Byron: Analytics Will Play A "Much" Bigger Role This Coming Season

Entire Interview can be heard here: http://thebeast980.com/2015/08/04/b...have-a-bigger-role-in-upcoming-lakers-season/

Byron is giving in to analytics?! Glad to hear that.

 

yeah, don't buy a word of it, but at least he's trying to help the PR department.

I wonder what the new dude's hoops chops are. I know dean oliver had some cred as a guy who played major college ball, but Byron is probably right that most guys with actual statistical skills probably have no idea what playing the game at this level is actually like--a shortcoming in stat folks that is unrecognized while guys like scott are viewed as complete d******es despite their years of expertise in playing and observing top level basketball...

not to be a Debbie downer, but the fact that the lakers need a stat "translator" may reflect a deeper issue with their coaching staff (as has been suggested by many for months now, of course). the kind of stuff these stat guys do is not at all complicated. if you can't understand it, you're probably just not very sharp. if you don't choose to incorporate it into your gameplan, I'm not sure it means you don't understand it, though.

in sum, I don't expect any actual differences, but fans seem to want the franchise to look different, so ok, I guess.

 

Analytics isn't something you can just "start". I'm sure they will be hiring a consulting firm to develop the data sets.

A dynamic team oriented sport using individual statistics for predictive analytics will be interesting. I'm not sold that you can do this in a meaningful way with the data available... at least the "advanced stats" I'm familiar with.

 

Luke Walton, Rick Carlisle, Thibs; do it, Mitch.

 

I was going to press like, but then I saw Luke Walton in there. No way I think he's ready yet. Not sure Thibs is the right coach for an end of career Kobe either, but might be great for the youngins

 

You're aware that Luke just got promoted to Alvin Gentry's position, right? So after 2 years of being in Golden State and learning a thing or two, who's to say he couldn't be ready? He's good with the media, the fan base is behind him, and now in his new position, we'll get to see if he command the players respect. If he does, he might be our guy. Oh, and he's analytics friendly.

Thibs? I'm not the biggest fan. He's bigger than Byron, though.

 

Duh, yeah by about 60lbs. What's that got to do with anything?

 

I think Luke is probably two years away. But with how the league goes through coaches that doesn't mean he doesn't have a shot of getting a gig next summer. Going down to the collegiate ranks (my Memphis tigers) during the lockout helped, as does his basketball pedigree, and fact that he's always been a heady player. that + height is why he stuck on the league for a decade.

 

Luke is 35. Kobe is almost 3 years older than him. I think he will benefit more being an assistant for a couple more years before becoming a head coach.

 

After you watch Byron coach this year, that view will change, IMO. An inexperienced Luke will be better than Byron.

 

Ouch, how do you really feel?

 

I follow your reasoning, and I know Scott's reputation doesn't speak well for him but I disagree.

There's a lot of good and bad with analytics. The good - quantifying attributes that were previously unavailable (ie usage, TS%). The bad - these stats come with just as many flaws as traditional stats, but because they tell you certain things in a vacuum, people weight them more heavily. IMO stats complement what I see on the floor. You don't need stats to tell you that Kobe is a ball dominant, volume scorer with average efficiency. I think Byron means that this guy is going to use his knowledge to improve our offense as it already stands. Maybe it will be used to get a guy certain looks on a certain spot on the floor, maybe it will be used to help him figure out what lineups are most effective vs certain defenses, etc. I don't think Byron is as stupid as we think, I think he's just stubborn.

 

Ok, so let's us an example. Something very simple. Let's take a look at Jordan Hill's analytics from last year; the shot chart said he shot horribly from mid-range. From what we understand, the mid-range shot is the worst shot you can take in today's NBA; Hill short horribly from distance what is the worst shot in today's NBA. Would have using a little common sense such as looking at a shot-chart and Hill's analytics to see where he was shooting at wasn't effective from an efficiency standpoint? I think so. Instead, that didn't happen.

How about another example? Tony Allen says he uses analytics. He likes to know where a players 'hot spots' are and take those away during a game. Shane Battier said he studied analytics to help him defend Kobe Bryant. So, we see how it could help the coach and player from two different perspectives. We know it's not the end all be all, obviously. However, it's a tool that give you more information that if utilized correctly, can help your team in a positive, productive, way.

 

and kobe took battier's lunch money.

the midrange shot is bad because it's usually a last resort. dirk and kobe have both led teams to titles relying heavily on this "awful" shot. the midrange shot, imo, is a prime example of where analytics fails to explain real baskeball phenomena--or at least common interpretation of the stat is either stupid or useless. james harden's allergy to the midrange probably has something to do with his routine wilting against quality defenses.

 

Kobe took everybody's lunch money. And? That means we shouldn't utilize the information that's in front of us; sorry, I think that's a very shortsighted view.