Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Which Player Has the Most Negative Impact on the Raps?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    malefax wrote: View Post
    It seems to me that a lot of people hear 'advanced stats have to be used with caution' and think 'advanced stats don't mean anything'. The one ain't the other.

    The big caution with even the adjusted +/- is that the standard error is really huge. It means you have to treat these numbers as general benchmarks rather than precise measures. So we can say that AB and DD and JJ all seemed to have a pretty negative impact on Raptor success, but we can't really say who was worse, exactly, and it's possible that for one or two of them the numbers are basically a fluke.

    Just as an aside, Ab's adjusted +/- numbers for the year were pretty decent up until the all-star break, after which they absolutely submarined. I'm curious what the reason for that was, and I suspect that there was a reason, whether it was that he was hampered by his ankle or that he was really unable to handle Chris's absence and the extra attention he received.
    Okay give us the calculation and back that statement up or give us a link

    To tell the truth this sounds like an attack without any proof to back it up.

    The numbers are what they are.

    People can be in cognitive dissonance all the time and that is what it smells like what is coming from those who are bashing the number. Especially when the web sites that publish these numbers are highly credible.

    Chow
    Avatar: Riverboat Coffee House 134 Yorkville Ave. billboard of upcoming entertainers - Circa 1960s

    Memories some so sweet, indeed

    Larger Photo of the avatar



    Quote from well known personality who led their high school team to a state championship.

    Comment


    • #17
      dagon420 wrote: View Post
      According to this, Bosh and AB should have similar +/- since they are both starters.

      Also, why are Jack/Calderon's +/- so much different than Turks or Derozan's. Since all of these players were starters as well as backups at different points in the season, it would suggest to me that their impact on the game is fundamentally different.
      If you'll notice, I said "aside from Bosh", as Bosh is clearly the best player on the team. His +/- is better than the rest of the starters because he's a better player. That's obvious. The point I was making is that to compare a starter to a bench player based SOLELY on +/-, as the originator of this thread did, is ridiculous. Bargs having a lower +/- than Belli does not make him a worse player. That was my point...that +/- stats have to be presented IN CONTEXT to be meaningful.

      So I would suggest Westbrook who is 22nd on the list including one year players is more important to the Thunder's overall success than KD especially because of his vastly superior defensive abilities and because he handles the ball more than KD.

      I am very comfortable with that.

      I stand by the data as being meaningful and reflective of a players value to a team's success.

      Westbrook caused a lot more problems for the Lakers than KD did that is 4sure beyond a doubt, the straight reality of what went down in that series.
      Westbrook caused more problems for the Lakers because he was being guarded by noted turnstile Derek Fisher. KD was being guarded by Kobe, Lamar, and Artest. The Lakers put their best defenders on him because he was the best player on the opposing team. What a novel concept!

      It's a lot easier for a complimentary player (Westbrook) to look good when the other teams defense is entirely geared towards stopping the star player (Durant). Jameer Nelson has dominated more games than Dwight Howard this postseason, but to suggest he's more important would be ridiculous, because Jameer's excellent play is very much a function of Dwight's presence.

      You're welcome to stand by the data, but if it leads you to make laughable claims like Westbrook being more important than Durant, you may want to re-think your position.

      It seems to me that a lot of people hear 'advanced stats have to be used with caution' and think 'advanced stats don't mean anything'. The one ain't the other.
      Thank you very much, sir. Some people seem to be missing that point.

      Comment


      • #18
        Ok so you still didn't reply to my second point.....

        ''Also, why are Jack/Calderon's +/- so much different than Turks or Derozan's. Since all of these players were starters as well as backups at different points in the season, it would suggest to me that their impact on the game is fundamentally different.''

        Comment


        • #19
          dagon420 wrote: View Post
          Ok so you still didn't reply to my second point.....

          ''Also, why are Jack/Calderon's +/- so much different than Turks or Derozan's. Since all of these players were starters as well as backups at different points in the season, it would suggest to me that their impact on the game is fundamentally different.''
          Because Jack and Calderon split the starting job right down the middle, while DeRozan and Turk started well over half of the games.

          Therefore, Jack and Calderon's +/- represents half a season of starting and half a season on the bench. DeRozan and Turk's represent primarily their role as starters (where they were both realtively ineffective) Had DeRozan and Turk spent more time coming off the bench (like Jack and Calderon did), it is likely that their +/- would have improved (like Jack and Calderon's did), due to the fact that our bench tended to play better than our starters (against generally lower levels of competition, of course).

          Comment


          • #20
            I agree these stats can be misleading. But even without the numbers I would have said Bargs because he's that big of a liability on defense. When you can't protect your own paint, you will have a tough time defending as it leads to open shots too. Raptors didn't protect the paint or defend 3's well.

            Comment

            Working...
            X