#CavsRank — At No. 10, it’s World B. Free
March 5, 2014
#CavsRank: No. 9 Anderson Varejao, the Wild Thing
March 6, 2014
By now, you’ve seen the first two renditions of our new version of While We’re Waiting. Andrew got us started on Tuesday. Rick followed up on Wednesday. Now, with my usual bent toward sports analytics and media topics, here’s my first stab at this new format. Hope you enjoy and chime in with your thoughts in the comments.
The 76ers are awful. Like, really, really awful. Is it an “embarrassment”? What needs fixed? Last week, it seemed like the ESPN properties all seemed to gang up on the Cleveland Cavaliers and Kyrie Irving’s free agency status. Yesterday, they all appeared to team up to discuss “tanking” and the currently horrendous Philadelphia 76ers. Last weekend, former NBA coach Stan Van Gundy called the 76ers’ current scheme an “embarrassment” to the league.
In a one-question, 4,000-word mailbag (i.e. a column), Grantland czar Bill Simmons tore into new Commissioner Adam Silver for enabling a culture where incentives are high to be non-competitive. ESPN Insider’s Kevin Pelton looked into whether the 76ers might lose out the rest of the season and whether they just had the worst month ever. As of now, Pelton estimates their talent as an eight-win team over the course of 82 games.
All I could think about from either article: Rebuilding is really hard and tanking is no guarantee. Cleveland fans are seeing that right now with the Cavaliers. Liberty Ballers’ Derek Bodner had a very comprehensive look at the lottery and the advantages of having a top-5 pick. But it’s still not easy. Any possible draft solution will have long-term implications that actually could harm competitive balance.
—
Jim Thome doesn’t want to be finished. Last July, Indians legend and no-doubt Hall of Famer Jim Thome formally took a job as the special assistant to the Chicago White Sox general manager. He did not play during the 2013 season, But, as CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman reported, would he take a call from an MLB team if they still wanted him to play? I think you’d have to take that call,” the 43-year-old Thome said. It’s possible he might be better than Jason Giambi. But his playing days are likely well over.
—
How much math is too much math? This is a question I’ve been getting for much of the past week in the aftermath of the 2014 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference. The Boston Globe’s Dan Shaugnessy gave his #hotsportstake on the matter, arguing that since some stats are irrelevant, all of them are relatively meaningless. Yeah, good luck with that take Shaugnessy. Then why are teams like the Rockets and others investing oodles of millions on analytic innovations? Because it has worth in society. Efficient markets exploit opportunities for marginal advantages.
Hardwood Paroxysm’s Steve McPherson wrote about Yale scholar’s Edward Tufte’s theories on how analytics elevate fan understanding of the game. This was a topic at Sloan too. Are we becoming numb to the game because of all of these new numbers attempting to explain every last action on the court or field? Tufte argues no. McPherson backs it up. I’d agree, saying that these early answers only lead to more questions which only leads to a more complete understanding of the game works.
Speaking of math that aims to serve in practicality, ESPN Insider’s Amin Elhassan wrote about proprietary screen-setting data and mentioned Spencer Hawes as an effective screener. NBA.com’s John Schuhmann used SportVU data to again look at the Indiana Pacers’ impressive defense as it comes to the pick-and-roll. This information backs up what fans and scouts can both see out on the court.
—
Cavs playoff odds update. Entering Wednesday, the Cavs’ playoff odds were 2.9%, per SportsClubStats.com, with just 20 games left in the regular season. The website CrabDribbles ran a roundtable looking at the two last playoff sports in the Eastern Conference, a crawl-to-the-finish race between Charlotte, Atlanta, Detroit and Cleveland. Only one writer had faith in the Cavs to narrowly edge over the Hawks, who were 1-11 in the last month entering a late-night game at Portland.
—
#TeamDannySalazar. For the third time this spring, Grantland’s Jonah Keri middle-school-girl crushed all over Indians youngster Danny Salazar in a column. This time, Keri’s really interesting look into fantasy baseball began with the overvaluation of young players. Of course, the writer is an admitted huge fan of Salazar’s potential, his prospects for 2014 and his impact on the Indians’ playoff odds. But he still shouldn’t be going among the top 30 starting pitchers in baseball.
