It never fails that, the more someone really knows basketball, the more complex and non-commital their answer is re: Jordan vs. LeBron. They're very difficult to compare as players.
That's because he is answering politically, just like Ronaldo vs Messi. Jordan has more hardware both individual as well as team than LeBron and KD put together. Enough for me to pick the best.
This is true of most things in life. The more expertise you have in a topic, the more aware you are of nuances & gray areas, and so the less likely you are to make sweeping claims with black and white thinking.
People are generally suprised to find that LeBron has a higher 2pt FG%, 3pt FG% and FT% than MJ did, and that MJ scored more per game because LeBron always looked for the open teammate first before taking a shot ... at least until the last two years in LA. Also, LeBron wasn't forced out of the league for two years due to gambling. So there's that. MJ was a more dynamic personality and imo more fun to watch. LeBron clearly had the greater total career. MJ had the greater peak.
@@studgerbil9081 so many excuses for the lack of rings and individual trophies LeBitch James has. Jordan did it all and didn't take him 20 years to do it. One thing he does better, I'll admit, no one flops, dives, cries and overacts like LeBron James!
The benefit of switching pitchers more often that was not mentioned is that hitters tend to do much better by the 3rd time they face the same pitcher in the same game, not only the pitcher is getting tired, but the hitters also had 2 previous experiences fresh. By switching to a new pitcher, hitter's previous experience gets nullified.
A big reason for no hitters, People are selling out for the homer at the plate and the strikeout as the hitter, this lowers batting averages and raises walks
Another thing is Relievers usually have better velocity and/or movement, so using more of them is often better than letting your starter go longer. However you also run into the problem of either working your relievers too hard and they struggle, or simply using too many pitchers, and only a handful of them are any good. Then it becomes important for starters to throw lots of innings again.
In postseason series, though, this seems to be leading to the problem reoccurring. Instead of a lineup seeing the starter too much, they may be seeing certain relievers too much over the course of a series. And relievers are usually relievers because they have less of an arsenal of pitches than a starter.
This kind of thinking and analytics time and time again lose teams games. As a Dbacks fan, Torey Lovullo has lost us countless games adopting this mentality.
I’m very impressed with this man’s knowledge of in depth statistics in several sports. He definitely knows what he’s talking about in Basketball, Baseball, and Football
He knows a lot about American sports. But saying that the best statistic we have for soccer is number of goals is a terrible answer to the question on ronaldo v messi
@@mrpigcho9466 Right... which is why he said it is not ideal, but they do not have many other statistics at this time. He said himself that it isn't optimal so Idk what video you watched lol
I was a sports statistician for one of the biggest media companies. Everything this guy just said is accurate, especially the part about how you get into the profession.
I would say an underrated WR is average separation gained on a route run. It seems rather consistently that WRs in college with poor separation numbers tend to fail in the NFL
Agreed, that’s a big one. Especially for the college to NFL transition. I think that this stat gets a bit murky at the NFL level, though. For one, defenses are far more complex - you don’t see a lot of zone/man hybrids in college. It’s hard to know what the goal of the WR even is on each play - find a hole in the zone? Decoy? Purposefully pull help coverage your way? Defenses also play off on purpose at times. This all exists in college, but it’s overall a lot more straightforward in College. Also, college defenses are, typically, pretty weak. Good WRs often play 1-3 good defenses a year, with the rest being trash. Most NFL defenses are decent quality - not many trash defense games, if any. Which might appear to be an argument for using this stat in the NFL, but it’s really saying that the gulf in quality among college defenses really means that you need a good avg separation there to be considered good enough to compete in the NFL.
It’s good seeing tech support videos back. I was worried Wired stopped doing those since we didn’t get any for a few weeks, until we got 1 last week and now this
I also don’t know much about soccer statistics. I assume they track things like assists and shooting percentages he could have mentioned. But do they also track things like turnovers versus passes, goals versus expected goals, offsides penalties, on/off goal differential, or stops/steals against ball handlers?
@@acgeewhiz They have plenty of statistics, and yeah they track all of that stuff alongside stuff like key passes and dribbles. American sports are a few years ahead of it in terms of a statistical revolution, partially due to circumstance but largely due to it being a much harder sport in which to quantify impact. Simple put, there's a much wider latitude of what each statistic can mean in soccer compared to, say, baseball where each incident that comprises a single stat has essentially the exact same value. Also, the game's structure makes it hard to get good statistical samples since there are only ~3 goals per game on average and maybe 10 incidents which decide the match and can accurately be quantified. And most elite players play for the entire game so you can't get reliable on/off data.
I wrote a short paper for a sports analytics class arguing why the three-point shot was the most effecient (not including possibilities of fouls). Glad it was on the right path!
There's a few caveats though, it is more efficient AS LONG AS THE PERCENTAGE IS ABOVE 35%. So there's a few things to consider: 1) A tough, contested three-pointer will not be above 35% regularly, it's probably 20%-25%. So don't chuck forced threes! 2) It depends on how good a shooter you are. Shaq will never hit above 35% even when wide open. So it's not more efficient for him!
Props to him for 99% of this, the football/soccer question about Messi and Ronaldo was very bland and simplistic thought. Especially when stats like xG and xA exist
@@davies010 ronaldo has more total goals. it's important to mention the positions that ronaldo played. he didn't really play a primary striker role until he got to madrid.
@@based__381And if you understood anything about statistics you would understand why. But you don’t so you just think it’s funny or out of place or something
@@vinniehuish3987 The only reason i know that those words are so commonly used in stats is because i’m very familiar with the subject. Idk why you would assume im not.
Man there are so SO many metrics in football (soccer) to judge player performance than just "goals". It doesn't even account for the different roles and positions that players play. I love all of his analysis, but this one take is kinda ridiculous.
