Which player would you rather have?

SoonerfanTU said:
Newsflash, DSmok1 didn't make that up. He's only putting it together for us.
Click to expand...
i guess i am mistaken. I could have sworn that DS made these stats up using his own methods.where do these stats come from?


That has nothing to do with how each player has played this year. That has as much to do with surrounding talent, and bench as anything.
Click to expand...

actually, it shows how much they contribute. (which is what this is all about) if you hold everything else constant and take away a player you can see how much worse the team is.
 
Last edited:
Well if you are still an accountant I pity you. I went from accounting major, to corporate accounting, to business planning, to business analyst to fund manager.

Last time I checked field goal % takes into account how many times you shoot the ball.

For willie to have a dramatically higher contribution in every category except turnovers and for you to come to the conclusion that their overall contribution is equal shows you possess a lack of quantitative ability.
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
actually, it shows how much they contribute. (which is what this is all about) if you hold everything else constant and take away a player you can see how much worse the team is.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I doesn't show how much you contribute, it shows how EFFICIENTLY you contribute. WW is probably contributing more, but he's expected to do more for OU than Paige is for OSU, and he shoots more. Efficiency is the key.
 
bocabull said:
Well if you are still an accountant I pity you. I went from accounting major, to corporate accounting, to business planning, to business analyst to fund manager.

Last time I checked field goal % takes into account how many times you shoot the ball.

For willie to have a dramatically higher contribution in every category except turnovers and for you to come to the conclusion that their overall contribution is equal shows you possess a lack of quantitative ability.
Click to expand...

Whatever dude, don't talk down to me. Fund manager? Pfft.

Maybe I shouldn't have said "overall contribution". As I explained above, WW does contribute MORE to OU, mostly b/c we don't have many guys contributing, and WW gets the most shots. Paige is contributing at the same efficiency level though, and that is telling. WW needs to shoot it better, and quit turning the ball over. He is essentially giving the other team 4-8 points per game on his turnovers, over what Paige is.
 
SoonerfanTU said:
I disagree. I doesn't show how much you contribute, it shows how EFFICIENTLY you contribute. WW is probably contributing more, but he's expected to do more for OU than Paige is for OSU, and he shoots more. Efficiency is the key.
Click to expand...

haha so now it changes from contribution to efficiency? I don't get how WW is expected to do more contributes to anything.

Somebody with the time could come up with KP's PPG pretty easily if he shot as much as WW. And I guess you need to define shoots more b/c KP shoots more 3s than WW while WW drives to the basket. Driving to the basket creates FTs (WW leads bigtime) which contributes to the team. And just for you info, 74% of KP's shots are 3s. 40% of WWs are 3s.
 
Keiton Page shoots the ball 8 times per game to score 10.6 points. He generates 1.33 points per shot.

Willie Warren shoots the ball 13 times per game to score 18.5 points. He generates 1.42 points per shot.

Willie is more efficient than Page. Period. Willie produces more per shot.

Willie averages 4.5 assists per game generating a minimum of 9 points. He turns the ball over 4 times costing OU approx 3.6 points per game (assuming the other team shoots 45%) for a net contrinution of 5.4 points.

Page averages 2 assists per game generating a minimum of 4 points. He turns the ball over .6 times per game costing OSU approx .5 points per game for a net contribution of 3.5 points per game.

Willie Warren contributes more than Keiton Page in every aspect and is more efficient per shot. Any formula that says otherwise is a crappy formula. Like a Rassmussen Poll. Worthless data.
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
And just for you info, 74% of KP's shots are 3s. 40% of WWs are 3s.
Click to expand...

Don't understand what that has to do with anything?

We all know WW has more skills and physical talent than KP. KP is a shooter. But so far this season, they are both being equally efficient on the offensive end. And that isn't b/c KP is having some freakishly good year. WW has just been THAT bad. 4.0 turnovers per game is terrible. Not just bad, but terrible. TE is the only guard to average more than about 2.5 in any season over the last 8-10 seasons or so. And only Blake and LL were around 3.
 
Keiton Page shoots the ball 8 times per game to score 10.6 points. He generates 1.33 points per shot.

Willie Warren shoots the ball 13 times per game to score 18.5 points. He generates 1.42 points per shot.
Click to expand...

Is that significant? What is the points per shot for Lace Dunn? Jacob Pullen? Damion James? James Anderson? Etc?
 
SoonerfanTU said:
Don't understand what that has to do with anything?

We all know WW has more skills and physical talent than KP. KP is a shooter. But so far this season, they are both being equally efficient on the offensive end. And that isn't b/c KP is having some freakishly good year. WW has just been THAT bad. 4.0 turnovers per game is terrible. Not just bad, but terrible. TE is the only guard to average more than about 2.5 in any season over the last 8-10 seasons or so. And only Blake and LL were around 3.
Click to expand...

The season isn't over yet. Maybe Willie will cut down on the TOs and play better?

This seems like a pretty pointless debate at this juncture. Yeah, OU has played poor basketball thus far (Willie included). Tell us something we don't know.
 