—
The Orange Bowl is dead and buried. Or at least that’s what it appears to be on Clemson’s campus, via Marc Dopher on Twitter. I’m sure that no Ohio State fans will overreact to this, right?
—
TrueHoop founder on blogging and more. “[Blogging] definitely shook up the snow globe big time, right? It used to be a very small channel of entry to be able to write about basketball all day every day. Basically, you had to know your local newspaper editor and get entrusted with a beat job or covering high school sports. That was just one subset of the population who got to have an audience on basketball. Blogging just let everybody who wanted to try it try it.” Go check out the entire interview with the new ESPN.com basketball editor Henry Abbott over at Nieman Journalism Labs.
—
Poor, poor Youngstown State. This right here, via The Dagger’s Jeff Eisenberg, might be the most depressing way to lose a basketball game ever. Let alone a Horizon League tournament game. That sucks.
117 Comments
Strawman after strawman Jim. Who said it came in a software bundle? The teams doing the advanced analytical work are pouring hundreds of hours into finding even the most minute advantages. They’re working damn hard.
But that’s you, not me. Why can’t crawdads just taste bad to me?
See, that’s where this discussion always comes out:
Stat guy: Crawdads taste great!
Non-stat guy: No, they don’t.
Stat guy: Yes, they do.
Non-stat guy: No. They really don’t.
Stat guy: Yes.
Non-stat guy: No.
Stat guy: Yes.
Non-stat guy: No.
Stat guy: Just eat your crawdads!
Non-stat guy: No.
Stat guy: Yes.
Non-stat guy: No.
Every summer, I attempt to build the wave-proof sandcastle. Someday, I will do it. And will laugh at that ocean.
Ok… if we’re doing this: no, Steve, not strawman. Strawman means “informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of the original topic of argument.”
Bill James did indeed change paths on clutch hitting and prior to his conversion on the way to Damascus, his followers parroted his (absurd) world view. When he changed, they changed.
Call it hyperbole, exaggeration-to-make-humorous-point, “sublimely elegant dig on the Sloan geeks” ,,, but not a strawman.
I’m oversimplifying, I realize that. And I don’t know of many folks saying disregard everything but the numbers. But some folks just seem incapable of taking in the action without immediately running through the paces of advanced statistical analysis, and it gets dull after a while. The practical application is and should be internal use by teams to improve rosters and winning chances.
I would guess that if you’re reading articles, posts, and comments, and getting geeked up over batting average, ERA, and home run totals you care about more than just taking in a game on a sunny Sunday afternoon.
Get geeked up over your typewriter/batting average, but we’ve moved on.
You really dont know what strawman means do you.
Which followers? And, if memory serves, Bill James hasn’t changed his belief on clutch in the sense that he now believes it exists. New research has made him question the original data which led him to conclude that it does not. I think his current point of view is that clutch is such a nebulous concept that finding reliable data to measure it is effectively impossible.
I don’t see why a person’s willingness to process new data and modify their old assumptions is a bad thing or a knock against analytics?
Have fun.
My argument lies in that if you enjoy that lobster bisque(BA,HR), then crawdads taste similarly good but take much more work to eat(understand & analyze).
But, I don’t begrudge someone not wanting to go through that work (it’s why I don’t eat pomegranate. so much work and mess that’s it’s just not worth it to me).
Not if you work at a job that uses carbon paper.
James originally said that we didn’t have the information to prove clutch hitting existed, so he rejected the concept, tabling that until we had proof of it’s existence. And now he’s saying that just because we haven’t identified it, it doesn’t mean it couldn’t possibly be there. There’s not much difference between the two and there is a huge fundamental difference in the way you presented it, which is why, in fact, it is a ridiculous strawman.
And this is my point. Bill James, who’s only serious work today is privileged information of the Red Sox, and is not leading the sabermetric charge, is skeptical of the information we have gathered. So are the majority of the math/science types who populate Sloan.
Fair enough. That’s the problem with analogies. They never quite tell the whole story.
And for the record, I love crawdads. Mmmm, mmmm.
What gets me is that critics rail against new stats for being complex and senseless, yet they usually stand behind batting average which, when you really lay it out, makes little sense. To quote Joe Posnanski…
“How do we figure batting average? Well, start with a players’ number of plate appearances. That would be the number of times the player comes to the plate.
Now, subtract the walks. No, seriously, just subtract those. We don’t care about those.
