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

RE: [APBR_analysis] Re: Assist tracking update

Expand Messages
  • Michael Tamada
    ... From: Charlie Board [mailto:cboard@telesyn.com] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 8:40 AM ... A good point, but now we re getting into things which are
    Message 1 of 18 , Feb 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Charlie Board [mailto:cboard@...]
      Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 8:40 AM


      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Tamada" <tamada@o...>
      wrote:

      >> But before we say that the assists aren't helping the 3-point shooters,
      >> we need to look at the "opportunity cost": the assist might still have
      >> value because it gave the 3-point shooter the chance to put up the shot
      >> in the first place.
      >
      >Indeed - what jumped out at me from Ed's original post
      >was the *huge* percentage of 3FGA that were assisted.
      >If I'm reading his numbers correctly only 36% of all
      >2FGA were assisted, while **74%** of all 3FGA were
      >assisted. That sounds to me like not only are assists
      >helping the 3 point shooters - the assist is *THE* major
      >factor in getting off a good 3.

      A good point, but now we're getting into things which are really
      hard to measure. The major factor probably was indeed the pass
      to the (presumably open) 3-point shooter. But to accurately put
      a value on that, we need to know what would've happened in the
      absence of that nice pass, a very hard hypothetical situation to
      measure.

      It's somewhat analogous to the assisted/unassisted basket situation,
      except taken a step further: the question now isn't the impact of
      the pass on the shooter's FG%, the question is whether the shooter
      got a look at the basket and a potential shot in at all.

      While we can measure FG% on assisted and unassisted baskets, we
      don't have stats on what sort of shot would've been attempted in
      the absence of the nice pass to the 3-point shooter.

      I supposed we could use unassisted 2pt FG% as a rough guesstimate
      (with cripple layins subtracted first).


      --MKT








      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/APBR_analysis/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • nick_scholtz
      I think the differences in 3pt and FT% obdcure the basic question: What is the scoring efficiency on plays with potential assists and on plays with no
      Message 2 of 18 , Feb 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        I think the differences in 3pt and FT% obdcure the basic question:

        What is the scoring efficiency on plays with "potential" assists and
        on plays with no assists?

        For example, look at the data suplied:
        > 2m-2a 2% 3m-3a 3% ftm-fta ft%
        > Ast'd 143-263 54% 41-125 33% 39-54 72%
        > UnAst'd 200-462 43% 12-43 28% 87-113 77%

        This generated the following.

        Shot attempts Points Scored PSA
        Ast 287 366 1.28
        Un 512 499 0.98

        Difference in PSA = value of assist = .3

        This is a far lower value than what I would have expected (I
        hypothesized a value of 1, John Hollinger uses a value
        of .67 for the calculations in the Pro Basketball Prospectus)

        In addition to my suprise at how low the value is, I am suprised by
        how few FT's come out of potential assist situations. Perhaps it makes
        sense that many fouls come on drives to the basket (not an assist) but
        that is a large reason why the calculated value is so low.

