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

Major Update of WINVAL Ratings Through 2003-04

Expand Messages
  • dan_t_rosenbaum
    I have completed a major update of my WINVAL ratings (using data from Roland at 82games.com) for both 2002-03 and 2003-04. I have come up with a way to
    Message 1 of 17 , Apr 28, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I have completed a major update of my WINVAL ratings (using data from
      Roland at 82games.com) for both 2002-03 and 2003-04. I have come up
      with a way to combine my adjusted plus/minus ratings with more
      traditional game statistics-based rating, and the end results are
      player ratings that are fairly precisely estimated.

      This is a very long document, so I apologize for that. But I think
      there is a few things there that folks will be interested in.

      http://www.uncg.edu/eco/rosenbaum/NBA/winval2.htm

      I still really need a piece to introduce what I am doing to a more
      general audience. I had something like that that ESPN.com considered
      running, but that didn't work out. Let me play around a bit more
      with that, and I will post that shortly.
    • tajallie@hotmail.com
      Dan, I like the ratings and am still digesting all the adjsutments. Just curious, how much difference would it make to Frahm s rating to remove the Dec 20 game
      Message 2 of 17 , Apr 29, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dan,

        I like the ratings and am still digesting all the adjsutments. Just
        curious, how much difference would it make to Frahm's rating to
        remove the Dec 20 game from his stats (32pts on 11 shots, 5 rebs, 3
        ass in 32 min ~ 7% of total minutes)?

        Frahm only played 10 games with 12 minutes or more. I wonder if a
        better cut-off for statistical significance might be something like
        40+ games of greater than 12 minutes rather than 500 minimum
        minutes . .that way you clear out the players who only play garbage
        minutes 'cept for the 1 out of ten games they are shooting lights out
        (all of Richie's bad games are limited in minutes). Clearly it's not
        a big factor in the rating just looking for ways to clear out a
        little more noise.
      • dan_t_rosenbaum
        It is a little tricky taking that one game of Frahm s out. It could be done, but it would probably take a few hours to make all of the necessary changes in
        Message 3 of 17 , Apr 29, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          It is a little tricky taking that one game of Frahm's out. It could
          be done, but it would probably take a few hours to make all of the
          necessary changes in the code (and make sure it was right).

          It is really only his pure adjusted plus/minus that is
          extraordinarily high; his stats-based rating is good but not great.
          If we knew what his plus/minus was for that game, we could get a back
          of the envelope guess about how much that one game had on his pure
          adjusted plus/minus rating.

          My cut-off is 250 minutes total in the two seasons, and I like
          keeping these outlier players in there. First of all, people are
          interested in seeing some of these players, even if their ratings are
          noisy. Second, it might be a good lesson about how little we can
          learn from a handful of games - a lesson that might be particularly
          valuable during the playoffs when a single performance can make or
          break a player.

          Best wishes,
          Dan

          --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, tajallie@h... wrote:
          > Dan,
          >
          > I like the ratings and am still digesting all the adjsutments. Just
          > curious, how much difference would it make to Frahm's rating to
          > remove the Dec 20 game from his stats (32pts on 11 shots, 5 rebs, 3
          > ass in 32 min ~ 7% of total minutes)?
          >
          > Frahm only played 10 games with 12 minutes or more. I wonder if a
          > better cut-off for statistical significance might be something like
          > 40+ games of greater than 12 minutes rather than 500 minimum
          > minutes . .that way you clear out the players who only play garbage
          > minutes 'cept for the 1 out of ten games they are shooting lights
          out
          > (all of Richie's bad games are limited in minutes). Clearly it's
          not
          > a big factor in the rating just looking for ways to clear out a
          > little more noise.
        • Kevin Pelton
          ... If you were going to take out anything, I don t think it would be the 12/20 game. I don t recall his plus-minus being anything exceptional for that game.
          Message 4 of 17 , Apr 29, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            > It is really only his pure adjusted plus/minus that is
            > extraordinarily high; his stats-based rating is good but not
            > great. If we knew what his plus/minus was for that game, we could
            > get a back of the envelope guess about how much that one game had
            > on his pure adjusted plus/minus rating.

            If you were going to take out anything, I don't think it would be the
            12/20 game. I don't recall his plus-minus being anything exceptional
            for that game.

