Bleacher Report - Sports and STEM

Bleacher Report Has a Head Start On STEM Public Awareness Initiative

Damali Binta YAEL — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:56:08 -0500

Sports is an integral part of the American lifestyle. It is an integral part of education.

There are about four broad purposes of sports, according to the American Sports data website:

It provides children with "fun" and instant gratification;

It fulfills what social psychologists call the "affiliative" need—friendship, and a sense of belonging;

It offers the near-term prospect of healthier minds and bodies through physical exercise;

For the longer term, its cumulative benefits hold the promise of those favorable "outcomes" associated with youth development.

Another website cites ten good reasons to engage young Americans in sports.

By participating in youth sports , the young athlete will:

1. Develop and become proficient at the various sports skills.

2. Develop skills needed to socialize with their peers as well as adults.

3. Develop independence and confidence.

4. Develop a sense of achievement, which helps develop a positive self-image.

5. Develop leadership skills and qualities.

6. Learn how to cooperate and compete.

7. Develop agility, coordination, endurance, flexibility, speed, and strength.

8. Develop the ability to make decisions and accept responsibilities.

9. Learn to understand and express emotions, imagination, and appreciation for what the body can do.

10. Develop an interest in continuing sports participation as an adult.

On a television screen in the Martin Luther King building of Texas Southern University, Houston, Texas, I saw President Obama announcing the Educate to Innovate initiative in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).

I was impressed, since I was among the hundreds of professors and administrators who visited Washington, DC earlier this month to discuss ideas in the STEM professions.

Most of all, I am pleased that this major sports website has a page titled "Sports and STEM."

This page will help in creating public awareness about the use of STEM in discussing, interpreting, and analyzing sports data, among other important related issues.

So, in agreement with the national call to action by the President of the United States, and others, I urge you to become cognizant of this crisis.

I encourage you to write and post your responses, blending, when possible, your analysis, descriptions, and interpretations of sports in conjunction with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Recently, there was an article on neuromuscular dentistry and how developments in the area are enhancing performance of athletes at all levels. That's a Sports and STEM area.

One of the television channels has a Sport Science telecast, which so many students enjoy.

Now, with the addition of the Bleacher Report "Sports and STEM" page, there is no doubt in my mind that public awareness will be increased, and some people just may delve to increase their knowledge and understanding of the area.

There are reports tagging the times we live in as a "quiet crisis." Surely, we want to hear and respond to this call to action in education and public awareness.

What's more, our national security is connected to our competence in the STEM professions. So, don't turn a "deaf ear" to this call to action.

Get involved.

What can you do?

Well, you can begin to support many of your arguments and discussions in sports with supporting data from science, technology, mathematics, statistics, and engineering.

Try it! You might like it.

White House Press Release

Xerox Executive named to STEM Board

Read more Sports and STEM news on BleacherReport.com

NBA MVP Award: What It Takes To Win the Maurice Podoloff Trophy

John Lorge — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:15:05 -0500

What does it take to win the NBA's MVP Award? Heart. Grit. Determination.

Every winner of the award has displayed the same immeasurable attributes throughout the coarse of the year, but those adjectives cannot be quantified—or can they?

Since Bob Pettit won the first NBA MVP Award in 1956 we have seen winners as tall as 7-foot-2 (Kareem Abdual-Jabbar), and some who've struggled to hit 6-foot (Allen Iverson). We've had once-in-a-generation athletes (Julius Erving, Michael Jordan, LeBron James), and some of the most skilled players to ever pick up a basketball (Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, and Steve Nash).

There are similarities and differences all throughout the list but there is one thing that shines through in all 28 winners of the award, and that is they are winners.

Using the last 20 winners (from Magic in 1990 to LeBron in 2009), I have compiled the data to determine what it takes to win the NBA MVP Award. Let's take a closer look.

