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

Re: New file uploaded to APBR_analysis

Expand Messages
  • mikel_ind
    Well, Dr. Oliver, I tried my best to make sense of this article; but, having failed miserably, I am somewhat consoled by my underappreciation of the conclusion
    Message 1 of 77 , Dec 24, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Well, Dr. Oliver, I tried my best to make sense of this article; but,
      having failed miserably, I am somewhat consoled by my
      underappreciation of the conclusion you mention.

      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "HoopStudies" <deano@r...> wrote:
      > ..... the results, which showed that, uh, Dennis
      > Rodman produced the most individual wins in 1998.
      >

      It is my dream that basketball statistics can become 'good' enough
      that 'playing for statistics' is good enough. (Playing more like
      Rodman would not improve most players' games, so I am not pursuing an
      understanding of that method.)

      At one time, per-game averages were the standard, and about the only
      statistics considered important. Thus, some guys were always trying
      to 'get theirs', and felt good about scoring 20 or whatever.

      Now the sophisticated fan (and the coach, and the teammates) knows
      the difference between playing for individual stats, and playing to
      win. Stats may have hurt team play in some cases, and stats may be
      improving somewhat, to where players are thinking about shooting pct
      and reduced turnovers, for example.

      It would be nice to believe that coaches are not puppets manipulated
      by the front office and the players, and that bad 'team' players do
      not get more minutes just because of their big salaries or their
      gaudy numbers. Exceptions aside, one can assume that playing time =
      value to team.

      So under ideal coaching circumstances, it just might be possible that
      a number could be derived from each players production/productivity;
      and combined with a similar team number, they could actually be
      assigned ratings of their actual value in the league.

      Such a number could determine salary, trade value, all-star status,
      MVP, hall-of-fame status, all-time ranking, or anything else.

      The important thing is, the Number has to be a measure of excellence,
      not selfishness.

      Now to specifics: Bo Outlaw is unselfish, but he is not one of the
      league's greatest players (nor was he in 1998). For that matter, in
      1998, Dennis Rodman was on the brink of unemployability. Both of
      these guys missed very few shots (because they attempted very few),
      and rebounded well. Good players, but no big deal.

      Missing a lot of shots does not make Allen Iverson (or Jerry
      Stackhouse) worse than they would be if they shot very rarely. Such
      assertions (and the blinding Greek-infested equations) can hardly
      attract a casual fan, or a general manager, to the method employed.

      Well, I've rambled long enough,

      Mike Goodman, PHD



      (that's Post Hole Digger)
    • APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
      Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the APBR_analysis group. File : /Warriors
      Message 77 of 77 , May 5, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello,

        This email message is a notification to let you know that
        a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the APBR_analysis
        group.

        File : /Warriors Stats.pdf
        Uploaded by : skauffman <skauffman@...>
        Description : Analysis of the Golden State Warriors 2004-05 Season

        You can access this file at the URL:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/APBR_analysis/files/Warriors%20Stats.pdf

        To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
        http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

        Regards,

        skauffman <skauffman@...>
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.