First it was baseball with Moneyball, and then football with The Blind Side. Now Michael Lewis focuses his attention on the undervalued in the world of basketball:

The virus that infected professional baseball in the 1990s, the use of statistics to find new and better ways to value players and strategies, has found its way into every major sport. Not just basketball and football, but also soccer and cricket and rugby and, for all I know, snooker and darts — each one now supports a subculture of smart people who view it not just as a game to be played but as a problem to be solved. Outcomes that seem, after the fact, all but inevitable — of course LeBron James hit that buzzer beater, of course the Pittsburgh Steelers won the Super Bowl — are instead treated as a set of probabilities, even after the fact. The games are games of odds. Like professional card counters, the modern thinkers want to play the odds as efficiently as they can; but of course to play the odds efficiently they must first know the odds. Hence the new statistics, and the quest to acquire new data, and the intense interest in measuring the impact of every little thing a player does on his team’s chances of winning. In its spirit of inquiry, this subculture inside professional basketball is no different from the subculture inside baseball or football or darts. The difference in basketball is that it happens to be the sport that is most like life.

This article focuses on the Rockets’ Shane Battier. Unlike Billy Beane and the A’s, however, Battier’s masters are wisely a little more cagey about what it is about him they value:

He may not grab huge numbers of rebounds, but he has an uncanny ability to improve his teammates’ rebounding. He doesn’t shoot much, but when he does, he takes only the most efficient shots. He also has a knack for getting the ball to teammates who are in a position to do the same, and he commits few turnovers. On defense, although he routinely guards the N.B.A.’s most prolific scorers, he significantly ­reduces their shooting percentages. At the same time he somehow improves the defensive efficiency of his teammates — probably, Morey surmises, by helping them out in all sorts of subtle ways . . .

. . . There are other things Morey has noticed too, but declines to discuss as there is right now in pro basketball real value to new information, and the Rockets feel they have some. What he will say, however, is that the big challenge on any basketball court is to measure the right things.

One wonders if the A’s would still be exploiting some of the old inefficiencies if Billy Beane had been similarly circumspect back in 2002.

(thanks to reader Bigcatasroma and a few others who sent me the link)

Print Friendly
 Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone
« Previous: Full Circle
Next: Peter Schmuck Interview »


  1. Pete Toms said...

    Not interested in basketball at all (although I understand that this is about more than basketball), but I did notice that this Lewis piece is being discussed at The Sports Economist blog also.

  2. bigcatasroma said...


    As a big soccer fan, do you know of anything equivalent to Moneyball, or Baseball Prospectus, for soccer?  Any blogs, literature, etc.?  I know that Billy Beane was consulting w/ Tottenham Hotspur for a while, or even still does.  Any information on that?  Work the channels . . .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>