            When he really built it up was the week before that. A couple of
            times he came in during the fourth quarter of blowouts and helped
            lead the Sonics back to respectability, and then he had an
            outstanding plus-minus playing regularly against Milwaukee. This
            article, which cites DeanO, discusses Frahm's plus-minus rating:

            http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/basketball/152685_sonx16.html

            I think the Sonics' loss at Boston on 12/10 was probably Frahm's best
            invidual game at +15 in 17 minutes (meaning they cut the lead from 29
            to 14). DanR's "garbage time" adjustments should reduce the impact of
            such games - though if you've posted how you do that, I've forgotten.

            (Looking now at Frahm's 12/20 performance, he was a +11 in 32
            minutes -- good, but not quite as good as his 12/10 effort.)

            > My cut-off is 250 minutes total in the two seasons, and I like
            > keeping these outlier players in there. First of all, people are
            > interested in seeing some of these players, even if their ratings
            > are noisy.

            Yeah, I agree with this. Even if I'm not sure it means very much,
            it's nice to know that guys like Frahm and Michael Sweetney have
            outstanding ratings.

            (Then again, I happen to like both guys, so OF COURSE it's
            meaningful!)
          • dan_t_rosenbaum
            Below are the details of clutch time/garbage time adjustments. Depending on exactly when Frahm played in that 12/10 game and the margin at the time, it is
            Message 5 of 17 , Apr 29, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Below are the details of clutch time/garbage time adjustments.

              Depending on exactly when Frahm played in that 12/10 game and the
              margin at the time, it is possible that almost none of that game
              counted in the pure adjusted plus/minus ratings.

              http://www.uncg.edu/bae/people/rosenbaum/NBA/winval2.htm#_ftn3

              Here is my exact code. Clock measures the minutes elapsed in the
              game at the beginning of the observation. Three minutes left in the
              game (in regulation or in overtime) is counted as 45. Margin is the
              absolute value of the difference in scores at the beginning of the
              observation.

              ptime=max(0,(clock-36)/12);
              marg10=10-ptime*7;
              wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1-(margin/marg10-1))));

              Basically, in the first three quarters, full weight is given to any
              part of a game where the margin is less than 10 and no weight is
              given if it is more than 20. Between 10 and 20, the weight is phased
              from full to zero.

              This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well, except
              that I decrease the margin from 10 (20) to 3 (6) from the beginning
              to the end of the fourth quarter. Also, ceteris paribus, the end of
              the quarter counts more than the beginning of the quarter.

              At the end of all of this, I renormalize the weights so that on
              average minutes in the fourth quarter count the same as those in the
              first three quarters.





              --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Pelton"
              <kpelton08@h...> wrote:
              > > It is really only his pure adjusted plus/minus that is
              > > extraordinarily high; his stats-based rating is good but not
              > > great. If we knew what his plus/minus was for that game, we could
              > > get a back of the envelope guess about how much that one game had
              > > on his pure adjusted plus/minus rating.
              >
              > If you were going to take out anything, I don't think it would be
              the
              > 12/20 game. I don't recall his plus-minus being anything
              exceptional
              > for that game.
              >
              > When he really built it up was the week before that. A couple of
              > times he came in during the fourth quarter of blowouts and helped
              > lead the Sonics back to respectability, and then he had an
              > outstanding plus-minus playing regularly against Milwaukee. This
              > article, which cites DeanO, discusses Frahm's plus-minus rating:
              >
              > http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/basketball/152685_sonx16.html
              >
              > I think the Sonics' loss at Boston on 12/10 was probably Frahm's
              best
              > invidual game at +15 in 17 minutes (meaning they cut the lead from
              29
              > to 14). DanR's "garbage time" adjustments should reduce the impact
              of
              > such games - though if you've posted how you do that, I've
              forgotten.
              >
              > (Looking now at Frahm's 12/20 performance, he was a +11 in 32
              > minutes -- good, but not quite as good as his 12/10 effort.)
              >
              > > My cut-off is 250 minutes total in the two seasons, and I like
              > > keeping these outlier players in there. First of all, people
              are
              > > interested in seeing some of these players, even if their ratings
              > > are noisy.
              >
              > Yeah, I agree with this. Even if I'm not sure it means very much,
              > it's nice to know that guys like Frahm and Michael Sweetney have
              > outstanding ratings.
              >
              > (Then again, I happen to like both guys, so OF COURSE it's
              > meaningful!)
            • Gabe Farkas
              didn t Trajan Langdon have something similar two years ago where he just exploded one game? ... __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000
              Message 6 of 17 , Apr 29, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                didn't Trajan Langdon have something similar two years
                ago where he just exploded one game?