        Nick Scholtz

        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Tamada" <tamada@o...>
        wrote:
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Charlie Board [mailto:cboard@t...]
        > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 8:40 AM
        >
        >
        > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Tamada" <tamada@o...>
        > wrote:
        >
        > >> But before we say that the assists aren't helping the 3-point
        shooters,
        > >> we need to look at the "opportunity cost": the assist might
        still have
        > >> value because it gave the 3-point shooter the chance to put up
        the shot
        > >> in the first place.
        > >
        > >Indeed - what jumped out at me from Ed's original post
        > >was the *huge* percentage of 3FGA that were assisted.
        > >If I'm reading his numbers correctly only 36% of all
        > >2FGA were assisted, while **74%** of all 3FGA were
        > >assisted. That sounds to me like not only are assists
        > >helping the 3 point shooters - the assist is *THE* major
        > >factor in getting off a good 3.
        >
        > A good point, but now we're getting into things which are really
        > hard to measure. The major factor probably was indeed the pass
        > to the (presumably open) 3-point shooter. But to accurately put
        > a value on that, we need to know what would've happened in the
        > absence of that nice pass, a very hard hypothetical situation to
        > measure.
        >
        > It's somewhat analogous to the assisted/unassisted basket situation,
        > except taken a step further: the question now isn't the impact of
        > the pass on the shooter's FG%, the question is whether the shooter
        > got a look at the basket and a potential shot in at all.
        >
        > While we can measure FG% on assisted and unassisted baskets, we
        > don't have stats on what sort of shot would've been attempted in
        > the absence of the nice pass to the 3-point shooter.
        >
        > I supposed we could use unassisted 2pt FG% as a rough guesstimate
        > (with cripple layins subtracted first).
        >
        >
        > --MKT
        >
        >
      • nick_scholtz
        uh . . . make that obscures I don t mean to suggest that other questions are uninteresting (I would, for example, suggest that the reason why FT% is lower in
        Message 3 of 18 , Feb 2, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          uh . . . make that "obscures"

          I don't mean to suggest that other questions are uninteresting (I
          would, for example, suggest that the reason why FT% is lower in
          assisted situations is because more of the FT's are being shot by big
          men and fewer by guards -- who have a higher FT%). I would also note
          that the observed 5% difference in assisted and unassisted 3 pointers
          would work out to a 7.5% difference in "true shooting %" which is
          closer to the 2 point percentage difference. It's still true that the
          true shooting % for assisted 3 point shots is lower than that for
          assisted 2 point shots which may or may not mean that teams should
          stop shooting 3 point attempts :)

          Also I think the table below is incorrect -- I didn't realize that 3
          pointers had already been separated out.

          Try this:

          Shot Attempts Points PSA
          AST 412 448 1.09
          UN 555 523 0.94

          Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15

          Nick Scholtz


          --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...>
          wrote:
          > I think the differences in 3pt and FT% obdcure the basic question:
          >
          > What is the scoring efficiency on plays with "potential" assists and
          > on plays with no assists?
          >
          > For example, look at the data suplied:
          > > 2m-2a 2% 3m-3a 3% ftm-fta ft%
          > > Ast'd 143-263 54% 41-125 33% 39-54 72%
          > > UnAst'd 200-462 43% 12-43 28% 87-113 77%
          >
          > This generated the following.
          >
          > Shot attempts Points Scored PSA
          > Ast 287 366 1.28
          > Un 512 499 0.98
          >
          > Difference in PSA = value of assist = .3
          >
          > This is a far lower value than what I would have expected (I
          > hypothesized a value of 1, John Hollinger uses a value
          > of .67 for the calculations in the Pro Basketball Prospectus)
          >
          > In addition to my suprise at how low the value is, I am suprised by
          > how few FT's come out of potential assist situations. Perhaps it
          makes
          > sense that many fouls come on drives to the basket (not an assist)
          but
          > that is a large reason why the calculated value is so low.
          >
          > Nick Scholtz
        • Dean Oliver
          ... Still preliminary, but that s pretty close to the difference between points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an offensive rebound. I
          Message 4 of 18 , Feb 3, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...> wrote:
            > Try this:
            >
            > Shot Attempts Points PSA
            > AST 412 448 1.09
            > UN 555 523 0.94
            >
            > Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15

            Still preliminary, but that's pretty close to the difference between
            points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an
            offensive rebound.

            I have been continuing my conversations with David Berri, the sports
            econ professor from Bakersfield. Using an approach that evaluates
            whether wins come from numerous different stats, he keeps seeing that
            assists have almost no value. That approach is different than this
            one and I've been trying to make a point that probably can be
            clarified just by stats like these (which, as I mentioned before, I
            didn't see in the smaller study I did in the early '90's). I believe
            the above is statistically significant. I'll have to follow up
            sometime to find out what games you were doing, though. You don't
            want it to be just a couple teams.

