Mike Wilbon: Black people don't like analytics

Besides being stupid, i dont like points per game because it makes the Jazz look like one of the worst offenses in the league as opposed to just the mediocre offense that they are.

Is this really that complex of math? How do you become a national writer without basic understanding of math?

I heard him talking about this on LeBatard earlier and mostly rolled my eyes. He went to the old line of "The analytics-heavy teams in the NBA have never won anything." I know teams like the Warriors, Spurs, Mavericks have notably old school guys in positions of prominence, but seriously? They've all been into analytics.

I don't get hard pressing one way or the other. At the end of the day statistics reveal trends and team cohesion is affected by personality because the players are humans not robots.

By rodeoclown Go To PostI heard him talking about this on LeBatard earlier and mostly rolled my eyes. He went to the old line of "The analytics-heavy teams in the NBA have never won anything." I know teams like the Warriors, Spurs, Mavericks have notably old school guys in positions of prominence, but seriously? They've all been into analytics.

What's the argument? That you need analytics in order to be competitive? Sure. No one disputes that.

People Dispute whether being the best at analytics or being the most analytically driven as an organization makes you MORE competitive. That's why people bring up the Magic, Houston and Philly.

By 33MillionDollarMen Go To PostI don't get hard pressing one way or the other. At the end of the day statistics reveal trends and team cohesion is affected by personality because the players are humans not robots.

I agree with this.

By 33MillionDollarMen Go To PostI don't get hard pressing one way or the other. At the end of the day statistics reveal trends and team cohesion is affected by personality because the players are humans not robots.

but people look at players like robots. Larry Sanders is the first that comes to mind, but just look at how everyone talked about him. "You're getting played millions, suck it up and do your job"

Wait, how is a power forward that shoots threes not based on analytics? Isn't that idea born out of analytics? Yeah, Dray may not talk about it but other people are talking about it (his coaches). The death lineup is based on analytics.

He based his beginning argument on stereotypical 'black' locations and why it's not being talked about. Da hell? Yeah, if you observe the average fan, I'm guessing analytics are not high on the discussion topics. Look at ESPN. It's not based on analytics. It's a bunch of talking heads. Skip and Screaming are not talking about analytics. They get handed some stats and a piece of paper and make up the other 95% based off feeling and emotion.

The better premise is most people don't talk about analytics, in depth but a few people have made an excellent discussion about analytics. Trying to find in depth conversation on analytics presumes many other fans are talking about it. The discussion is probably self selecting; it's math and a ton of people are not doing math at home. Maybe evaluating the work of someone else and trying to have a discussion.

And Wilbon is an excellent ESPN talking head. Knows enough about basketball to keep a job but pretty much gets his shit handed to him on a piece of paper and makes up the other 95%.

I couldn't with the rest of his argument.

By Rob Go To Postbut people look at players like robots. Larry Sanders is the first that comes to mind, but just look at how everyone talked about him. "You're getting played millions, suck it up and do your job"

Eh I think that's generally something else more like envy and projection. People/employees within organizations should frankly know better. You're assembling a group of dudes to work together for 80+ games (and win these), practice and even their off the court antics can become a factor in performance. You got dudes getting fucked up before games or helping dudes with DUI problems get fucked up before games. It takes its toll.

i'm enjoying seeing how differently this is read across a couple sites i read.

By Rob Go To Postbut people look at players like robots. Larry Sanders is the first that comes to mind, but just look at how everyone talked about him. "You're getting played millions, suck it up and do your job"

I don't think analytics people were the people bashing Larry Sanders for suffering from mental illness.

Georgetown should rescind his friend's degree.

“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?”

Okay who edited this article? How does an editor not know the difference between qualitative and quantitative? I really want The Undefeated to be successful because we need more diverse voices in sports commentary, but they gotta do better than that, right?

By HasphatsAnts Go To PostOkay who edited this article? How does an editor not know the difference between qualitative and quantitative? I really want The Undefeated to be successful because we need more diverse voices in sports commentary, but they gotta do better than that, right?

