APBRmetrics

Mike G wrote:Interesting that you credit players with 3-pointers they might have made.
And if there had been 3-pointers, the inside game might have opened up more. Dolph Schayes might have been Dirk Nowitzki -- he shot close to .900 FT%.

Do you use a single multiplier for an entire decade? What about the occasional expansion? In 1966 there were 9 teams; in 1968, there were 23 (11 in ABA).
What do you do with ABA stats?

There's a thread on the evolution of league strength, and a table I posted which doesn't indicate that the '80s are necessarily the strongest era.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8803
How did you figure this?

Dolph Schayes = 23.06
Tony Parker = 23.76
Wes Unseld = 22.76
Dennis Johnson = 23.02

Ha. McGinnis is #100 at 23.77

Schayes 3pt% = .261

He was a PF/C odds are there weren't many Dirk's playing American basketball in the 1950s. However, it is an assumption based off shooting ability and position. I also applied LQ multipliers to all 3PM, in expectation that perimeter defense would've been stronger. While increases in perimeter shooting attempts may have opened up the paint in some earlier NBA decades, pace-adjustments and rule changes offset much of those advantages scoring-wise.

Far as my LQ adjustments, here's the article that serve as my basis.

https://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/20 ... n-the-nba/

I of course performed my own pace-adjustments, and stat translations. I compile as much research data as I could, and estimated pre-'78 league production levels.

I did deduct about .10 points from ABA player stats, basically with a quick comparison with NBA competition at the time, the 70s ABA played out to some extent like the 60s NBA. Most ABA stars did spend significant amounts of time in the NBA. Few exceptions, Mel Daniels comes to mind. I'll likely run his score.

I don't follow that article on league strength. He seems to be saying that if players are more productive, it must mean the league is more competitive. But if a given age stratum of players gets more productive, doesn't that mean the rest of the league is weaker?

Seems to me the years '91-93 represent a dip in league strength, as players found rebounds and minutes a bit easier to accrue than normal. Then these stats were harder to get in '98-'00, so that surely means the league is overall a more competitive environment.

I did deduct about .10 points from ABA player stats, basically with a quick comparison with NBA competition at the time, the 70s ABA played out to some extent like the 60s NBA...

So you deduct .10 from Spencer Haywood's amazing 1970, and also .10 from Erving and Gilmore in '76 ? The ABA had grown up quite a bit in that time. Rebounds in particular had achieved almost equal difficulty as in the NBA -- both ABA and NBA vets saw their Reb% drop about the same between '76 and '77, as the leagues merged.

Mike G wrote:I don't follow that article on league strength. He seems to be saying that if players are more productive, it must mean the league is more competitive. But if a given age stratum of players gets more productive, doesn't that mean the rest of the league is weaker?

Seems to me the years '91-93 represent a dip in league strength, as players found rebounds and minutes a bit easier to accrue than normal. Then these stats were harder to get in '98-'00, so that surely means the league is overall a more competitive environment.

I did deduct about .10 points from ABA player stats, basically with a quick comparison with NBA competition at the time, the 70s ABA played out to some extent like the 60s NBA...

So you deduct .10 from Spencer Haywood's amazing 1970, and also .10 from Erving and Gilmore in '76 ? The ABA had grown up quite a bit in that time. Rebounds in particular had achieved almost equal difficulty as in the NBA -- both ABA and NBA vets saw their Reb% drop about the same between '76 and '77, as the leagues merged.

Well, the 10% drop off ABA to NBA varies, by box stat, and position. It's not an across the board reduction in the multiplier. The estimated drop off is seemingly reflected in most star players transitioning from the ABA into the NBA even with the applicable age factors. Take Dr. J, Charlie Scott for instance, it appears overall player efficiency declines in transition from ABA to NBA. I estimate overall btw 5-10%.

Could you explain how the age factor works here?

i'm struggling with that value vs. perhaps a peak career value. The key metrics guys are Barkley behind 3 other power forwards, as his peak and VORP numbers disagree. A bit confused to see West at 23. Shaq and Hakeem again seem a bit high but nothing crazy. There however seems to be a bit of an era bias and just wondering if longer careers of modern players is a factor.

hoops wrote: Shaq and Hakeem again seem a bit high but nothing crazy. There however seems to be a bit of an era bias ..

We haven't heard how postseasons are weighed in, so that could explain Shaq and Hakeem.
Era bias also seems a bit fuzzy, possibly just a personal favoritism.