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

Offensive Rebounding Part of Offensive Rating

Expand Messages
  • dan_t_rosenbaum
    I very much agree that offensive rebounds should be part of an offensive rating, but I think it is very tough to come up with the right way to do it. DeanO
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I very much agree that offensive rebounds should be part of an
      offensive rating, but I think it is very tough to come up with the
      right way to do it.

      DeanO adds in an offensive rebounding part in both the numerator and
      denominator of his offensive efficiency formula. Here are the
      formulas.

      Denominator Offensive Rebounding Part
      = Individual Offensive Rebounds
      * Team Offensive Rebounding Weight
      * Team Play Percentage

      Numerator Offensive Rebounding Part
      = Denominator Offensive Rebounding Part
      * Team Points per Scoring Play Adjustment

      This Team Points per Scoring Play Adjustment roughly measures the
      number of points per effective field goal made, so it is likely to
      above two, implying that the offensive rebounding part going into
      the numerator will be more than twice as large as the offensive
      rebounding part in the denominator. Thus, a player who did nothing
      but offensive rebound would get an offensive rating of greater than
      200.

      The problem with the offensive rebounding part is that unlike the
      points part or assist part, there is no negative associated with
      offensive rebounds. Players trying to score are at risk of missed
      shots and turnovers, implying that increasing the number of points
      possessions will not necessarily increase a player's offensive
      rating. Players attempting to get assists do so at the risk of
      turnovers, so trying to get more assists will not necessarily
      increase a player's offensive rating.

      But a player attempting to get more offensive rebounds takes no risk
      (in his offensive rating), except for maybe an occasional turnover.
      Thus, players who specialize in offensive rebounds are almost
      guaranteed to have high offensive ratings. This is not so with
      players who specialize in point production, but may be a bit true
      with players who specialize in assist production (depending on the
      relative weight of the assist part versus the turnover part).

      Now the reason that this does prove to be a huge problem is because
      the offensive rebounding part is a pretty small fraction of total
      possessions even for most offensive rebounding specialists. Thus,
      it is not that big of a deal.

      My approach, without going into gory detail for now, is to split up
      possessions into three parts - points, assists, and offensive
      rebounds. Turnovers are apportioned to the points and assists part
      according to their respective proportions of total possessions.
      Then I calculate separate "offensive ratings" for each category
      separately with offensive rebounds being measured as a percentage of
      total team offensive rebounding opportunities (adjusting for minutes
      played).

      This gives me three separate offensive ratings with three very
      different scales. I normalize all three scales to have the same
      mean and standard deviation as the minutes-weighted distribution for
      points per effective field goal attempt. Then I add them together
      weighting them by their respective proportion of total possessions.

      This methodology does tend to reward specialists, but overall I do
      not think it gives any particular advantage to assist producers
      versus points producers or offensive rebound producers versus assist
      producers.

      Hopefully, this is enough of a description for people to get an idea
      of what I am doing.

      I would like also to point out that IMO the possessions
      used/offensive rating tradeoff is the single most important concept
      in what we do. Many folks should get some credit for that concept,
      but DeanO certainly is the guy who has done the most heavy lifting.
      So plese do not see what I am doing here as some sort of agenda
      against DeanO. I will forever be grateful for the pathbreaking work
      that he has done.

      Thanks,
      Dan
    • Dean Oliver
      ... I will say that it was the conceptually most difficult aspect of what I ve had to do. ... But this isn t actually true. A lot of offensive rebounders
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "dan_t_rosenbaum"
        <rosenbaum@u...> wrote:
        > I very much agree that offensive rebounds should be part of an
        > offensive rating, but I think it is very tough to come up with the
        > right way to do it.

        I will say that it was the conceptually most difficult aspect of what
        I've had to do.

        >
        > The problem with the offensive rebounding part is that unlike the
        > points part or assist part, there is no negative associated with
        > offensive rebounds. Players trying to score are at risk of missed
        > shots and turnovers, implying that increasing the number of points
        > possessions will not necessarily increase a player's offensive
        > rating. Players attempting to get assists do so at the risk of
        > turnovers, so trying to get more assists will not necessarily
        > increase a player's offensive rating.
        >
        > But a player attempting to get more offensive rebounds takes no risk
        > (in his offensive rating), except for maybe an occasional turnover.
        > Thus, players who specialize in offensive rebounds are almost
        > guaranteed to have high offensive ratings.

