Re: PlusMinus - direct player comparison
Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:53 pm
So that's what I call 190 possessions, which is really small.
Analysis of basketball through objective evidence
http://apbr.org/metrics/
Yeah, that is basically what my question should imply. Taking the average pace into account we are talking about roughly 100 minutes of basketball.EvanZ wrote:So that's what I call 190 possessions, which is really small.
Not to mention that rAPM should favor Love some in that he usually would be playing more against other team's starters, and not be playing as many "garbage" minutes... the regression would adjust some for that.bbstats wrote:On Kevin Love -
True, but his impact was much greater than what rAPM predicts (+9.55 better, weighted per Poss)
The Net numbers, if I understand J.E. correctly, are also adjusted for the strength of the opponents.Statman wrote: Not to mention that rAPM should favor Love some in that he usually would be playing more against other team's starters, and not be playing as many "garbage" minutes... the regression would adjust some for that.
It's certainly not meant for predictions. As already stated, I think it's a nice tool when explaining why player A is most likely better (in terms of influence on team points) than player B to someone who does not know regression or chose to ignore RAPM results. It's pretty straight forward and more intuitive. It's certainly useful when trying to make a point like Nowitzki being better than Marion(or Collison over Perkins) because it's a more straight forward way to compare players, without a complicated algorithm behind itmystic wrote: We can see that certain players are doing better than others, maybe it can show some chemistry issues for some lineups/players, but I'm hard pressed to see anything more in those numbers
What are "pace-corrected minutes" or "something"? Why is one attack by team A and a following attack by team B one possession?EvanZ wrote:Jerry, my only suggestion is to divide the #possessions by 2. I think that is more consistent with the convention people typically use. Even better (but more work) would be to convert to pace-corrected minutes or something.
I guess, Evan wants to see pace-adjusted minutes. Meaning: If player A plays 10 minutes on a team with pace 90, he played 11.1 minutes per 100 possessions or so.J.E. wrote:What are "pace-corrected minutes" or "something"?
Well, usually only the offensive possessions are counted, because possession means "possessing the ball".J.E. wrote: Why is one attack by team A and a following attack by team B one possession?
Yes, that would be helpful. And you should really think about adding the overall Net (ORtg-DRtg) for the respective lineups, not just the difference between lineups with player X vs. lineups with player Y. That should lower the amount of confused people.J.E. wrote: I suppose I could test all of the results for significance with a paired T-Test?!
Something I just made up.J.E. wrote:What are "pace-corrected minutes" or "something"?
Well, they occur simultaneously in time. One team is playing offense, and the other is playing defense. Also, and others can feel free to give their own opinion, but my assumption is that most statheads are thinking the same way I do about it. (I think in American football, this would also be the convention. Is soccer different?)Why is one attack by team A and a following attack by team B one possession?
If we only count offensive possessions, everybody in the league was on the floor for exactly 0 defensive possessions last year, because we're not counting those?mystic wrote:Well, usually only the offensive possessions are counted, because possession means "possessing the ball".![]()
hahaYes, that would be helpful. And you should really think about adding the overall Net (ORtg-DRtg) for the respective lineups, not just the difference between lineups with player X vs. lineups with player Y. That should lower the amount of confused people.
Well, they were on the floor while the opposing offense possessed the ball. I agree with Mystic that by definition of the word, "defensive possession" is an oxymoron, since the offense is the one with possession.J.E. wrote:If we only count offensive possessions, everybody in the league was on the floor for exactly 0 defensive possessions last year, because we're not counting those?mystic wrote:Well, usually only the offensive possessions are counted, because possession means "possessing the ball".![]()
That's good if so, but not long ago we were dealing with someone's use of "defensive offensive rebound".Nobody says "defensive turnover"...