Slashdot Mirror


"Muthuball": How To Build an NBA Championship Team

First time accepted submitter Quillem writes "Muthu Alagappan, a 5'9" biomechanical engineering undergraduate at Stanford, made a presentation at this year's MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference which might well do to basketball what Moneyball did to baseball. His contribution revolves around a topographical analysis of NBA games which contends that there are really 13 positions in basketball — not just five. Besides a rather patronising — but informative — read in Gentlemen's Quarterly, there are earlier stories over at Wired and NYT blogs. Muthu's talk and slides are also available."

50 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Sorry, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I could personally care less about professional sports, however, there is a lot of money to be made from such analysis. Advertiseing revenues, statistical odds(for gambling), and learning more about a game that millions of people love than what those millions of people will ever find useful and just because we freaking can are great reasons to investigate this Stanford student's work.

  2. This is amazing by Hermanas · · Score: 5, Funny

    a 5'9" biomechanical engineering undergraduate

    I, for one, welcome our new 5'9" cyborg overlords.

    1. Re:This is amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Is this like a biomechanical Engineer (ie, Space Jockey?)

    2. Re:This is amazing by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I, for one, welcome our new 5'9" cyborg overlords.

      For some of us, 5'9" is an underlord.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. good but incomplete by evangellydonut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The statistics currently being tracked is more offense focused. Bad Boys of Detroit, the Bulls, and the Spurs had solid defense that helped them win but not necessarily show up in statistics unless you do a game-to-game analysis of the opponent's average offense performance vs performance against a specific team.

    Other than that, it's a pretty interesting thought/analysis... Just incomplete... but I'm sure someone can do a much more complete PhD thesis on this and get funded by some NBA team :-P

    1. Re:good but incomplete by kamapuaa · · Score: 2

      Blocked shots, defensive rebounds, steals...however I have my doubts basketball will ever get sabermatic. Single players dominate too much, lineups are smaller, and playing strategies are less strategic.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    2. Re:good but incomplete by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up! Great article. Thanks for sharing.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
  4. Patronising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    How is the GQ article "patronising" - because the opening summary says, "A Stanford undergrad's new super-nerd study"? That's the only thing I see that could be remotely considered patronizing. And frankly, this *is* a "super-nerd" study - how is a statistical analysis of NBA players NOT super nerdy?

    Can we change the Slashdot motto to "butthurt editorializing for nerds," instead of "news for nerds?" The "news" part implies a factual focus, and the summaries are increasingly flamebait of the first order.

    1. Re:Patronising? by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Sadly, I don't have mod points or I would mod the parent up. Two excellent points.

  5. Re:Sorry, but... by Slyfox696 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's basketball. Really, does anybody with a working brain really give a screw about this game? .

    Yes, we don't all fit the stereotype of nerds living in our parent's basement. Some of us actually loved sports in school, and have gone on to use that in carving a career out for ourselves.

    I work in technology, and serve as a webmaster. I'm not even going to pretend like I have the tech knowledge many of the people who post on Slashdot do, but at the same time, I have more than enough to do my job. I would also like to point out, it's a job I love very much. All of which is to say I definitely have a working brain, and anyone who has spent any time with basketball knows it very much is a sport which requires the ability to think and analyze at a very rapid pace. Playing, coaching, broadcasting, even watching can be mentally taxing if you wish.

    So I'd ask for you to leave your ignorance at the door and appreciate the fact that just because other people have interests you do not share, it doesn't reflect poorly on their intelligence.

  6. Top minds in America... by Osgeld · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Emulating a brad pit movie in order to advance the profitability of a stupid game that already rakes in tens of millions per team.

    Great work, humanity will place you among the legends

    1. Re:Top minds in America... by Klinky · · Score: 4, Informative

      Moneyball the movie was based off Moneyball the book. The concepts in Moneyball are real & have been implemented by most of Major League Baseball.