                --- tajallie@... wrote:
                > Dan,
                >
                > I like the ratings and am still digesting all the
                > adjsutments. Just
                > curious, how much difference would it make to
                > Frahm's rating to
                > remove the Dec 20 game from his stats (32pts on 11
                > shots, 5 rebs, 3
                > ass in 32 min ~ 7% of total minutes)?
                >
                > Frahm only played 10 games with 12 minutes or more.
                > I wonder if a
                > better cut-off for statistical significance might be
                > something like
                > 40+ games of greater than 12 minutes rather than 500
                > minimum
                > minutes . .that way you clear out the players who
                > only play garbage
                > minutes 'cept for the 1 out of ten games they are
                > shooting lights out
                > (all of Richie's bad games are limited in minutes).
                > Clearly it's not
                > a big factor in the rating just looking for ways to
                > clear out a
                > little more noise.
                >
                >





                __________________________________
                Do you Yahoo!?
                Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
                http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
              • Kevin Pelton
                ... Quoting from his NBA.com playerfile: on Nov. 21 vs. Detroit, scored a career-high 31 points on 11-13 FG (career-high 11 FGM), including 6-6 on
                Message 7 of 17 , Apr 29, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  > didn't Trajan Langdon have something similar two years
                  > ago where he just exploded one game?

                  Quoting from his NBA.com playerfile:
                  "on Nov. 21 vs. Detroit, scored a career-high 31 points on 11-13 FG
                  (career-high 11 FGM), including 6-6 on three-pointers (both Cavs
                  season-highs) and 3-3 FT with 4 rebounds, 4 assists and 2 steals in
                  35 minutes "

                  But I'd say that wasn't quite as odd. Langdon averaged 6.0 ppg that
                  year, so it was only five times his average. He also had double-
                  figures 18 times.

                  Frahm, by contrast, averaged 3.4 ppg (183 total points) and was in
                  double-figures six times. To back up the point about his good games
                  being overweighted, he scored 86 points in those six games and only
                  97 in the other 48. Although, in his defense, those were some of the
                  only chances he got to play regularly, and it is tough to come in off
                  the bench cold and shoot. For example, he certainly would not have
                  had that Denver game had not Ray Allen, Brent Barry, and Antonio
                  Daniels all been out with various injuries.
                • Daniel Dickey
                  ... So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has less value than a 11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course - I very well could
                  Message 8 of 17 , May 2 1:30 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@...>
                    >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                    >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                    >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings Through 2003-04
                    >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:02:03 -0000

                    >Here is my exact code. Clock measures the minutes elapsed in the
                    >game at the beginning of the observation. Three minutes left in the
                    >game (in regulation or in overtime) is counted as 45. Margin is the
                    >absolute value of the difference in scores at the beginning of the
                    >observation.
                    >
                    >ptime=max(0,(clock-36)/12);
                    >marg10=10-ptime*7;
                    >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1-(margin/marg10-1))));
                    >
                    >Basically, in the first three quarters, full weight is given to any
                    >part of a game where the margin is less than 10 and no weight is
                    >given if it is more than 20. Between 10 and 20, the weight is phased
                    >from full to zero.
                    >
                    >This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well, except
                    >that I decrease the margin from 10 (20) to 3 (6) from the beginning
                    >to the end of the fourth quarter. Also, ceteris paribus, the end of
                    >the quarter counts more than the beginning of the quarter.
                    >
                    >At the end of all of this, I renormalize the weights so that on
                    >average minutes in the fourth quarter count the same as those in the
                    >first three quarters.

                    So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less" value than a
                    11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course - I very well
                    could be reading this wrong.

                    I also tend to think that EVERY minute should count just a little bit - EVEN
                    if it's in a blowout. These garbage players aren't going to not try (if
                    they wanna play in the future) - and it doesn't seem quite fair that a guy
                    could come in and play extremely well for 5 minutes and not have it count at
                    all. I mean - I know that garbage time had no true value to the team
                    win/loss wise - but doesn't it show a little bit the value of the player
                    still?

