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

Re: OK, player rankings 2001

Expand Messages
  • Mike Goodman
    ... DEAN S LIST Mike s List ... Shaquill O Neal lal 9.32 1 49.1 ... Stephon Marbury njn 5.70 15 36.4 David Robinson san 5.48 13 36.9 ... Glenn
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 9, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Dean Oliver <deano@t...> wrote:
      >
      DEAN'S LIST Mike's List

      > FullName Team AvgNetPts Rk Rating
      Shaquill O'Neal lal 9.32 1 49.1
      > Allen Iverson phi 8.99 8 39.8
      > Chris Webber sac 7.54 3 42.3
      >Jer Stackhouse det 7.50 14 36.7
      > Kobe Bryant lal 7.44 9 39.5
      > Karl Malone uta 7.39 2 43.0
      > Vince Carter tor 7.37 6 40.0
      > Tracy McGrady orl 7.19 7 40.0
      > Tim Duncan san 6.65 4 42.2
      > Paul Pierce bos 6.16 11 37.6
      Stephon Marbury njn 5.70 15 36.4
      David Robinson san 5.48 13 36.9
      > Dirk Nowitzki dal 5.47 10 37.9
      > Ray Allen mil 5.41 16 36.3
      > Kevin Garnett min 5.23 5 40.9
      > Gary Payton sea 5.01 17 36.0
      > Steve Francis hou 4.69 21 35.6
      > John Stockton uta 4.25 23 35.0
      > Sam Cassell mil 3.88 31 32.9
      Glenn Robinson mil 3.79 27 33.8
      Antoine Walker bos 3.75 20 35.7
      Antonio McDyess den 3.68 12 37.1
      > Jason Kidd pho 3.61 22 35.3
      > Shawn Marion pho 3.58 18 35.8
      Rasheed Wallace por 3.58 19 35.7
      > Eddie Jones mia 3.54 35 31.6
      > Steve Nash dal 3.37 34 31.7
      Jamal Mashburn cha 3.35 26 33.8
      > Andre Miller cle 3.20 30 33.0
      Pred Stojakovic sac 3.06 46 30.3
      Derek Anderson san 2.93 56 28.7
      > Allan Houston nyk 2.91 57 28.7
      > Jalen Rose ind 2.91 33 32.4
      > Tim Hardaway mia 2.88 49 30.0
      Corey Maggette lac 2.77 85 26.1
      Donyell Marshalluta 2.68 32 32.6
      Antawn Jamison gsw 2.59 39 31.1
      Terrell Brandon min 2.59 37 31.5
      >Michael Finley dal 2.55 48 30.1
      > Bonzi Wells por 2.55 44 30.4
      > Brian Grant mia 2.54 38 31.2
      > Lamar Odom lac 2.51 29 33.4
      Sha Abdur-Rahim van 2.49 28 33.4
      Cuttino Mobley hou 2.47 61 28.5
      Darre Armstrong orl 2.44 45 30.4
      > Jason Terry atl 2.44 55 29.2
      > Marcus Camby nyk 2.42 25 34.3
      > Elton Brand chi 2.39 24 34.9
      > Reggie Miller ind 2.30 60 28.5
      Hakeem Olajuwon hou 2.29 40 30.9
      Ruben Patterson sea 2.18 69 27.9
      Nick Van Exel den 2.16 41 30.9
      > Anthony Mason mia 2.07 36 31.5
      Elden Campbell cha 1.86 50 29.9
      Latrel Sprewell nyk 1.83 72 27.5
      Cliff Robinson pho 1.82 71 27.5
      > Vlade Divac sac 1.79 53 29.4
      > David Wesley cha 1.70 75 27.1
      > Kurt Thomas nyk 1.67 68 27.9
      > Steve Smith por 1.65 83 26.4
      Damo Stoudamire por 1.57 65 28.1
      > Rodney Rogers pho 1.46 84 26.3
      > Tim Thomas mil 1.37 87 25.7
      > Travis Best ind 1.36 74 27.3
      > Baron Davis cha 1.30 52 29.6
      Richar Hamilton was 1.17 89 25.7
      Antonio Daniels san 1.07 107 24.5
      Jermaine O'Neal ind 0.98 43 30.6
      Chris Gatling cle 0.95 91 25.6
      > Glen Rice nyk 0.82 ??
      Austin Croshere ind 0.79 ?
      > Joe Smith det 0.78 100 25.1
      > Rashard Lewis sea 0.70 66 28.0
      > Aaron McKie phi 0.67 78 26.6
      > Mike Bibby van 0.62 54 29.4
      > Antonio Davis tor 0.58 59 28.6
      Keith Van Horn njn 0.52 73 27.5
      Lindsey Hunter mil 0.50 ?
      > Tony Delk pho 0.44 ?
      > Raef Lafrentz den 0.43 51 29.7
      LaPhonso Ellis min 0.42 88 25.7
      Lorenzen Wright atl 0.40 77 26.8
      Juwan Howard was 0.36 64 28.3
      Maurice Taylor hou 0.23 98 25.3
      > Jeff McInnis lac 0.19 105 24.8
      Chaunce Billups min 0.09 ?
      Scottie Pippen por 0.08 76 26.9
      Bryon Russell uta 0.07 109 24.3
      > Doug Christie sac 0.00 ?
      Wal Szczerbiak min -0.02 80 26.5
      Eric Piatkowski lac -0.09 ?
      Morris Peterson tor -0.23 ?
      Lamond Murray cle -0.34 ?
      > Johnny Newman njn -0.34 ?
      Cl Weatherspoon cle -0.41 67 27.9
      Alvin Williams tor -0.45 ?
      >Mike Miller orl -0.47 ?
      > Ron Mercer chi -0.51 92 25.5
      > Vin Baker sea -0.55 ?
      Aaron Williams njn -0.58 95 25.3
      > Chucky Atkins det -0.61 ?
      Alan Henderson atl -0.64 ?
      > Rick Fox lal -0.73 ?
      > Voshon Lenard den -0.80 ?
      > Larry Hughes gsw -0.83 99 25.1