            DeanO
            www.basketballonpaper.com

            >
            >
            > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...>
            > wrote:
            > > I think the differences in 3pt and FT% obdcure the basic question:
            > >
            > > What is the scoring efficiency on plays with "potential" assists and
            > > on plays with no assists?
            > >
            > > For example, look at the data suplied:
            > > > 2m-2a 2% 3m-3a 3% ftm-fta ft%
            > > > Ast'd 143-263 54% 41-125 33% 39-54 72%
            > > > UnAst'd 200-462 43% 12-43 28% 87-113 77%
            > >
            > > This generated the following.
            > >
            > > Shot attempts Points Scored PSA
            > > Ast 287 366 1.28
            > > Un 512 499 0.98
            > >
            > > Difference in PSA = value of assist = .3
            > >
            > > This is a far lower value than what I would have expected (I
            > > hypothesized a value of 1, John Hollinger uses a value
            > > of .67 for the calculations in the Pro Basketball Prospectus)
            > >
            > > In addition to my suprise at how low the value is, I am suprised by
            > > how few FT's come out of potential assist situations. Perhaps it
            > makes
            > > sense that many fouls come on drives to the basket (not an assist)
            > but
            > > that is a large reason why the calculated value is so low.
            > >
            > > Nick Scholtz
          • bchaikin@aol.com
            ... Still preliminary, but that s pretty close to the difference between points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an offensive rebound. I
            Message 5 of 18 , Feb 3, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              > Try this:
              >
              >         Shot Attempts   Points  PSA
              > AST       412          448    1.09
              > UN        555          523    0.94 
              >
              > Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15

              Still preliminary, but that's pretty close to the difference between
              points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an
              offensive rebound.

              I have been continuing my conversations with David Berri, the sports
              econ professor from Bakersfield.  Using an approach that evaluates
              whether wins come from numerous different stats, he keeps seeing that
              assists have almost no value.  That approach is different than this
              one and I've been trying to make a point that probably can be
              clarified just by stats like these (which, as I mentioned before, I
              didn't see in the smaller study I did in the early '90's).  I believe
              the above is statistically significant.  I'll have to follow up
              sometime to find out what games you were doing, though.  You don't
              want it to be just a couple teams.

              anyone know if dave berri has any basketball related thoughts/musings posted somewhere on the internet, or in print?...





            • schtevie2003
              In the how big is big category, here is how I would contextualize the calculated value. Consider the case of Sacramento, the best passing team in the NBA,
              Message 6 of 18 , Feb 3, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                In the "how big is big" category, here is how I would contextualize the calculated
                value. Consider the case of Sacramento, the best passing team in the NBA, defeating
                its opponents by 7.4 ppg (also perhaps league leading). If we take an assist value of
                0.15 and note that they accumulate about 5.5 more assists than the median team in
                the league (which by observation appears close to the average) then a fair estimate is
                that their exceptional passing ability explains only about one tenth of their
                exceptional superiority (calculation: 5.5*0.15/7.4). Does this seem high or low? I
                guess that my prior would have been that it would have been a slightly higher.

