Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1175Re: [APBR_analysis] Euclidian comparison of current and past players

Expand Messages
  • Michael K. Tamada
    Aug 2, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, mikel_ind wrote:

      > In APBR room, I touched on the Euclidian Distance method of comparing
      > statistical profiles. This got me to thinking.
      > Currently, there are a number of players whose career totals bring up
      > Hall of Fame mention. Others have just been around forever, and so
      > have amassed big numbers.
      > I decided to use career totals, rather than per-game/t*nd*x-type
      > stuff. Playoff games are included, but weighted no than regular-
      > season games.
      > In no particular order, current players and those from the past with
      > most-similar career totals:
      > The Euclidian Distance has 6 factors: pts, reb, ast, stl, blk, and
      > total of those first 5.


      Interesting stuff, but I think the lack of rate and ratio statistics
      weakens the formula. If nothing else, I think you should put career total
      minutes in there, to distinguish players who had similar totals, but who
      may've amassed their stats at different rates. E.g.:

      > Mookie Blaylock
      > .41 Cheeks
      > .54 Richie Guerin
      > .63 KJ

      It's believable that KJ's career totals may be fairly similar to
      Blaylock's, but KJ piled up the points and assists (per game and per
      minute) faster than Mookie. Also the lack of a FG% measure (corrected for
      era if you want to get fancy) means that one of the biggest differences
      between Cheeks and Blaylock isn't getting measured.


      > Chris Webber
      > .28 Mickey Johnson

      > Tim Duncan
      > .23 Thurl Bailey

      Two more examples of the pitfalls of looking only at totals and not rates;
      of course Webber and Duncan are both young and so their career totals are
      unknown, so getting good matches is much more complex. Interestingly, I
      think of Mickey Johnson and Thurl Bailey as being sort of similar to each
      other: tall thin guys who were too skinny for PF but much taller than
      typical SFs of the era, who could score in a variety of ways (not just
      inside plodders).

    • Show all 9 messages in this topic