                    Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes - and
                    probably most of them are garbage time. Maybe his poorer play just happened
                    during this time - and his better play happened the few minutes (percentage
                    wise) that counted?

                    _________________________________________________________________
                    Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download today -
                    it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
                  • Kevin Pelton
                    ... Most people have made the opposite argument -- that Frahm s good unadjusted plus-minus (+10.0 Roland Rating, almost twice that of any other Sonics player
                    Message 9 of 17 , May 2 1:51 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes
                      > and probably most of them are garbage time. Maybe his poorer play
                      > just happened during this time - and his better play happened the
                      > few minutes (percentage wise) that counted?

                      Most people have made the opposite argument -- that Frahm's good
                      unadjusted plus-minus (+10.0 Roland Rating, almost twice that of any
                      other Sonics player save the four-minute effort of Leon Smith) is
                      largely due to him playing in garbage time and leading the Sonics on
                      runs along the lines of the 12/10 Boston game I mentioned previously
                      and the New Jersey game the night before.

                      I was genuinely surprised to see Frahm rate so extraordinarily well
                      in DanVAL given the "clutch" adjustment.

                      The Sonics simply have played well with Frahm in the game,
                      regardless the circumstances.
                    • John Hollinger
                      I agree with Daniel. I think you have to make a prima facie case for not counting garbage time stats before making the decision to overweight clutch stats.
                      Message 10 of 17 , May 2 6:08 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I agree with Daniel. I think you have to make a prima facie case for
                        not counting garbage time stats before making the decision to
                        overweight "clutch" stats.



                        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Dickey"
                        <danthestatman@h...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@u...>
                        > >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                        > >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                        > >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings
                        Through 2003-04
                        > >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:02:03 -0000
                        >
                        > >Here is my exact code. Clock measures the minutes elapsed in the
                        > >game at the beginning of the observation. Three minutes left in the
                        > >game (in regulation or in overtime) is counted as 45. Margin is the
                        > >absolute value of the difference in scores at the beginning of the
                        > >observation.
                        > >
                        > >ptime=max(0,(clock-36)/12);
                        > >marg10=10-ptime*7;
                        > >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1-(margin/marg10-1))));
                        > >
                        > >Basically, in the first three quarters, full weight is given to any
                        > >part of a game where the margin is less than 10 and no weight is
                        > >given if it is more than 20. Between 10 and 20, the weight is
                        phased
                        > >from full to zero.
                        > >
                        > >This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well,
                        except
                        > >that I decrease the margin from 10 (20) to 3 (6) from the beginning
                        > >to the end of the fourth quarter. Also, ceteris paribus, the end of
                        > >the quarter counts more than the beginning of the quarter.
                        > >
                        > >At the end of all of this, I renormalize the weights so that on
                        > >average minutes in the fourth quarter count the same as those in
                        the
                        > >first three quarters.
                        >
                        > So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less" value
                        than a
                        > 11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course - I very
                        well
                        > could be reading this wrong.
                        >
                        > I also tend to think that EVERY minute should count just a little
                        bit - EVEN
                        > if it's in a blowout. These garbage players aren't going to not
                        try (if
                        > they wanna play in the future) - and it doesn't seem quite fair
                        that a guy
                        > could come in and play extremely well for 5 minutes and not have it
                        count at
                        > all. I mean - I know that garbage time had no true value to the
                        team
                        > win/loss wise - but doesn't it show a little bit the value of the
                        player
                        > still?
                        >
                        > Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes -
                        and
                        > probably most of them are garbage time. Maybe his poorer play just
                        happened
                        > during this time - and his better play happened the few minutes
                        (percentage
                        > wise) that counted?
                        >
                        > _________________________________________________________________
                        > Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download
                        today -
                        > it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
                      • Craig Biddle
                        John Hollinger wrote:I agree with Daniel. I think you have to make a prima facie case for not counting garbage time stats before making
                        Message 11 of 17 , May 2 6:38 PM
                        • 0 Attachment


                          John Hollinger <alleyoop2@...> wrote:
                          I agree with Daniel. I think you have to make a prima facie case for
                          not counting garbage time stats before making the decision to
                          overweight "clutch" stats.