Football is statiscally underexplored though. And most of the current statistics are crap. Like theres no metric to measure a defensive midfield player individually. How he affects the field off ball for instance.
@@gaming4yallexactly. there’s no stat that can determine how well a midfielder dictates tempo or anything else that can only be viewed through the eye test. it’s understandable why they don’t have stats for these types of things
I think he said goals because both of them are attackers. Just like for receivers he said catches and didn't take into account everything the receiver does to get into the position to catch. By listening to some of his other answers it seems that there are in fact basic stats that are "good enough" to determine someone's skill and goals/catches are some of them. If a receiver is good he will get into position to make catches. If a football attacker is good he will find scoring opportunities. Remember Filippo Inzaghi? Not the fastest, not the most technical, but his sense for positioning was through the roof.
I'll argue there was at least a little bit of merit to the Pitcher win before the 80s or 90s, when pitchers would throw complete games with regularity and even then throwing 7 or 8 innings there's a significant portion of a game win that can be attributed to a pitching performance. But it really is deeply flawed when so much hangs on how much the other 9 guys score. You're not going to win 20 games without being decent, but you can win 20 games when there are 20 better pitchers than you in the league.
Are they a main defender? Or is their main purpose to put the ball in the net? If so, then the player who puts the ball in the net more is the better player
IMO the most important part of the video was the little bit he said about triangle bc so many ppl and teams use the “make the defense pick and choose” idea and then the triangle flips that to offenses choosing and flowing. The other side of that r having the smart enough players that r good enough threats on ball to make a triangle function.
Sports is a great way to get into statistics and programming. If you're into football/soccer and want to learn some programmings and stats, there's a good book on the topic. There's some serious statistical and spatial models used in football with great success!
Bad fielders make slightly above average plays look spectacular cause they’re lunging and diving for balls that elite fielders make plays on routinely. That’s why Outs Above Average is an important metric.
The problem with pitcher wins is that pitchers don't win games all by themselves. Teams win and lose games, not individual players. The run support that a pitcher gets has a huge effect on his win percentage. The defense behind the pitcher also has an effect. So does the bullpen. A good pitcher on a bad team will probably win fewer games than a bad pitcher on a good team. One of my favorite examples is Storm Davis with the 1989 Oakland A's. He had a record of 19-7 that season. He did this while allowing more runs than an average pitcher, despite the Coliseum being a good pitcher's park. His ERA was 4.36 in a league with an overall ERA of 3.88. His ERA+ was 85 (i.e. 15% below average). HIs WHIP was 1.506, while the league WHIP was 1.355. His FIP was 4.40, while the league FIP was 3.52. He got those 19 wins even though he pitched only 169.1 innings because the A's scored a lot of runs, had a good defense, and a great bullpen.
I did stats for basketball in Australia a decade ago. We were taught to only give an assist to someone if their pass lead to an instant basket. So if you pass to someone who pump fakes and takes a couple dribbles then shoots that should not be an assist. I'd say majority of assists in the NBA are borderline assists.
Interesting how it works compared to hockey where the assists are always given to the two previous players who touch the puck at all, doesn't matter if it's just the goalie stopping the puck behind the net and a forward going end to end, the goalie will get an assist.
"the best measure we have for soccer performance for individuals, is goals." is an outrageous simplification of one of the most if not the most data-driven sports in the world.
I think he had a point. No matter how many data models the game produced, football is very subjective. How many times have you heard legends and former said Messi is the better player, but Ronaldo is the better goalscorer? Now they are saying Haaland is the better goalscorer while Mbappe is the more complete.
Outrageous. So defenders and midfielders always have bad performances according to how he measures performance. There are new stats like chances created, and possession value which are determining how scouting is done. This man does not know anything about soccer, he should have just said that.
@@boomboom1601 I think his point is that goal is the only objective reliable metric. A defender used to be measured by tackles, but now it became known that the better defender, the less tackles he had to make. The clean sheet can be attribute to the defensive midfielder or the goalkeeper or his partner or the tactics. A midfielder in a poccession-based team would make more passes than a counter-attack team, how do you define who is the better midfielder? We know Messi and Ozil has many assist, but they also provide the pre-assist that not many noticed.
how did it take people that long to realize that almost all running backs' success is dependent on the offensive line. This is why Emmitt Smith was good. He ran through 10 feet wide holes that the GOAT offensive line created for him.
Bc back in the day rb’s actually ran through people. Yards after contact was higher just 10 years ago compared to today. And I’m sure the 15-20 years+ it was a higher number. You don’t see rb’s consistently trucking much any more. Back then it was a more violent league when rb’s were the hardest/most frequent hit position in the game. They deserved to get paid. Nowadays unfortunately, offenses aren’t dependent on the quality of an rb unless you’re Derrick Henry.
@@phomjachana If I had to guess I'd imagine RBs get much better yardage when they don't have to run people over. That, plus reduced risk of injury and reduced CTE damage, they're on the field more often, and for longer.
There are two popular sports with the same name, one of which has an acceptable alternative name. Why in a public forum, like a comments section for a video where both sports were discussed, would you insist on using the confusing same name, when you could just use the alternative name and clear up all confusion?
Great video. Glad he actually tried to answer each question to the best of his availability instead of just saying words that don’t answer the question but do take up time in the video.
@TRP you need to do a video on Drew Griffith. He just ran a 3:57.08 1600m at the PIAA Track and Field Championships in Shippensburg, PA. This time is a new NFHS record and smashed Gary Martin's state record.