Now, subtract the hit-by-pitches. Get rid of them.
Now, subtract the times that the player hit a fly ball that allowed a runner to tag up and score from third base.
Now, subtract the times the batter bunted a runner from first to second base, or second to third, or third to home but still made an out. Do not subtract the plate appearance if the batter successfully made it to first base. Do not subtract it if he hit a hard smash that accomplished PRECISELY THE SAME THING as a bunt. Do not subtract it if he hit a check-swing dribbler that was KIND OF like a bunt but did not seem from the press box to be a purposeful bunt.
Remember to include the times he reached base but only because of a defensive blunder.
OK, you have that number? We call those “at-bats.” Now, what you want to do it take the number of hits and divide those by at-bats. What is a hit? Any time someone hits a ball that allows him to reach base. No, wedon’t care what base he reaches. Double … triple … home runs … they’re all just “hits” when it comes to batting average.
Of course, if the batter gets on base because of a defensive error, that doesn’t count as a hit. That counts as an out. Even though he didn’t make an out. How do we determine if the defensive player made an error? Someone in the press box we call the “official scorer” will watch the game and make the determination based on whatever he happens to be thinking at that moment.OK, now you divide the hits by at-bats. And that is your hits percentage. We call it batting average even though it is not an average of anything.”
You keep misrepresenting the other viewpoint to knock it down. Meanwhile, I’ll wait for you to actually respond to points made.
I’m more of a lobster bisque guy myself 🙂
You too, but don’t tell me I’m a sandcastle destroyer or my cooking tastes terrible in the process.
It seems the conversation goes:
Stat guy: “here is a new thing that tastes great, better than what you usually eat”
Non-stat guy: “no it doesn’t, and you’re a jerk for making me try it”
the point is that sloan is being offered as new science and adopted as gospel by many. you cant have a convo with sloan evangelists but because sloan evangelists view non-believers as dinosaurs.
re james: i mean… he needed ‘new research’ that caused him to ‘question the original data’?? are you effing kidding me? just watch dwight evans, reggie jackson, michael jordan and you know clutch exists. i have a friend, scratch golfer, who plays better when the game is on the line. it’s the craziest thing to witness in person but it exists and it’s wonderful and a key part of the randomness, the analog that is intrinsic to sport.
d-bags like james and his followers take that wonderful-ness and cull out the joy and arrive at a numbers-based conclusion and disparage non-believers.
sorry not to be grateful.
“d-bags like james and his followers take that wonderful-ness and cull out the joy”
“and disparage non-believers”
Oh, the irony.
Touche.
There’s plenty of jerk-hurling to go around. It’s all in perception and reception.
no… i dont think i will. in fact, i dont recall you making a point to me; just kinda coming after me.
but you have your world view and you’re welcome to it. there’s no point to talking you through mine.
Well, if you’re going to insult people personally because they don’t share your personal preference, don’t be too surprised when they don’t take so keenly to your preferences either.
Who did that?
Well, the only way to stop learning more about a subject is to stop talking about it.
Go ahead, keep your uninformed viewpoints on advanced analytics, you must already know more than enough anyway.
haha. that reminds me of a conversation I had with my Dad when I was young. we were talking along the same lines and I mentioned we could just build a sandcastle indoors far away from the ocean shoreline and cover it with glass afterwards. he mentioned that it would take longer but someday from heaven we could look at that sandcastle being overtaken by waves or wind or some other natural course even if man left it alone 🙂
love Pos.
When you call it a sandcastle destroyer, and say the “advanced stat cooking” tastes terrible. I get that it’s in a joking manner, but it’s no longer “well you have your preference and I have mine”.
kind words are like honey
cmon guys. G_O was calling me the sandcastle destroyer and called my wife’s cooking terrible 🙂
seriously though, it was all in the larger analogy context and it was good, enjoyable discussion. there is no reason to be putting stakes in the ground here. it’s perfectly acceptable to enjoy these games however we want to enjoy them. they are merely entertainment afterall just as these discussions should be.
Carry on.
Reggie Jackson (career): .262/.356/.490
Reggie Jackson (playoffs): .278/.358/.527
Reggie Jackson (RISP): .263/.375/.481
Reggie Jackson (RISP, 2 outs): .253/.378/.473
Sorry, but I don’t see how Reggie Jackson’s career proves (or disproves) clutch.
