"Analytics" impact the way we play sports. But does a given action, sequence, or player impact winning? This evolved partly from the work on Bill James in baseball, from Michael Lewis's best-seller Moneyball, and from Dean Oliver's Basketball on Paper.
Offensive and defensive efficiency, turnovers committed and forced, and other statistics earned focus. Tracking numbers just for numbers' sake isn't that helpful. The local writer shares, "Susie Smith led the team in defeat with fourteen points." That doesn't say whether Susie played defense, rebounded, passed the ball, played hard, took thirty shots, or whatever. It's like saying, "It was the warmest day of the Antarctic winter."
Good teams have more good possessions, make more "positive plays" and fewer negative ones. Missing shots and low attack efficiency, especially attack errors (balls into the net or out) prevent winning.
If you're not scoring on setter dumps or back sets, it makes sense to reduce them. "Do more of what works and less of what doesn't."
Sometimes you work overtime to register a kill. Gia does here.
No comments:
Post a Comment