The goal stat in soccer was not one that was very useful until Messi and Ronaldo and is actually worse than evaluating basketball or football players based on the points they score, far worse. A better way to do would be impact on expected goals. I should write a paper
It’s tough to grade NFL and NBA players because there are so many variables. NBA players efficiency rating could take a hit based on the talent and spacing they have around them. Same with NFL players. Even individual advanced analytics that try to factor that in like expected rushing yards or yards after contact don’t account for oline play that can affect a rushers ability to gain downhill momentum b4 they are hit w contact. If Rhamodre Stevenson for example is hit behind the LOS bc of bad oline play, he’s going to be an inefficient runner vs a Raheem Mostert who has time and space to gain momentum. Nor does a statistic value their pass pro. That’s why baseball is the perfect game for data nerds bc it’s very individual and there are way less variables
LOVED this!!! Only questions is about the first question. Is a layup a more efficient shot vs a dunk? Or..... is a dunk really a "shot". Is this a definition thing? "Shot" is when a ball is released and has some level of trajectory? Whereas a "dunk" is literally placing the ball in the hoop, so while NOT 100%... it's pretty close. What is the rationale? Thanks anyone!
The gambling one is wrong. market making books no longer go for a 50/50 split. they usually have profiled their consumers very well that help them know which action is sharp vs recreational, which allows for a much more efficient closing line.
Clearly, this dude doesn't know his Basketball stats too well. MJ is a statistical outlier in dozens of categories, the only way MJ and LBJ's stats are comparable is if you ignore all the advanced stats and just look at their Points/Assists/Rebounds/Steals. The moment you start looking at the advanced stats, it's not even a close contest. Then there's the eye test, if you actually got to see MJ play, you know who is better.
what advanced stat does mj beat lebron out in. they have similar PER at their peaks and Lebron has a higher True shooting percentage. I don’t know what you’re talking about
I'm surprised that with the mentions of Jordan, LeBron and Jeter, that there's only like 136 comments about it lol Edit: people also dont recognize that the Oakland As also had a pretty good pitching lineup too which def helped with getting this wins
they had a great rotation and their shortstop, Miguel Tejada, won AL MVP that year. The book barely mentions any of that and the movie completely ignores it.
Running back devaluation isn't just because we're recognizing the impact of offensive lines more, though that's indisputably part of it. Another part is that as the game has become a more passing league, the big physical backs of old are being phased out for smaller quicker guys who can be bigger contributors in the pass game. Being small used to be an instant disqualifier for RBs, and the league thus ignored alot of talented guys or pigeon holed them for small roles. Now that you no longer need to be 6'2" and 230lbs to get drafted, the position is suddenly oversupplied. There are way more good RBs than there are RB jobs. That pushes value down. Likewise, having (on average) smaller RBs means that they also wear out faster, and too many teams have been burned after signing a RB to a lucrative 2nd contract. So teams realized this and many now just refuse to pay big money to a RB...which further pushes the value of the position down relative to others. You're better off spending the money elsewhere and then drafting a 3rd round rookie who will probably perform at a level pretty similar to the veteran you're losing to free agency.
I would disagree that goals is the only statistic that we can use to compare Messi and Ronaldo. It´s just the easiest one because they have both been forwards for all of their careers. Goals really just messure output, and that´s where Ronaldo is the best ever. But it doesnt take into account the differences in the roles they played for their teams. Ronaldo has almost always been an "output merchant" so to speak. Brilliant technique as well obv but goals have been his main focus. But Messi did so much more for Barcelona other than being the main goalscorer, and he still hit over 40 goals basicly every season in Barcelona. Even managing 90 goals in a calendar year once while also being the creator of the team.
I don't watch any of these sports...but that was great! I'm not even into math lol Luv to see more of this guy regarding current team line ups, how/what to change...also any gambling tips ;) Be like Moneyball 2
So - if the O-Line gets credit for running yards (or more credit) - how about great running backs on bad teams? Did Sweetness or Barry Sanders have great lines but still had putrid teams?
He applied it to basketball in the 90s. This was before the Billy Beane A's. But Bill James's book did influence Dean (according to his other interviews)
The fact he said free throws are important for players like Jimmy Butler, Giannis, or LeBron... And Hardens name did not come out this man's mouth, even Embiid.. when they first played together they shot like 50 free throws combined and the games took so long
These people who act like analytics are bad or good are insane, they are a tool. This kid at 7:05 for example, win loss matters. Dude its literally as simple as camping in Call of Duty, people were good at camping, which was hated but to sit back and say that the person who is camping winning 60% of his games isnt as good as another run and gun player winning at a 60% rate is odd. They would have to play each other to tell us... which is the beauty of sports. You still have no idea until they play and thats why sports having divisions is to this day the biggest problem, cant stand divisions in any pro sports, divisions are unprofessional imo and make college football unwatchable to me, college football is not worth me needing to know more about it then professional football im sorry college football fans have my respect huge, yall love football man and im mostly a Nascar fan whos fans constantly shyt on it so yall are refreshing.
Baseball needs a new stat: Effective Batting Average. A single hit where the batter ends up stranded, with no other runners advancing is not an 'effective' at-bat. This new statistic could also be 'weighted' i.e. should a hit or at-bat be considered 'effective' if the hit comes in the ninth inning when the batter's team is behind by seven runs? (Ichiro, when he played for the Mariners had 1200 hits but only two walk-off hits (one homer, one single) in all those hits; he also hit a lot when there were two outs or Seattle was so afr behind it was not important).
stats are useful for the teams themselves, since they're focused on winning, and also people with some stake in the outcomes of games like gamblers or fantasy players. For the casual fan, they're not really necessary to fully understand or care much about.
What I can't stand is that the NFL and NCAA exalt YARDS as the premiere metric for a football team's offensive or defensive success. Although yards have some correlation with success in the NFL it is very weak, yet the NFL will routinely tout individual players and teams yardage stats as though they are the end all be all. They'll even rank teams based on this. Yards are easy to understand, but they are incredibly misleading, yet the NFL continues to lean into it.