Isn't an ESPN affiliated thing? Nuff said. Just about the only thing they put out worth a damn are the 30 for 30s.

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.

This annoys me...

So if my stock price goes up 175%, it should seen as "bogus?"

What the fuck, Wilbon.

Also, the reason for measuring offensive efficiency in points per 100 possessions is simple: it adjusts for pace.

By KingGondo Go To PostAlso, the reason for measuring offensive efficiency in points per 100 possessions is simple: it adjusts for pace.

Exactly. One of the dumbest things I've ever read.

How do i maths?

wait....the writer is shocked players don't talk analytics?

You play by feel and comfort... Not by numbers. Scouting and what not are what analytics are good for not for the players to play by...

I mean I doubt a baseball player goes to bat thinking

"I am .214 against lefties during day games..."

By blackace Go To Postwait….the writer is shocked players don't talk analytics?

You play by feel and comfort… Not by numbers. Scouting and what not are what analytics are good for not for the players to play by…

I mean I doubt a baseball goes to bat thinking

"I am .214 against lefties during day games…"

I'd be more concerned that the baseball is sentient.

It's absolutely fair to ask whether the analytics community is exclusionary on a racial basis. Underneath all that garbage Wilbon spewed there's a terrific column there.

Unfortunately, Wilbon's not the guy to write it.

By Mamba Go To PostI'd be more concerned that the baseball is sentient.

har har

It's fair to ask. We see the people making a living off of these things. I'm sure some people don't have the time, resources and other privileges to jump into analytics, let alone the racial barriers into journalism.

By domino Go To Posti'm enjoying seeing how differently this is read across a couple sites i read.

Got a link or two?

By HasphatsAnts Go To PostIt's absolutely fair to ask whether the analytics community is exclusionary on a racial basis. Underneath all that garbage Wilbon spewed there's a terrific column there.

Unfortunately, Wilbon's not the guy to write it.

is it fair?

By blackace Go To Postis it fair?

Why wouldn't it be? As sports management align its hiring practices toward a more data driven set of criteria, they'll have to wrestle with the same diversity problem that faces the rest of corporate America.

By HasphatsAnts Go To PostWhy wouldn't it be? As sports management align its hiring practices toward a more data driven set of criteria, they'll have to wrestle with the same diversity problem that faces the rest of corporate America.

I think the entirety needs to be looked if the concern is diversity...

I also think sports analytics attracts the same crowd as much of the tech/startup industry and there have been big issues with inclusion there.

By KingGondo Go To PostI also think sports analytics attracts the same crowd as much of the tech/startup industry and there have been big issues with inclusion there.

Also I'd go as far as to say an assumption of "objectivity" and being more "rational."

By KingGondo Go To PostI also think sports analytics attracts the same crowd as much of the tech/startup industry and there have been big issues with inclusion there.

By blackace Go To PostI think the entirety needs to be looked if the concern is diversity…

These, basically.

There could be underlying racial discrimination specifically in analytics departments. Could be.

Could also just be that the people who get these jobs are people who pour time into it as a past time, to start with, and then migrate into it as a job. Which would tend to be about the differences in levels of education, and then, purely a numbers thing.

Or just the same racism that people could use to not hire anyone.

I'll also hazard a guess that most are also male! ....

Wilbons article is pretty terrible because he doesn't raise any real point, and skims over any that he comes close to making.

Most sports conversations I have in any other place than on the internet never encompass analytic s either. Certainly not more than in passing. The only time I ever see it is in a message board setting where people can actually lay out the stats and have time to look them up.

It's a silly "obsverational" article. It's more aligned to a Jerry Seinfeld humour article than what ever "Think Piece" he has put together.

Also, I don't consider stats like team ORTG and individual TS% to be "advanced" anymore.

By KingGondo Go To PostAlso, I don't consider stats like team ORTG and individual TS% to be "advanced" anymore.

I think anyone who is even more than "slightly" casual would know what quite a few of the stats are and how they're used. Even if they don't understand exactly how they're derived/ exactly why they're better.