        But this isn't actually true. A lot of offensive rebounders don't
        have high offensive ratings, in fact. And the ones that do have very
        low possession usage. In other words, it reflects the fact that they
        aren't taking a lot of risks. The tradeoff between possession usage
        and efficiency is still maintained. My skill curves do show that
        these guys, like Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman, with high efficiency
        mainly through offensive boards would drop off significantly if they
        tried to do more.

        You might have said that later...

        >
        > My approach, without going into gory detail for now, is to split up
        > possessions into three parts - points, assists, and offensive
        > rebounds. Turnovers are apportioned to the points and assists part
        > according to their respective proportions of total possessions.
        > Then I calculate separate "offensive ratings" for each category
        > separately with offensive rebounds being measured as a percentage of
        > total team offensive rebounding opportunities (adjusting for minutes
        > played).
        >
        > This gives me three separate offensive ratings with three very
        > different scales. I normalize all three scales to have the same
        > mean and standard deviation as the minutes-weighted distribution for
        > points per effective field goal attempt. Then I add them together
        > weighting them by their respective proportion of total possessions.
        >
        > This methodology does tend to reward specialists, but overall I do
        > not think it gives any particular advantage to assist producers
        > versus points producers or offensive rebound producers versus assist
        > producers.
        >
        > Hopefully, this is enough of a description for people to get an idea
        > of what I am doing.

        Not sure I get it, but it will have to wait for a month until I come back.

        DeanO

        Dean Oliver
        Author, Basketball on Paper
        http://www.basketballonpaper.com
        "Oliver goes beyond stats to dissect what it takes to win. His breezy
        style makes for enjoyable reading, but there are plenty of points of
        wisdom as well. This book can be appreciated by fans, players,
        coaches and executives, but more importantly it can be used as a text
        book for all these groups. You are sure to learn something you didn't
        know about basketball here." Pete Palmer, co-author, Hidden Game of
        Baseball and Hidden Game of Football
      • bchaikin@aol.com
        The problem with the offensive rebounding part is that unlike the points part or assist part, there is no negative associated with offensive rebounds..... But
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 3, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          The problem with the offensive rebounding part is that unlike the points part or assist part, there is no negative associated with offensive rebounds.....

          But a player attempting to get more offensive rebounds takes no risk (in his offensive rating), except for maybe an occasional turnover. Thus, players who specialize in offensive rebounds are almost guaranteed to have high offensive ratings....

          the act of actually getting an offensive or defensive rebound has no negative to it because both are in fact completely positive acts - there is no negative to getting a rebound, just as there is no negative to getting a steal. a missed shot is a free ball, like a jump ball, that everyone on the floor theoretically has access to. what you are failing to take into consideration, by implying that there is no negative to a rebound, is that whenever a shot is taken and missed, all 10 players on the court have an opportunity to get that rebound (theoretically an equal opportunity, in reality not, but nonetheless everyone does have the opportunity)....

          thus you can just as easily give no credit to the player that got an off (or def) rebound, but then credit a negative "missed rebound" to each of the other 9 players that missed getting that rebound each and every time someone does get one. the risk associated in getting an off or def rebound is in not getting it. the statement that "...a player attempting to get more offensive rebounds takes no risk...", if taken at face value, implies a misunderstanding of the process involved. when a player gets an off reb that's one off reb the his 4 other teammates did not get, and thus their "offensive ratings" suffer in the fact that they could have gotten that rebound but didn't, and the ratings of the 5 defensive players suffer in that each of them did not get an additional def rebound...

          shots, missed shots, turnovers, assists, are all acts that are credited to a player because he already has the ball in his hands. he has to at some point do something with it - shoot it, pass it, get fouled, or turn it over (dribbing leads to one of these), and we currently only measure three of these four parameters. but the only way for a player to gain possession of the ball in the first place - is on a throw in, a jump ball, receive a pass, or get a rebound. nobody keeps track of successful throw ins because the vast majority of the time its successful - when its not players gets TOs or STs. same with receiving a pass or gaining possession of a jump ball....

          thus each time a player takes a shot, we can just as easily forget crediting missed shots and rebounds, and call a missed shot followed by a def reb a "turnover" to the player who shot the ball, or call it "nothing" if the shot is missed and is followed by an off reb. but we don't do this - we break the measurement of the process down even further, into missed shots and rebounds. but since a missed shot is a free ball, like a jump ball, anyone getting the rebound is gaining possession of the ball for his team, and preventing the opposition from gaining possession, both of which have equal and opposite inherent value, and thus off and def rebounds are of the value as a team possession, a positive value...