There is a common personality in statisticians (let’s say 75 percent) where expressing anything seems too definitive to them so they seem inhuman at times and neutral. They know the world so much more deeply and therefore are kind of reticent to be present.
Highly disagree with the idea that running backs are being devalued due to a recognition shift towards the offensive line. They aren't getting paid because their production drops off a cliff within a few years after their rookie contracts, and it's cheaper to draft another one in later rounds over paying them adequately. In other words, money.
you make a good point about longevity, but the reality is the running game is simply less effective. There are stats out there that show when a team chooses to run the ball on any given down and field position (vs passing), win probability drops. This applies for the vast majority of offenses in the NFL, and a contributor as to why payrolls are more focused on other positions nowadays. There are outliers, but overall running backs should not be paid the share that they once were, because why would you pay more for a less efficient style of play.
MJ was a slightly overrated defender for his career, with most of the hard defensive assignments going to Pippen, but Jordan was a very solid defender for a long time. However, I agree with you, 2013 Lebron was an alien on the defensive end and the fact he didn’t win DPOY might be the biggest award snub of all time.
rebounds are more overrated as a stat than assists, take away "rebounds" gained off free throws for example, specifically the ones where the other team doesn't even try to box out for an O-board, they shouldn't count, don't say assist are too easily given with them still in the game.
lol I came here to say the same thing. It was jarring to hear him say that the best stat to measure performance in soccer is goals - I’m not even sure that has ever really been the case, but it absolutely isn’t now. In fairness, I feel like he’s probably not at all a soccer guy and just didn’t want to respond with “I don’t know,” but still, what an awful answer.
so the best measure for individual performance in Football consists of between 0(!) and 2-3 single Data Points for a 90-120 min match? are you serious?
I find it absolutely criminal to hear that the only important stat in actual football is goal 🤣 My man obviously know nothing about the sport, but there was no need to show it like that
It never fails that, the more someone really knows basketball, the more complex and non-commital their answer is re: Jordan vs. LeBron. They're very difficult to compare as players.
That's because he is answering politically, just like Ronaldo vs Messi. Jordan has more hardware both individual as well as team than LeBron and KD put together. Enough for me to pick the best.
This is true of most things in life. The more expertise you have in a topic, the more aware you are of nuances & gray areas, and so the less likely you are to make sweeping claims with black and white thinking.
People are generally suprised to find that LeBron has a higher 2pt FG%, 3pt FG% and FT% than MJ did, and that MJ scored more per game because LeBron always looked for the open teammate first before taking a shot ... at least until the last two years in LA. Also, LeBron wasn't forced out of the league for two years due to gambling. So there's that. MJ was a more dynamic personality and imo more fun to watch. LeBron clearly had the greater total career. MJ had the greater peak.
@@studgerbil9081 so many excuses for the lack of rings and individual trophies LeBitch James has. Jordan did it all and didn't take him 20 years to do it. One thing he does better, I'll admit, no one flops, dives, cries and overacts like LeBron James!
Magic
The benefit of switching pitchers more often that was not mentioned is that hitters tend to do much better by the 3rd time they face the same pitcher in the same game, not only the pitcher is getting tired, but the hitters also had 2 previous experiences fresh. By switching to a new pitcher, hitter's previous experience gets nullified.
That's how you used to tell the real aces. Guys who could get through the lineup that 3rd time were the elites
A big reason for no hitters, People are selling out for the homer at the plate and the strikeout as the hitter, this lowers batting averages and raises walks
Another thing is Relievers usually have better velocity and/or movement, so using more of them is often better than letting your starter go longer. However you also run into the problem of either working your relievers too hard and they struggle, or simply using too many pitchers, and only a handful of them are any good. Then it becomes important for starters to throw lots of innings again.
In postseason series, though, this seems to be leading to the problem reoccurring. Instead of a lineup seeing the starter too much, they may be seeing certain relievers too much over the course of a series. And relievers are usually relievers because they have less of an arsenal of pitches than a starter.
This kind of thinking and analytics time and time again lose teams games. As a Dbacks fan, Torey Lovullo has lost us countless games adopting this mentality.
I’m very impressed with this man’s knowledge of in depth statistics in several sports. He definitely knows what he’s talking about in Basketball, Baseball, and Football
It’s almost as if it’s his full time job
@@hoptoit8687lol always gonna be a douche like you in the comments huh
He knows a lot about American sports. But saying that the best statistic we have for soccer is number of goals is a terrible answer to the question on ronaldo v messi
@@mrpigcho9466probably because football is not USA's top sport historically
@@mrpigcho9466 Right... which is why he said it is not ideal, but they do not have many other statistics at this time. He said himself that it isn't optimal so Idk what video you watched lol
I will forever appreciate Wired for calling it Twitter instead of X.
Move on
@@josemv25dawg if youre calling it X youre really weird
@@zaycomage6888 I don't even use Twitter
Probably filmed before
i'll check back in 1000 years to see if you're still appreciative
I was a sports statistician for one of the biggest media companies. Everything this guy just said is accurate, especially the part about how you get into the profession.
didn’t really assume it wasn’t
didn’t really assume it wasn’t
prove it
How exactly did you get into this field, would you recommend this to someone that loves math and watching sports?
Ofc it is. He's like the father of basketball analytics
I would say an underrated WR is average separation gained on a route run. It seems rather consistently that WRs in college with poor separation numbers tend to fail in the NFL
Agreed, that’s a big one. Especially for the college to NFL transition.
