APBR_analysis is a Restricted Group with 455 members.
 APBR_analysis

 Restricted Group,
 455 members
Primary Navigation
Major Update of WINVAL Ratings Through 200304
 0 Attachment
I have completed a major update of my WINVAL ratings (using data from
Roland at 82games.com) for both 200203 and 200304. I have come up
with a way to combine my adjusted plus/minus ratings with more
traditional game statisticsbased 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. 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 cutoff 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. 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 statsbased 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 cutoff 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 cutoff 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. 0 Attachment
> It is really only his pure adjusted plus/minus that is
If you were going to take out anything, I don't think it would be the
> extraordinarily high; his statsbased 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.
12/20 game. I don't recall his plusminus 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 plusminus playing regularly against Milwaukee. This
article, which cites DeanO, discusses Frahm's plusminus 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 cutoff is 250 minutes total in the two seasons, and I like
Yeah, I agree with this. Even if I'm not sure it means very much,
> keeping these outlier players in there. First of all, people are
> interested in seeing some of these players, even if their ratings
> are noisy.
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!) 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,(clock36)/12);
marg10=10ptime*7;
wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1(margin/marg101))));
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
the
> > extraordinarily high; his statsbased 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
> 12/20 game. I don't recall his plusminus being anything
exceptional
> for that game.
best
>
> 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 plusminus playing regularly against Milwaukee. This
> article, which cites DeanO, discusses Frahm's plusminus rating:
>
> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/basketball/152685_sonx16.html
>
> I think the Sonics' loss at Boston on 12/10 was probably Frahm's
> 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.
>
are
> (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 cutoff is 250 minutes total in the two seasons, and I like
> > keeping these outlier players in there. First of all, people
> > 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!) 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 cutoff 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 0 Attachment
> didn't Trajan Langdon have something similar two years
Quoting from his NBA.com playerfile:
> ago where he just exploded one game?
"on Nov. 21 vs. Detroit, scored a careerhigh 31 points on 1113 FG
(careerhigh 11 FGM), including 66 on threepointers (both Cavs
seasonhighs) and 33 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
doublefigures 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. 0 Attachment
>From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@...>
So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less" value than a
>ReplyTo: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
>To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings Through 200304
>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,(clock36)/12);
>marg10=10ptime*7;
>wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1(margin/marg101))));
>
>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.
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/ 0 Attachment
> Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes
Most people have made the opposite argument  that Frahm's good
> 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?
unadjusted plusminus (+10.0 Roland Rating, almost twice that of any
other Sonics player save the fourminute 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. 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:>
Through 200304
>
>
> >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@u...>
> >ReplyTo: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings
> >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:02:03 0000
phased
>
> >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,(clock36)/12);
> >marg10=10ptime*7;
> >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1(margin/marg101))));
> >
> >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
> >from full to zero.
except
> >
> >This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well,
> >that I decrease the margin from 10 (20) to 3 (6) from the beginning
the
> >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
> >first three quarters.
than a
>
> So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less" value
> 11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course  I very
well
> could be reading this wrong.
bit  EVEN
>
> I also tend to think that EVERY minute should count just a little
> 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?
and
>
> Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes 
> 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?
today 
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download
> it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
 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"
> >ReplyTo: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings
Through 200304
> >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,(clock36)/12);
> >marg10=10ptime*7;
> >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1(margin/marg101))));
> >
> >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_analysisunsubscribe@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 manhours 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 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 nowin
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
0.00.1 0.3 9.5
0.10.2 0.9 10.4
0.20.3 1.2 11.6
0.30.4 1.2 12.8
0.40.5 1.5 14.3
0.50.6 1.7 16.1
0.60.7 1.8 17.9
0.70.8 2.2 20.1
0.80.9 2.6 22.7
0.91.0 0.5 23.2
1.01.1 3.0 26.2
1.11.2 62.5 88.8
1.21.3 0.8 89.5
1.31.4 1.4 91.0
1.41.5 1.3 92.3
1.51.6 1.4 93.7
1.61.7 1.3 95.0
1.71.8 1.2 96.2
1.81.9 1.3 97.5
1.92.0 0.9 98.4
2.02.1 0.6 98.9
2.12.2 0.4 99.3
2.22.3 0.2 99.5
2.32.4 0.5 100.0
Best wishes,
Dan
 In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Dickey"
<danthestatman@h...> wrote:>
Through 200304
>
>
> >From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@u...>
> >ReplyTo: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings
> >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:02:03 0000
the
>
> >Here is my exact code. Clock measures the minutes elapsed in the
> >game at the beginning of the observation. Three minutes left in
> >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
any
> >observation.
> >
> >ptime=max(0,(clock36)/12);
> >marg10=10ptime*7;
> >wgt=10*(1+ptime)*max(0,min(1,(1(margin/marg101))));
> >
> >Basically, in the first three quarters, full weight is given to
> >part of a game where the margin is less than 10 and no weight is
phased
> >given if it is more than 20. Between 10 and 20, the weight is
> >from full to zero.
except
> >
> >This is basically what happens in the fourth quarter as well,
> >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.
the
> >
> >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
> >first three quarters.
value than a
>
> So a 4 point lead with 11 minutes left in the game has "less"
> 11 point lead with 13 minutes left in the game? Of course  I
very well
> could be reading this wrong.
bit  EVEN
>
> I also tend to think that EVERY minute should count just a little
> 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?
and
>
> Maybe this is part of the Frahm situation? He has so few minutes 
> 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?
today 
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself with the new version of MSN Messenger! Download
> it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
 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
any
> > 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 plusminus (+10.0 Roland Rating, almost twice that of
> other Sonics player save the fourminute effort of Leon Smith) is
on
> largely due to him playing in garbage time and leading the Sonics
> runs along the lines of the 12/10 Boston game I mentioned
previously
> and the New Jersey game the night before.
I am not sure that true . .I think the cause and effect is when Frahm
>
> 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.
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). 0 Attachment
> Dan 
Well, obviously that message was supposed to only go to DanR, but I
>
> The article is now live at Hoopsworld.
>
> Kevin
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 linearweights 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 0 Attachment
>From: "dan_t_rosenbaum" <rosenbaum@...>
OK cool  that makes sense.
>ReplyTo: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
>To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [APBR_analysis] Re: Major Update of WINVAL Ratings Through 200304
>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
>After I normalize the weights so that the average weight in the
Count me as one that WOULD NOT complain about measuring garbage time. You
>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 nowin
>situation.
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/ 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 nongarbage
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 doubleteam 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 tossup 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).