Re: Pro Basketball Prospectus
- --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Pelton" <kpelton08@h...>
> --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Oliver" <deano@r...>Same paper. I just felt I owed him some time to really explain what
> > It's another linear weights method, like John's, Dave Heeren's,
> > Bob Belotti's. It's got a dramatically different set of weights
> > than everyone else's. It's a different approach to finding the
> > weights than everyone else has taken, though.
> To me, this is Berri's biggest flaw. I didn't read all of his new
> stuff (did read the paper you posted here waaaaaaaay back in the
> day - it was actually my first post here - but looking at the part
> where he referenced Rob Neyer, he seems to be using linear weights'
> success in baseball to justify using them in basketball.
> In baseball, the fragments really do add together. Get fourstraight
> singles and, barring an intervening event like a caught stealing,and
> you will score a run. You can't say the same about something like a
> defensive rebound. You could grab 10 straight offensive rebounds
> still not score a point, for example. I guess this gets at one ofyou're
> DeanO's criticisms of linear weights (I think), which is that
> mixing possessions and points, which are two very different things.Yup.
> Not that it stops me from using linear weights, but whatever.Tsk, tsk. ;)
> The thing of it is - this seems more like where baseball analysisat
> is going. BaseballProspectus' current method for evaluating hittersI also really like this concept. The Winston-Sagarin method we
> uses Marginal Lineup Value, the difference created by adding a
> hitter to an otherwise-average lineup, replacing an average player.
> Replacement level is subtracted from this to give Value Over
> Replacement Player.
discussed also goes at this but it too had some funky results -- a
team with Tim Duncan and 4 average guys wins 73 games, according to
them. But if you can evaluate a marginal value on an average team,
you can evaluate a marginal value on a good team or a bad team.
These things are DEFINITELY not the same for many players.
>Unfortunately, it's tough to maintain the Project Defensive
> Of course, just because baseball folks are doing it doesn't make it
> right and I'm not sure how accurately we can ever rate defense
> without something like DeanO's defensive stats to help us
Scoresheet work we did last year without a full time coordinator of
the project. I had relatively more time last year to do this and
still couldn't keep up. This year, I have much less time. I'm
hoping we find a way to maintain it, however. It did have
tremendously valuable info -- info I haven't even tapped into fully.
- I've bought your book also. First I've read the Prospectus of
Hollinger and after that Basketball on paper. I'v read reviews that
said: the prospectus is good but basketball on paper is better. Well
I don't agree. The analytic methods are there but the conclusions
are sometimes not so strong. For example your rebounding part. You
make a conclusion and than you begin to correct yourself(offensive
rebounds create free throw attempts,...)