I think that this stat gets a bit murky at the NFL level, though. For one, defenses are far more complex - you don’t see a lot of zone/man hybrids in college. It’s hard to know what the goal of the WR even is on each play - find a hole in the zone? Decoy? Purposefully pull help coverage your way? Defenses also play off on purpose at times. This all exists in college, but it’s overall a lot more straightforward in College.
Also, college defenses are, typically, pretty weak. Good WRs often play 1-3 good defenses a year, with the rest being trash. Most NFL defenses are decent quality - not many trash defense games, if any. Which might appear to be an argument for using this stat in the NFL, but it’s really saying that the gulf in quality among college defenses really means that you need a good avg separation there to be considered good enough to compete in the NFL.
It’s good seeing tech support videos back. I was worried Wired stopped doing those since we didn’t get any for a few weeks, until we got 1 last week and now this
- How is Messi better than Ronaldo, statistically speaking?
The sports statistician:
- Goals 🤷
Won't blame him if he's not familiar with football. He's American after all. But for the rest of the questions, he did very well.
This debate was already over last year. It's just Ronaldo fanboys who are still clinging desperately to this question.
I also don’t know much about soccer statistics. I assume they track things like assists and shooting percentages he could have mentioned. But do they also track things like turnovers versus passes, goals versus expected goals, offsides penalties, on/off goal differential, or stops/steals against ball handlers?
xg per 90, figured he would at least know that. or shots per goal ratio
@@acgeewhiz They have plenty of statistics, and yeah they track all of that stuff alongside stuff like key passes and dribbles. American sports are a few years ahead of it in terms of a statistical revolution, partially due to circumstance but largely due to it being a much harder sport in which to quantify impact. Simple put, there's a much wider latitude of what each statistic can mean in soccer compared to, say, baseball where each incident that comprises a single stat has essentially the exact same value.
Also, the game's structure makes it hard to get good statistical samples since there are only ~3 goals per game on average and maybe 10 incidents which decide the match and can accurately be quantified. And most elite players play for the entire game so you can't get reliable on/off data.
I wrote a short paper for a sports analytics class arguing why the three-point shot was the most effecient (not including possibilities of fouls). Glad it was on the right path!
There's a few caveats though, it is more efficient AS LONG AS THE PERCENTAGE IS ABOVE 35%. So there's a few things to consider:
1) A tough, contested three-pointer will not be above 35% regularly, it's probably 20%-25%. So don't chuck forced threes!
2) It depends on how good a shooter you are. Shaq will never hit above 35% even when wide open. So it's not more efficient for him!
Props to him for 99% of this, the football/soccer question about Messi and Ronaldo was very bland and simplistic thought. Especially when stats like xG and xA exist
The question was asking how is Messi better than CR7 then he talked about goals, well, in goals Messi is not better than CR7 lmao
@@sh3ltonyes he is? Messi has a better goals to game ratio than Ronaldo.
@@davies010 ronaldo has more total goals. it's important to mention the positions that ronaldo played. he didn't really play a primary striker role until he got to madrid.
@@huegrection9698 SHUT UP
@@huegrection9698 shall we ignore that Messi play with Suarez for most of him prime then
i like how the statistician fittingly uses the word "probably" so often
Win probabilities... probably. 😆
probably, approximately, potentially, etc are all the favorites 💀
@@based__381And if you understood anything about statistics you would understand why. But you don’t so you just think it’s funny or out of place or something
@@vinniehuish3987 The only reason i know that those words are so commonly used in stats is because i’m very familiar with the subject. Idk why you would assume im not.
@based__381 well we probably, likely, potentially wont see a rebuttal
There's better stats than "just" goals to measure a footballer's performance
Like what
Man there are so SO many metrics in football (soccer) to judge player performance than just "goals". It doesn't even account for the different roles and positions that players play. I love all of his analysis, but this one take is kinda ridiculous.
He's american. Americans do not give a single solitary fugg about football (soccer).
Football is statiscally underexplored though. And most of the current statistics are crap. Like theres no metric to measure a defensive midfield player individually. How he affects the field off ball for instance.
@@gaming4yallexactly. there’s no stat that can determine how well a midfielder dictates tempo or anything else that can only be viewed through the eye test. it’s understandable why they don’t have stats for these types of things
I think he said goals because both of them are attackers. Just like for receivers he said catches and didn't take into account everything the receiver does to get into the position to catch. By listening to some of his other answers it seems that there are in fact basic stats that are "good enough" to determine someone's skill and goals/catches are some of them. If a receiver is good he will get into position to make catches. If a football attacker is good he will find scoring opportunities. Remember Filippo Inzaghi? Not the fastest, not the most technical, but his sense for positioning was through the roof.
@@RunawayYeif that's the case, then he just shouldn't have responded to that question, bc he just doesn't understand the sport
Pitcher wins have a correlation with how good they are, but there is also a correlation with how good the rest of the team is.
came here to say this. Take two identical pitchers, the one with a better offense backing him up will have a better W/L record. Simple as that!
It’s why King Felix was one of the best pitchers without a great win count. The Mariners just couldn’t score!
Nolan Ryan had that problem, although he just through so many innings he eventually got there on the counting stats.
@@tjtribble.
I'll argue there was at least a little bit of merit to the Pitcher win before the 80s or 90s, when pitchers would throw complete games with regularity and even then throwing 7 or 8 innings there's a significant portion of a game win that can be attributed to a pitching performance. But it really is deeply flawed when so much hangs on how much the other 9 guys score. You're not going to win 20 games without being decent, but you can win 20 games when there are 20 better pitchers than you in the league.