          A lot of offensive rebounders don't have high offensive ratings, in fact.  And the ones that do have very low possession usage.  In other words, it reflects the fact that they aren't taking a lot of risks.

          this is in fact the reality...

          My skill curves do show that these guys, like Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman, with high efficiency mainly through offensive boards would drop off significantly if they tried to do more.

          if trying to do more means other than getting more off rebounds in general i would tend to agree because the vast majority of very good off rebounders have low touches/min and high %TOs, meaning high rates of turnovers per ball possession, and consequently these are not the people you want having the ball in their hands on offense. this year for example danny fortson, reggie evans, chris mihm, nazr mohammed, jahidi white, all excellent off rebounders, turn the ball over more than 10% of the time they get it. but then their are players like shaq who are very good off rebounders and only turn the ball over on 6% of their ball possessions, and thus you do want them to have the ball because he is such an efficient scorer...

          bob chaikin
          bchaikin@...



        • roland_beech
          ... actually I think there is a way to measure a negative associated with offensive rebounding to mitigate the effect somewhat. Namely defensive rebounds
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 3, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            > The problem with the offensive rebounding part is that unlike the
            > points part or assist part, there is no negative associated with
            > offensive rebounds.

            actually I think there is a way to measure a negative associated
            with offensive rebounding to mitigate the effect somewhat.
            Namely "defensive rebounds allowed"

            if we measure the ratio of a player's offensive rebounds to the
            times the other team or the other team's counterpart player gets the
            defensive rebound you have some basis for forming an adjustment for
            the player based on the expectations for the position the player
            plays at.

            So a center who grabs 3 rebounds, but gives up 12 defensive rebounds
            to the opposing center would be underperforming relative to a guard
            who grabs 2 off rebounds to 3 def rebs allowed...

            at the same time with usage rates as Dean/Bob mention you can also
            adjust to downgrade the Rodman types.

            Another avenue is to look at "first shot offense" versus "second+
            shot offense" within possessions. I'll be getting round to an
            article on this at some point (no doubt after the regular season
            concludes) and it will be interesting to see with a guy like Dampier
            what his numbers are for the first shot (he will be very strong on
            the second shot since many of his offensive rebounds lead to
            immediate dunks)

            of course, compartementalizing different areas on offense may also
            yield very notable numbers
          • Gabe Farkas
            your point about turnovers interests me. i m curious, using your method, what the flip side of turnovers is? in other words, if Ron Artest steals the ball from
            Message 5 of 11 , Apr 4, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              your point about turnovers interests me. i'm curious,
              using your method, what the flip side of turnovers is?

              in other words, if Ron Artest steals the ball from
              Shaq, then Artest is credited with a Steal (gaining of
              possession) and Shaq is "credited" with a Turnover
              (losing of possession). However, at the end of the
              game, the Lakers will almost invariably have
              registered more Turnovers than the Pacers have Steals.

              thus, is there any positive value credited to the
              Pacers in some way for the balance of Turnovers
              committed by the Lakers that were not the result of
              Steals?

              does that make sense?


