For the most part stats should back up the well informed eye test . If they dont , you should decide how far off that value is from what you think youre seeing on the court and then dive into all the contextual factors that are influencing that number . This is where i think a lot of guys spewing analytics go wrong , they use it in place of actually watching someone play enough to know what those contextual factors are and how greatly they may be influencing those statsThe other thing is , sometimes the stats just totally ignore , or just dont signal , something as subtle as how well a guy shades his man to the help D for example . What i think gets lost is that the game is actually played on the court with real live people and everything that happens on the court is an organic reaction between players . In the title you said and vice versa but i think only the vice versa is true real world observable results drive advanced stats . Advanced stats do not drive real world observable results , they only try to assign a value to them or predict future results . Think about it , for all the formulas there are for these stats , whos to say they are the right formulas ? Certain ones are okay like TS % but theres some that dont include things that cant be quantified but are still a part of what organically happened on the court . The stat wants to quantify what happened , but it has no input value for denying your man without letting him go backdoor , so the formula skips over that even though it is definitely something that helped your team