  7. Re:Sorry, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "even watching can be mentally taxing if you wish."

    only if your so fucking stupid that watching a bright orange 30 inch chunk of rubber being tossed around is mentally taxing

  8. Re:Sorry, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I could personally care less about professional sports.

    How much less could you care, or do you mean you could not care less?

  9. BB Theory by JustOK · · Score: 1

    As Ethan "Bubblegum" Tate will have already remarked someday, whilst pondering the time dilation effects of Basketball wherein time passes progressively slower as less time is left "on the clock":

    I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  10. Re:Sorry, but... by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Funny

    your so fucking stupid

    Sorry. Could you repeat that? The irony made me black out for a few seconds there.

    that watching a bright orange 30 inch chunk of rubber

    Sorry. Now my brain is bleeding. Could you start over?

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  11. Re:Sorry, but... by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's basketball. Really, does anybody with a working brain really give a screw about this game?

    I had a sarcastic reply but instead I'm going to simply say this: Donald Knuth was a basketball coach. See him talk about his baskeball coaching experience here.

    --
    Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
  12. 5'9" by hammeraxe · · Score: 1

    What the hell does his height have to do with anything?

    1. Re:5'9" by Organic+Brain+Damage · · Score: 1

      What the hell does his height have to do with anything?

      Nothing, now go back to bed Napoleon.

  13. there are really 13 positions in basketball... by phorest · · Score: 1

    Duh, 5 players on a team (X2) and 3 officials do add up to 13.

    --
    God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
  14. MOD PARENT UP by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 2

    ...for pointing out a common error that makes the speaker sound stupid. Is it just me or does anyone else get that "fingernails on a chalkboard" sensation every time you hear a speaker blithely say words that clearly mean the *exact opposite* of what was intended?

    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Funny

      I could agree more. It literally makes my blood boil!

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Irregardless of your blood, I could care less...

    3. Re:MOD PARENT UP by GrandCow · · Score: 1

      ...for pointing out a common error that makes the speaker sound stupid. Is it just me or does anyone else get that "fingernails on a chalkboard" sensation every time you hear a speaker blithely say words that clearly mean the *exact opposite* of what was intended?

      Look, for all intensive purposes I could care less. You shouldve noticed how rediculous that argument was so it's a mute point, per say.

      --
      "Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
  15. The comments so far are disappointing by excelsior_gr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You should all hand over your geek cards at the front desk, if you ever were in position of one.

    You have a geek making a presentation about an idea on how to bring together an optimum team of items depending on their statistical profiles, and you argue about how interesting basketball/baseball is? I have never witnessed people miss the point all at once that badly ever before in my life...

    Here, I will boil it down for you:
    1. Gather statistical data on the items of which you want to build a new group of.
    2. Do some data-mining and graphing to figure out how these items cluster. Do not predefine clusters, but let them surface themselves.
    3. Depending on a free, non-mapped variable (e.g. cost) make an optimum choice of individuals from each group. Alternatively, base your choice on a given pattern that you want to match or counter-act (e.g. the opposing team).
    4. Profit!
    5. Gather new data and update your graphs to keep up with times.

    How about starting to come up with ideas on how to apply this concept to physics, medicine, engineering and economics? Jeez...

    1. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by garcia · · Score: 1

      The problem is that, like Moneyball showed, it will only be an advantage as long as only a few teams (and not a majority) are using the methodologies. Once that happens, it's just the new norm.

    2. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by uniquename72 · · Score: 1

      When you show how this is anything at all new, and also applicable to medicine and other fields, I'll get excited. But it's not, so I won't hold my breath. Also, PLAYING sports is great. WATCHING sports is for paraplegics, fat people, and/or parents who have kids in the game.

    3. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by gknoy · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I really don't give a fig about basketball, likely as I don't understand it, and I found this talk (and slides) fascinating! I thought it was interesting to see how he could correlate players similarity by statistics, and then use that to expose cheaper versions of awesome players, or to show how your team is missing a certain skillset.