      Manipulating this chart, I may have erased some names; if not,
      where is Mutombo? I have him at #42.
      Others I don't see:
      Player My Rank
      Sabonis 47
      Ratliff 56
      Nazr Mohammed 62
      C. Williamson 63
      Kukoc 70
      S. Bradley 79
      Brad Miller 81
      Laettner 82
      Marc Jackson 86
    • Dean Oliver
      ... All were eliminated by my minimum criterion of 300 scoring possessions. Some of them because they had fewer than this because of trades. After combining
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 9, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Mike Goodman" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
        > Manipulating this chart, I may have erased some names; if not,
        > where is Mutombo? I have him at #42.
        > Others I don't see:
        > Player My Rank
        > Sabonis 47
        > Ratliff 56
        > Nazr Mohammed 62
        > C. Williamson 63
        > Kukoc 70
        > S. Bradley 79
        > Brad Miller 81
        > Laettner 82
        > Marc Jackson 86

        All were eliminated by my minimum criterion of 300 scoring
        possessions. Some of them because they had fewer than this because
        of trades. After combining teams, Kukoc, Laettner, and Mutombo all
        make the 300 sc. poss minimum. Here are the #'s

        FullName NetPts/48
        Shawn Bradley -1.00
        Marc Jackson -0.16
        Toni Kukoc 2.17
        Chris Laettner 1.19
        Brad Miller -0.22
        Nazr Mohammed 2.29
        Dikembe Mutombo -0.52
        Theo Ratliff 0.22
        Arvydas Sabonis 2.46
        C. Williamson 0.41

        Mutombo's number is (much) lower than I'd put it. That's the curse
        of defense right now. Mutombo is clearly more valuable than this.
        Same with Ratliff and Bradley. All similar defensive players with
        little to contribute offensively.

        As mentioned in that much earlier message, the 2 methods of net pts
        do very different things.

        1. First one looks at offensive and defensive ratings and uses the
        the number of _offensive_ possessions used by a player to estimate
        net points (ORtg - DRtg)*OffPoss. This one benefits efficient
        (offensive or defensive) players even if they aren't prolific.

        2. Second one takes the number of points a player produces
        (ORtg*OffPoss) and subtracts off the estimated number of points they
        would have allowed by being in the game as long as they were. This
        one more heavily benefits scorers (like Stackhouse) even if they
        aren't efficient.

        The 2nd one is what hurts the defenders on this list. They just
        don't score, so they aren't contributing offensively. They may limit
        the scores of the opponents, but this technique says they can't help
        enough to make up for their lack of offense.

        Usually averaging the 2 techniques more or less makes me happy
        enough. In Mutombo's case (and Ratliff's and Bradley's), it doesn't.
        I would note, however, that all of them have been traded at least 2
        times, suggesting that their value is questionable. Interestingly,
        Mutombo, Ratliff, and Bradley are all at 1.6-2.0 Net Pts using the
        first method. Using that method, these guys rank about even with

        Paul Pierce bos
        Charles Outlaw orl
        Hakeem Olajuwon hou
        Doug Christie sac
        Darre Armstrong orl
        Dale Davis por
        Jason Kidd pho
        Horace Grant lal
        Vlade Divac sac


        Some interesting #s:
        Atlanta was 7-26 without Mutombo, 18-31 with him. Philly was 37-19
        without Mutombo, 19-7 with him. Philly was 20-12 without Ratliff,
        36-14 with him. Philly was 18-16 without Kukoc, 38-10 with him
        (!This doesn't seem right!).

        Laettner is higher than I'd think, but I think that is just an
        anti-Dook bias.

        Sabonis fell off from 3.5 in 2000. In Net Pts method 1 (the one
        looking at efficiency), he particularly fell off.

        Again, I'd never use ratings for ANY personnel decision.

        Dean Oliver
        Journal of Basketball Studies
      • mstenby@spacestar.net
        Dean, You re obviously a very bright guy and I enjoyed reading your ratings and comments very much. Just a comment about Ben Wallace -- how can a guy that
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 13, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Dean,
          You're obviously a very bright guy and I enjoyed reading your ratings
          and comments very much. Just a comment about Ben Wallace -- how can a
          guy that grabbed over 1000 rebounds and also led his team in steals
          and blocks end up last on your list? I know he's a non-scorer and
          poor outside shooter (33% at the line), but he was near 50% from the
          field. Perhaps your ratings do not give enough credit for the "non-
          scoring" stats. Would be interested to hear your reply and thanks
          again for your interesting contribution.

          -Mark
        • Dean Oliver
          ... ratings ... a ... the ... I hate ratings. HATE. Passionately. Can I underline that? Wallace did an outstanding job rebounding and playing D on a team
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 13, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In APBR_analysis@y..., mstenby@s... wrote:
            > Dean,
            > You're obviously a very bright guy and I enjoyed reading your
            ratings
            > and comments very much. Just a comment about Ben Wallace -- how can
            a
            > guy that grabbed over 1000 rebounds and also led his team in steals
            > and blocks end up last on your list? I know he's a non-scorer and
            > poor outside shooter (33% at the line), but he was near 50% from
            the
            > field. Perhaps your ratings do not give enough credit for the "non-
            > scoring" stats. Would be interested to hear your reply and thanks
            > again for your interesting contribution.
            >

            I hate ratings. HATE. Passionately. Can I underline that?

            Wallace did an outstanding job rebounding and playing D on a team
            that exceeded expectations. If I'm on a team that needs rebounding,
            I definitely look for Wallace. If I'm on a team that already has 3
            scorers, I look for Wallace. If I'm on the Bulls, a team that has no
            scorers (Brand is getting there), Wallace is a liability. It is that
            last thing that is reflected in the negative #.

            In the follow-up post, I put both versions of Net Pts and you'll
            notice that Wallace was actually positive in version 1. That version
            says that Wallace's offensive rating was higher than his defensive
            rating and that, if you look only at that and the possessions he
            used, his net point contribution is positive, nicely so.

            If you look at version 2, though, you see that Wallace simply
            contributed so little offensively (606 pts created) to not make up
            for his time on the court. Version 2 compares that 606 to the
            estimated # of points he "allowed" while on the court. Wallace was
            on the court 2760 minutes. Each Piston "faced" about 0.4 possessions
            per minute (once every 2.5 minutes, Wallace was involved in a
            defensive play). On those possessions, Wallace allowed 91.3 points
            per 100 (a very good figure). But multiplying those out, I
            calculated that he allowed 1012 pts. That's a net -406 pts, IF YOU
            LOOK AT IT THIS WAY.

