On November 29 2017 15:46 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i find the suspense of the 3 point shot similar to a long fly ball in baseball. it might go.. it might not. so i like the 3 pointer. but that's just me.
On November 29 2017 15:30 cLutZ wrote:
On November 29 2017 14:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
On November 29 2017 14:22 cLutZ wrote: So I was watching this and it struck me how much skinnier NBA rookies are now. Not really less muscular, but less beefy. IMO its partially younger rookies, and partially indicative of how much more cardio-oriented the NBA is now.
i think its a good change. the general direction the league has taken the past 15 years has been good. i like the philosophy behind the officiating now. imo, the game is better to watch compared to 15 years ago.
Its good and bad. On the good side I do think its easier to show skill and there are fewer pure "enforcers" like Ben Wallace, Oakley, etc.
On the other hand, the 3 Point shot is a disease, and is the most boring play in basketball aside from the pathetic flop by a player with the ball, both have gone up significantly. IMO the fixes are easy for the NBA, but IDK if they will do them. #1 Eliminate the short corner 3 and just have it always be 23'9'' (or go to 24') and just make it so there is no corner 3.
#2 Is letting coaches have "silent challenges" to flops (or auto reviews of every foul call). This means that, the initial foul is not reviewed (the player gets the FTs for example), however, if the NY office determines there was a flop, the flopper is given a technical at the next stoppage of play, and the opposing team gets 3 FTs + possession.
flopping is a very tough issue to get right every time.. but this after the play idea would help.
i've noticed Derozan and Lowry are not getting nearly as many of those BS ticky-tack fouls on "shots". Lowry feels someone and he just instinctively jumps up. This change has probably impacted Harden a lot as well, but i don't watch him play. when Derozan and Lowry were piling up those calls the last few years i always thought it was BS and kinda dumb. So i'm glad they are calling less of those silly fouls. Bet you Harden fans don't like it though.
On November 29 2017 10:48 JimmiC wrote: ("Is Kyle Korver really the second best SG in the league? I need to investigate."
i already covered the case of players who play limited minutes. you can't compare a guy who plays 32+ minutes as a starter to a bench player like Korver who plays 21 minutes a game. i explained it with the curious case of Kyle Anderson. You can't directly compare Demar Derozan to Kyle Korver. You can only compare Korver to other limited minutes bench players. Likewise, you can only compare Derozan to other 32+ minute-a-game starters.
Comparing Korver to Derozan using this metric would be like trying to use ERA to compare a baseball starting pitcher to a lefty side armer relief specialist who throws 2 innings a week. The manager carefully hand picks who the side arming lefty will face... The Starting pitcher faces everyone all the time. NBA coaches want to win so they protect their weaker non-starting players by using them judiciously throughout a game.
A million relievers have a better ERA than Nolan Ryan's 3.19. ERA is useful for comparing starters against other starters and relievers against other relievers. Same applies with Real Plus Minus.
Real Plus Minus is good for comparing starters against other starters of the same position. Bench players versus other bench players of the same position. The bigger the difference in minutes played between the 2 players you are trying to compare... the weaker the comparison is.
Although OG Anunoby has the best RPM of any Raptor small forward he only plays 19 minutes per game. So we can't say for certain he is truly the best. Everything is very encouraging though.. both with the eye-test and with all metrics including ESPN RPM. Therefore, the most prudent course of action for Coach Casey is to experiment with larger #s of minutes and give OG increasingly difficult assignments LIKE GUARDING HARDEN ! ! ! and see what happens. If he continues to produce at the rate he has been at 18 minutes a game.. keep on increasing his work load. Start him a few times.
i project OGs # of minutes per game to rise this year above the ~18.5 minutes he is getting now.
Choosing one sentence out of a post and arguing it is pointless when you take that point out of context. Perhaps go back and read at least the sentences around it. That was a small example or how you can look for outliers in RAPM and do further investigations to see if it was true.
