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

1263Re: Ballhogs - Dominique Wilkins

Expand Messages
  • Dean Oliver
    Sep 12, 2002
      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., bchaikin@a... wrote:
      >
      > But the #'s are estimated from formulas, though, right? Are you
      > saying the formulas are always perfect?
      >
      > the simulation i developed would not produce statistical results
      that match
      > real life numbers if the player attributes were not right on -
      meaning the
      > player possession factor and their player attributes. think about
      it, if i
      > don't peg pretty much exactly how often each player handles the
      ball on
      > offense, and then what they do when they do get it (either shoot,
      pass, get
      > fouled, or turn it over) and how often, how could the program
      possibly
      > reproduce past real life numbers with so many players involved?...
      >

      The same way Stratomatic, etc. reproduce numbers. They don't use a
      touch factor. From economics (and other stat sciences), there are
      always a lot of different ways to _explain_ past results using all
      sorts of models. Dave Berri's estimates of individual wins reproduce
      team wins very well. Does that mean his model of individual wins is
      right? No. I'm pretty sure that your #'s are ballpark -- they
      mostly reflect subjective ideas that we have. But I want to know how
      big that ballpark is.

      > I know you estimate only 40% of Iverson's touches were shots in
      2000
      > playoffs. Different year than what Stu mentioned and his was only
      > Finals, but I don't imagine things would be horribly different. 9%
      > is a lot of difference.
      >
      > the database shows iverson shooting 40 times per 100 ball
      possessions for the
      > 22 games he played in the playoffs. i did not break it down by
      finals,
      > opening round, etc...
      >

      Can we break it down for the Finals? Since Stu has directly observed
      numbers from the 2001 Finals, that would give a sense for how
      accurate it really is in a small sample of games. If you can, do it
      for all players in the Finals so that we can compare with Stu's
      counts.


      > I've done it in the past, it's just that that online db is pretty
      > hard to use -- some columns aren't readable and you can't do much
      > analysis with because you can't save any of the data.
      >
      > how is the database hard to use? you can sort and limit the
      database in
      > innumerable ways. what can't you read? is your resolution high?

      The sorting and limiting work fine. My resolution is definitely
      high. I cannot read a lot of the columns, primarily in the basic
      fields (minutes, fga, etc.). The last number gets cut off
      frequently. Because I can't cut and paste, it's hard to put in a
      format that I can read the way I want to read it. Sometimes, you
      want to see %shoot next to minutes and FGA, but you can't do that. I
      understand your desire to keep it all proprietary and that limits cut
      and paste and display options, but that also limits usage.

      DeanO
    • Show all 21 messages in this topic