                ***********

                --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Oliver" <deano@r...> wrote:
                > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...> wrote:
                > > Try this:
                > >
                > > Shot Attempts Points PSA
                > > AST 412 448 1.09
                > > UN 555 523 0.94
                > >
                > > Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15
                >
                > Still preliminary, but that's pretty close to the difference between
                > points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an
                > offensive rebound.
                >
                > I have been continuing my conversations with David Berri, the sports
                > econ professor from Bakersfield. Using an approach that evaluates
                > whether wins come from numerous different stats, he keeps seeing that
                > assists have almost no value. That approach is different than this
                > one and I've been trying to make a point that probably can be
                > clarified just by stats like these (which, as I mentioned before, I
                > didn't see in the smaller study I did in the early '90's). I believe
                > the above is statistically significant. I'll have to follow up
                > sometime to find out what games you were doing, though. You don't
                > want it to be just a couple teams.
                >
                > DeanO
                > www.basketballonpaper.com
                >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...>
                > > wrote:
                > > > I think the differences in 3pt and FT% obdcure the basic question:
                > > >
                > > > What is the scoring efficiency on plays with "potential" assists and
                > > > on plays with no assists?
                > > >
                > > > For example, look at the data suplied:
                > > > > 2m-2a 2% 3m-3a 3% ftm-fta ft%
                > > > > Ast'd 143-263 54% 41-125 33% 39-54 72%
                > > > > UnAst'd 200-462 43% 12-43 28% 87-113 77%
                > > >
                > > > This generated the following.
                > > >
                > > > Shot attempts Points Scored PSA
                > > > Ast 287 366 1.28
                > > > Un 512 499 0.98
                > > >
                > > > Difference in PSA = value of assist = .3
                > > >
                > > > This is a far lower value than what I would have expected (I
                > > > hypothesized a value of 1, John Hollinger uses a value
                > > > of .67 for the calculations in the Pro Basketball Prospectus)
                > > >
                > > > In addition to my suprise at how low the value is, I am suprised by
                > > > how few FT's come out of potential assist situations. Perhaps it
                > > makes
                > > > sense that many fouls come on drives to the basket (not an assist)
                > > but
                > > > that is a large reason why the calculated value is so low.
                > > >
                > > > Nick Scholtz
              • Dean Oliver
                Plenty of papers available through... http://www.csub.edu/~dberri/ Some abstracts and papers at http://www.csub.edu/%7Edberri/Research.html ...
                Message 7 of 18 , Feb 3, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Plenty of papers available through...

                  http://www.csub.edu/~dberri/

                  Some abstracts and papers at

                  http://www.csub.edu/%7Edberri/Research.html

                  --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, bchaikin@a... wrote:
                  > > Try this:
                  > >
                  > > Shot Attempts Points PSA
                  > > AST 412 448 1.09
                  > > UN 555 523 0.94
                  > >
                  > > Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15
                  >
                  > Still preliminary, but that's pretty close to the difference between
                  > points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an
                  > offensive rebound.
                  >
                  > I have been continuing my conversations with David Berri, the sports
                  > econ professor from Bakersfield. Using an approach that evaluates
                  > whether wins come from numerous different stats, he keeps seeing that
                  > assists have almost no value. That approach is different than this
                  > one and I've been trying to make a point that probably can be
                  > clarified just by stats like these (which, as I mentioned before, I
                  > didn't see in the smaller study I did in the early '90's). I believe
                  > the above is statistically significant. I'll have to follow up
                  > sometime to find out what games you were doing, though. You don't
                  > want it to be just a couple teams.
                  >
                  > anyone know if dave berri has any basketball related
                  thoughts/musings posted
                  > somewhere on the internet, or in print?...
                • schtevie2003
                  ... defeating ... of ... is ... Perhaps I should also have added the calculation for New Jersey, the second best passing team in the league, as measured by
                  Message 8 of 18 , Feb 3, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "schtevie2003" <schtevie@h...> wrote:
                    > In the "how big is big" category, here is how I would contextualize the calculated
                    > value. Consider the case of Sacramento, the best passing team in the NBA,
                    defeating
                    > its opponents by 7.4 ppg (also perhaps league leading). If we take an assist value
                    of
                    > 0.15 and note that they accumulate about 5.5 more assists than the median team in
                    > the league (which by observation appears close to the average) then a fair estimate
                    is
                    > that their exceptional passing ability explains only about one tenth of their
                    > exceptional superiority (calculation: 5.5*0.15/7.4). Does this seem high or low? I
                    > guess that my prior would have been that it would have been a slightly higher.
                    >
                    > ***********
                    >
                    Perhaps I should also have added the calculation for New Jersey, the second best
                    passing team in the league, as measured by assists. For the Nets, assists explain
                    about 20% of their victory margin (=3.3*0.15/2.4).