      Now if only I knew what a paint protector was and why it's important. :)

    4. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Actually it is worse than that because of what Moneyball did not show. The movie Moneyball completely ignored the role played in the success of the team it followed by players who were stars by traditional baseball standards. In addition, the team in Moneyball was not all that successful, it never won a championship using the Moneyball techniques. I suspect that this new analysis will be somewhat similar. It will add a few new wrinkles to the process that teams use to evaluate talent and choose players. In addition, the way the NBA is currently structured, non-basketball factors have a much bigger impact on the success of a team than statistical analysis does.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    5. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      How about starting to come up with ideas on how to apply this concept to physics, medicine, engineering and economics? Jeez...

      How about RTFA? He was presenting on behalf of Ayasdi, a company run by Stanford mathematicians, whose proprietary software is used by physicians, environmentalists, and the government to understand cancer, diabetes, and oil spills.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    6. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      What do you mean the team was not that successful?

      2000 91 70 .565 1st in AL West Lost ALDS to New York Yankees, 2–3.
      2001 102 60 .630 2nd in AL West Lost ALDS to New York Yankees, 2–3.
      2002 103 59 .636 1st in AL West Lost ALDS to Minnesota Twins, 2–3.
      2003 96 66 .593 1st in AL West Lost ALDS to Boston Red Sox, 2–3.
      2004 91 71 .562 2nd in AL West
      2005 88 74 .543 2nd in AL West
      2006 93 69 .574 1st in AL West Won ALDS vs. Minnesota Twins, 3–0. Lost ALCS vs. Detroit Tigers, 0–4.

      Those were some very successful years. hey were toe to toe with the Yankees, which is was (and is) best teams money could buy?

    7. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And they did it for a fraction of the price of the Yankee's team. To use the Slashdot mandated car analogy, this is the same thing as racing against a 911 with a chevy accent and almost winning. Sure, you lost, but you didn't have to spend nearly as much money as your opponent to compete.

      The system employed in Moneyball were great for team owners and front offices. They've been HELL for fans and players though.

      Traditionally, better players were kept around and you only traded marginal players. Now though, it's the good players who are traded in deals (not major stars like Chipper and A-rod, but still great players) for multiple, lesser players. And it keeps people like Matt Diaz changing teams every year or two. (he was traded from braves, to pirates, and back to braves in a single season)

      As a baseball fan, I'm not a fan of this new team building strategy that's based on money.

    8. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

      No, I wasn't aiming for irony. I'm just in a complete other field than biomedical research. Please, enlighten us!

    9. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

      I RTFA. I also watched the presentation where he makes a similar mention. But he does not give any examples. The only example that we have is the one for basketball. So how does this work in other fields? Just to mention that it is "used by x to understand y" is not enough!

    10. Re:The comments so far are disappointing by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      That's what their company does, the primary uses of their software is in exactly the fields you mentioned. He simply applied it to BB as his pet project.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
  16. Re:Sorry, but... by murdocj · · Score: 1

    Well, some people like to *think* about what they are watching. Guess you aren't one of those people.

  17. Re:Sorry, but... by Post-O-Matron · · Score: 1

    "even watching can be mentally taxing if you wish."

    only if your so fucking stupid that watching a bright orange 30 inch chunk of rubber being tossed around is mentally taxing

    Troll? Gentlemen this should be modded 5: "Genius Irony" !

  18. Re:Sorry, but... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Wow, troll? I guess that's the new [citation needed], huh? Or maybe someone just got a little too sensitive. I don't care about basketball either way. I'm tall but fat so all I was ever good at was layups.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  19. Re:Sorry, but... by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

    That makes it even funnier. Someone who proclaims that paying attention to basketball is stupid cites the size of the ball's circumference ... accurately.

