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

Minkoff Player Rating?

Expand Messages
  • cwfrizzell
    I m sure some of you recall this. Other than some broken links and a few minor references in the group archives, I m at a loss. Can anybody expand on this or
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 30, 2003
      I'm sure some of you recall this. Other than some broken links and a
      few minor references in the group archives, I'm at a loss. Can
      anybody expand on this or provide some actual analysis as to how it
      was constructed?
    • dlirag
      I found this in an old newsgroup post: First, minutes/game for each player is fit to a linear sum of that player s per-minute statistics. The resulting
      Message 2 of 4 , Sep 1, 2003
        I found this in an old newsgroup post:

        "First, minutes/game for each player is fit to a linear
        sum of that player's per-minute statistics. The resulting
        weights indicate how valuable NBA coaches think various
        statistical categories are, as expressed by their
        willingness to give more minutes to players who excel
        at them.

        The Raw Minkoff Player Rating is determined by summing
        the weighted per-minute statistics, thus determining how
        many minutes/game each player "earned". In practice,
        some bit-part players will seem to deserve an amazing
        number of minutes (eg, a player who played 1 minute and
        shot 1-1 from the field would "deserve" 105 minutes/game).
        To combat this, one uses the Minkoff Player Rating
        defined as (MPR) = (RMPR)**(2/3) * (min/gm)**(1/3).
        That is, a player's final rating is two parts statistical
        and one part empirical, based on how many minutes he
        actually did play. MPR's below about 13 denote players
        not of NBA quality, barring special circumstances
        (e.g. Terry Cummings)."

        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "cwfrizzell" <cwfrizzell@y...>
        wrote:
        > I'm sure some of you recall this. Other than some broken links and
        a
        > few minor references in the group archives, I'm at a loss. Can
        > anybody expand on this or provide some actual analysis as to how it
        > was constructed?
      • Dean Oliver
        ... I hadn t heard this last part. Actually, I remember Tony suggesting a straight linear average of RMPR and min/gm, which I never liked. This weighting is
        Message 3 of 4 , Sep 2, 2003
          --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "dlirag" <dlirag@h...> wrote:
          > I found this in an old newsgroup post:
          >
          > "First, minutes/game for each player is fit to a linear
          > sum of that player's per-minute statistics. The resulting
          > weights indicate how valuable NBA coaches think various
          > statistical categories are, as expressed by their
          > willingness to give more minutes to players who excel
          > at them.
          >
          > The Raw Minkoff Player Rating is determined by summing
          > the weighted per-minute statistics, thus determining how
          > many minutes/game each player "earned". In practice,
          > some bit-part players will seem to deserve an amazing
          > number of minutes (eg, a player who played 1 minute and
          > shot 1-1 from the field would "deserve" 105 minutes/game).
          > To combat this, one uses the Minkoff Player Rating
          > defined as (MPR) = (RMPR)**(2/3) * (min/gm)**(1/3).
          > That is, a player's final rating is two parts statistical
          > and one part empirical, based on how many minutes he
          > actually did play. MPR's below about 13 denote players
          > not of NBA quality, barring special circumstances
          > (e.g. Terry Cummings)."

          I hadn't heard this last part. Actually, I remember Tony suggesting
          a straight linear average of RMPR and min/gm, which I never liked.
          This weighting is interesting. The cutoff of 13 min/g hints at the
          old question of replacement level. The reference to Cummings reminds
          us that it is a pain to actually determine.

          DeanO
        • Michael Tamada
          ... From: Dean Oliver [mailto:deano@rawbw.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 9:10 AM ... [...] ... Yeah, I d forgotten about that too. It s a weighted
          Message 4 of 4 , Sep 2, 2003
            -----Original Message-----
            From: Dean Oliver [mailto:deano@...]
            Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 9:10 AM

            --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "dlirag" <dlirag@h...> wrote:

            [...]

            >> To combat this, one uses the Minkoff Player Rating
            >> defined as (MPR) = (RMPR)**(2/3) * (min/gm)**(1/3).
            >
            >I hadn't heard this last part. Actually, I remember Tony suggesting
            >a straight linear average of RMPR and min/gm, which I never liked.
            >This weighting is interesting. The cutoff of 13 min/g hints at the

            Yeah, I'd forgotten about that too. It's a weighted geometric mean,
            probably a very good idea, for dealing with those 1 minute played,
            1-1 players Minkoff mentioned in his example. An arithmetic mean
            would still show those players with high "value"; a geometric mean
            cuts down the ratings of players with low actual minutes/game (or
            low RMPR scores).


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