                    The interest in this particular stat is this tentative interpretation: for a rather ordinary
                    (this year) above-average team, passing, at best (Kidd is the best, no?) can account for
                    "at most" 20% of success.

                    *************

                    > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Oliver" <deano@r...> wrote:
                    > > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...> wrote:
                    > > > Try this:
                    > > >
                    > > > Shot Attempts Points PSA
                    > > > AST 412 448 1.09
                    > > > UN 555 523 0.94
                    > > >
                    > > > Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15
                    > >
                    > > Still preliminary, but that's pretty close to the difference between
                    > > points per possession and points per play, i.e., the value of an
                    > > offensive rebound.
                    > >
                    > > I have been continuing my conversations with David Berri, the sports
                    > > econ professor from Bakersfield. Using an approach that evaluates
                    > > whether wins come from numerous different stats, he keeps seeing that
                    > > assists have almost no value. That approach is different than this
                    > > one and I've been trying to make a point that probably can be
                    > > clarified just by stats like these (which, as I mentioned before, I
                    > > didn't see in the smaller study I did in the early '90's). I believe
                    > > the above is statistically significant. I'll have to follow up
                    > > sometime to find out what games you were doing, though. You don't
                    > > want it to be just a couple teams.
                    > >
                    > > DeanO
                    > > www.basketballonpaper.com
                    > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nick_scholtz" <nick@l...>
                    > > > wrote:
                    > > > > I think the differences in 3pt and FT% obdcure the basic question:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > What is the scoring efficiency on plays with "potential" assists and
                    > > > > on plays with no assists?
                    > > > >
                    > > > > For example, look at the data suplied:
                    > > > > > 2m-2a 2% 3m-3a 3% ftm-fta ft%
                    > > > > > Ast'd 143-263 54% 41-125 33% 39-54 72%
                    > > > > > UnAst'd 200-462 43% 12-43 28% 87-113 77%
                    > > > >
                    > > > > This generated the following.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Shot attempts Points Scored PSA
                    > > > > Ast 287 366 1.28
                    > > > > Un 512 499 0.98
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Difference in PSA = value of assist = .3
                    > > > >
                    > > > > This is a far lower value than what I would have expected (I
                    > > > > hypothesized a value of 1, John Hollinger uses a value
                    > > > > of .67 for the calculations in the Pro Basketball Prospectus)
                    > > > >
                    > > > > In addition to my suprise at how low the value is, I am suprised by
                    > > > > how few FT's come out of potential assist situations. Perhaps it
                    > > > makes
                    > > > > sense that many fouls come on drives to the basket (not an assist)
                    > > > but
                    > > > > that is a large reason why the calculated value is so low.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Nick Scholtz
                  • nick_scholtz
                    So I get to be the first person to correct it :) Talking about calculating the value of assists I offered the ... This was computed from the following data ...
                    Message 9 of 18 , Feb 5, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      So I get to be the first person to correct it :)

                      Talking about calculating the value of assists I offered the
                      following calculation:

                      > Shot Attempts Points PSA
                      > AST 412 448 1.09
                      > UN 555 523 0.94
                      >
                      > Value of assist (by my calculations) 0.15

                      This was computed from the following data

                      > > 2m-2a 2% 3m-3a 3% ftm-fta ft%
                      > > Ast'd 143-263 54% 41-125 33% 39-54 72%
                      > > UnAst'd 200-462 43% 12-43 28% 87-113 77%

                      The calculation was correct in saying that comparing the assisted
                      shot attempts non Unassisted the increase in PSA was 0.15 (which
                      seemed low). This is correct as far as it goes, but I forgot the
                      final step of distributing the value of the extra points to the
                      assists. In this case the 412 shot attempts with potential assists
                      generated 61 more points than if the same shots hadn't had potential
                      assists. They also were responsible for 184 assists (143 on 2 pt
                      basktes, 41 on 3 point shots).