You Must Win Games To Win The Award

Everyone wants to point at points when picking the MVP, but it's not about points, it's about wins. Basketball is a team sport and the goal is to win games, if your team isn't winning games, you have no real value.

The lack of winning is the reason Dwyane Wade had no chance of coming away with the award last season and the reason Kobe Bryant didn't deserve it in 2006.

Of the 20 MVP seasons I looked at all but three winners played for teams who won more than 70 percent of their games (see lest below). That doesn't mean you can't be the runner-up if your team is floating just above .500, but it does mean you shouldn't expect to win the hardware.

OK, So Points Do Matter

I lied when I said the MVP isn't about points (or stats) because it is, but it’s about how your stats convert to wins.

To integrate wins and losses into a player's statistical production I have created the MVP Index, or what I call the MVPi. To calculate the MVPi you look at the three major stat categories (points, rebounds, and assists) as well as the player's losing percentage, here is the formula:

[(PPG+RPG+APG) X 82 - (PPG+RPG+APG) X Games Missed ] / [82 X (1 - Winning Percentage)]

*Karl Malone's 1999 MVPi was adjusted for an 82 game season.

The two things that will hurt your MVPi the most are missing games, and more importantly, losing games.

Some would argue that steals, blocks, and threes should be accounted for or that assists should earn a higher value. The defensive stats tend to even out amongst elite players, threes are great when you need them but it has never been a prerequisite for MVPs, and if assists had more value we would see more point guards winning the award.

The top MVPi doesn't always win the award however, and this is because it matters how much better your team is than other teams and how much more valuable you are to your team than the second or third best player on your team.

Championships Matter

Ultimately you have the best chance of winning the award if you have the best record in the NBA, but having the best record in your conference goes a long way, and having the best record in your division is a must.

Over the past 20 years all 20 winners won their division, 17 won their conference, 12 had the NBA's best record during the regular season. Although it doesn't come into consideration during voting, seven of the 20 went on to win the title—Michael Jordan accounts for four of the seven.

In 1999 the Utah Jazz ties the San Antonio Spurs for the Midwest Division when Karl Malone won the MVP in the lockout-shortened season. The Jazz also happened to tie the Spurs for the best record in the NBA that year.

The 1994 and 1995 MVP races are a perfect indicator of how championships come into play. David Robinson statistically had a better season in 1993-94 than he did in 1994-95, on top of that his Spurs beat Hakeem Olajuwon's Rockets three of four times. With the absence of Jordan there was no question who the two best players in the NBA were, and they were in the same division.

Houston went on to win the Division in 1994, they didn't win the Western Conference but Olajuwon went on to win the MVP. In 1995 Robinson went home with the award with lesser stats but the most wins in the NBA.

Outliers

If you look at the bottom of the MVPi list you will see the three lowest scores belong to Allen Iverson, Steve Nash, and once again, Steve Nash.

It's easy to see why people have such a problem with Nash winning the award twice, but there is some explanation. The voters favor little men.

Nash and Iverson are the two shortest winners since Bob Cousy took home the second ever NBA MVP in 1957. While Nash's output was the lowest of anyone you also have to consider that Iverson missed 11 games (13.4 percent) during the 2000-01 season. Both of these guys got a boost from the voters.

To their defense they did win their division, Iverson led the Sixers to the best record in the East, and in 2005 Nash's Suns had the best record in the NBA.

In 2006 the Suns only won their conference but picking the MVP was picking your poison, the division winners were New Jersey, Detroit, Miami, Denver, San Antonio, and Phoenix. You can try to argue Dwyane Wade was the pick but with a 63.4 winning percentage his MVPi was at 99.1, only 4.5 points higher than Nash.

Conclusion

When you are talking about MVP candidates, you must narrow your list by potential division winners and teams winning more than 65 percent of their games (preferably 70 percent). Only then are you talking sensibly about who can win the Maurice Podoloff Trophy.

Follow me on Twitter @JohnLorge .

Read more Sports and STEM news on BleacherReport.com