This post – like our podcast — is in two parts. The first part is from Andres Alvarez and details the podcast from April 10th. The second part is just a few links that needed to go up someplace (so why not make it part of a post with many links?).
Super Stat Team Assemble!
- Dre Alvarez from Nerd Numbers
- Devin Dignam from NBeh?
- Ben Gulker from Pistons by the Numbers
- Dave Berri from The Wages of Wins Journal
This week we decided to try a little something new and cut your weekly podcast into bite size pieces that can be found here.
If you’re interested in more you can also
With that here’s a run down of some links that may make listening more enjoyable.
The Pistons
- Dave holds that Joe Dumars is trying to prove the Isiah Thomas school of thought is right.
- Devin sums up Joe Dumars managerial style well – Take the mystery box!
- What will Joe do with Stuckey?
- At least Greg Monroe is panning out.
- Should Detroit have let Ben Wallace go?
Dennis Rodman
- We discuss a Sport’s Illustrated piece on if Dennis really belongs.
- Were the Bad Boy Pistons really all about Isiah and Joe?
- We discuss Basketball Reference’s awesome Hall of Fame model a few times.
- Dave brings the George Costanza defense for some NBA players.
- My dog Mobius decides to voice his disapproval at Dennis Rodman making Hall of Fame.
The Hall of Fame
- Devin discusses his thoughts on the old “greats”
- Artis Gilmore got in, was he that good? Dave thinks he was.
- Sidney Moncrief was an agreed snub. Did someone else get the credit?
Of course we also talk briefly about how Derrick Rose is not MVP. Hope you enjoy it and as always leave your thoughts.
-Dre
And Now for More Links
- Mosi Platt – of the Miami Heat Index – is normally part of the podcast. Although he missed this week, check out his investigation of the Denver Nuggets’ defense for the Bleacher Report.
- Jonah Lehrer – author of How We Decide (an excellent book on behavioral economics and decision-making) – has authored the following article for ESPN the Magazine: True grit: Quarterbacks need instincts more than smarts; why are some better at getting better? The following should be familiar to readers of Stumbling on Wins: Consider a recent study by economists David Berri and Rob Simmons. While they found that Wonderlic scores play a large role in determining when QBs are selected in the draft — the only equally important variables are height and the 40-yard dash — the metric proved all but useless in predicting performance. The only correlation the researchers could find suggested that higher Wonderlic scores actually led to slightly worse QB performance, at least during rookie years. In other words, intelligence (or, rather, measured intelligence), which has long been viewed as a prerequisite for playing QB, would seem to be a disadvantage for some guys.
- I should note that Lehrer did not actually interview me (or Rob) for this story. It would have been great to talk to the author of one of my favorite books on behavioral economics, but I was still glad to see Lehrer quote our research.
Speaking of focusing on the negative… let me close with another observation from behavioral economics. The difficulty decision-makers have with selecting quarterbacks in the draft has been documented and discussed frequently in the past. And of course, the story of Tom Brady illustrates this problem. An ESPN documentary – the Brady 6 – details what happened to the quarterbacks selected before Brady in the 2000 draft. What is interesting about this story is how Brady still remembers being passed over eleven years ago. After all the success he has had as an NFL player, he still gets very emotional when thinking about having to wait until the 199th pick to hear his name on draft day (check out the video clip “Brady Recalls Draft Day”). Brady’s reaction is not unusual. People tend to have stronger reactions to losses than they have to victories. This is true for Brady. It is true for Michael Jordan. And it is likely to true for most everyone else.
– DJ
Wages of Wins Journal 
Evan
April 11, 2011
The sound quality this week is terrible.
reservoirgod
April 11, 2011
I would love to see a post identifying players that coaches leeched their careers from the way Don Nelson did w/ Sidney Moncrief. The sad thing is that Wayne Embry gave Nelson a chance because they were roommates when they played together on the Celtics and then Nelson stabbed him in the back and got him fired. That damn Celtics organization has affected basketball beyond the hall of fame.
Ra's Head
April 11, 2011
There are two arguments that bother me in that SI article.
First, that the hall of fame is only for well-rounded players. That is crazy to me. I think anyone who can dominate a facet of the game as much as Rodman did (two facets really) deserves a shot. There are plenty of hall of famers who were not particularly good rebounders or possibly not particularly good defenders. Rebounding is an important aspect of basketball. Even coaches will tell you that. If a player can lead the league in rebounding for a bunch of years and accumulate DPOY trophies he deserves a place in the hall.
Second, I don’t understand why the author seems to attribute Rodman’s defensive and rebounding abilities to his lack of offensive role. As if any player could be a great rebounder and defender if they just focused on it instead of offense. There are bunches of guys in the NBA who are in limited offensive roles, why don’t they just focus on defense and rebounding and produce like Rodman? I don’t understand why people seem so reluctant to state that rebounding and defense are skills like shooting and passing and just as difficult to come by.