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

Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: Assigning Credit to Players

Expand Messages
  • Michael K. Tamada
    ... [...] ... [...] This is how my model of basketball works. It can be used to generate means and standard deviations, but can even more directly be used to
    Message 1 of 10 , Mar 29, 2002
      On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, HoopStudies wrote:

      > --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "dlirag" <dlirag@h...> wrote:

      [...]

      > > A shot can be seen as a pass that results in one of the following
      > > things happening: 2 or 3 points are immediately scored (45%
      > chance),
      > > the ball ends up in a teammate's hands (16% chance), or the ball
      > goes
      > > to the opposing team (39% chance).
      >
      > This gets at what Gary Skoog did in one of James' abstracts, where
      > they assessed the expected runs for every given state and assigned
      > credit/blame for transitions between those states.
      >
      > At the point before a shot, every possession is worth about 1 pt.
      > After the shot, it could go to 2 pts with a made shot and end of
      > possession, 3 pts with a made shot and end of possession, rare cases

      [...]

      This is how my model of basketball works. It can be used to generate
      means and standard deviations, but can even more directly be used to
      estimate win probabilities. The trouble is that the models make it easy
      and tempting to assign all the credit for an action to a player, e.g. the
      offensive rebounder gets the +2/3 that you describe, when some of the
      credit perhaps should go to teammates who blocked out (unlikely however in
      an offensive rebounding situation) and maybe some of the blame should go
      to the defensive rebounder who failed to block the guy out. So this model
      makes assignment of credit to players easy to do -- but not necessarily
      truly accurate.

      > Though in this case the rebounder and scorer are the same, note that
      > there is more relative credit to the scorer (+1) than to the
      > rebounder (+2/3). This may be in conflict with what the offensive
      > rebound studies we did earlier here said, but I'd need to check.

      No, scoring a field goal is clearly more valuable than grabbing an
      offensive rebound, even when the loss of possession is taken into account.
      Missing a field goal is the act that is approximately equal to an
      offensive rebound.


      --MKT
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.