Me, a European, listening about baseball and American football: yes, those words probably exist
Most Americans would feel the same when hearing about cricket 😆
Europeans too
I feel like there’s more than just goals to tell how good a player is
Yeah, he knows a lot about sports, but I don’t think soccer is his area of expertise so his answer wasn’t great
Are they a main defender? Or is their main purpose to put the ball in the net? If so, then the player who puts the ball in the net more is the better player
Wonder how this guy does in his Fantasy League 🤔
Wish he would’ve touched on separation stats when he brought up receivers. Fantasy experts love separation and avg depth of target stats
There should be more statistics on refs/umps that are more available to the fans.
IMO the most important part of the video was the little bit he said about triangle bc so many ppl and teams use the “make the defense pick and choose” idea and then the triangle flips that to offenses choosing and flowing. The other side of that r having the smart enough players that r good enough threats on ball to make a triangle function.
I could listen to this man all day
Hope they get Scott Steiner for the next Sports Math Support
Sènor Joe, the numbers don't lie, and they spell doom for you at Sackerfice.
Sports is a great way to get into statistics and programming. If you're into football/soccer and want to learn some programmings and stats, there's a good book on the topic. There's some serious statistical and spatial models used in football with great success!
Bad fielders make slightly above average plays look spectacular cause they’re lunging and diving for balls that elite fielders make plays on routinely. That’s why Outs Above Average is an important metric.
The problem with pitcher wins is that pitchers don't win games all by themselves. Teams win and lose games, not individual players. The run support that a pitcher gets has a huge effect on his win percentage. The defense behind the pitcher also has an effect. So does the bullpen. A good pitcher on a bad team will probably win fewer games than a bad pitcher on a good team.
One of my favorite examples is Storm Davis with the 1989 Oakland A's. He had a record of 19-7 that season. He did this while allowing more runs than an average pitcher, despite the Coliseum being a good pitcher's park. His ERA was 4.36 in a league with an overall ERA of 3.88. His ERA+ was 85 (i.e. 15% below average). HIs WHIP was 1.506, while the league WHIP was 1.355. His FIP was 4.40, while the league FIP was 3.52. He got those 19 wins even though he pitched only 169.1 innings because the A's scored a lot of runs, had a good defense, and a great bullpen.
I did stats for basketball in Australia a decade ago. We were taught to only give an assist to someone if their pass lead to an instant basket. So if you pass to someone who pump fakes and takes a couple dribbles then shoots that should not be an assist. I'd say majority of assists in the NBA are borderline assists.
Interesting how it works compared to hockey where the assists are always given to the two previous players who touch the puck at all, doesn't matter if it's just the goalie stopping the puck behind the net and a forward going end to end, the goalie will get an assist.
"the best measure we have for soccer performance for individuals, is goals." is an outrageous simplification of one of the most if not the most data-driven sports in the world.
This dude's knowledge checks out until they talk about the thing you know a lot about.
agreed, and this analyst certainly only works with the big three US sports nearly all the time.
I think he had a point. No matter how many data models the game produced, football is very subjective. How many times have you heard legends and former said Messi is the better player, but Ronaldo is the better goalscorer? Now they are saying Haaland is the better goalscorer while Mbappe is the more complete.
Outrageous. So defenders and midfielders always have bad performances according to how he measures performance. There are new stats like chances created, and possession value which are determining how scouting is done. This man does not know anything about soccer, he should have just said that.
@@boomboom1601 I think his point is that goal is the only objective reliable metric. A defender used to be measured by tackles, but now it became known that the better defender, the less tackles he had to make. The clean sheet can be attribute to the defensive midfielder or the goalkeeper or his partner or the tactics. A midfielder in a poccession-based team would make more passes than a counter-attack team, how do you define who is the better midfielder? We know Messi and Ozil has many assist, but they also provide the pre-assist that not many noticed.
i feel enlightened!! this was a very cool interview for us non sports nerd types. Very awesome. Thank you Coach Oliver
If you nerd and don't play any sports you are double nerd not different type nerd
I stand corrected. :) @@nexustom5823
how did it take people that long to realize that almost all running backs' success is dependent on the offensive line. This is why Emmitt Smith was good. He ran through 10 feet wide holes that the GOAT offensive line created for him.
Bc back in the day rb’s actually ran through people. Yards after contact was higher just 10 years ago compared to today. And I’m sure the 15-20 years+ it was a higher number. You don’t see rb’s consistently trucking much any more. Back then it was a more violent league when rb’s were the hardest/most frequent hit position in the game. They deserved to get paid. Nowadays unfortunately, offenses aren’t dependent on the quality of an rb unless you’re Derrick Henry.
@@phomjachana If I had to guess I'd imagine RBs get much better yardage when they don't have to run people over. That, plus reduced risk of injury and reduced CTE damage, they're on the field more often, and for longer.
Was hoping they'd somehow slide in some sort of Emmitt Smith/Barry Sanders comparison question. If only breaking the defense's ankles was a statistic.
I hope we get one for soccer as well
you mean football.
I obviously mean football. It's for the rest of the comments to get@@cktorm
yeah that was a super weak answer, felt like he doesnt rlly know much about the sport, which is understandable as its not big in usa
There are two popular sports with the same name, one of which has an acceptable alternative name. Why in a public forum, like a comments section for a video where both sports were discussed, would you insist on using the confusing same name, when you could just use the alternative name and clear up all confusion?
@@rokeYouuer because it's only confusing for americans. You are right about having an alternate name though, handegg seems appropriate.
Great video. Glad he actually tried to answer each question to the best of his availability instead of just saying words that don’t answer the question but do take up time in the video.
It would be awesome to have such a video with more world famous sports like Football(soccer), cricket, boxing etc..!
I feel so bad i thought he wasn't looking straight, always to the side and was getting annoyed, then i noticed the obvious.... Great insightful video!
@TRP you need to do a video on Drew Griffith. He just ran a 3:57.08 1600m at the PIAA Track and Field Championships in Shippensburg, PA. This time is a new NFHS record and smashed Gary Martin's state record.