                      This leads to a value of an assists of 61/184 or just under 1/3
                      point. This is still much lower than I expected but, at least,
                      should be the correct calculation.

                      I would be very interested if anyone else has collected similar data
                      for other teams to see how consistant that number is.

                      Nick
                    • igor eduardo küpfer
                      After 26 games, here s what it looks like: 2m 2a 2% 3m - 3a 3% ftm - fta ft% AST 311 - 570 55% 97 - 252 38% 97 - 142 68% UNAST
                      Message 10 of 18 , Feb 12, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        After 26 games, here's what it looks like:

                        2m 2a 2% 3m - 3a 3% ftm - fta ft%
                        AST 311 - 570 55% 97 - 252 38% 97 - 142 68%
                        UNAST 441 - 1037 43% 20 - 95 21% 239 - 318 75%

                        DIFF 12% 17% -7%
                        p <.001 <.01 ns

                        Over the last dozen games I've started tracking shot attempts in the paint
                        separate from those outside the paint.

                        In2m - In2a In2% Out2m - Out2a Out2%
                        AST 89 - 137 65% 69 - 153 45%
                        UNAST 129 - 275 47% 66 - 192 34%

                        DIFF 18% 11%
                        p <.05 ns

                        We should be able to combine this with the data from the 82games site which
                        shows shot attempt distance for each player in order to begin to credit
                        assists properly -- more credit for inside attempts should go to the
                        assister. By the end of this season, I'll have enough games scored from a
                        wide variety of teams to know how much of the credit should go to the
                        passer.

                        ed
                      • Kevin Pelton
                        I ve scored about five Sonics games now ... I need to translate them to HTML. Hopefully the weekend. Are you doing road games as well as home games?
                        Message 11 of 18 , Feb 13, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I've scored about five Sonics games now ... I need to translate them
                          to HTML. Hopefully the weekend.

                          Are you doing road games as well as home games?
                        • Mike G
                          ... Trying to figure out what to make of these numbers. I ve reduced this chart to one that represents an average game in the sample: .category. 3pt. 2 pt.
                          Message 12 of 18 , Feb 13, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, igor eduardo küpfer
                            <edkupfer@r...> wrote:
                            > After 26 games, here's what it looks like:
                            >
                            > 2m 2a 2% 3m - 3a 3% ftm - fta ft%
                            > AST 311 - 570 55% 97 - 252 38% 97 - 142 68%
                            > UNAST 441 - 1037 43% 20 - 95 21% 239 - 318 75%
                            >
                            > DIFF 12% 17% -7%
                            > p <.001 <.01 ns

                            Trying to figure out what to make of these numbers.

                            I've reduced this chart to one that represents an "average" game in
                            the sample:

                            .category. 3pt. 2 pt. FT

                            "assisted" 4-10 12-22 4-6
                            unassisted 1-5_ 17-40 9-12

                            Counting 2 FTA as one 'play':

                            On 35 "assisted" plays, 40 pts are scored, or 1.143 pts per play

                            On 51 unassisted plays, 46 pts are scored, at .902 ppp

                            The difference is .216 ppp

                            But: In reality, only 16 assists are counted. So, from 16 actual,
                            counted assists, 40 pts are produced.

                            Therefore, each assist produces 2.5 points; and the difference is
                            now 1.585 as the value of each assist.

                            (The actual difference, from Ed's 2184 plays, is 1.561)


                            We probably all know that a counted assist is only the 'tip of the
                            iceberg' which represents all 'good passes' a player executes.
                            While there have been players (Kevin Porter? Ray Williams?) who have
                            ONLY passed when an assist was to be had, many players get few
                            assists, yet are credible passers.

                            So the assist represents an "estimate" of the number of
                            good, "assist-worthy" passes a player throws.
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.