Numbers Tell

Chad Ford repeats a common assessment of Andris Biedrins: "Biedrins falls a little bit into the Anderson Varejao category -- energetic big man whose stats don't tell the whole story in terms of on-court contributions."

But here's the thing: Unless by "stats" you mean "per game scoring average and nothing else" the story Biedrins' stats tell you is that he's a very good player. His stats tell me that he average 9.8 rebounds per game in 27.4 mpg. They tell me that his 10.5 ppg came on an extraordinarily good 63 percent field goal percentage. They tell me that the Warriors defense was better with Biedrins on the floor. These contributions are perfectly quantifiable.

Comments

Didn't you write this exact same post a few months ago?

http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/stats_tell.php

Should we be worrying about early-onset Alzeimer's or something?

And yeah, Biedrins is great. Without him, the Warriors are a 40-win sideshow instead of a 48-win team that nobody wants to play in the playoffs.

Posted by too many steves | June 30, 2008 5:25 PM

Yeah, but can he flop like Varejao? That certainly doesn't show up in the box score.

Posted by Stacy | June 30, 2008 5:28 PM

What the stats don't tell you is that Don Nelson inexpicably chooses not to play Biedrins in situations where the Warriors would clearly be better off with him on the floor.

Biedrins would be even better on another team.

Posted by blah | June 30, 2008 5:31 PM

Matt, you know who had the best plus/minus of anyone on the Lakers in the Finals? No one other than series goat Vladimir Radmanovich, a player absolutely everyone (correctly) identified as having a horrid series. Couldn't it possibly be that these human-devised metrics aren't perfect, and that there is actually some advantage to watching the games and making distinctions from what you see? I know-- that's old fashioned no-nothingism to the statheads of the world. Well I like the new metrics and find them useful. But I think things like this demonstrate the futility of using only statistics to measure a player's value.

Posted by Freddie | June 30, 2008 5:40 PM

I think with Nellie, you've got to take the bad (not enough PT for Biedrins) with the good. The Warriors aren't the Warriors if they aren't a threat to bust out a 3-guard, 2-small-forward lineup at any moment. If the other coach get suckered into playing Nellie's games, and benches his best big man because the Warriors have Harrington at the 5, then Nellie wins.

If Brandon Wright and Anthony Randolph are any good, I like the team that Mullin is building for the post-Nellie, post-Baron era. Biedrins in the middle, Monta in the backcourt (maybe he learns to play the point, maybe not, he's still awesome). Capt Jack is signed for a couple more years. Then you've got these ridiculously long, fast, athletic guys in Wright and Randolph. The key here is either resigning Baron to help this ship or getting something for him when he leaves, either through a trade or signing a decent free agent with his cap space. Also, they should replace Nellie with a coach who has a similar philosophy, because the team is built for speed.

Posted by too many steves | June 30, 2008 5:57 PM

http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/stats_tell.php

Too funny.

I hereby incorporate by reference my comments to that post.

Posted by Al | June 30, 2008 6:00 PM

resinging Baron to helm the ship, rather. And that only happens if Baron realizes his best and most marketable days will be behind him.

Also, Harrington is ridiculously overpaid, and should be traded to a team that wants another scorer and doesn't care about the money.

That talk of a Baron-and-Harrington for Billups-and-Sheed trade is intriguing. I love the idea of Sheed in the Warriors system, and I think Billups would be a good complement to Monta, because, like Baron, he's a big PG. I also really like the idea of Sheed and Stephen Jackson on the same team. Since he arrived in Oakland, Jack has been a choir boy, believe it or not, and the fans love him. I could see Sheed doing the same thing.

The downside for the Warriors is age. Baron's a little broken down, but Billups is a few years older, and Sheed is way older than Harrington.

Posted by too many steves | June 30, 2008 6:04 PM

I agree with Freddie to an extent. A player's +/- for a series probably doesn't tell you shit. Although Van Gundy talked the whole series about how he liked the Lakers with VladRad in the lineup because they were able to use their spacing better. But for a whole season, its pretty tough to argue.

Posted by Stacy | June 30, 2008 6:05 PM

One thing about Biedrins that doesnt show up in the boxscore is his poor defensive awareness. He makes Al Jefferson look good by comparison.

Posted by Joel | June 30, 2008 6:44 PM

What exactly do you mean by "defensive awareness"? Al Jefferson is a horrible defensive player and, from what I can see, Biedrins is a pretty good one.

Posted by too many steves | June 30, 2008 7:06 PM

Biedrins is good at accumulating defensive stats (blocks, steals and rebounds) but has bad "defensive awareness" - meaning he does not rotate, double team or provide weakside help well. This is not surprising, given his lack of experience. He also is a hideous free throw shooter (both in results and form). These deficits lead Nellie to bench him during crunch time.

Posted by ephus | June 30, 2008 8:30 PM

Didn't you write this exact same post a few months ago?
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/stats_tell.php
Should we be worrying about early-onset Alzeimer's or something?

Absolutely hilarious. Nicely done.

Posted by Andrew | June 30, 2008 8:51 PM

One thing you don't see from the stats is the gaping holes in his offensive game. He can't throw a rock in the ocean from outside 5 ft. In fact the FG% falsely suggests that he can actually shoot. So he's a purely inside player, only he can't make free throws when he's fouled. Good thing the Warriors have a wide open style of play, or he'd get a lot fewer of those ally-oops and layups slashing to the basket. I think on any team but Nellie's he'd be non-productive.

One good thing Biedrins is for is breaking down those Euro sterotypes. A big guy who never shoots and can't, who is pretty athletic and plays defense.

"But I think things like this demonstrate the futility of using only statistics to measure a player's value."

Straw man. MY is not claiming you should only use stats to evaluate players. He's pointing out that certain alleged intangible, unquanifiable qualities are in fact often quantifiable.

Posted by Colatina | June 30, 2008 11:18 PM

Couldn't it possibly be that these human-devised metrics aren't perfect...

Freddie: The plus/minus is definitely imperfect. I've read numerous critiques of the validity of that particular stat, though I can't for the life of me remember what they are.

Posted by Jasper | July 1, 2008 12:57 PM