              --- bchaikin@... wrote:
              > The problem with the offensive rebounding part is
              > that unlike the points part
              > or assist part, there is no negative associated with
              > offensive rebounds.....
              >
              >
              > But a player attempting to get more offensive
              > rebounds takes no risk (in his
              > offensive rating), except for maybe an occasional
              > turnover. Thus, players who
              > specialize in offensive rebounds are almost
              > guaranteed to have high offensive
              > ratings....
              >
              > the act of actually getting an offensive or
              > defensive rebound has no negative
              > to it because both are in fact completely positive
              > acts - there is no
              > negative to getting a rebound, just as there is no
              > negative to getting a steal. a
              > missed shot is a free ball, like a jump ball, that
              > everyone on the floor
              > theoretically has access to. what you are failing to
              > take into consideration, by
              > implying that there is no negative to a rebound, is
              > that whenever a shot is taken
              > and missed, all 10 players on the court have an
              > opportunity to get that
              > rebound (theoretically an equal opportunity, in
              > reality not, but nonetheless
              > everyone does have the opportunity)....
              >
              > thus you can just as easily give no credit to the
              > player that got an off (or
              > def) rebound, but then credit a negative "missed
              > rebound" to each of the other
              > 9 players that missed getting that rebound each and
              > every time someone does
              > get one. the risk associated in getting an off or
              > def rebound is in not getting
              > it. the statement that "...a player attempting to
              > get more offensive rebounds
              > takes no risk...", if taken at face value, implies a
              > misunderstanding of the
              > process involved. when a player gets an off reb
              > that's one off reb the his 4
              > other teammates did not get, and thus their
              > "offensive ratings" suffer in the
              > fact that they could have gotten that rebound but
              > didn't, and the ratings of
              > the 5 defensive players suffer in that each of them
              > did not get an additional
              > def rebound...
              >
              > shots, missed shots, turnovers, assists, are all
              > acts that are credited to a
              > player because he already has the ball in his hands.
              > he has to at some point
              > do something with it - shoot it, pass it, get
              > fouled, or turn it over (dribbing
              > leads to one of these), and we currently only
              > measure three of these four
              > parameters. but the only way for a player to gain
              > possession of the ball in the
              > first place - is on a throw in, a jump ball, receive
              > a pass, or get a rebound.
              > nobody keeps track of successful throw ins because
              > the vast majority of the
              > time its successful - when its not players gets TOs
              > or STs. same with receiving
              > a pass or gaining possession of a jump ball....
              >
              > thus each time a player takes a shot, we can just as
              > easily forget crediting
              > missed shots and rebounds, and call a missed shot
              > followed by a def reb a
              > "turnover" to the player who shot the ball, or call
              > it "nothing" if the shot is
              > missed and is followed by an off reb. but we don't
              > do this - we break the
              > measurement of the process down even further, into
              > missed shots and rebounds. but
              > since a missed shot is a free ball, like a jump
              > ball, anyone getting the rebound
              > is gaining possession of the ball for his team, and
              > preventing the opposition
              > from gaining possession, both of which have equal
              > and opposite inherent
              > value, and thus off and def rebounds are of the
              > value as a team possession, a
              > positive value...
              >
              > A lot of offensive rebounders don't have high
              > offensive ratings, in fact.�
              > And the ones that do have very low possession
              > usage.� In other words, it
              > reflects the fact that they aren't taking a lot of
              > risks.
              >
              > this is in fact the reality...
              >
              > My skill curves do show that these guys, like Ben
              > Wallace and Dennis Rodman,
              > with high efficiency mainly through offensive boards
              > would drop off
              > significantly if they tried to do more.
              >
              > if trying to do more means other than getting more
              > off rebounds in general i
              > would tend to agree because the vast majority of
              > very good off rebounders have
              > low touches/min and high %TOs, meaning high rates of
              > turnovers per ball
              > possession, and consequently these are not the
              > people you want having the ball in
              > their hands on offense. this year for example danny
              > fortson, reggie evans,
              > chris mihm, nazr mohammed, jahidi white, all
              > excellent off rebounders, turn the
              > ball over more than 10% of the time they get it. but
              > then their are players like
              > shaq who are very good off rebounders and only turn
              > the ball over on 6% of
              > their ball possessions, and thus you do want them to
              > have the ball because he is
              > such an efficient scorer...
              >
              > bob chaikin
              > bchaikin@...
              >
              >
              >
              >


              __________________________________
              Do you Yahoo!?
              Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
              http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
            • Mike G
              ... Good question, Gabe. The team gets indirect credit for turnovers forced in the final score. It amounts to an extra possession, and points off
              Message 6 of 11 , Apr 4, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, Gabe Farkas <gabefark@y...>
                wrote:
                > ... is there any positive value credited to the
                > Pacers in some way for the balance of Turnovers
                > committed by the Lakers that were not the result of
                > Steals?

                Good question, Gabe.

                The team gets indirect credit for "turnovers forced" in the final
                score. It amounts to an extra possession, and "points off
                turnovers" is a often-tracked quantity.

                Individual players don't get direct credit, as turnovers aren't
                credited to players on the defensive side. However, a number of
                accounting systems give indirect credit for team scoring
                differentials; as such, credit can be apportioned for a player's
                minutes on the floor.

                DanR's "corrections" of Roland's in/out figures would seem to
                incorporate this "uncounted" stat, within the team +/- .
              • Gabe Farkas
                Mike, I m not sure that s exactly where I was going with this. Basically, there are two kinds of turnovers: forced and unforced. Right? So, how can a forced
                Message 7 of 11 , Apr 5, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Mike,

                  I'm not sure that's exactly where I was going with
                  this.

