PDA

View Full Version : Basketball Value


alby
02-09-2009, 04:31 PM
Emeka Okafor is well ahead of Kobe Bryant (http://blogmaverick.com/2009/02/08/nba-all-stars-by-the-numbers/) in the Dallas Mavericks' proprietary statistical rankings, which Mark Cuban is blogging about. And Jason Kidd is second in the league. The core of the system is much like the adjusted plus/minus at Basketball Value (http://basketballvalue.com/index.php), although it has many different adjustments.

http://basketballvalue.com/index.php

---

http://blogmaverick.com/2009/02/08/nba-all-stars-by-the-numbers/

NBA All Stars by the Numbers (http://blogmaverick.com/2009/02/08/nba-all-stars-by-the-numbers/)

Feb 8th 2009 4:31PM

We have developed and enhanced a player and lineup evaluation system. We have been working on this for the last 8 years. Its far from perfect, and its greatest value is that over a period of years we have been able to identify trends to help us identify up and coming, starring and declining players. It also helps us understand what combinations of players work well together, and which dont.

To give you a basic understanding of the system, at its most basic its a plus minus system. Then we adjust it to take into account who the opponent is, is it home or away, are you playing against the other teams good lineup or bad lineup, what the score and game clock are (scoring the game winner is worth more than the 1st basket of the game. Scoring when up by 30 is worth nothing). If the team scores or gets a stop when the game is on the line, then your impact percentage goes up. We reward for getting the job done when it matters.

We track as you can see below by last games, and also track the variance. In other words, average is pretty much meaningless. You can score plus 20 one day, zero the next, but are you a 10 level
player ? We track the variance of the players performance. THe lower the variance, the more consistent the player on offense or defense.

One more point, these numbers don’t reflect necessarily the best players in the league, but what they do reflect is the players that are being best put in a position to succeed and are delivering.

When their teams have a need, they deliver. Thats why some names are not the biggest names. its also a reflection of their coaches. Some coaches don’t necessarily use their players in the
best lineups or matchups, which negatively impacts their ability to perform. Others are consistently good at it.

This is purely quantitative, nothing more or less.

But Im sure it will lead to lots of discussion

- Mark Cuban

Tokey41
02-09-2009, 04:43 PM
I hope this stupid ass model doesn't provoke us to trade Dirk for Randy Foye.

Sportstudi
02-09-2009, 04:45 PM
Well, nothing against Cubes, but some parts of his ranking are definitely beyond my way of understanding basketball. :confused::confused:
Link (http://blogmaverick.com/2009/02/08/nba-all-stars-by-the-numbers/)

alby
02-09-2009, 04:48 PM
http://www.dallas-mavs.com/vb/showthread.php?t=34757

Sportstudi
02-09-2009, 04:50 PM
Sorry, didn't see it

ty
02-09-2009, 05:21 PM
Interesting that Dallas' top unit does not include Josh Howard and NJ's top unit does not include Devin Harris...hmm....

Underdog
02-09-2009, 08:03 PM
Cuban ranking Jason Kidd at #2 almost makes me think we're trying to trade him...

Zki41
02-10-2009, 01:01 AM
Well I can agree with LBJ being #1

Fidel
02-10-2009, 04:45 AM
What??? Jason Kidd is not NR 1???
Im Savovic shocked.
You need to tweak that formula just a little bit more Cubes.

Also if we are going to the Lakers with this do you think theyd do Kobe for Kidd straight up? I mean... cant argue with the numbers.

Usually Lurkin
02-10-2009, 09:23 AM
[URL="http://blogmaverick.com/2009/02/08/nba-all-stars-by-the-numbers/"]We have developed and enhanced a player and lineup evaluation system. We have been working on this for the last 8 years. Its far from perfect, and its greatest value is that over a period of years we have been able to identify trends to help us identify up and coming, starring and declining players.
I'm sorry, but if this is true, why do they seem to be getting worse in player acquisition?