This was a really great video!
True shooting percentage puts a high value on made 3s, but doesn't similarly reflect missed 3s.
Watching this vid is the closest I’ve ever gotten to understanding why people like sports
The goal stat in soccer was not one that was very useful until Messi and Ronaldo and is actually worse than evaluating basketball or football players based on the points they score, far worse. A better way to do would be impact on expected goals. I should write a paper
It’s tough to grade NFL and NBA players because there are so many variables. NBA players efficiency rating could take a hit based on the talent and spacing they have around them. Same with NFL players. Even individual advanced analytics that try to factor that in like expected rushing yards or yards after contact don’t account for oline play that can affect a rushers ability to gain downhill momentum b4 they are hit w contact. If Rhamodre Stevenson for example is hit behind the LOS bc of bad oline play, he’s going to be an inefficient runner vs a Raheem Mostert who has time and space to gain momentum. Nor does a statistic value their pass pro.
That’s why baseball is the perfect game for data nerds bc it’s very individual and there are way less variables
Great video, disappointed no hockey though!
LOVED this!!! Only questions is about the first question. Is a layup a more efficient shot vs a dunk? Or..... is a dunk really a "shot". Is this a definition thing? "Shot" is when a ball is released and has some level of trajectory? Whereas a "dunk" is literally placing the ball in the hoop, so while NOT 100%... it's pretty close. What is the rationale? Thanks anyone!
He's using the term layup to refer to any shot close to the basket, so a dunk would be included in that definition.
@@DellpodderExactly. That there are so many comments about this suggests he's maybe not that good communicating with sports people though
The gambling one is wrong. market making books no longer go for a 50/50 split. they usually have profiled their consumers very well that help them know which action is sharp vs recreational, which allows for a much more efficient closing line.
This has nothing to do with his lazy eye, but him always looking at whoever is next to the cameraman was so distracting
Clearly, this dude doesn't know his Basketball stats too well. MJ is a statistical outlier in dozens of categories, the only way MJ and LBJ's stats are comparable is if you ignore all the advanced stats and just look at their Points/Assists/Rebounds/Steals. The moment you start looking at the advanced stats, it's not even a close contest.
Then there's the eye test, if you actually got to see MJ play, you know who is better.
what advanced stat does mj beat lebron out in. they have similar PER at their peaks and Lebron has a higher True shooting percentage. I don’t know what you’re talking about
wide shot, medium shot, close-up, wide shot, medium shot, close-up, next question, repeat
How did they not answer the questions about when is it better to punt in American football as opposed to going for a 4th down?
I was expecting the answer to be: the free throw
Interesting I thought the most efficient shot is the long 2
I'm surprised that with the mentions of Jordan, LeBron and Jeter, that there's only like 136 comments about it lol
Edit: people also dont recognize that the Oakland As also had a pretty good pitching lineup too which def helped with getting this wins
they had a great rotation and their shortstop, Miguel Tejada, won AL MVP that year. The book barely mentions any of that and the movie completely ignores it.
was that the same "moving on" byte every time? xD
Running back devaluation isn't just because we're recognizing the impact of offensive lines more, though that's indisputably part of it.
Another part is that as the game has become a more passing league, the big physical backs of old are being phased out for smaller quicker guys who can be bigger contributors in the pass game. Being small used to be an instant disqualifier for RBs, and the league thus ignored alot of talented guys or pigeon holed them for small roles. Now that you no longer need to be 6'2" and 230lbs to get drafted, the position is suddenly oversupplied. There are way more good RBs than there are RB jobs. That pushes value down.
Likewise, having (on average) smaller RBs means that they also wear out faster, and too many teams have been burned after signing a RB to a lucrative 2nd contract. So teams realized this and many now just refuse to pay big money to a RB...which further pushes the value of the position down relative to others. You're better off spending the money elsewhere and then drafting a 3rd round rookie who will probably perform at a level pretty similar to the veteran you're losing to free agency.
This guy is a statistical unicorn
7:00 the pitcher win rule is so odd. it seems designed specifically for closers.
Get This guy on again
Interesting I would have thought the most effective way to win games is build the better team
This guy looks exactly like a stereotypical statistician. Great vid!
I would disagree that goals is the only statistic that we can use to compare Messi and Ronaldo. It´s just the easiest one because they have both been forwards for all of their careers. Goals really just messure output, and that´s where Ronaldo is the best ever. But it doesnt take into account the differences in the roles they played for their teams. Ronaldo has almost always been an "output merchant" so to speak. Brilliant technique as well obv but goals have been his main focus. But Messi did so much more for Barcelona other than being the main goalscorer, and he still hit over 40 goals basicly every season in Barcelona. Even managing 90 goals in a calendar year once while also being the creator of the team.
I don't watch any of these sports...but that was great! I'm not even into math lol
Luv to see more of this guy regarding current team line ups, how/what to change...also any gambling tips ;)
Be like Moneyball 2
Interesting his take on Moneyball
He is wizards analyst lads, he knows squat
This guy must hit some crazy multis
What's a more important defensive stat, steals or blocks?
QBs are the most depended position in football? If will they get devalued as well?
It becomes clear in this video that the US has no idea about soccer.
4:00 Nick Anderson
isn't non-penalty xG p/90 a better metric than just raw goals? it's more predictive is it not?
So - if the O-Line gets credit for running yards (or more credit) - how about great running backs on bad teams? Did Sweetness or Barry Sanders have great lines but still had putrid teams?
moneyball walked so this guy could run
Moneyball walked so its author could trip by hard-committing to defending SBF's bank fraud.
