2013-14 RSPM- Regularized Statistical Plus-Minus

[Crow]

http://youhavenogame.wordpress.com/2013-14-rspm/ values

http://youhavenogame.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/197/ explanation

[nbacouchside]

Found that a few months back. Pretty cool stuff.

[v-zero]

The big issue with this is that his regression is picking up mostly the box score info in XRAPM, so it isn't as nice as it may seem.

[steveshea]

There is a dig on PER at the end of the second link. "And I’m sorry, but they’re way better than PER."

This got me thinking. I remember a time when I used to go to ESPN.com for some basketball statistics. Now, I never go there. NBA.com, basketball-reference and some of the sites maintained by contributors here are far better. If you pull up MLB stats on ESPN, they at least have WAR. The front page for NBA stats gives pts, reb, ast, blk, stl, fg%. There, they aren't promoting a single stat that was developed in the last say 50 years? On the player pages, the only "advanced" statistic is PER (and a few deeply buried stats such as scoring efficiency). PER was innovative for its time, but for how long will this be the one modern stat ESPN.com promotes?

I know certain ESPN columns and columnists mention and support more advanced stats, but when will those stats hit the player and front pages? With Dean Oliver in house, can we expect significant renovations in the near future?

(Sorry to take the post a bit off topic, but the thought occurred to me while reading the links.)

[Mike G]

Not to beat any dead horses, but stats that aren't improving aren't really 'advancing', are they?