                  Basically, there are two kinds of turnovers: forced
                  and unforced. Right?

                  So, how can a forced turnover occur? The other team
                  steals the ball.

                  And how can an unforced turnover occur? Throwing the
                  ball away, double-dribble, traveling, charging, etc.

                  My question is this: Other than steals, are there any
                  recorded and tabulated statistics that are the
                  flip-side of turnovers, or that lead to forced
                  turnovers?

                  Am I oversimplifying?

                  --Gabe


                  --- Mike G <msg_53@...> wrote:
                  > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, Gabe Farkas
                  > <gabefark@y...>
                  > wrote:
                  > > ... is there any positive value credited to the
                  > > Pacers in some way for the balance of Turnovers
                  > > committed by the Lakers that were not the result
                  > of
                  > > Steals?
                  >
                  > Good question, Gabe.
                  >
                  > The team gets indirect credit for "turnovers forced"
                  > in the final
                  > score. It amounts to an extra possession, and
                  > "points off
                  > turnovers" is a often-tracked quantity.
                  >
                  > Individual players don't get direct credit, as
                  > turnovers aren't
                  > credited to players on the defensive side. However,
                  > a number of
                  > accounting systems give indirect credit for team
                  > scoring
                  > differentials; as such, credit can be apportioned
                  > for a player's
                  > minutes on the floor.
                  >
                  > DanR's "corrections" of Roland's in/out figures
                  > would seem to
                  > incorporate this "uncounted" stat, within the team
                  > +/- .
                  >
                  >


                  __________________________________
                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                  http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                • Kevin Pelton
                  ... On an individual level? Not yet. Have you seen DeanO s system? some explanation: http://f2.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/kJBxQCBiN7JnB9ZlKgeKp7wq-
                  Message 8 of 11 , Apr 5, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > My question is this: Other than steals, are there any
                    > recorded and tabulated statistics that are the
                    > flip-side of turnovers, or that lead to forced
                    > turnovers?

                    On an individual level? Not yet. Have you seen DeanO's system?

                    some explanation:
                    http://f2.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/kJBxQCBiN7JnB9ZlKgeKp7wq-
                    7TntGsnvp2l3c49Cz03ntrXD0lEWDOD9UVsUoRMb4FPY-1Zb-
                    PwL31OG7yaucWm7L7I6WyNqF0YkQ/defstophandchart.xls

                    of course, it's all explained in more detail in Chapter 17 of The
                    Book:
                    http://www.basketballonpaper.com/book.html

                    One of the interesting things about DeanO's system is that while the
                    stats are primarily defensive, they can be used to evaluate offenses
                    as well. When you break out "unforced" turnovers that are really
                    charges and deflections off a player and out of bounds, etc., you get
                    really unforced turnovers -- throwing the ball out of bounds, for
                    example. It's a useful thing to know about an offense.
                  • Michael Tamada
                    DeanO s defensive box scores that he (and his corps of volunteers) did for the WNBA did this: assign credit for turnovers to one or more defenders. Even
                    Message 9 of 11 , Apr 5, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      DeanO's defensive box scores that he (and his
                      corps of volunteers) did for the WNBA did this:
                      assign credit for turnovers to one or more
                      defenders. Even steals, which under standard
                      statistics get credited to only one player, might
                      get credited to two if, e.g. in the opinion of the
                      stats-keeper, one player stood up the dribbler with
                      a double-team, enabling the other to grab the ball.

                      If it was something like a 5-second violation or
                      shot clock violation, that credit went to the whole
                      team ... or did it go to the 5 people on the floor?
                      I forget, but the latter would make sense.

                      However, those are special statistics not normally
                      collected. For most situations, I think MikeG's
                      answer is correct; these unforced turnovers only
                      show up very indirectly in the defenders' stats.


                      --MKT

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Gabe Farkas [mailto:gabefark@...]
                      Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 7:55 AM


                      Mike,

                      I'm not sure that's exactly where I was going with
                      this.

                      Basically, there are two kinds of turnovers: forced
                      and unforced. Right?

                      So, how can a forced turnover occur? The other team
                      steals the ball.

                      And how can an unforced turnover occur? Throwing the
                      ball away, double-dribble, traveling, charging, etc.

