Moneyball on the hardwood

I read the book Moneyball several years back about efforts to better understand a player's contribution to helping a team win in baseball. It showed that traditional statistics generally weren't good measures of how helpful a player was in helping a team win.

Moneyball author Michael Lewis writes an extended piece - note this is long - in the NYTimes but relates it to basketball. Excellent, excellent read if you're into analytics. In my mind, this type of thinking applies far beyond the sports realm.

Here's a link the article, and a brief excerpt:

Battier’s game is a weird combination of obvious weaknesses and nearly invisible strengths. When he is on the court, his teammates get better, often a lot better, and his opponents get worse — often a lot worse. He may not grab huge numbers of rebounds, but he has an uncanny ability to improve his teammates’ rebounding. He doesn’t shoot much, but when he does, he takes only the most efficient shots. He also has a knack for getting the ball to teammates who are in a position to do the same, and he commits few turnovers. On defense, although he routinely guards the N.B.A.’s most prolific scorers, he significantly ­reduces their shooting percentages. At the same time he somehow improves the defensive efficiency of his teammates — probably, Morey surmises, by helping them out in all sorts of subtle ways. “I call him Lego,” Morey says. “When he’s on the court, all the pieces start to fit together."