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

Re: predicting bust-out years (and bust years)

Expand Messages
  • Mike G
    ... way ... Having a very good backup (Magloire) probably helps. Elden s foul rate has gone up, while minutes have gone down. Blocks up a bit -- unusual for
    Message 1 of 20 , Oct 15, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Dean Oliver" <deano@r...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Campbell's minutes are down, but his scoring and efficiency are
      way
      > > up.
      >
      > His efficiency went back up to where it was between 96 and 99.
      > Probably not sustainable. Though there may be a story here. I'd
      > need to look to see why he bounced back so much last year. He was
      > definitely down for 2000 and 2001 in terms of efficiency (around
      > 101), but was 106-109 last year and in '96-99.

      Having a very good backup (Magloire) probably helps. Elden's foul
      rate has gone up, while minutes have gone down. Blocks up a bit --
      unusual for an older player. Shooting pct is at an alltime high
      (.545 last year, career .508).

      > >
      > > Johnny Newman
      > > yr aj min pct sco. reb ast - total
      > > 99 35 19 .517 11.2 2.9 1.6 - 16.4
      > > 00 36 22 .556 16.2 2.9 1.2 - 20.3
      > > 01 37 25 .531 15.3 3.1 2.0 - 20.6
      > >
      >
      > Johnny Newman? Maybe I have inaccurate numbers for him. I do
      indeed
      > have his efficiency staying about where it has been throughout his
      > career -- a pretty good 109 -- but the rate at which he used
      > possessions declined immensely, from around 18% to 11%. 11%
      usually
      > signals end of career.

      The above data block refers to '99-01, and I guess you are looking
      at '02.


      > > Brian Taylor 79-81 (27-29)

      > Advent of 3pt shot.

      Taylor and fellow ABA-er Ron Boone started for the Kings in 1977.
      Then Taylor had 2 really sinking years. Indeed, the 3-pointer helped
      revive his career.

      >
      > > Larry Bird 84-88 (27-31), like Zelmo
      >
      > I think this relates to the experience vs. age thing. Most guys do
      > peak after 4-8 yrs in the league, which is close to where Bird was
      > here.

      Bird had 2 years as a mere star, 3 as a mere superstar, then 4 as the
      best of the best.

      > > Tom Chambers 88-90 (28-30)
      >
      > His 1990 season was his best, but it's not all that different
      > efficiency-wise and possession-rate wise than what he did from '84-
      > 88. Ratings all around 106-110, using 24-26% of team possessions.

      Enough of both adds up. His 1st year in Phoenix ('89) was also his
      career-best as a rebounder, and his 2nd year there was the
      astronomical scoring year.

      >
      > > Sedale Threatt 91-93 (29-31)
      >
      > With some of these guys, I looked to eyeball peak periods before
      > reading yours. With Threatt, I saw a sustained period from '87
      > to '95. He got more regular minutes in '91 to '93 and his rating
      did
      > go up each year, from 111.6 to 112.4 to 113.5, but his % of the
      > offense went down from 21% to 20% and 20%.

      Yep. With the Lakers, he pretty much maintained his scoring pace but
      added the assists, which boosted him a lot (from 4.3 to 7.2, per-
      36). Rebounds also rose.


      > > Fred Roberts 89-91 (27-29)
      >
      > His first 3 years out of Boston. His rating went 105, 108, 111 and
      > he used 15%, 17%, and 18% of team possessions. Still a role
      player,
      > but a better one each year. In 1992, he tried to use 20% of the
      > possessions and his rating dropped back down to 106.

      Roberts was a steady 5 reb/2 ast guy, while his scoring went from 10
      to 15 to 10.

      >
      > > Derek Harper 94-96 (32-34)
      >
      > Efficiency went down in '96 pretty bad.

      NOT!

      Derek Harper
      yr age pct sco. reb ast - total
      95 32 .482 11.8 2.3 5.4 - 21.3
      96 33 .539 13.3 2.8 6.4 - 23.8
      97 34 .551 16.2 2.8 4.7 - 24.7

      You might be thinking of some other Harper?


      > > Kevin Willis 96-98 (33-35)
      >
      > He was supposedly history in '96 after a horrid year. He basically
      > returned to about his previous days (a little below in '98) then
      > plummeted after '98.

      Yes, in '96 he was bad in Miami and worse in Golden State. In
      Houston, he carried the team while Hakeem was hurt. Pretty good for
      a 35-year-old.


      > > John Stockton 93-95 (30-32)
      >
      > He had a down year in '93 as defenses were allowed to pretty much
      > slam anyone who came through the middle, which John does a lot.

      1993 was known for this?

      Outside of '93, Stockton has had the smoothest career trajectory of
      any player I have seen. And for the longest period.

      > > A.C. Green 91-93 (27-29)
      > > Terry Porter 97-99 (33-35)
      >
      > Classic case of a guy whose efficiency went up when he took a
      lighter
      > load in the offense. He dropped below 20% tm poss usage and his
      > rating repeaked. Guys change roles in the NBA a fair amount.

      After 3 benchwarming years in Portland and Minnesota, Porter
      rediscovered his shot and gave up his passing duties. This is rather
      counter to the trend of older players trying to find a niche, but it
      worked for him.


      > I'm tired. And hungry. Italian food tonight, some chicken and
      > pancetta thing. Sounds better than looking at more stats.

      Not to mention, a hungry statistician is an ugly thing. But outside
      of the Newman and Harper misses, you shot about 80%.
    • Dean Oliver
      ... his ... outside ... Hey, Newman I ll grant you (though his efficiency went down in 2001 a little and, like Willis, it just points to a surprisingly bad
      Message 2 of 20 , Oct 15, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Johnny Newman
        > > > yr aj min pct sco. reb ast - total
        > > > 99 35 19 .517 11.2 2.9 1.6 - 16.4
        > > > 00 36 22 .556 16.2 2.9 1.2 - 20.3
        > > > 01 37 25 .531 15.3 3.1 2.0 - 20.6
        > > >
        > >
        > > Johnny Newman? Maybe I have inaccurate numbers for him. I do
        > indeed
        > > have his efficiency staying about where it has been throughout
        his
        > > career -- a pretty good 109 -- but the rate at which he used
        > > possessions declined immensely, from around 18% to 11%. 11%
        > usually
        > > signals end of career.
        >
        > The above data block refers to '99-01, and I guess you are looking
        > at '02.
        > >
        > > > Derek Harper 94-96 (32-34)
        > >
        > > Efficiency went down in '96 pretty bad.
        >
        > NOT!
        >
        > Derek Harper
        > yr age pct sco. reb ast - total
        > 95 32 .482 11.8 2.3 5.4 - 21.3
        > 96 33 .539 13.3 2.8 6.4 - 23.8
        > 97 34 .551 16.2 2.8 4.7 - 24.7
        >
        > You might be thinking of some other Harper?
        >
        > > I'm tired. And hungry. Italian food tonight, some chicken and
        > > pancetta thing. Sounds better than looking at more stats.
        >
        > Not to mention, a hungry statistician is an ugly thing. But
        outside
        > of the Newman and Harper misses, you shot about 80%.

        Hey, Newman I'll grant you (though his efficiency went down in 2001 a
        little and, like Willis, it just points to a surprisingly bad year in
        that bad year for several, 1999).

        But Harper is different. He had more turnovers and fewer assists and
        didn't go to the line as much (relative to FGA) as the previous
        year. You don't seem to track turnovers much as part of your
        preferred stats (at least you don't post them, though I know they go
        in your overall power rating).


        DeanO
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.