Advanced Statistics vol. NBA

I'll paraphrase:

Offensive Rating = (Points Produced / Individual Possessions) x 100
Points can be produced through FGs, FTs, assists, and offensive rebounds. Individual possessions are the sum of a player's possessions (FGs, FTs, plus partial credit for assists), missed field goals and free throws that the defense rebounds, and TOs.

Defensive Rating = (Opponent's Points Allowed/ Opponent's Possessions) x 100. The result is the expected amount of points that an individual player will allow on defense over 100 possessions. This stat can be significantly influenced by the defense of a player's teammates.

Offensive Win Shares are credited using the following formula: (marginal offense) / (marginal points per win). Marginal offense is equal to (points produced) - 0.92 * (league points per possession) * (offensive possessions). Marginal points per win reduces to 0.32 * (league points per game) * ((team pace) / (league pace)).

Defensive Win Shares are credited using the following formula: (marginal defense) / (marginal points per win).
Marginal defense is equal to (player minutes played / team minutes played) * (team defensive possessions) * (1.08 * (league points per possession) - ((Defensive Rating) / 100)). Marginal points per win reduces to 0.32 * (league points per game) * ((team pace) / (league pace)).

Wins Shares as a whole is just a sum of offensive and defensive win shares.
 
Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
 
Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
 
Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion.

FYI, most advanced stats were created by statisticians hired by NBA teams and/or media outlets for the purposes of evaluating/analyzing player production and performance. Not so they could make their favorite players look good.
 
Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion.

FYI, most advanced stats were created by statisticians hired by NBA teams and/or media outlets for the purposes of evaluating/analyzing player production and performance. Not so they could make their favorite players look good.
 
Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion.

FYI, most advanced stats were created by statisticians hired by NBA teams and/or media outlets for the purposes of evaluating/analyzing player production and performance. Not so they could make their favorite players look good.
Click to expand...

So why do some stats use (for instance) divide by 30 for guards, by 40 for forwards, and by 50 for centers? 

I've seen stats like that where the number you divide by is based off a damn position you play. 
sick.gif
  (I forget which one, but I have seen it on ESPN site) 
  
 
Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion.

FYI, most advanced stats were created by statisticians hired by NBA teams and/or media outlets for the purposes of evaluating/analyzing player production and performance. Not so they could make their favorite players look good.
Click to expand...

So why do some stats use (for instance) divide by 30 for guards, by 40 for forwards, and by 50 for centers? 

I've seen stats like that where the number you divide by is based off a damn position you play. 
sick.gif
  (I forget which one, but I have seen it on ESPN site) 
  
 
you can have the PER and win shares crap.

anything beyond what kenpom has for statistics are meaningless to me in basketball. Maybe they shouldn't be, but I don't bother with them.
 
you can have the PER and win shares crap.

anything beyond what kenpom has for statistics are meaningless to me in basketball. Maybe they shouldn't be, but I don't bother with them.
 
Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion.

FYI, most advanced stats were created by statisticians hired by NBA teams and/or media outlets for the purposes of evaluating/analyzing player production and performance. Not so they could make their favorite players look good.
Click to expand...

So why do some stats use (for instance) divide by 30 for guards, by 40 for forwards, and by 50 for centers? 

I've seen stats like that where the number you divide by is based off a damn position you play. 
sick.gif
  (I forget which one, but I have seen it on ESPN site) 
  
Click to expand...
Not sure what you're referring to, but it was probably to account for the inherent difference in positional statistic accumulation. In other words, it is done so that a center/forward is not overvalued over a guard due to rebounds or something, just because that player plays in the front-court.

you can have the PER and win shares crap.

anything beyond what kenpom has for statistics are meaningless to me in basketball. Maybe they shouldn't be, but I don't bother with them.

Again, these stats are not the end-all of scouting. They are simply another tool used in evaluation, just like everything else. And you should be aware that kenpom uses very similar methodologies in his "player stats" section.
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Any of these stats that are based on a formula suck. You can make so many players that aren't good players look good if you develop a formula that suits their stats.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion.

FYI, most advanced stats were created by statisticians hired by NBA teams and/or media outlets for the purposes of evaluating/analyzing player production and performance. Not so they could make their favorite players look good.
Click to expand...

