Most uncertain value?
- Having looked through JohnH's book and added his stuff to my matrix
of linear weights, I was wondering what stats people thought had the
most uncertain value. I've listened to all arguments about the value
of different stats and I now have a range of numbers. I'm just
curious what things have the most uncertainty in people's minds?
Assists, rebounds, three point shots, steals, blocks?
Following on that, I'm curious about how the different systems value
players differently. I've found that the most certain valuation is
in the great players and the really bad ones. But players like
Stackhouse, Iverson, Rodman, etc -- their values can vary quite a
lot. I'd be curious where MikeG's, Dan's, JohnH's, TPR, Berri, etc.
all rank this kind of player.
- I do not believe just because a player played 200 minutes because he is definitely better than the other options for that 200 minutes. Coaches do not always play the best players. Coaches still play Eric Montross - and I bet you could find 1000 players not in the NBA who could whoop him one on one. I know he's big - who cares. Should EVERY player have a positive replacement player level - because obviously he's better than his replacements (because he's playing)? I don't think so.Pippen played alot more minutes than Patterson for the Blazers - but I think Patterson is probably now the better player. The coach HAS to play Scottie because he is paid more and he'll whine if he doesn't play. This happens ALOT in the NBA. Plus the worst 2 players on each team are not really any better than the best players in the lesser pro leagues - they just lucked into guaranteed contracts.NBA----- Original Message -----From: Michael TamadaSent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 12:52 PMSubject: RE: [APBR_analysis] Re: Most uncertain value?It's a question of what (or who) is the alternative player, the replacement player, for the player in question. And that replacement player can never be a better player than the player in question, because if there was a better player available, the team would be playing him and not giving any minutes to the player in question. So the player in question, whether he is playing 200 minutes or 3200 minutes, must be a BETTER player than anyone else who could've filled up those 200 or 3200 minutes.