Comments on: Thoughts On the 2010 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741 NBA & ABA Basketball Statistics & History Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:56:04 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6 By: Kandis Rowell http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-53888 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 23:47:00 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-53888 Hi There. Your a formidable writer with unique talent and imaginative thoughts. This is excellent work. I'm considering about starting my own site. I'd like to ask if it is demanding to run your own website? I certainly enjoy commenting. Merci.

]]> By: Jose A. Martinez http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15189 Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:29:44 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15189 Thank you very much Neil for this post.

]]> By: Jason J http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15070 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:11:21 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15070 Nice comments, Scott.

]]> By: Scott S http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15063 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:41:40 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15063 Good writeup Neil. I attended for a third time and enjoyed the event, as always.

If I understand the anarchy presentation correctly, I think it has some validity and application, but it fails to explain "The Ewing Theory".

First of all, and this may be besides the point, the Knicks very rarely did better without Ewing. By looking at the Knicks record in Ewing's BR splits, it is apparent that they win more frequently when he plays. I estimate that this methods shows he adds at least 7 wins per 82 games over his Knicks carer. I can expand on this conclusion if people want to see it. In fact, if I do this for other superstars, this usually ends up being a decent proxy for their expected value using statistics, etc. A similar method is used to approximate value in Basketball on Paper.

To me there appears to be mild usefulness for applying this to skill curves. The problem lies with how the team determines who shoots what shot. I feel teams should look for the easiest shot first and the bailout shot last. Thus, the last shot that should be passed up is an open layup then an open three (depending on the player of course), etc. If the team can set up a good strategy that basically looks for this progression, then you can clearly envision the effects of the "skill curve". In Ray Allen's example, the first shot would be successful at 75% (using the given .75 - .62x curve provided with x being usage%), the next would be less than that and his hardest shots when he is taking 60% of his team's shots would have virtually no chance of success. (Keep in mind that there is limited applicability to estimate success beyond the observed data points used to determine the yield curve. There are few observable situations where a player takes more than 60% of his team's shots.) By this method, which assumes a linear decrease in eFG%, the point in which Allen's next shot is expected to succeed at less than 50%, he has a 62.5% cumulative eFG%, which corresponds to the optimal eFG% quoted in the "Price of Anarchy" presentation. If I understand the assumption of traffic theory, it is assumed that when Ray Allen's eFG% is 50%, every shot he takes has a 50% success rate.

In reality, teams employ a combination of the two. A team will often look for a good shot type such as a close shot or open three and give the ball to their best shot creator, or bailout guy as the shot clock winds down. This is why eFG%'s decrease with the shot clock. However, teams will often have their best player shoot difficult shots to keep the defense honest and to suck the defense in and open things up on other possessions.

The best use for this study would be analyzing shot types. I always thought that being able to shoot a 15 footer was very valuable in keeping the defense honest, even though it is the poorest shot in terms of expected points produced. I always wondered what the optimal 2 point shooting usage would be in relation to its actual success. Shooting this more might suck the defense in and open up easier 3's and close shots for others. This could shed some light on the value of keeping defenses honest.

]]> By: Drescher http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15037 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:26:39 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15037 Being a member of the 'lucky thousand', I have to say this recap is a good one. I spent all of my time in the research paper room before lunch (when 'price of anarchy' and 'adjusted plus-minus' were presented), and noticed the following:

-at LEAST Cuban and Morey were in the room for the 'adj +/-' presentation. There was an entire row of experts, possibly a dozen of them, all clustered together in the middle of the audience. Afterwards, during the question-and-answer part of the program, Mr. Cuban made note of HOW his team uses adjusted +/-, and how extremely specific and situational the data needs to be in order for statistical analysis to TRULY have merit for predictive purposes. I didn't have time to get direct quotes, but he made general mention of the following points:

1) The data is only worth noting if you have a large enough sample (he mentioned pulling the trigger on the Evan Eschmeyer signing BECAUSE his metrics showed so much promise for the young NorthWestern Alumnus; and noted that they NEVER jump to conclusions based on paltry data samples because of it.

2) The data needs to be specific in order to be important. (Eg: Stats in the 2nd night of a back-to-back; stats in the 4th game in 5 days; stats on the last game of a road trip; stats in the 4th quarter, against a double-team, when down by 10 or more points; (he continued on for 7 or 8 more examples, which truly showed how ahead of the pack the Mavs' 'statistical war chest' has become). -how do you like the parenthetical-in-a-parenthetical? Thats how I ROLL!)

On that note, I have spoken too much.

-Dresch

]]> By: edk http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15026 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:17:11 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15026 I yearn to be a member of the who's who club. One day...

]]> By: Jared Ras http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15022 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:37:46 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15022 I haven't read the whole Anarchy paper yet, but I have trouble believing that the expected values will be better with 20-20-20-20-20. Just a theoretical example, say that Steve Nash and Grant Hill have equally viable shots for the whole game. Nash has a higher FG% and EFG% than Hill, so the expected value of points with Hill taking as many shots as Nash is less than that if Nash took more shots than Hill. Thus, letting Nash take a portion of Hill's shots would give the team more points as long as he takes the right shots.

]]> By: izzy http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15021 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:54:54 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15021 As far as the "Price of Anarchy," here is an excellent article about the subject. There are great charts, analogies, and math. Highly recommended

http://gravityandlevity.wordpress.com/2009/05/28/braesss-paradox-and-the-ewing-theory/

]]> By: Paul Mason http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15020 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:50:12 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15020 I wanted to comment on the 'Value of a blocked shot' piece that I read on ESPN.
Though I only saw summary commentary I think the whole idea put forward is quite flawed because it seems to assume a normal distribution of expected value and doesn't factor in any diminished expected value caused by the defender prior to them blocking a shot.
For example, if I was playing in the NBA and had the choice of driving to the rim with Jermaine O'neal's old legs trying to block my shot or D12's 40 inch vert and 300 pound frame trying to block my shot, I am choosing to drive against Jermaine every time. As such the higher frequency of layups available for Jermaine to block would make it more likely that he gets opportunities to block layups.
Further, the fact that D12 is able to close out on NBA guards and block shots speaks volumes to his shotblocking ability. The fact that Jermaine rarely blocks jump shots could just as easily be an indication of his inability to get in a position to block jump shots as opposed to any extra value he creates. Tim Duncan would now be suffering from a similar phenomenon given how much he has slowed in the last two years compared to his youth. Also, given it is more difficult to initiate a fast break blocking a jump shot than a layup due to the trajectory of the ball prior to being blocked, the fact that one block leads to a fast break and another doesn't seems like a faulty measure of a shotblocker's value as Jermaine and TD physically could not block some of the shots D12 does.
In general you should expect a Center's value according to this measure to increase with age as they become less mobile and therefore more likely to be unable to move far from the rim on defence. As such this measure appears fundamentally flawed in assessing the value of a shotblocker on face value.
If there is more info on this article and their previous stuff on 'the hot had' I would be interested to read it more thoroughly if you are able to post it online or email it around.

]]> By: Jason J http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741&cpage=1#comment-15013 Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:34:44 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4741#comment-15013 Thanks for all the great info, Neil! Could you give a general feeling of the crowd / presenters' reactions to some of the presentations? I would think the "Price of Anarchy" paper in particular would generate a lot of surprise - I'm certainly surprised by the 20-20-20-20-20 results!

]]>