|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Nov 7, 2019 16:33:24 GMT
I'd like to say there isn't an upside to analytics, but the Red Sox brass that have brought four titles the least 15 years after 86 years of nothing would tell me I'm wrong. I'm a basketball fan and I hate what analytics have done to that sport. Every 7'5" goon out of Ukraine is a volume three point shooter now because that's what 'the numbers' tell you to do. Take threes all night and whoever hits the most, wins. There's no mid-range game anymore. The better teams still move the ball well, but the end result is always to try to get a three. There's no value in a posting up at all. Shaq would be obsolete in today's NBA, how insane is that? I think the impact of analytics on the game itself on a day-in, day-out basis are somewhat overstated, but the real impact is how teams are constructed, as you mentioned regarding the Red Sox. Analytics can help you decide between two players who have similar batting averages, HR and RBI totals but in reality are vastly different players who perhaps were buoyed by a great supporting cast, hindered by a poor supporting cast, helped out by a favorable ballpark, etc., things like that. Keith Law's book about this is really a great read for anyone who loves baseball and he gets into the good and bad of analytics (and I'm someone who never really paid much attention before that). I can't speak to how it's affected basketball. You can count on one hand the number of minutes of basketball I've watched during the last decade. And it totally makes sense considering how numbers-oriented baseball is. I absolutely see the value in it even if it's probably taken to extremes in some cases. But basketball kind of sucks now. It really is about who makes the most threes every night. Though I can't blame analytics entirely, as the NBA is so obsessed with the success of its best teams/players that defense has basically been taken out of the game completely and the officiating is borderline WWE quality these days.
|
|
