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

3684Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: Dampier (was Article from _The Economist_)

Expand Messages
  • bchaikin@aol.com
    Apr 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      but i suggest we let JohnH say for himself...

      Gladly. First, an aside on Kidd and Cassell: I'm assuming the difference is because your rating attempted more defensive accounting (i.e., going beyond steals/blocks) than mine. Lemme know if I'm mistaken.

      actually on kidd versus cassell for 02-03, if you add it up what i am calling their production (pts+reb+ast+st+bs-0.67xFGmissed-FTmissed-pf-to) and divide by their minutes played, kidd's at 0.649/min and cassell's at 0.579/min (again may not be the best rating system but its easy and telling). each is a single season high for their respective careers. again this is a simple calculation, and looking at your PER formula i have no idea if they are compatible - again i have no clue which is more "realistic". that why i use the sim...

      having said that i ran an 8200 game simulation (100 simulated seasons) with both on the 02-03 nets for 40 min/g and both on the 02-03 bucks. although i have kidd rated a much better defender in 02-03 (-5.0% to +3.5% for cassell), i changed both to 0.0% (avg defender) prior to running the sim, i.e. they had the same defensive FG%. overall kidd made the nets 2 games better per avg 82 game season than cassell did and he made the bucks 1 game better per avg 82 game season than cassell - not much of a difference. the difference would be larger if i used what i had them rated at defensively....

      As for Dampier, as Kevin points out, I had him rated as a Fluke year candidate. The other seven players -- Shawn Bradley, Howard Eisley, Grant Hill, Jason Kidd, Toni Kukoc, Brian Grant and David Wesley -- are more than doing their part to prove the rule.

      But Dampier is now going to be a DOUBLE FLUKE -- he's going to quality again this year. I have to go back through my data and see if there's even been one of these before. I have no idea what the hell happened, although certainly replacing Murphy with Clifford Robinson
      gave him more rebounds.

      again look at ben wallace's rebounding last season and this season, then dampier's last season and this season. the key to each's major improvement is the presence of weak rebounding clifford robinson playing major minutes alongside them. doesn't mean they weren't great rebounders - in just means you have to put their performance in context...

      as for kidd, i find his performance in 02-03 just a few percentage points better than his 98-99 season, and just a couple of percentage points more than this 03-04 season. eisley in 02-03 had a slightly better season in 97-98, kukoc had a better season in 00-01 than in 02-03, same with wesley, same with b.grant. none i would consider to have had fluke performances (just my definition of fluke). but dampier's numbers this year are significantly better than last year, and much better than anything before in 7 seasons. that to me is a sure fluke, to the point that you'd have to be crazy to sign him to any kind of major megabucks long term deal...

      bob chaikin
      bchaikin@...


    • Show all 21 messages in this topic