Lakers Believers In Analytics? Espn Ranks Us Bottom 10

pop said analytics is why they drafted parker, duncan, and ginobili? could you provide the link there?

 

^I never said and/or insinuated that they used analytics to draft Parker, Duncan, or Ginobili. Nevertheless, around the time those 3 were drafted there wasn't has much or if any emphasis on analytics during that time. Nevertheless, times change; if you clicked the link you could read Kevin's description on how SAS has implemented analytics in their Front Office and not as a means of not using this method to take as the be all end all; they take a balanced approach, IMO.

 

i bring up houston because morey is the self-aggrandizing poster boy for the movement. you'd think they were actually a contender, but unless a couple other teams experience major injuries, they're an also-ran. if morey's a genius and his system is the best, i'd think 8 years is enough time to yield a real contender. the lakers have won titles, rebuilt, and won other titles in a shorter span. somehow they did it despite being bumbling morons, too!

invented 20 years ago, held up as holy grail, now laughed at. get ready for more.

wait...is per 36 now an advanced stat? and agree to disagree; i don't remember most analysts thinking harden wasn't worth a max deal. i remember folks (like myself) saying he wasn't good enough to be the top guy on a title team. and he's still not. unless they decide to officiate him like 2006 wade in the playoffs.

i picked ny because there was a season recently where they looked good (weren't you the one saying houston's maybe 3 seed was great?) and the lakers also looked good and both would have been ranked at the bottom of this incredibly stupid list. last year, the hawks would have ranked high and still been "meh". the timing of the piece certainly oversells its thesis. hell, had the league not vetoed the paul deal, the lakers would still be at the top, and this list would be viewed as completely silly, as "use of analytics" would correlate basically zero with success.

the argument is supposed to discredit the morons that bother ranking "use of analytics" and expecting me to care about it.

again, i'd be surprised if any team willfully ignores data, and despite the stat-thumping blogosphere's best efforts, i still have yet to see compelling evidence that relying more heavily on "analytics" (again, whatever that actually is*) is actually giving teams a serious edge in any way.


*btw, this is important to me: analysis implies what someone does with data. this term is often confused in these discussions, i think. i don't doubt that data (which is what you provided in the wade/kobe retort) is useful (when applied intelligently--which it rarely is by your henry abbotts and such). what i doubt is useful is the post-processing of the data--the things it takes a PhD in statistics to do (or if you're hollinger, 6th grade math). this is what people think morey has, and i don't think he does--because i don't think anyone does. sportvu and such is about gathering data and counting, not real data analysis.

so, do i think the lakers should attend to data? well, sure. and i think they do, despite the media reports or even what scott, mitch, and madsen say. data comes in lots of forms, some of it not quantified. for a silly example, i'm sure scott isn't telling say, sacre to shoot threes or ryan kelly to iso a guard at the top of the key. he knows not to do these things via reliance on data. but if the lakers don't want to use the omnibus player evaluative stat of the day (new PER) to make FA decisions, i'm fine with it.

 

well, you responded to my point that i don't care about the other stuff after the securing of those three players by saying that you trust their word over mine, which had to imply that they said that--else it's sort of a non-sequitur.

in other words, i'm guessing even the lowly lakers (or worse, the knicks!), armed with popovich, duncan, parker, and ginobili could have implemented any system they liked and had a lot of success.

 

Ok.

 

btw, side note to all of this: mark cuban is a huge supporter of analytics. but his biggest FA signing in recent years (monta ellis) went against what almost all stat guys would have suggested. i believe cuban himself said they went with non-quantifiables on that one.

 

I'm interested to know who knows for a fact that Kupchek and Buss disregard analytics? It's possible they do not make decisions solely on it, but in the past few years they have not had the cap space or assets for trades that analytics would have been useful, except possibly on Nick Young. When you're signing guys for vets mins on one year deals, why bother using analytics, you already know what you're going to see. And the big fish they were pursuing last year Anthony...well what would analytics said about him? Maybe they did look at that and did not make a whole hearted effort to get him, Thank God, but put it out in the press to ease the hate being hurled at the FO.

 

I respect your opinion as well. again, my point was not to tear down data; I just have a rather visceral reaction to the smug and condescending usage of "analytics" by fans and media (particularly the latter). maybe it's charlatans like Hollinger who have poisoned me over time, but I just think the narrative has gone too far to the side of the quants.

as for rondo, it looks bad now, but it also looked bad when the mavs got kidd. unique players like that take time to adjust/be adjusted to. we'll see how things go in the playoffs; that will be the real test. well, that and if they offer him anything in FA.

 

I agree with the premise (that we can't be sure the lakers are totally ignorant), but I do think that vet mins and the like are where little things like advanced stats should be of most use (as opposed to max signings or trades for 24 year old all stars). but the lakers have done pretty well in terms of value signings (imo) and in terms of draft picks over time.

btw, morey chased melo pretty hard, iirc.

 

I'm guessing that if it were the lakers pulling a philly, the owners would have voted to change the lotto system midstream...you know, like they voted to veto the paul trade...