            So both of these are calculations of an imaginary number. In a team
            game, individual net points is theoretically difficult (if not
            impossible) to define. Both of these methods sum up to the team
            total (one better than the other - can you guess which?). They
            reflect the interplay of efficiency vs. number of scores. My first
            shot at balancing the 2 is this.

            So is Wallace bad? Yeah. He ain't great. He is a role player,
            playing the roles of rebounder/defender. Neither of those are the
            most valuable roles in the league (relative to scoring). But, one of
            my favorite questions is -- Could he be a part of a championship
            team? Yes, he could be. The Pistons need a lot more efficient
            scoring (and/or much more efficient team D) to approach a
            championship. Wallace is not going to get them there. Nor is he the
            best in the league at what he does. The numbers quantify this to a
            reasonable degree.

            As for whether the ratings give "enough credit to non-scoring stats"
            -- it's a subjective call. I would never use a rating for personnel
            decisions. If I ever figure out a good theoretical definition of
            individual net points, I'll call it an estimate, not a rating.

            Complete Detroit calculated stats below. Ben had a higher offensive
            rating than D rating in 43 of 80 games (Game-by-game Win-Loss
            record). I like that number personally. It implies the guy is doing
            his job 43/80 days, no matter how small it is. (He was 47-33 in
            2000.)


            . Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Game-by-Game
            Player Poss. . Pct. . Prod. Win% Wins Loss
            Stacke 1056 2222 0.475 103.5 2299 0.475 38 42
            Wil'msn 182 341 0.534 105.5 360 0.667 18 9
            Smith 405 827 0.490 99.8 825 0.435 30 39
            Atkins 438 1004 0.436 97.8 982 0.358 29 52
            Barros 203 429 0.473 105.0 450 0.517 31 29
            Wil'ms 130 261 0.497 99.9 260 0.515 17 16
            BWallac 310 631 0.492 96.1 606 0.538 43 37
            JWallac 106 241 0.441 89.7 216 0.300 12 28
            Ceballo 29 70 0.423 98.4 68 0.417 5 7
            Cleaves 230 547 0.421 85.6 468 0.244 19 59
            Curry 177 364 0.486 100.5 366 0.433 29 38
            Moore 182 358 0.508 102.2 365 0.481 38 41
            Owens 113 259 0.437 88.0 228 0.378 17 28
            Buechle 77 166 0.465 109.6 182 0.566 30 23
            Montros 58 151 0.380 75.2 114 0.225 9 31
            Cardina 16 42 0.395 76.9 32 0.143 2 12
            David 10 23 0.439 88.7 20 0.444 4 5
            TEAM 3722 7933 0.469 98.8 7841 0.428 371 496

            . Defensive Stops Def. Net Net Net
            Player Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% W L
            Stackhouse 573 0.178 0.443 102.3 0.547 10.0 8.3
            Williamson 170 0.213 0.530 98.8 0.746 2.4 0.8
            Joe Smith 413 0.213 0.529 98.8 0.541 4.9 4.1
            Chucky Atkins 389 0.165 0.410 103.6 0.278 3.0 7.7
            Dana Barros 184 0.171 0.425 103.0 0.577 2.1 1.5
            Jerome Williams 198 0.246 0.612 95.5 0.677 1.8 0.8
            Ben Wallace 797 0.289 0.719 91.3 0.700 7.4 3.1
            John Wallace 103 0.196 0.488 100.5 0.132 0.3 1.7
            Cedric Ceballos 33 0.201 0.500 100.0 0.431 0.3 0.3
            Mateen Cleaves 230 0.181 0.452 101.9 0.053 0.3 4.5
            Michael Curry 232 0.156 0.389 104.4 0.346 1.9 3.7
            Mikki Moore 262 0.227 0.565 97.4 0.688 2.5 1.1
            Billy Owens 171 0.216 0.537 98.5 0.134 0.4 2.5
            Jud Buechler 137 0.185 0.461 101.6 0.779 1.5 0.4
            Eric Montross 122 0.215 0.535 98.6 0.011 0.0 2.2
            Brian Cardinal 28 0.220 0.548 98.1 0.018 0.0 0.4
            Kornel David 17 0.245 0.610 95.6 0.224 0.0 0.2
            TEAM 4057 0.204 0.509 100.0 0.470 38.5 43.5

            Dean Oliver
            Journal of Basketball Studies
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.