Remember back in 2003 when the book Moneyball came out about Billy Beane and how he was using statistical data to put together a team of baseball players at a fraction of the price of the "big market" teams and still remained competitive?
The book itself was really good (I'll read pretty much anything non-fiction and about sports), but there was always something that bothered me about Moneyball.
Billy Beane was basically portrayed as a new wave genius in the book. Sure, there were plenty of passages about his temper and I'm not saying Michael Lewis painted him out to be a saint, but I couldn't help but think that based on the book Lewis wanted us to think that Beane was some sort of revolutionary; a man who was going to revolutionize the way professional sports teams are put together.
The issue I took with the book at the time is the issue I still have with it today: what has Billy Beane won? Sure, he was approaching constructing a baseball team differently than anyone had ever done it before, and that in itself is worthy of making him the protagonist of a book. But wasn't it a little premature to praise his innovative way of thinking?
Nearly a decade later, the A's still haven't been to the promise land, or even close for that matter. In the Moneyball era, the A's have lost in the first round of the playoffs four times, been swept in the ALCS once, and missed the playoffs five times, including five of the past six seasons.
The point is, for as good of a story as Moneyball was, it was far from a story about a guy reinventing Major League Baseball. It was about a guy who tried something different, has a very small window of moderate at best success, and ultimately ended up being outdone by the very people that he was setting out to destroy (big market teams).
Fast forward to 2010, and I'm having the same feelings about the new whiz kid on the block in my favorite sport: Houston Rockets GM Daryl Morey.
Take a poll of any causal basketball fan and ask them to name the best GM in the NBA, and at some point in the conversation Morey's name is sure to come up. Like Beane, he's developed a reputation of being a borderline "genius" for his use of mathematical formulas and advanced statistics to put together and NBA team.
And like Beane, when it comes to Morey, I have to ask: what has he won?
Now, let's make one thing clear: I'm not saying I don't like what Morey is doing. I'd be lying if I said that wasn't intrigued to see if his emphasis on stats can work when putting together an NBA roster.
But after the trade deadline last week Twitter was abuzz with things about how Morey has "done it again" and plenty of other things of that nature. But when I look at the track record of Morey, he absolutely reeks of the stench of Billy Beane.
Morey served as the Senior Vice President of Operations for the Celtics from 2004-2006, when he advised on the draft, free agency, trades, statistical analysis, and advanced scouting for the team. In his three seasons with the Celtics, the team went 114-132, and in typical Billy Beane fashion, lost in the first round of the playoffs twice, and finished in the lottery once.
He then took over as assistant GM for the Rockets before the 2006-07 season, and helped lead the Rockets to, you guessed it, a first-round loss in the playoffs.
The following season, Morey was named as the GM and his Rockets (wait for it...) lost in the first round of the playoffs. The next season, 2008-09, the Rockets finally got over the hump, took the basketball world by storm, and won the NBA title!
Okay. Not really. The Rockets lost to the Lakers in the second round of the playoffs, but still received a lot of national recognition, including Morey winning Yahoo! Executive of the Year for 2008-09.
The Rockets are currently in 10th place in the Western Conference.
Billy Beane gets a whole book dedicated to him for losing in the first round of the playoffs over and over, and Daryl Morey wins an award for losing in the second round of the playoffs.
It's time we take a step back when it comes to these number crunching gurus and tell it like it is: it's interesting, but it's not revolutionary. There is probably a lot of value in the information they provide, which is why plenty of elite level NBA teams now employee stat gurus, but it all needs to be taken with a grain of salt. All the stats in the world can't replace a feel for the game.
Professional sports is not a liner equation, and that's what makes them great. The old cliché is "that's why they don't play the game on paper." Yes, you can give your team a slight advantage by amassing a ton of statistical data and theories and then applying them to setting your roster or lineup. But the second you start relying on too heavily on numbers, you can bet that you will be passed up by a team that still considers the intangibles when putting together a team.
Look no further than Daryl Morey and the Rockets for the perfect example. There isn't a statistic in the world that says that Derek Fisher should be the starting point guard in the NBA, let alone the starting point guard on the NBA champions. Yet it was Fisher's flagrant foul on Luis Scola that lit a fire under the previously "soft" Lakers that helped propel them past the Rockets in the second round of the 2009 playoffs.
Fisher averaged 8 points, 2.2 assists, and 2 rebounds per game in the playoffs last season. And there wasn't a single Laker fan that didn't want him on the floor in the NBA Finals. And of course, it paid off, with Fisher hitting two huge shots in Orlando that basically sealed the Lakers 15th NBA title.
There's not a chance in hell that Fisher would crack a Daryl Morey roster, because he doesn't have a great +/- or PER or whatever else you want to use to robotically evaluate good players, but Phil Jackson didn't hesitate for a second to start him at point guard when it mattered most last season.
The moral of the story: the next time you try to sell me on the fact that Daryl Morey is the next great NBA GM, I'm going to stop you mid-sentence and tell you to pass the salt.
Then, and only then, will I listen to what you have to say.
February 24, 2010
Jacob Cordova:
Your Dereck Fisher analogy doesn’t really match what Morey does. Look up the stats of Shane Battier and Chuck Hayes. There is no way you would think they should be starting or even on the Houston Rockets team but they are. The stats and numbers that Morey looks at are not the same stats we look at. Morey looks at intingable stats to us if that maks since. Its not ppg. Check out this article. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html)