                          --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Dickey"
                          wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum"
                          > >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                          > >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                          > >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings
                          Through 2003-04
                          > >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:02:03 -0000
                          >
                          > >Here is my exact code. Clock measures the minutes elapsed in the
                          > >game at the beginning of the observation. Three minutes left in the
                          > >game (in regulation or in overtime) is counted as 45. Margin is the
                          > >absolute value of the difference in scores at the beginning of the
                          > >observation.
                          > >
                          > >ptime=max(0,(clock-36)/12);
                          > >marg10=10-ptime*7;
                          > >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1-(margin/marg10-1))));
                          > >
                          > >Basically, in the first three quarters, full weight is given to any
                          > >part of a game where the margin is less than 10 and no weight is
                          > >given if it is more than 20. Between 10 and 20, the weight is
                          phased
                          > >from full to zero.
                          > >
                          > >This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well,
                          except
                          > >that I decrease the margin from 10 (20) to 3 (6) from the beginning
                          > >to the end of the fourth quarter. Also, ceteris paribus, the end of
                          > >the quarter counts more than the beginning of the quarter.
                          > >
                          > >At the end of all of this, I renormalize the weights so that on
                          > >average minutes in the fourth quarter count the same as those in
                          the
                          > >first three quarters.
                          >
                          > So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less" value
                          than a
                          > 11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course - I very
                          well
                          > could be reading this wrong.
                          >
                          > I also tend to think that EVERY minute should count just a little
                          bit - EVEN
                          > if it's in a blowout. These garbage players aren't going to not
                          try (if
                          > they wanna play in the future) - and it doesn't seem quite fair
                          that a guy
                          > could come in and play extremely well for 5 minutes and not have it
                          count at
                          > all. I mean - I know that garbage time had no true value to the
                          team
                          > win/loss wise - but doesn't it show a little bit the value of the
                          player
                          > still?
                          >
                          > Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes -
                          and
                          > probably most of them are garbage time. Maybe his poorer play just
                          happened
                          > during this time - and his better play happened the few minutes
                          (percentage
                          > wise) that counted?
                          >
                          > _________________________________________________________________
                          > Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download
                          today -
                          > it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/



                          ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                          Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
                          Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
                          http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
                          http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/wHUolB/TM
                          ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->


                          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/

                           

                          A much simpler approach appears to me to be - what percentage of his team's minutes in the 4th quarter of "close" games did the guy play, and what percentage of "garbage" minutes.  His coach has a vested interest in getting him onto the floor in close games if he's one of his team's 5 best players, and also a vested interest in resting his 5 best players in garbage time.

                          I suggest defining "garbage time" as when one team has a lead sufficient to give it a 95% chance to win given the currrent score differential.  Young guys are going to start out the season getting garbage minutes, but if they are truly playing well, that ratio is going to change, since the coach gets paid big $$ to know who is doing the job and would like to continue doing so.

                          This stat should be reasonably calculable.  I think measurable production in the late stages of close games is somewhat less important than mere presence, given our current ability to measure production.  Maybe some day that will change, but I, for one, am not really excited about the likelihood of finding 14,500 man-hours to break down game tapes to generate the Artest stats for every player in the league.  But the league coaching staffs have done that for us, if we can only find a way to pick their brains on the cheap.


                          Do you Yahoo!?
                          Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
                        • dan_t_rosenbaum
                          Dear DanD and JohnH: First of all, in comparing the game with an 11 point margin with 1 minute left in the third versus a game with a 4 point margin with 11
                          Message 12 of 17 , May 2 7:42 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Dear DanD and JohnH:

                            First of all, in comparing the game with an 11 point margin with 1
                            minute left in the third versus a game with a 4 point margin with 11
                            minutes left in the fourth, here is what my formula comes up with.

                            11 point margin, 1 minute left in third: 9.0
                            4 point margin, 11 minutes left in fourth: 10.8

                            After I normalize the weights so that the average weight in the
                            fourth quarter is the same as the rest of the game, here is what I
                            end up with (with the average weight being 1).

                            11 point margin, 1 minute left in third: 1.00
                            4 point margin, 11 minutes left in fourth: 1.29

                            So I am counting latter situation much heavier.

