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

3665Re: [APBR_analysis] Dampier (was Article from _The Economist_)

Expand Messages
  • bchaikin@aol.com
    Apr 4, 2004
      > IMHO one that is out of character of a defined pattern of play -
      > meaning someone who has played a number of seasons (at least 3-5),
      > having played substantial minutes (1000, maybe less, per season),
      > whose performance has "leveled" out, meaning not necessarily
      > peaked but a certain level or pattern of production has been
      > established, and then drastically improves or gets worse (gets
      > worse without injury)...

      By your own standard, Dampier pretty clearly is not having a fluke season, in that he had not "leveled" prior to this year. Before last season, he had leveled off at a sub-mediocre level of performance, but he dramatically improved last year -- in fact, in a point I don't think anyone else has pointed out, JohnH has Dampier as one of his fluke players this year.

      quite the contrary... by my own standard he clearly had a 'leveled' performance prior to this current season, in which he is now having a fluke good season (but thanks for speaking for me anyway)......

      currently i use a tendex-like per minute production rating for a quick (not a definitive but quick look, for anything more i use simulation) look at how players change from year to year - the only difference is that i rate a FGmissed as less than 1, about 0.67, all other coefficients are 1 (pts+reb+ast+st+bs-0.67xFGmissed-FTmissed-pf-to, all divided by minutes). not a perfect rating system but it is a quick rating for production - the ability to rack up measurable quantifiable stats - and as such i use it for quick evaluations because it shows how a player's production changes from season to season....

      so by my own standards e.dampier is clearly having a fluke season. his 02-03 production per min was indeed better than his previous high in 97-98 (when he played his career high in minutes), but only by about 7% more on a per minute basis, and from 98-99 to 01-02 it was less but not substantially less than his average. not counting 99-00 when he played only 495 minutes, prior to this season he had played six seasons with between 1000 and 2700 minutes - by my standard more than enough to establish a definitive pattern, which he had done. his per minute production wavered between .32 and .43 per min, but the difference of each of those seasons from the average of them all is not IMHO enough to justify any of his performances to be considered a fluke in either way (better or worse)....

      but his production per minute this season is much higher, incredibly despite less touches/min, than all but one of his previous seasons (last year in 02-03), and this season he is 22% higher per minute than his previous best (02-03), and over 35% over his previously defined average. that to me clearly qualifies this year as a fluke season...

      That's not a player who's leveled off....

      again, by my standards it is. a 7% improvement on your previous best to me does not constitute anything major....

      PER shows a similar pattern, so I didn't bother graphing it....

      i don't know exactly what PER is (page 11 of his 03-04 book), but if it does not show dampier's 03-04 performance as being significantly better per minute than last season, and even more significantly better than his average production from 96-97 to 02-03, i don't know if i would trust that rating system. that does not mean his rating system is any worse or better than what i use, it just means that by the methods i use i see it differently. his 03-04 book has sam cassell rated better than jason kidd by PER in 02-03, i clearly have jason kidd as being better per minute (by about 10%)...

      but i suggest we let JohnH say for himself, rather than you. you have a habit of speaking for others ("...by your own standard, dampier is clearly not having a fluke season...")...

      Well, Dampier hasn't come back to earth, he's been even better...

      exactly.... that's why this is a fluke good season...

      Two years of well above-average play in the middle seems an awful lot to explain away to a fluke to me.

      fine - then you sign him to a huge mega bucks contract. but i sure wouldn't - all the historical evidence points to me that he'll have few - if any - seasons in the future like this current season. and since if he is signed as a free agent odds are the contract would be for more than 1 or 2 seasons, paying a 29 year old for one really good season with a contract going for 4 or 5 at mega bucks IMHO would be ill-advised....

      bob chaikin
      bchaikin@...

    • Show all 21 messages in this topic