If people adopt and apply analytics without thinking, then that’s their own problem. Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not wisdom.
Sounds like you have a problem with James. And I really don’t think he has followers. Like Steve said, he’s sort of on the periphery of sabermetrics at this point. As I pointed else where, measuring things and entering them into a spreadsheet does not/should not cull out the joy of sports.
To quote a Cleveland sports blogger: “That being said… there’s a reason NFL teams want this data: it’s
important. Just how big and how fast and how explosive are these guys in real life? The combine measures this and so everyone has good data.There are correlations between these metrics and predictive success.”
If d-bags like James and his followers can create new metrics that correlate with future success, what’s the big problem?
This is my point, and I’ll admit that it could have been presented better.
Garry, and any old school guys can enjoy the game, so can I and anyone into the newer analytics. But it’s frustrating to hear the insults because the way I enjoy the game is becoming more popular.
Don’t know what Dweebermetrics is, can’t answer that
Except, you know, it was said ironically to someone with whom I have rapport (not you). If you take offense to that, your problem is not mine.
Oh, and anytime someone says that something “tastes” a certain way, it is most certainly a matter of preference. Some would even say “taste.”
Oh, and anytime someone says that something “tastes” a certain way, it is most certainly a matter of preference. Some would even say “taste.”
Ok, guys….back to your corners….time to settle down the tone a little bit. Lets keep this debate about sports and analytics and stay away from the personal attacks that are surely about to come at this rate. Thanks guys.
Ok, guys….back to your corners….time to settle down the tone a little bit. Lets keep this debate about sports and analytics and stay away from the personal attacks that are surely about to come at this rate. Thanks guys.
Ah, the old “its your problem not mine” defense, when someone states what their preferences are. You’re quite the charmer Garry. I’ll be sure to remember that you don’t take it past “you have your preference and I have mine”
Interesting discussion about advanced metrics vs the eyeball. I don’t see it as either or, but rather as a continuum. For those who make a living at the game, one would want to have as much objective data as possible, while realizing that sports are not completely analytical. it ‘s the old saying of “why they play the game”. You can tilt the odds in your favor, but the outcome still involves uncertainty. For the fan who simply enjoys a warm summer night at the park, and the beauty of the game as well as the competition, one need not know every single metric involved in the game. Since I look at baseball as the thinking man’s sport, I enjoy some of each.
Feel like I’ve stumbled into a Rust Cohle monologue right now. “Time is just a flat circle, man…”
Oh, brother. I can’t believe I’m having this anonymous conversation with an unknown person. Reason #534 why the internet sucks.
I quit. You win. Now. In the past. In the future. Forever. Always. Peace to you.
It would really help if you understand what you are criticizing. All 30 teams are using wOBA (farting around, hilarious) and all 30 have guys watching as many games as possible and talking to players and coaches as much as possible.
As far as the watching games, there is a new edge, being brought to you by the, wait for it, technology and analytics guys. They’re able to track exactly how quickly players move and in what direction down to the minutiae. The scouts can now gather data on exactly how many steps the outfielder takes that aren’t on the ideal line to the ball. Yeah, its not as traditional as the old guy in an ugly hat chomping on a cigar making a wild guess, but oh well.
We are constantly discovering new things about this sport, and we’re also discovering just how little we actually know. To pretend otherwise is not only ignorant, it’s stupid. There’s nĂ´thing wrong with using analytics and statistics to help our understanding. If it doesn’t make sense to you or to anyone else, there are better ways to ask for an explanation than to devolve into dweeb and loser talk. (I take nerd as a compliment)
As always, I’m very sorry that not everyone agrees with everything you have to say. You’re welcome to not use the internet whenever you wish.
How bout ?
That was me, backing away. Stop charging at me. Let it go. Please.
Watch out! He smells blood, he’s swooping in to stab you in the heart with is slide rule!
That was you being sarcastic and snapping back. Pretty it up however you wish. Like I said, you’re free to stop using the internet whenever you wish to stop having discussions with people who don’t agree always agree with you.
It’s already gone, Garry, I’ve understood where we each stand on this issue hours, days, weeks, months ago.
Boobie Gibson scored 31 points against the Pistons in Game 6, whats he up to these days? Anomalies happen.
You’re absolutely right. You win.