                            And on the matter of not counting garbage time at all. I could set
                            a minimum weight so that every observation is counted, but then I
                            suspect there are going to be a lot of people complain about me
                            measuring a bunch of garbage time phenoms. It is a bit of a no-win
                            situation.

                            But this is not a trivial issue. Here is the distribution of the
                            weights. So 9.2 percent of the minutes played (4.5 minutes per
                            game) are garbage minutes that according to my weighting system get
                            zero weight. Seventy percent of the zero weight minutes take place
                            in the fourth quarter, where they make up 28.3 percent of minutes
                            played.

                            Range Percent Cumulative Percent
                            ----------------------------------------------------
                            0 9.2 9.2
                            0.0-0.1 0.3 9.5
                            0.1-0.2 0.9 10.4
                            0.2-0.3 1.2 11.6
                            0.3-0.4 1.2 12.8
                            0.4-0.5 1.5 14.3
                            0.5-0.6 1.7 16.1
                            0.6-0.7 1.8 17.9
                            0.7-0.8 2.2 20.1
                            0.8-0.9 2.6 22.7
                            0.9-1.0 0.5 23.2
                            1.0-1.1 3.0 26.2
                            1.1-1.2 62.5 88.8
                            1.2-1.3 0.8 89.5
                            1.3-1.4 1.4 91.0
                            1.4-1.5 1.3 92.3
                            1.5-1.6 1.4 93.7
                            1.6-1.7 1.3 95.0
                            1.7-1.8 1.2 96.2
                            1.8-1.9 1.3 97.5
                            1.9-2.0 0.9 98.4
                            2.0-2.1 0.6 98.9
                            2.1-2.2 0.4 99.3
                            2.2-2.3 0.2 99.5
                            2.3-2.4 0.5 100.0

                            Best wishes,
                            Dan

                            --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Dickey"
                            <danthestatman@h...> wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@u...>
                            > >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                            > >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                            > >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings
                            Through 2003-04
                            > >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:02:03 -0000
                            >
                            > >Here is my exact code. Clock measures the minutes elapsed in the
                            > >game at the beginning of the observation. Three minutes left in
                            the
                            > >game (in regulation or in overtime) is counted as 45. Margin is
                            the
                            > >absolute value of the difference in scores at the beginning of the
                            > >observation.
                            > >
                            > >ptime=max(0,(clock-36)/12);
                            > >marg10=10-ptime*7;
                            > >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1-(margin/marg10-1))));
                            > >
                            > >Basically, in the first three quarters, full weight is given to
                            any
                            > >part of a game where the margin is less than 10 and no weight is
                            > >given if it is more than 20. Between 10 and 20, the weight is
                            phased
                            > >from full to zero.
                            > >
                            > >This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well,
                            except
                            > >that I decrease the margin from 10 (20) to 3 (6) from the
                            beginning
                            > >to the end of the fourth quarter. Also, ceteris paribus, the end
                            of
                            > >the quarter counts more than the beginning of the quarter.
                            > >
                            > >At the end of all of this, I renormalize the weights so that on
                            > >average minutes in the fourth quarter count the same as those in
                            the
                            > >first three quarters.
                            >
                            > So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less"
                            value than a
                            > 11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course - I
                            very well
                            > could be reading this wrong.
                            >
                            > I also tend to think that EVERY minute should count just a little
                            bit - EVEN
                            > if it's in a blowout. These garbage players aren't going to not
                            try (if
                            > they wanna play in the future) - and it doesn't seem quite fair
                            that a guy
                            > could come in and play extremely well for 5 minutes and not have
                            it count at
                            > all. I mean - I know that garbage time had no true value to the
                            team
                            > win/loss wise - but doesn't it show a little bit the value of the
                            player
                            > still?
                            >
                            > Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes -
                            and
                            > probably most of them are garbage time. Maybe his poorer play
                            just happened
                            > during this time - and his better play happened the few minutes
                            (percentage
                            > wise) that counted?
                            >
                            > _________________________________________________________________
                            > Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download
                            today -
                            > it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
                          • tajallie@hotmail.com
                            ... any ... on ... previously ... I am not sure that true . .I think the cause and effect is when Frahm plays well (read shoots well) he get to stay in the
                            Message 13 of 17 , May 3 7:44 AM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Pelton" <kpelton08@h...>
                              wrote:
                              > > Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes
                              > > and probably most of them are garbage time. Maybe his poorer play
                              > > just happened during this time - and his better play happened the
                              > > few minutes (percentage wise) that counted?
                              >
                              > Most people have made the opposite argument -- that Frahm's good
                              > unadjusted plus-minus (+10.0 Roland Rating, almost twice that of
                              any
                              > other Sonics player save the four-minute effort of Leon Smith) is
                              > largely due to him playing in garbage time and leading the Sonics
                              on
                              > runs along the lines of the 12/10 Boston game I mentioned
                              previously
                              > and the New Jersey game the night before.
                              >
                              > I was genuinely surprised to see Frahm rate so extraordinarily well
                              > in DanVAL given the "clutch" adjustment.
                              >
                              > The Sonics simply have played well with Frahm in the game,
                              > regardless the circumstances.

