http://nyloncalculus.com/2015/01/02/pos ... -scarcity/
Pct above neutral and avg. estimate for those players thru last season. Lots of positive PGs but their avg. rating is drifting down. Shortage of positive SGs but it has been worse. High level of positive SFs but the quality at the top is nothing special and declining. Golden age for positive PFs but quantity and quality are drifting down. Top centers are weaker on avg. than anytime in 24 yrs.
If you did a followup, a count of the plus 2s or betters would be a nice addition. Avg. pay for the positives and the plus 2s would also be useful for last year or the multi-yr trend. Are GMs paying more or less for a point of RAPM? How does it vary by position and conference? How does the pay trend for these top groups compare to salary increases for the rest of players? Almost one third of players are positive on RAPM are positive for first time in period. How much should the negative RAPM really be paid by their production and is the market operating efficiently? Offensive and defensive splits would also be interesting to analyze and track vs pay.
Any chance your database could be archived at nylon calculus?
Top tier RAPM by position and yr
Re: Top tier RAPM by position and yr
Thanks for reading Crow. I wrote this/researched this pretty quickly, but I can definitely be open to revisiting it. I mentioned this on twitter the other day; although there are the fewest relative positive contributors at SG, more players were classified at SG last year (by basketball-reference) then any other positions. So a count would be beneficial, as well as an analysis of some of the very good questions you posed.
Re: Top tier RAPM by position and yr
I tweeted a table of the count of players with RAPM over 0 per position earlier today. https://twitter.com/itsastat/status/551754193573146624
Re: Top tier RAPM by position and yr
Thanks.
Almost enough to go around to fill starter spots if evenly distributed. But it is not. Wonder what % of starters have negative estimates? 40%? 50-60%?
For the above .600 teams, how much of their edge vs. lesser teams do they get from their bench? Does it matter in the playoffs where the edge comes from? Usually play less bench then, but...
Almost enough to go around to fill starter spots if evenly distributed. But it is not. Wonder what % of starters have negative estimates? 40%? 50-60%?
For the above .600 teams, how much of their edge vs. lesser teams do they get from their bench? Does it matter in the playoffs where the edge comes from? Usually play less bench then, but...