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

Re: performance rating and trade value

Expand Messages
  • Mike G
    ... + .5*as ... I ll streamline this formula to: P = (Pts + VOP*(1.25*Stl + .50*Ast + .33*Blk + Reb - FGms -.50*FTms - 1.25*TO - .81*PF)) My own weights are
    Message 1 of 66 , Mar 7, 2004
      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <myviewonthis@y...>
      wrote:

      > performance = (PTS - VOP*FGmsd - .5*VOP*FTmsd + 1.25*VOP*st
      + .5*as
      > + .33*VOP*bl + VOP*reb - 1.25*VOP*to - .81*pf) / GamesPlayed
      >
      > (where value of possession VOP is equal to 1.04.

      I'll streamline this formula to:

      P = (Pts + VOP*(1.25*Stl + .50*Ast + .33*Blk + Reb - FGms -.50*FTms -
      1.25*TO - .81*PF))


      My own weights are identical to yours for Rebounds and Turnovers.

      Subtracting for missed FG and FT isn't equivalent to what I do: I
      multiply scoring rate by overall shooting % (among other things).

      Within the last week or two, some of us discussed the value of an
      assist. Your coefficient is toward the low end. I suggested (from
      Ed Kupfer's Toronto data) a relatively huge number, about 1.5
      [There hasn't been any rebuttal that I've noticed.]

      Weighing blocks at .33 seems very low. Shotblockers get a lot more
      minutes than players with otherwise equivalent stats.

      The weight on fouls seems very high.


      > i dont adjust for minutes played (what you actually did rather
      than
      > what you might be capable of)

      What you ARE capable of doing in 36 minutes -- whether it takes you
      1 or 2 or 3 games to get 36 min. -- could also be called 'what you
      actually did'. No ?


      > or pace (only a 5-7% spread in the
      > league?). but you could.

      Isn't it more like a 10-12% difference both above and below the
      mean? I'm seeing this as about 22% between the highest- and lowest-
      scoring teams. Quite a difference between 20 PPG in a 104-100
      scoring milieu, and 20 PPG in 84-87 games.

      >
      > explanation of specific weights:

      >
      > personal fouls: on average yield 1.0893 FTs per foul using league
      > stats *0.7475 league FT%= approx .81 points

      This has been a recurring theme here. Shouldn't the .81 pts be
      compared to the VOP ? If a possession is, on average, worth 1.04
      points, it looks as if your average 'fouled' possession is an
      advantage to the defense.

      Of course, offensive fouls are worse than a turnover; and that
      contributes some of the negative value to fouls, in general.

      >
      > assists (.5) and blocks (33 *1.04= .342) basically as previously
      > discussed.

      Sorry, I don't see this discussion. But I'm curious how you manage
      to rate these skills so low.
    • 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
        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.