[lprubin]

I completely agree that modern analytics has made baseball more boring. More strikeouts, more pitching changes, less stolen bases, more walks, and more pitches per at bat all make the game more boring for sure.

But basketball seems the opposite to me. Analytics has shown that except in a few superstar cases, back to the basket isolation mid range jumpers while the rest of the team stands around and does nothing (IMO the most boring play in basektball), is a terrible play call.

Analytics has shown that the pick and roll is a fantastic play in terms of points expectancy and I find it to be a really enjoyable play to watch because it often results in dunks and nifty passes or acrobatic layup attempts.

Analytics has shown that faster pace, shooting earlier in the shot clock, and getting out in transition more often to be hugely valuable strategies, all strategies that I think are more enjoyable to watch.

The perceived value of 3-pointer shooting has caused offenses to spread the floor creating more driving lines and making it harder for defenses to pack the paint which has created more offense which I think most people enjoy seeing.

I'd love to hear what you think analytics has done to make modern basketball more boring.

[polygotdomain]

I find this interesting, as it actually emphasizes baseball's role as a _passtime_. One of the key aspects in sabermetrics is that activities that carry the risk of an out are disincentivized because baseball is not time-limited, but out-limited. Therefore all the activities that are interesting, but carry that extra risk like stealing, are taken out of the game.

Basketball is time-limited, and therefore the strategy of maximizing the number of shots within that time period as well as maximizing their value, make sense.

I'll note that I don't necessarily think one is better than the other, as each game can have a different approach. I also think that maximizing purely for excitement (from a rules perspective), can lead to gimmicks rather than genuine improvements to the sport.

[edmundsauto]

It's interesting in baseball (I agree the game is less exciting!) because the new way of playing is optimized for winning games, not for fan enjoyment. To me, this says that baseball's structural balance between pitchers and hitters is fundamentally unstable, with both sides optimizing to increase variance.

Analytics only uncovered these structural issues for teams to exploit. Personally, I think if the strikeout rate were tamed back to 1990s levels, the game would balance.

[lprubin]

I believe MLB management agrees with you because they're considering testing moving the mound back a foot which would give hitters more time to react and should help balance the strikeout rate.

[bart_spoon]

Personally I think its boring simply because there really isn't any variety in strategy. I agree that iso basketball can be boring but that isn't really the same thing as having a viable midrange shot. The pick and roll and the drive and kick can all be used to create shots that aren't 3s or immediately under the basket, they just aren't because those shots aren't worth it. And I personally think the most boring playstyle in basketball is exemplified by Kyle Korver: a player who really does nothing but stand on the perimeter and run around screens until someone passes him the ball to shoot a 3.

Ultimately I guess I don't mind if some teams play like today's style of basketball, but I do mind if its the only viable strategy.