FanShot

David Berri on John Hollinger

11
From Raffo: I really like this fanshot by Erik O and the ensuing thread, but because it's a fanshot I can't bump it to the cover. So, I'm forcing it at the top of the river. Erik O: So this is way, way after the fact, but I thought it was interesting. Back when the Grizzlies hired Hollinger, David Berri was interviewed by the Grizzlies website, 3 Shades of Blue about what he thinks about Hollinger. In the advanced stats community, it's no secret Berri thinks PER is kind of a joke, so he was a bold (and great) choice for the interview. Berri begins by saying that Hollinger's metric is based off of all kinds of arbitrary weights he uses that he thinks make sense, which makes it flawed. I've complained about PER in the same way, that it uses certain weights that are completely subjective, but then the formula is used objectively. But then if you scroll down into the comments, Neil Paine (part of the basketball-reference.com team) calls out Berri and his Wins Produced formula for also having arbitrary weights, and makes subjective choices, which it absolutely does. For example, Berri says the value of a point is 0.033 wins, and the cost of a possession is 0.034 wins. Aren't these arbitrary weights as well? Berri goes on to ding PER for not having any correlation with wins, point out that it isn't good for guessing team records--of course Hollinger has admitted as much before, but I guess Berri didn't see that. In the comments section again, Neil Paine explains why Wins Produced (and Win Shares too, interstingly made by Justin Kubatko of basketball-reference.com, which tells us Neil Paine is at least being unbiased) are so highly correlateed with wins, and why it doesn't mean they are better metrics necessarily. In a nutshell, Neil says what Steve has said tons of times, that these metrics are so highly correlated with actual wins because they have a strong basis in offensive/defensive ratings (which are derived from points scored/allowed, which is always going to be very highly correlated with wins). Steve has repeatedly said that you can get high correlation just looking at team points scored and points allowed (or even easier, Margin of Victory). Surprise, surprise, the teams with a high Margin of Victory have the best records, with the obvious exception being the Lakers this year. Wins Produced also randomly has exceptions too, which is why it's only 95% correlated. As Steve, again, has pointed out to me (and John R, Michael White, SilverClip etc. in the discussions I'm remembering back to), while there is a high correlation between the "wins" formulas and actual wins, there's very little predictability power behind those formulas. That is, you can't use them to predict how a team will do very well. Isn't that the whole point? Why correlate with wins if you can't even use it to predict wins? Neil Paine's ultimate conclusion is that you shouldn't rely on any of the advanced metrics solely, because they are imperfect for predicting what's going to happen. No one, not a single metric, had any idea that Andray Blatche would be good this year. I've always thought he was just a crappy version of Marreese Speights, but this year he's playing like a borderline all star. What's funny is that for all their arguing, in the interview Berri also acknowledges that you can't just use stats to run a team, even if it’s wins produced. You have to look at the coach’s system, the type of players you have and what roles they play, the chemistry between players, and lots of other non-stats factors. This is the first time I’ve ever seen Berri say this out loud, and it was kind of nice to see he’s not a total nutjob. Hollinger never really said this, which has always bugged me, but I think Berri's right that Hollinger won't run the Grizzlies' scouting just based on PER. Anyway, super nerdy, but still interesting.
X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Clips Nation

You must be a member of Clips Nation to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Clips Nation. You should read them.

Join Clips Nation

You must be a member of Clips Nation to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Clips Nation. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker