On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Dean Oliver wrote: [...] ... That s exactly the thing that I m wondering. Or alternatively, calculate loss-shares. And then calculate
Message 1 of 2
, May 1, 2002
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Dean Oliver wrote:
> > A truly valid quantitative measure, such as value over replacement, has
> > the correct balance between longevity and excellence already built in.
> What is this solution? You just say that the replacement value player
> contributes, say, 10 win-shares per season (or it varies through time,
> whatever), then subtract that off of every year that the players are in the
> league before summing? I know James has done that before on other
> studies. I wonder why he wouldn't have done it here.
That's exactly the thing that I'm wondering.
Or alternatively, calculate loss-shares. And then calculate players'
career wins and losses -- but with the understanding that it is almost
certainly too high a standard to compare their records to .500, or to
penalize them for some rookie years and late career years that are below
.500. Wins and losses relative to replacement would be the way to go.
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer.
We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.