Earl Weaver was doing the stuff they talk about in Moneyball in the 70s
He applied it to basketball in the 90s. This was before the Billy Beane A's. But Bill James's book did influence Dean (according to his other interviews)
Is a dunk a shot?
Wouldn't that be more efficient shot?
Presumably he's including dunks with layups
a sports scientist what an innovation
I hope he comes back.
Well explained Dean.
I hope the Pardon My Take Boys do something with this.
I know he didn’t just say jordan is a better defender lol
The fact he said free throws are important for players like Jimmy Butler, Giannis, or LeBron... And Hardens name did not come out this man's mouth, even Embiid.. when they first played together they shot like 50 free throws combined and the games took so long
These people who act like analytics are bad or good are insane, they are a tool. This kid at 7:05 for example, win loss matters. Dude its literally as simple as camping in Call of Duty, people were good at camping, which was hated but to sit back and say that the person who is camping winning 60% of his games isnt as good as another run and gun player winning at a 60% rate is odd. They would have to play each other to tell us... which is the beauty of sports. You still have no idea until they play and thats why sports having divisions is to this day the biggest problem, cant stand divisions in any pro sports, divisions are unprofessional imo and make college football unwatchable to me, college football is not worth me needing to know more about it then professional football im sorry college football fans have my respect huge, yall love football man and im mostly a Nascar fan whos fans constantly shyt on it so yall are refreshing.
Baseball needs a new stat: Effective Batting Average. A single hit where the batter ends up stranded, with no other runners advancing is not an 'effective' at-bat. This new statistic could also be 'weighted' i.e. should a hit or at-bat be considered 'effective' if the hit comes in the ninth inning when the batter's team is behind by seven runs? (Ichiro, when he played for the Mariners had 1200 hits but only two walk-off hits (one homer, one single) in all those hits; he also hit a lot when there were two outs or Seattle was so afr behind it was not important).
Seems to me the most efficient shot is the Free Throw.
stats dont lie. but they dont tell us everything. like the example on the quality of assists.
To me, Sports are bettter if you enjoy the moment, I don't think about the numbers 😆
stats are useful for the teams themselves, since they're focused on winning, and also people with some stake in the outcomes of games like gamblers or fantasy players. For the casual fan, they're not really necessary to fully understand or care much about.
Okay, so an in-depth statistical analysis for sports popular in the United States. What about the rest of the world?
I understood some of what he said. The words that weren't sports or math.
“He gets on base”
Granny style free throw.
Ed Begley Jr.'s brother
What I can't stand is that the NFL and NCAA exalt YARDS as the premiere metric for a football team's offensive or defensive success. Although yards have some correlation with success in the NFL it is very weak, yet the NFL will routinely tout individual players and teams yardage stats as though they are the end all be all. They'll even rank teams based on this. Yards are easy to understand, but they are incredibly misleading, yet the NFL continues to lean into it.
Anyone else notice he didn't answer the question as to whether missing the first free throw effects whether you make the second?
There is a common personality in statisticians (let’s say 75 percent) where expressing anything seems too definitive to them so they seem inhuman at times and neutral. They know the world so much more deeply and therefore are kind of reticent to be present.
Highly disagree with the idea that running backs are being devalued due to a recognition shift towards the offensive line. They aren't getting paid because their production drops off a cliff within a few years after their rookie contracts, and it's cheaper to draft another one in later rounds over paying them adequately. In other words, money.
both can be true, not mutually exclusive points
you make a good point about longevity, but the reality is the running game is simply less effective. There are stats out there that show when a team chooses to run the ball on any given down and field position (vs passing), win probability drops. This applies for the vast majority of offenses in the NFL, and a contributor as to why payrolls are more focused on other positions nowadays. There are outliers, but overall running backs should not be paid the share that they once were, because why would you pay more for a less efficient style of play.
To say MJ was a better defender seems off. LBJ can defend 1 - 5 at a solid level. Obviously, not vs Giannis, but neither could MJ.
MJ was a slightly overrated defender for his career, with most of the hard defensive assignments going to Pippen, but Jordan was a very solid defender for a long time. However, I agree with you, 2013 Lebron was an alien on the defensive end and the fact he didn’t win DPOY might be the biggest award snub of all time.
@@daltongiddings2771the documented stats disagree with you. Lebron analytically only had a couple good defensive seasons out of his whole career
@@cgpxae2119 are these documented stats in the room with us right now?
@@daltongiddings2771 you got google right?
I love these series, but also the questions some of these twitter idiots ask are infuriatingly stupid.
I mean, look at the quality of the comments here and these are definitely slanted to being your more savvy sports fan. Ever listen to sports radio?
rebounds are more overrated as a stat than assists, take away "rebounds" gained off free throws for example, specifically the ones where the other team doesn't even try to box out for an O-board, they shouldn't count, don't say assist are too easily given with them still in the game.
The answer to the question about Messi and Ronaldo was really bad. Seems like he doesn't know much about football.
lol I came here to say the same thing. It was jarring to hear him say that the best stat to measure performance in soccer is goals - I’m not even sure that has ever really been the case, but it absolutely isn’t now. In fairness, I feel like he’s probably not at all a soccer guy and just didn’t want to respond with “I don’t know,” but still, what an awful answer.
@@DaqPorterBridges you know what I mean
so the best measure for individual performance in Football consists of between 0(!) and 2-3 single Data Points for a 90-120 min match? are you serious?
I find it absolutely criminal to hear that the only important stat in actual football is goal 🤣
My man obviously know nothing about the sport, but there was no need to show it like that
Most statistically efficient shot in history may actually be Steph wide open for a corner 3.
very interesting
Nice vid
4:58 you meant football*, you're welcome
he meant soccer 👍
Not a single hockey question ☹️
The beautiful game doesn’t need stats