Nov

18

An article that would suggest the Knicks have less skilled players and team winning % will not be helped by mean reversion. Given Tversky, Gould, Buffett, and Graham are all mentioned I wonder if all the conclusions reached by M have validity:

"Professional basketball in the U.S. certainly stands out as the sport where skill plays the largest role in shaping results. One intriguing explanation for the NBA's strong skill contribution is the height of the players. In most sports, the most skillful players within a wide range of heights can make it to the pros. But a relatively small percentage of the population is tall enough to play in the NBA. In their book, only about 3 percent of the male population in America is 6' 3" or taller, and a tiny percentage is above 6' 10" (about four standard deviations from the average). Yet almost 30 percent of NBA players are at least 6' 10". They conclude that a "short supply of tall people" contribute to the talent disparity and hence the greater relative role of skill. The right tail of the height distribution does not overlap completely with the right tail of the skill distribution. The Wages of Wins, David Berri, Martin Schmidt, and Stacey Brook note that…"

George Zachar comments: 

Occam's razor: The Knicks' owner, James Dolan, is a hoodoo.
 


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

1 Comment so far

  1. Gregory Rehmke on November 19, 2010 1:01 am

    Height is easy to measure, but it is a misleading measure in basketball. Players rarely shoot or block shots with their heads. Instead, it is reach that matters. Some long-armed 6′7″ players can outreach 6′10″ players with shorter arms. All the blocks, shots, and rebounds are with hands, and how far they can reach makes a difference.

    I mention this to emphasize the importance of focusing on the significant variable in such tests, rather than popular measures.

Archives

Resources & Links

Search