    I'm ambivalent about pro ball. But that original comment was just too hilarious to let pass. Learning it could be interpreted to be even funnier than it originally appeared is priceless.

    Thank you.

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  20. MOD PARENT UP by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    Spot-on insightfulness should be rewarded.

  21. Re:Sorry, but... by ifwm · · Score: 1

    chunk of rubber has been made into a ball does not change the fact that it's a 30 inch chunk of rubber

    All of my basketballs are leather with a synthetic polyethylene bladder.

    No rubber anywhere, but don't let that stop you from being wrong.

  22. Re:Sorry, but... by jfengel · · Score: 1

    It's the word "that", presumably a typo for "than", that caused the cerebral hemorrhage. Ordinarily, not a major problem, but if one is going to call somebody "stupid" it's a good idea to spell everything correctly. Otherwise, the irony can induce cerebrovascular accident.

  23. Re:Data mining has been in use in basketball by wmorrow · · Score: 1

    A good Q&A at the end of the video answers some of the questions asked here. I'm disappointed no one asked him if they're using it for gambling. Although data mining of this complexity may not be needed. Anyone profiting using this simple metric to gamble on games?

  24. Re:Sorry, but... by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

    Wow! Very interesting!

    I really admire Donald Knuth, I really do, but I did not know he was so inarticulate! Or is it just the camera that makes him so?

  25. Re:Sorry, but... by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

    I'm no Knuth biographer, but every single interview and presentation given by Knuth that I ever saw, he always spoke like that.

    Going back to basketball, some people talk tons of shit about players such as Derrick Rose for not being very articulate, accusing him of being a moron, a retard and even autistic. Yet, people such as Knuth are also not very articulate, and no one in their right mind would accuse Knuth of being a moron. That says something about being prejudiced.

    --
    Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
  26. Re:Sorry, but... by ifwm · · Score: 1

    That was an anonymous coward, not me

    Sure guy.

    I do think that being a big sports fan to the point that you memorize shit about it is a big fat fucking waste of time. But hey, is it any more of a big fat fucking waste of time than ranting on slashdot?

    Unfortunately for you, you're guilty of both.

  27. Re:Sorry, but... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Sure guy.

    If there is any evidence to suggest it was me, please share it. If not, please die in a fire. I'm not the asshole who let anonymous cowards post on slashdot and I'm also not stupid enough to think that AC posts mean anything. That comment was probably yours since you're still here to talk shit about it. That's a better assumption than that it was mine, since I have no history of playing stupid games like that, and I've been here considerably longer than you have. In summary, bite my crank.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  28. public access? by clairity · · Score: 1

    i play basketball on a rec league team and sometimes like to analyze our stats. does anyone know if there's a way to access these tools publicly? it would be interesting to see what kind of player we each are and then see how to complement our existing team. we know that we have some imbalances, but it would be cool to see if the tool picks out the same issues that we understand more intuitively.

  29. NICE. Thanks to share. by saleson · · Score: 1

    NICE. Thanks to share. I love Oklahoma City Thunder Jerseys . Hello. I am the admin of wholesalejerseysiso.com t and I want to use this pic on my website, if you let me oof course.

  30. Re:Sorry, but... by scot4875 · · Score: 1

    Normally wouldn't bother responding to an AC troll, but this is one that will have a lot of bobbleheads nodding on Slashdot.

    How comical! How comical! You're rationalizing your pathetic, worthless interests. You know, deep in your heart, that you're wrong for enjoying meaningless things such as sports. You know this. You agree with me 100%.

    Pretty much every interest, short of curing disease and inventing new useful things in your spare time, is ultimately worthless. It's up to us to find our own meaning in what we do.

    Watching sports can be exciting for some people. Beating the final boss in a video game can be exciting for some people. As long as what a person is doing isn't affecting you at all, please piss right off with your "your interests are worthless" bullshit.

    --Jeremy

    --
    Jesus was a liberal