So why do some stats use (for instance) divide by 30 for guards, by 40 for forwards, and by 50 for centers? 

I've seen stats like that where the number you divide by is based off a damn position you play. 
sick.gif
  (I forget which one, but I have seen it on ESPN site) 
  
Click to expand...
Not sure what you're referring to, but it was probably to account for the inherent difference in positional statistic accumulation. In other words, it is done so that a center/forward is not overvalued over a guard due to rebounds or something, just because that player plays in the front-court.

you can have the PER and win shares crap.

anything beyond what kenpom has for statistics are meaningless to me in basketball. Maybe they shouldn't be, but I don't bother with them.

Again, these stats are not the end-all of scouting. They are simply another tool used in evaluation, just like everything else. And you should be aware that kenpom uses very similar methodologies in his "player stats" section.
Click to expand...
 
VA: Value Added - the estimated number of points a player adds to a team’s season total above what a 'replacement player' (for instance, the 12th man on the roster) would produce. Value Added = ([Minutes * (PER - PRL)] / 67). PRL (Position Replacement Level) = 11.5 for power forwards, 11.0 for point guards, 10.6 for centers, 10.5 for shooting guards and small forwards
The hell? 
laugh.gif
laugh.gif


Why 11.5?  Why not 7?  Why not 85?  Why 10.6 and 10.5?  Why not 42 and 43 respectively? 


This is the kind of stuff that is fishy to me.  Basic stuff that you want to divide by minutes, and add other totals, i get that, but when you pick numbers randomly from a hat, place a value on it by a position, and then say here's the number, that don't seem right.  What about when you play 2 spots, like Center/PF?  Or Small Forward/Power Forward?  Carve the numbers up more or go by only one position? 
Click to expand...
 
VA: Value Added - the estimated number of points a player adds to a team’s season total above what a 'replacement player' (for instance, the 12th man on the roster) would produce. Value Added = ([Minutes * (PER - PRL)] / 67). PRL (Position Replacement Level) = 11.5 for power forwards, 11.0 for point guards, 10.6 for centers, 10.5 for shooting guards and small forwards
The hell? 
laugh.gif
laugh.gif


Why 11.5?  Why not 7?  Why not 85?  Why 10.6 and 10.5?  Why not 42 and 43 respectively? 


This is the kind of stuff that is fishy to me.  Basic stuff that you want to divide by minutes, and add other totals, i get that, but when you pick numbers randomly from a hat, place a value on it by a position, and then say here's the number, that don't seem right.  What about when you play 2 spots, like Center/PF?  Or Small Forward/Power Forward?  Carve the numbers up more or go by only one position? 
Click to expand...
 
Obviously this is a science and numbers don't lie, but they sure can mislead imo.  I'll just stick with the player's winning percentage.
 
Obviously this is a science and numbers don't lie, but they sure can mislead imo.  I'll just stick with the player's winning percentage.
 
A "replacement player" and the assigned level figure is basically used as a basis from which any random player's value over a fictitious "replacement player" can be extrapolated. A replacement player performs at "replacement level," which is the level of performance a team can expect when trying to replace a player at minimal cost (12th man), or simply freely available talent.

Those numbers used as the replacement level are calculated by a league-wide assessment of the average player, respective to position.

And of course you're going to find flaws in every statistic. That's why there's more than one. But easily the most flawed are the mainstream per-game statistics. Which is why these advanced metrics are constantly being invented, and tinkered with. The more you know...

Edit: I stand corrected. My man just broke out the player's winning percentage. So that would be the most flawed
laugh.gif
 
A "replacement player" and the assigned level figure is basically used as a basis from which any random player's value over a fictitious "replacement player" can be extrapolated. A replacement player performs at "replacement level," which is the level of performance a team can expect when trying to replace a player at minimal cost (12th man), or simply freely available talent.

Those numbers used as the replacement level are calculated by a league-wide assessment of the average player, respective to position.

And of course you're going to find flaws in every statistic. That's why there's more than one. But easily the most flawed are the mainstream per-game statistics. Which is why these advanced metrics are constantly being invented, and tinkered with. The more you know...

Edit: I stand corrected. My man just broke out the player's winning percentage. So that would be the most flawed
laugh.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom