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

Re: performance rating and trade value

Expand Messages
  • dlirag@hotmail.com
    What s the formula for Size? ... difference ... ranking ... that .75. ... power
    Message 1 of 66 , Mar 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      What's the formula for Size?

      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <myviewonthis@y...> wrote:
      >
      > at the end of this post i list the top 50 players according to the
      > new performance rating. i also try to capture trade value with
      > factors to adjust that performance rating based on rarity of that
      > performace level (my thinking being that in trades guys with high
      > performance rankings are worth a premium greater than the
      difference
      > in the performance ranking from the average alone because they are
      > rare and stars win games), and that age and size also matter
      > independent of performance.
      >
      >
      > more specifically i estimated that players with a performance
      ranking
      > of 20 or above would command a 1.35 factor premium, over 15 a 1.2,
      > above 10 a 1.1, between 5 and 10 a normal value of 1 and below
      > that .8 (because those level players are common enough to be
      > discounted in value for trading purposes).
      >
      > age was weighted as follows <22 1.3 (valuable because of youth but
      > still a little raw and learning) <27 1.4 (highest-young prime), <32
      > 1.2 (older prime, worth about 15% less), <35 1.0, older than
      that .75.
      >
      > size i divided into three groups because size earns a trade
      premium:
      > under 6-8 1.0, 6-8 - 6-11 and not really a power player 1.15,
      power
      > players 1.35.
      >
      > (please give me feedback on these weights.)
      >
      > Player New Performance Rarity Age Size Trade TRank
      > garnett,kevin 27.55 1.35 1.2 1.35 60.25 1
      > webber,chris 23.31 1.35 1.2 1.35 50.98 3
      > duncan,tim 23.12 1.35 1.2 1.35 50.56 4
      > brand,elton 21.76 1.35 1.4 1.35 55.53 2
      > stojakovic,predr20.95 1.35 1.4 1.15 45.54 5
      > o'neal,shaquille20.54 1.35 1.2 1.35 44.92 6
      > nowitzki,dirk 19.17 1.2 1.4 1.35 43.48 7
      > mcgrady,tracy 18.80 1.2 1.4 1.15 36.32 14
      > miller,brad 18.77 1.2 1.2 1.35 36.48 13
      > boozer,carlos 18.33 1.2 1.3 1.35 38.60 9
      > wallace,ben 18.04 1.2 1.2 1.35 35.06 16
      > randolph,zach 17.97 1.2 1.4 1.35 40.75 8
      > marion,shawn 17.92 1.2 1.4 1.15 34.62 17
      > bryant,kobe 17.39 1.2 1.4 1.15 33.61 18
      > kirilenko,andrei17.36 1.2 1.4 1.15 33.53 19
      > martin,kenyon 16.95 1.2 1.4 1.35 38.45 10
      > abdur-rahim,shar16.81 1.2 1.4 1.35 38.12 11
      > malone,karl 16.73 1.2 0.85 1.35 23.04 32
      > marshall,donyell16.43 1.2 1.20 1.35 31.95 20
      > o'neal,jermaine 16.36 1.2 1.4 1.35 37.10 12
      > ming,yao 15.87 1.2 1.4 1.35 35.99 15
      > dampier,erick 15.86 1.2 1.2 1.35 30.83 23
      > redd,michael 15.76 1.2 1.4 1 26.48 24
      > allen,ray 15.62 1.2 1.2 1 22.50 34
      > kidd,jason 15.13 1.2 1.2 1 21.78 39
      > stoudemire,amare15.09 1.2 1.3 1.35 31.77 21
      > finley,michael 15.02 1.2 1.2 1.15 24.87 30
      > gasol,pau 14.96 1.1 1.4 1.35 31.11 22
      > odom,lamar 14.86 1.1 1.40 1.15 26.32 25
      > maggette,corey 14.81 1.1 1.4 1.15 26.24 26
      > pierce,paul 14.80 1.1 1.4 1.15 26.20 27
      > cassell,sam 14.75 1.1 1.00 1.00 16.23 x
      > marbury,stephon 14.56 1.1 1.4 1 22.43 35
      > lewis,rashard 14.23 1.1 1.4 1.15 25.21 28
      > iverson,allen 14.13 1.1 1.2 1 18.65 51
      > jefferson,richar14.05 1.1 1.40 1.00 21.64 38
      > bibby,mike 13.93 1.1 1.4 1 21.45 40
      > thomas,kenny 13.89 1.1 1.2 1.15 21.09 43
      > davis,baron 13.79 1.1 1.4 1 21.24 41
      > brown,p.j. 13.76 1.1 1 1.35 20.43 45
      > jamison,antawn 13.63 1.1 1.2 1.15 20.69 44
      > richardson,jason13.39 1.1 1.4 1 20.62 46
      > james,lebron 13.37 1.1 1.30 1.15 21.99 36
      > miller,andre 13.13 1.1 1.20 1.00 17.33 x
      > camby,marcus 13.12 1.1 1.20 1.35 23.39 31
      > vanhorn,keith 12.97 1.1 1.20 1.15 19.68 47
      > harpring,matt 12.95 1.1 1.2 1.15 19.65 48
      > anthony,carmelo 12.90 1.1 1.30 1.15 21.22 42
      > ilgauskas,zydrun12.84 1.1 1.2 1.35 22.88 33
      > walker,antoine 12.84 1.1 1.2 1.15 19.49 49
      > artest,ron 12.57 1.1 1.4 1 19.36 50
      > wallace,rasheed 12.26 1.1 1.2 1.35 21.84 37
      > magloire,jamaal 12.22 1.1 1.40 1.35 25.42 29
      > mashburn,jamal 12.12 1.1 1.2 1.15 18.40 52
      >
      > the top 7 on performance rating and trade value are the same except
      > brand moves up a bit because he is so young. in the next group,
      > young bigmen pass by a some of the perimeter players with slightly
      > higher performance rankings. that seems reasonable to me.
      >
      > feedback?
    • nickouli5
      I will agree that Manu has been gambling since about mid-season when he moved to the bench more than he did in the beggining of the season (in fact much more).
      Message 66 of 66 , Mar 23, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        I will agree that Manu has been gambling since about mid-season when
        he moved to the bench more than he did in the beggining of the season
        (in fact much more).