                      My question is this: Other than steals, are there any
                      recorded and tabulated statistics that are the
                      flip-side of turnovers, or that lead to forced
                      turnovers?

                      Am I oversimplifying?

                      --Gabe


                      --- Mike G <msg_53@...> wrote:
                      > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, Gabe Farkas
                      > <gabefark@y...>
                      > wrote:
                      > > ... is there any positive value credited to the
                      > > Pacers in some way for the balance of Turnovers
                      > > committed by the Lakers that were not the result
                      > of
                      > > Steals?
                      >
                      > Good question, Gabe.
                      >
                      > The team gets indirect credit for "turnovers forced"
                      > in the final
                      > score. It amounts to an extra possession, and
                      > "points off
                      > turnovers" is a often-tracked quantity.
                      >
                      > Individual players don't get direct credit, as
                      > turnovers aren't
                      > credited to players on the defensive side. However,
                      > a number of
                      > accounting systems give indirect credit for team
                      > scoring
                      > differentials; as such, credit can be apportioned
                      > for a player's
                      > minutes on the floor.
                      >
                      > DanR's "corrections" of Roland's in/out figures
                      > would seem to
                      > incorporate this "uncounted" stat, within the team
                      > +/- .
                      >
                      >


                      __________________________________
                      Do you Yahoo!?
                      Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                      http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/



                      Yahoo! Groups Links
                    • Gabe Farkas
                      No, I haven t gotten a chance to read the book yet, but I ve been craving it for a few months now. Just haven t gotten around to picking it up. Can you
                      Message 10 of 11 , Apr 5, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        No, I haven't gotten a chance to read the book yet,
                        but I've been craving it for a few months now. Just
                        haven't gotten around to picking it up. Can you
                        summarize the book in 25 words or less? Kidding, of
                        course.

                        what about taking Charges? are those tracked?

                        --- Kevin Pelton <kpelton08@...> wrote:
                        > > My question is this: Other than steals, are there
                        > any
                        > > recorded and tabulated statistics that are the
                        > > flip-side of turnovers, or that lead to forced
                        > > turnovers?
                        >
                        > On an individual level? Not yet. Have you seen
                        > DeanO's system?
                        >
                        > some explanation:
                        >
                        http://f2.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/kJBxQCBiN7JnB9ZlKgeKp7wq-
                        > 7TntGsnvp2l3c49Cz03ntrXD0lEWDOD9UVsUoRMb4FPY-1Zb-
                        > PwL31OG7yaucWm7L7I6WyNqF0YkQ/defstophandchart.xls
                        >
                        > of course, it's all explained in more detail in
                        > Chapter 17 of The
                        > Book:
                        > http://www.basketballonpaper.com/book.html
                        >
                        > One of the interesting things about DeanO's system
                        > is that while the
                        > stats are primarily defensive, they can be used to
                        > evaluate offenses
                        > as well. When you break out "unforced" turnovers
                        > that are really
                        > charges and deflections off a player and out of
                        > bounds, etc., you get
                        > really unforced turnovers -- throwing the ball out
                        > of bounds, for
                        > example. It's a useful thing to know about an
                        > offense.
                        >
                        >


                        __________________________________
                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                        http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                      • Kevin Pelton
                        ... I m not sure whether you mean in DeanO s system or in general, so I ll answer both questions. In DeanO s system, they re counted as any other forced
                        Message 11 of 11 , Apr 5, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > No, I haven't gotten a chance to read the book yet,
                          > but I've been craving it for a few months now. Just
                          > haven't gotten around to picking it up. Can you
                          > summarize the book in 25 words or less? Kidding, of
                          > course.
                          >
                          > what about taking Charges? are those tracked?

                          I'm not sure whether you mean in DeanO's system or in general, so
                          I'll answer both questions.

                          In DeanO's system, they're counted as any other forced turnover, not
                          broken out (though certainly one *could* do that).

                          In real life, I think some teams track this (Denver?
                          http://www.nba.com/nuggets/news/notes.pdf ) but it's not official.
                          I'll take a look and see if they're in Harvey Pollack's book.

                          (As an aside, one of the neat things about being part of The Media is
                          the chance to see what things teams track in their game notes, like
                          the Wolves with what we now know as "Roland Ratio" last year -- when
                          there was a lot of general scoffing at the notion that a team could
                          be 25 points better with its star player on the court.)
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.