posted above at least 25 times. We covered that garbage in the first two weeks of my high school stats class. Wilbon wouldn't have succeeded.
 
And yeah the part about "100" is just dumb too. There's no background on what the scale is and there's definitely not any implication that the statistic was measured in percentages.

Regardless of your view on analytics, this seems short-sighted:

"“No. Neither. Professionally, I play completely off of feel. I hear people discussing my game in terms of all these advanced numbers. I have no part of it,” Green said. “Even paying attention to it, from a playing standpoint, would make me robotic and undermine my game. I’m supposed to step back behind the line in real time to avoid taking a ‘bad two’? That’s thinking way too much. I don’t get the fascination at all.”"

Increasing information about your craft is only going to help you in the long run.
 
So players and an executive know less than posters here, interesting.

What do you mean by "know less"? Nobody claimed to know more. I just said the article was horrific.

I think people use the term "analysts" incorrectly, and most players within the game use way more analytics than they ever think about.

Everything quantifiable, even if people don't think of it in that sense. I guarantee you the front offices of every single NBA franchise use "advanced analytics", as well as any other tool possible to enhance their team.
 
Shane Battier is one of the first players I remember who discussed how analytics shaped his game.
 
rj vs stats rears it's entertaining head yet again.
 
I'm not going to dispute that black people don't discuss advanced stats. Anecdotally that seems true and I have no issue with people who enjoy the game without stats because looking just at the numbers feels antiseptic. That said the undertone that the stats have no value by cherry picking the "over 100" stat feels lazy and not representative of the analytics movement.
 
Any coach I had would have figured out that Steph's shooting from the corners was better and would be different with more ball handling duties and being in different positions to shoot. You don't need analytics for that.

It's not just "stats". Stats have been used for over half a century.
 
Also you missed the best part of spelling ANALytics
 
So let me get this straight. Wilbon wrote an entire article claiming black people don't embrace advanced analytics based on #anecdotes and interviews with a few black athletes and people in sports.

:smh
 
Back
Top