        I actually thought he cut down on the gambling A LOT from last
        season, but there was a game in New Orleans, when he came off the
        bench and did it at a crucial point of the game and might have been a
        huge reason the Spurs lost the game. He usually never made those
        type of mistakes down the stretch of games.

        Either way, I think he is generally a very solid defender. Even
        though he gambles a bit these days, he still creates a lot of
        turnovers via charges and steals.

        And about 2001, I know Bowen was not around. But I was trying to
        kind of hint towards the TWIN TOWER approach maybe being the primary
        reason an SG/SF always is in the top TENDEX defensive ratings since
        2001 (maybe even before that) if we were to check.

        If Bowen is the reason for the SG's being held so low, then why is
        the SG production PER at a net positive at +2.5? And negative at the
        SF position (or was once close to it)? He certainly doesn't put up
        LARGE PER and Turkoglu altough is scoring more these days and
        grabbing rebounds, I would have to assume Manu, Turk, AND Bowen are
        all playing solid defense. If there is any weakness in the D its
        with Parker slightly, and even MORE SO at the backup PG position for
        the Spurs.

        Of course the two 7 footer approach helps them all become a little
        more risky etc..... But I don't see how Manu and Hedo cannot being
        doing solid defensively, when the PER, defensive ratings are solid
        across the board? Isn't it safe to conclude the Spurs are getting
        reasonable production on both ends with the THREE MAN ROTATIOn at the
        SG and SF? And the reason the SF might be low is solely because of
        Bowens lack of scoring at times?
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.