                              I am not sure that true . .I think the cause and effect is when Frahm
                              plays well (read shoots well) he get to stay in the game. When he
                              doesn't shoot well . .the plays only a couple of minutes and sits. I
                              think he probably has 8 or so good games that skew his results (not
                              sure if skew is the right word, but indicate a greater value of his
                              play than otherwise would be true).
                            • Kevin Pelton
                              Dan - The article is now live at Hoopsworld. Kevin
                              Message 14 of 17 , May 3 10:38 AM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Dan -

                                The article is now live at Hoopsworld.

                                Kevin
                              • Kevin Pelton
                                ... Well, obviously that message was supposed to only go to DanR, but I humbly think the column is worth pimping here anyway, especially since Stuart already
                                Message 15 of 17 , May 3 7:10 PM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > Dan -
                                  >
                                  > The article is now live at Hoopsworld.
                                  >
                                  > Kevin

                                  Well, obviously that message was supposed to only go to DanR, but I
                                  humbly think the column is worth pimping here anyway, especially
                                  since Stuart already hit on the Holy Grail metaphor:

                                  The latest from "Page 23" at Hoopsworld.com by Kevin Pelton:

                                  The Last NBA Crusade

                                  If you've seen the third and final Indiana Jones movie, "Indiana
                                  Jones and the Last Crusade", you probably recall what the hero
                                  encounters on his way to find the Holy Grail -- skulls and skeletons
                                  of those who have gone before him, also searching for the Holy Grail
                                  only to give their lives in the chase.

                                  Things aren't quite as dire when it comes to the search for the Holy
                                  Grail of rating systems by basketball's statistical analysts, but
                                  there are plenty of skeletons drying in the sun if you look through
                                  the history of such efforts.

                                  Over there is TENDEX, Doug Heeren's revolutionary first strike for
                                  using player statistics in a comprehensive rating form. Beside it
                                  lies Manley Credits, the simplification of TENDEX with no
                                  complicated pace factor to complicate, now resurrected as
                                  NBA.com's " Efficiency Rating System".

                                  Scattered throughout are other linear-weights formulas, with various
                                  values for blocks, steals, and whatever else. Squint hard enough and
                                  you might even find my own VORP system.

                                  None of these efforts, however, has succeeded in its quest to
                                  provide one rating system that's all we need to evaluate players.

                                  Dean Oliver, the author of Basketball on Paper, thinks there's a
                                  good reason for that -- the Holy Grail, at least the NBA version, is
                                  apocryphal, a myth blindly chased despite the fact that it does not
                                  exist.

                                  Oliver has won me over as a convert. No single rating system can
                                  ever provide enough subtlety, enough nuance, that it will be all we
                                  need. A balanced perspective, one that considers multiple rating
                                  systems as well as personal observation, is the only way to go.

                                  But that doesn't mean we can't make better rating systems. . . .

                                  Read the rest of the column:
                                  http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_8137.shtml
                                • Daniel Dickey
                                  ... OK- cool - that makes sense. ... Count me as one that WOULD NOT complain about measuring garbage time. You obviously would have it weighted quite a bit
                                  Message 16 of 17 , May 5 2:00 AM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@...>
                                    >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                                    >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
                                    >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings Through 2003-04
                                    >Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 02:42:40 -0000
                                    >
                                    >Dear DanD and JohnH:
                                    >
                                    >First of all, in comparing the game with an 11 point margin with 1
                                    >minute left in the third versus a game with a 4 point margin with 11
                                    >minutes left in the fourth, here is what my formula comes up with.
                                    >
                                    >11 point margin, 1 minute left in third: 9.0
                                    >4 point margin, 11 minutes left in fourth: 10.8

                                    OK- cool - that makes sense.