These discussions are interesting as a debate of what has been done thusfar in the season. But what is the predictive value of these various statistics? So Page and Warren have been about relatively equal in their production thusfar this season. What are the chances that continues throughout the rest of the season? And if the answer is, "not a whole lot," then what is the value of them? Do any of these statistics translate predictively better than others? For one thing, it seems like per/minute statistics would be generally preferable than per/game statistics, but I don't know for sure about that.
 
I post the sources for my work on every game recap:


Statistical Plus/Minus (SPM) is a method of estimating each player's impact from the box score statistics. SPM is listed in points above the average player playing per 100 possessions--so if that player was replaced by an average player for 100 possessions, SPM is the difference in the final margin. The total of all player's contributions will sum to the actual scoring margin (each team's total will equal half of the overall margin). The original method was outlined by Dan Rosenbaum at 82games.com; recently additional factors were added by Neil Paine at Basketball-Reference.com. I previously compiled the complete 2008-2009 NCAA numbers on this forum.​

The method is not foolproof; it is simply approximating a player's contributions from the box score.

The basic concept--we measure how much a player contributes directly in the NBA. That is Adjusted Plus-Minus. However, it is really noisy because it is numerically hard to separate teammates' contributions. (Not to mention that we can't calculate that for the NCAA due to lack of data.) So, we take what we had and regress the box score stats onto it. That's a lot more stable (i.e. less prone to wacky interaction effects) but doesn't account for all contributions, particularly on the defensive side. Dr. Rosenbaum estimates that it accounts for about 85% of what a player contributes. It is quite accurate on the offensive side of the ball.

It is about as good as we can get using pure box score information. Read Rosenbaum's information to see the particulars. Rosenbaum is now working for an NBA team, if I remember correctly.

As for my own qualifications--I have a master's in structural engineering. (Not the PE yet, though--I'll sit for that in April.)
 
Tony said:
These discussions are interesting as a debate of what has been done thusfar in the season. But what is the predictive value of these various statistics? So Page and Warren have been about relatively equal in their production thusfar this season. What are the chances that continues throughout the rest of the season? And if the answer is, "not a whole lot," then what is the value of them? Do any of these statistics translate predictively better than others? For one thing, it seems like per/minute statistics would be generally preferable than per/game statistics, but I don't know for sure about that.
Click to expand...

SPM is more of a retrodictive stat--it tells you what has happened. Predictive stats require different information.

SPM is based on per 40 minute, pace-adjusted stats.

It is mighty hard to predict the future.... Often retrodictive stats are pretty close to as good as anything else. There are so many variables that stats simply don't encompass.
 
bocabull said:
Well if you are still an accountant I pity you. I went from accounting major, to corporate accounting, to business planning, to business analyst to fund manager.

Last time I checked field goal % takes into account how many times you shoot the ball.

For willie to have a dramatically higher contribution in every category except turnovers and for you to come to the conclusion that their overall contribution is equal shows you possess a lack of quantitative ability.
Click to expand...

Are you really peddling that?
 
bocabull said:
You obviously are not an accounting/finance/economics major and do not have a grasp on what the word "contribution" means.
Click to expand...

Here's a hint. No one who has finished college and works in the real world refers to what "major" someone "is".
 
Tony said:
These discussions are interesting as a debate of what has been done thusfar in the season. But what is the predictive value of these various statistics? So Page and Warren have been about relatively equal in their production thusfar this season. What are the chances that continues throughout the rest of the season? And if the answer is, "not a whole lot," then what is the value of them? Do any of these statistics translate predictively better than others? For one thing, it seems like per/minute statistics would be generally preferable than per/game statistics, but I don't know for sure about that.
Click to expand...

Statistics are never predictive. Just like anything that records history, people make predictions based upon statistics, but it is the people who are predictive, not the statistics.
 
Shooterms said:
Statistics are never predictive. Just like anything that records history, people make predictions based upon statistics, but it is the people who are predictive, not the statistics.
Click to expand...

Well, they are never perfectly predictive, but they certainly tell you SOMETHING about the true talent level of a player or team, and surely some are more predictive than others. We know, through research, that a baseball team's Pythagorean Record is more predictive of a baseball team's ability than their actual record. I admit that as much as I consider myself a fan of sabermetrics in baseball that I am clueless/skeptical when it comes to hoops, especially college hoops where the variance in abilities is really large. But I am open-minded, and appreciate DSMok1's response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
2014 AP Women's Basketball All-Americans
Replies
2
Views
2K
jerry
J
S
A brief comparison
Replies
0
Views
2K
SoonerNorm
S
Sam
How good/bad is ORU and team comparison
Replies
2
Views
2K
thebigabd
thebigabd
thebigabd
Its early, but which star guard would you rather have?
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
campbest
campbest
lexusooner
Would u rather have Nick Thompson or Chris CJ Washington??
Replies
17
Views
6K
Krugerfan52
Krugerfan52
Back
Top