Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: underclassmen and the draft

Expand Messages
  • Michael K. Tamada
    ... Yes, I ll be interested to see what those Fed economists come up with. They undoubtedly know the econometric techniques that ll be needed and I m presuming
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 23, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 harlanzo@... wrote:

      > --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Dean LaVergne" <deanlav@y...> wrote:
      > > Actually, I'm working with some economists at the Federal Reserve
      > Bank in
      > > New York who is testing that theory (among others). I'll let you
      > know the
      > > results when their results are in.
      > >
      > >
      > > Dean L.
      >
      > Some of you have mentioned the need for playing time to develop
      > skills of younger players. This is true to some extent. But I
      > wonder if certain players, as a result of physical development, just
      > get better because of the maturation process and that it would not
      > matter if the player spent 4 years with Dean Smith or 2 years with
      > Kevin Mackey he is still going to great because of his god-given
      > abilities. Obivously, you need some polish but I wonder if that is
      > only 10% of the puzzle whereas the physical/mental maturation process
      > is a much larger piece.

      Yes, I'll be interested to see what those Fed economists come up with.
      They undoubtedly know the econometric techniques that'll be needed and I'm
      presuming that they have the basketball knowledge necessary to
      successfully apply them.

      In particular, people here have come up with several hypotheses for player
      development:

      1. simple age (a 24 year old will play better than an 18 year old)
      2. receiving training (including practice time, perhaps this is best
      measured by practice minutes, or number of practices, or months of
      practice -- though that'll be practically identical with using simple age)
      3. minutes (or games, or seasons) of actual playing time
      4. minutes (or games, or seasons) of non-garbage playing time

      For explanations 2, 3, and 4 there are further some qualitative
      differences to investigate: are all minutes the same, or does it make a
      difference if they're experienced in the NBA, NCAA, (or NAIA, or the
      now-defunct CBA, or Europe, or ???). Also even within those categories,
      there are differences: would four years at UNC be the same as four years
      at, say, UHouston? Would a season of NBA experience be the same at, say,
      Phoenix (which always seems to be able to come up with little heralded
      players who end up making good contributions) or under George Karl (who at
      least in Seattle was notorious for burying rookies and never letting them
      produce or develop, Eric Snow being the most notorious example).

      Probably, player development is aided by all four of the factors listed,
      but the question is which factors are more important than others, and
      which ones would lead to the fastest development of a player (And is
      fastest best? Most people think that it would be a mistake to rush even a
      20-year old pitcher to the major leagues, ditto for most 18-year old
      position players; on the other hand some 20-year old position players
      such as Ken Griffey Jr and Alex Rodriguez were ready to play).

      To make matters even more complex, there are undoubtedly players for whom
      college coaching is the way to go, and others who would do better in the
      NBA developmental league or on the bench in the NBA. Depending on
      personality, ability to live on one's own, coachability, level of coaching
      already received in high school, etc. etc. I don't think any study can
      definitively provide an answer for individual players, but the Fed might
      be able to provide an overall average.


      --MKT
    • Dean Oliver
      ... player ... best ... simple age) ... I don t know if there is enough data to do the kinds of studies being proposed. I hope so. My concept is that you
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 24, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > In particular, people here have come up with several hypotheses for
        player
        > development:
        >
        > 1. simple age (a 24 year old will play better than an 18 year old)
        > 2. receiving training (including practice time, perhaps this is
        best
        > measured by practice minutes, or number of practices, or months of
        > practice -- though that'll be practically identical with using
        simple age)
        > 3. minutes (or games, or seasons) of actual playing time
        > 4. minutes (or games, or seasons) of non-garbage playing time
        >

        I don't know if there is enough data to do the kinds of studies being
        proposed. I hope so.

        My concept is that you somehow want to control for the quality of
        high school prospect you've got. A relative ranking may be all we
        can do -- look at the top 100 and their average ranking by the
        different services -- and track those guys through college/pros. (An
        absolute ranking would be better since there is some sense of
        better/worse high school classes.)

        What you don't want to do is what we have already done -- match Kobe
        Bryant with Shane Battier (maybe that was the other group). Kobe was
        considered easily the best player in the nation that year (by my
        faulty memory), whereas Battier was an "ordinary" McDonalds
        All-American. Basically, Battier would not have been drafted then.
        Kobe has few peers, except for Kevin Garnett, by being the only
        highly drafted high school kid in his year (am I forgetting
        someone?).

        But how does Rashard Lewis compare? Does he have a match who stayed
        in college at least a year or two?

        What about finding matches for these guys? Do people have old HS
        evaluations that we could use as a start for matching up appropriate
        guys?

        Tim Thomas? Jumaine Jones? Steve Francis with Larry Johnson? Dion
        Glover? Jonathan Bender? Ron Artest? Elton Brand? Glenn Robinson?
        Rodney Rogers?

        Dean Oliver
        Journal of Basketball Studies
      • Mike Goodman
        ... best ... simple age) ... What about championship minutes? What of that frozen moment when the shot has been released, the shot that will either secure
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 24, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
          >
          >
          ....people here have come up with several hypotheses for player
          > development:
          >
          > 1. simple age (a 24 year old will play better than an 18 year old)
          > 2. receiving training (including practice time, perhaps this is
          best
          > measured by practice minutes, or number of practices, or months of
          > practice -- though that'll be practically identical with using
          simple age)
          > 3. minutes (or games, or seasons) of actual playing time
          > 4. minutes (or games, or seasons) of non-garbage playing time
          >
          What about championship minutes? What of that frozen moment when
          the shot has been released, the shot that will either secure one's
          legacy as an amateur player, or tarnish it?
          Michael Jordan hit a championship shot in college. Did this whet
          his appetite for more, and sustain him thru the lean years in Chicago?
          Hakeem never won a college title. Did coming-so-close allow him
          to focus on doing even more to ensure that future opportunities would
          not slip away?
          A very-good college-age player, it seems, faces the choice of
          vying for a national collegiate championship, or putting in time on
          an NBA bench (or on the floor for a bad team).
          If money is everything, and sooner is better, then you don't like
          the possibility of an injury in college, carving out of your earning
          and achievment potential. If there is anything to the notion that
          certain vital personality traits are learned at certain ages, then
          you have an argument: that anyone who likes the idea of college
          competition may well do better by going to school, having that
          youthful experience, and letting the pro career happen later.
          How many NBA players have expressed regret at staying in school
          longer than was economically expedient? Has Jordan publicly lamented
          his time "wasted"? Has anyone?
          I like Kevin Garnett, even his expletives. Presumably, a college
          career would have purged him of his habit. But for every KG, there
          are probably a dozen or more guys who could develop, as people, more
          beneficially, by an amateur career, walking through the seasons, from
          dorm to class to gym, learning some life; and then going pro.
          Just my opinion.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.