                                    >After I normalize the weights so that the average weight in the
                                    >fourth quarter is the same as the rest of the game, here is what I
                                    >end up with (with the average weight being 1).
                                    >
                                    >11 point margin, 1 minute left in third: 1.00
                                    >4 point margin, 11 minutes left in fourth: 1.29
                                    >
                                    >So I am counting latter situation much heavier.
                                    >
                                    >And on the matter of not counting garbage time at all. I could set
                                    >a minimum weight so that every observation is counted, but then I
                                    >suspect there are going to be a lot of people complain about me
                                    >measuring a bunch of garbage time phenoms. It is a bit of a no-win
                                    >situation.

                                    Count me as one that WOULD NOT complain about measuring garbage time. You
                                    obviously would have it weighted quite a bit less. PLUS you are already
                                    taking into account opposing lineups and other teamates on the court, etc.

                                    I do think we aren't getting a complete picture of a player that already has
                                    limited minutes to analyze when we ignore much of his performance (because
                                    he mainly is a "garbage time" player). So - I for one feel there should be
                                    a minimum small weight for garbage time.

                                    By the way - it looks like you might be weighting max clutch time at about
                                    twice the value of "normal" time- when it is all said and done - is this
                                    right? That kinda fits how I've envisioned looking at clutch performance -
                                    except I always thought the max having a weight of 2, normal 1, and
                                    "garbage" 0.5. Maybe 3, 1, and 0.33 would be even better. Who knows.

                                    Dan D

                                    _________________________________________________________________
                                    Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download today -
                                    it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
                                  • tajallie@hotmail.com
                                    Dan, Having been one of the defenders of limiting the value of garbage time credit, count me as one who really doesn t care rather you have a zero value for
                                    Message 17 of 17 , May 5 6:59 AM
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Dan,

                                      Having been one of the defenders of limiting the value of garbage
                                      time credit, count me as one who really doesn't care rather you have
                                      a zero value for garbage time or some minimum value (in other words
                                      you wouldn't hear me screaming if you added a minimum value). While I
                                      agree there should probably be some value for performing well when
                                      you team is down by 25 pts in the fourth, the truth is that if you
                                      are performing well enough to matter, you will play more non-garbage
                                      minutes. . .I think it would be fine to give some value but I don't
                                      think it hurts to give none.

                                      Mike/Bob:

                                      Andre Miller this season

                                      Jump
                                      62% .376
                                      Close
                                      36% .607
                                      Dunk
                                      1% .800
                                      Tips
                                      1% .714
                                      Inside
                                      38% .612

                                      Last season

                                      Jump
                                      74% .369
                                      Close
                                      26% .557
                                      Dunk
                                      0% .667
                                      Tips
                                      0% .667
                                      Inside
                                      26% .560

                                      To me, this would seem to bear out that Denver does have better
                                      spacing and that playing with a very active big man like Camby,
                                      instead of low post player like Brand, along with a wing that often
                                      demands a double-team like 'Melo could easily be the reason for
                                      Miller's improvement. I suspect if you charted where he got his
                                      points from, you would find offensive rebounding due to 'Melo double
                                      teams and more focus on Camby, Nene resulted in more flexibity for
                                      Andre to crash the boards (rather than actual drives, in which case
                                      we would expect the close shots to maintain a 56% instead of
                                      improving to 61% although it could just be deviation noise).

                                      BTW: Despite the stats, I think it was a toss-up between
                                      Miller, 'Melo, and Camby for Denver's MVP as all three were clearly
                                      more important than everyone else. Basically against any good team,
                                      Denver needed to have two of those three play well to win.
                                      Furthermore, Miller is probably the best position / technical
                                      rebounder on the team (i.e. he understands when and where to crash
                                      the boards and how to box out better than any other Nugget . .I
                                      beleive those benefits are underated by both the stats and perception
                                      of value).
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.