245Re: Similarity Scores
- Sep 18, 2001--- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Dean Oliver" <deano@t...> wrote:
> (I didn't realize that you don't have a db of raw#'s.)My raw totals and per-game averages are contained in my 'season'
files, along with team totals and averages for that season. My
composite lists only have the 'standardized' rates. From those
rates, I can generate 'equivalent totals'. For 'average'
scoring/rebounding teams, these would be equal to raw season totals.
> One of my personal quibbles with all the tendex-like rating systems
> out there is there is that they do combine offensive with defensive
> contributions. There is a big difference in my mind between Moses
> Malone, who was an offensive force, and Hakeem Olajuwon, who has
> dominant defensively. Both were good in the other thing, butprobably
> dominant in just one. Kareem was dominant offensively (and
> defensively) early on. Duncan has been dominant defensively, notI get your point, Dean, but your examples don't seem the clearest.
> offensively. (Duncan appears to have more of the competitive fight
> than Kareem, but, again, I missed the early Kareem.)
Olajuwan is better than Malone because he has all the offense Malone
had PLUS defense. Never seen the Dream shake?
Duncan has virtually all the offense Kareem had, averaged over their
careers, according to my numbers. Kareem did maintain a great
shooting pct., but Duncan plays in an era of universally-tough D.
> I don't think I'd say that Duncan's peaked. He's been prettyready
> remarkably consistent since entering the league. Maybe it's only
> remarkable that he stayed in school long enough to actually be
> for the league when entering.Some guys enter the league at full strength: Wilt, Oscar, Kareem,
Robinson, never improved beyond their first 3 years. Others start as
near- superstars, then several years along suddenly shift into true
superstar mode: Magic, Bird, Olajuwon, ...
> Depending on how you define "average", but, yeah, Duncan looks
> offensively than he really is because he plays on a great defensiveDon't know how a guy 'looks better than he really is', DeanO.
> team. (He would make most teams better defensively, too.)
>Assists from guards tendThis is fun, splitting hairs!
> to be more valuable. This is because they often have to make the
> tougher pass than big men. The weight on an assist is proportional
> to the expected FG% of the guy he passes to. Historically, big men
> have had higher FG% than guards -- hence their assists are weighted
> less. (The assists of the best shooting player on a team are less
> valuable than the assists of the guys getting him the ball.) This
> has changed with the 3 pt shot, but it's a conversion from FG% to
> effective FG%...
> Dean Oliver
> Journal of Basketball Studies
If your center kicks out 3 nice passes to guards, who only hit one of
the 3 shots, the center only gets one assist.
The guard can make 3 nice passes inside, 2 of which may be converted,
so he gets 2 assists.
So an equally valid argument is that assists from guards
are 'easier', and assists from centers are 'undercounted'.
I say they are equal.
Perhaps more to the issue, evaluate which players make those
practical passes which may or may not get them an assist, versus
those who will not give up the ball unless it gets them an assist. I
can't discern the 2 types from the statistics, but I know it when I
see it. (It might be partly discernible in that old assist/turnover
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>