Knicks · real plus-minus statistic may weigh heavily in decisions (page 1)

dk7th wrote:http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/111565...

That was a very good read. Those writers did an amazing job with the information they put out. Have to respect the tine and effort put in to break down what each contract would have to be for the Heat and Clippers.

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

GP: Games Played
MPG: Minutes Per Game
ORPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team offensive performance, measured in points scored per 100 offensive possessions
DRPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team defensive performance, measured in points allowed per 100 defensive possessions
RPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team performance, measured in net point differential per 100 offensive and defensive possessions. RPM takes into account teammates, opponents and additional factors
WAR: The estimated number of team wins attributable to each player, based on RPM

fishmike wrote:if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

Correct.

CrushAlot wrote:

GP: Games Played
MPG: Minutes Per Game
ORPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team offensive performance, measured in points scored per 100 offensive possessions
DRPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team defensive performance, measured in points allowed per 100 defensive possessions
RPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team performance, measured in net point differential per 100 offensive and defensive possessions. RPM takes into account teammates, opponents and additional factors
WAR: The estimated number of team wins attributable to each player, based on RPM

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/...

correction-- why are you bolding the word "estimated"

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

SO TRUE.. and when it comes to wade the number just don't lie.. wade a couple of years ago was an elite NBA player, he no longer is and the number prove that.. this was a pretty good write up, and i always thought the clippers would be an ideal landing spot for lebron..

but for me DK, I would like to see lebron do something different.. he has two rings so no one can say he never won... but I would like to see him take a younger and smaller market team and bring them to a finals, like he did cleveland, but this time win one.. A team i had in mind was orlando... could you Imagine lebron, vucevic, oladipo, and payton kid and aaron Gordon... very interesting.. that would be a challenge I would like to see someone like lebron take on. I know it is unrealistic, he won't do that, but will get my respect if he does... something along those lines..

another place would be atlanta, they are set up nice with a good coach, system, some nice vet pieces and flexibility...

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

nychamp wrote:

fishmike wrote:if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

Correct.

Bonn1997 wrote:

nychamp wrote:

fishmike wrote:if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

Correct.

Is this "real plus minus" stat still impacted by the quality of your sub? If so, this would make sense since Tyson was light years better than Bargnani or whatever other options we had at center.

i believe that is likely true. there is another, deeper level call RAPM real adjusted plus minus that accompanied an article on gallinari's value to the nuggets-- i believe it takes into account subbing but not sure. here have a look:

http://www.denverstiffs.com/2013/1/12/38...

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

they dont? Did you watch Chandler play last year? What do the numbers actually say? Because I have Chandler as a zero sum player last year on both ends and these #s dont lie either:
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK18.HTM

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

you can't post an entire page without citing which numbers we are supposed to look at to support your case. what garbage posting-- do a little work so you can actually earn the right to get schooled by me, k?

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

they dont? Did you watch Chandler play last year? What do the numbers actually say? Because I have Chandler as a zero sum player last year on both ends and these #s dont lie either:
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK18.HTM

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

they dont? Did you watch Chandler play last year? What do the numbers actually say? Because I have Chandler as a zero sum player last year on both ends and these #s dont lie either:
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK18.HTM

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

Wait, are you really challenging the idea that the defense was a few points better when Tyson was at center than when Bargs or Amare was? What you cited was only the man-to-man defensive #s, nothing about help defense.

translation: his post is garbage

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

they dont? Did you watch Chandler play last year? What do the numbers actually say? Because I have Chandler as a zero sum player last year on both ends and these #s dont lie either:
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK18.HTM

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

Wait, are you really challenging the idea that the defense was a few points better when Tyson was at center than when Bargs or Amare was? What you cited was only the man-to-man defensive #s, nothing about help defense.

translation: his post is garbage

Bonn1997 wrote:

nychamp wrote:

fishmike wrote:if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

Correct.

Is this "real plus minus" stat still impacted by the quality of your sub? If so, this would make sense since Tyson was light years better than Bargnani or whatever other options we had at center.

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

they dont? Did you watch Chandler play last year? What do the numbers actually say? Because I have Chandler as a zero sum player last year on both ends and these #s dont lie either:
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK18.HTM

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

you can't post an entire page without citing which numbers we are supposed to look at to support your case. what garbage posting-- do a little work so you can actually earn the right to get schooled by me, k?

fishmike will often use that site to support his argument. however, I explained to him that he does not apply it correctly. for example he used the +/- to try to expalin that the knicks were a winning team with carmelo on the floor.. I asked how is that possible when he played more minutes than anyone in the NBA and the knicks have a losing record, at the time we were waaaaaay under .500

what he didn't understand about that stat is that it tells us that with carmelo on the floor the knicks are better, but not a winning team. for example.. without carmelo on the floor the knicks can be -15, but with him on the floor we can be -7... better, but still not good or winning..

so it is no surprise that he didn't cite the numbers to look at...