The part of your post I have bolded I believe is your main point in that post and about RAPM in general. Sadly it is not true. At least not according to the articles I read or the info on the players year to year. Their minutes did not change but their performance changed DRASTICALLY. It is not a ranking system at all, using it as such is a mistake regardless of if they both play 18 mins or not. I think I did a decent job of saying why in my other posts so I won't re write here or quote my own post again, but the links I attached do a great job if you feel like keeping and open mind and getting a better understanding of how RAPM actually works and what it is and isn't capable of telling you.
Like it is not true that gerald harris is the best starting SG or Covington is the best starting SF. It doesn't take a heck of a lot other statistical analysis to figure this out. It also doesn;t pass the smell test. Deandre Jordon didn't all the sudden become a bad starting center this year from the 3rd best starting one one last year, his teammates drastically changed. Same with all the people I showed the numbers from year to year, they didn't ALL get way better or way worse, they changed situations.
The main point of both those articles and the data within them was that if you are using RAPM as a ranking tool you are doing it wrong. Comparing people based on minutes does not change that.
If RAPM worked how you think it does and told the value of a player while removing the noise of teammates and systems then people who changed systems and teams but kept similar minutes would keep similar scores. This clearly is not the case.
it best usage is as a way to compare starters... the more data the better. the stat is best at picking out players at the extremes and figuring out who the very best and very worst offensive and defensive players are.
many years ago a guy came up with a technique to use PLus/Minus to evaluate coaches. basically it considers the coach to be an imaginary 6th player always on the court at all times.. and you examine the +/- of that imaginary player and then assess the coach accordingly.
long before i ever found this i viewed Casey as a good, maybe very good.. but not great coach. the casey haters who frequent the raptors reddit and other raptor convo places are wrong. its interesting that this stat backs him as being a good coach.
plus-minus isn't going away. quite the opposite is happening. more and more research is being done to refine and evolve the stat. its moving forward in both basketball and hockey. interestingly, the stat has pretty much failed in european football/soccer.
Scotty Bowman, the original pioneer of the stat is an analytics genius and a man ahead of his time.
in the 80s they didn't call the game any where near as tight as they do now. Jordan got beat up by the bad boy detroit pistons. so you need to be strong to take the pounding.
On November 29 2017 15:46 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i find the suspense of the 3 point shot similar to a long fly ball in baseball. it might go.. it might not. so i like the 3 pointer. but that's just me.
On November 29 2017 15:30 cLutZ wrote:
On November 29 2017 14:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
On November 29 2017 14:22 cLutZ wrote: So I was watching this and it struck me how much skinnier NBA rookies are now. Not really less muscular, but less beefy. IMO its partially younger rookies, and partially indicative of how much more cardio-oriented the NBA is now.
i think its a good change. the general direction the league has taken the past 15 years has been good. i like the philosophy behind the officiating now. imo, the game is better to watch compared to 15 years ago.
Its good and bad. On the good side I do think its easier to show skill and there are fewer pure "enforcers" like Ben Wallace, Oakley, etc.
On the other hand, the 3 Point shot is a disease, and is the most boring play in basketball aside from the pathetic flop by a player with the ball, both have gone up significantly. IMO the fixes are easy for the NBA, but IDK if they will do them. #1 Eliminate the short corner 3 and just have it always be 23'9'' (or go to 24') and just make it so there is no corner 3.
#2 Is letting coaches have "silent challenges" to flops (or auto reviews of every foul call). This means that, the initial foul is not reviewed (the player gets the FTs for example), however, if the NY office determines there was a flop, the flopper is given a technical at the next stoppage of play, and the opposing team gets 3 FTs + possession.
flopping is a very tough issue to get right every time.. but this after the play idea would help.
i've noticed Derozan and Lowry are not getting nearly as many of those BS ticky-tack fouls on "shots". Lowry feels someone and he just instinctively jumps up. This change has probably impacted Harden a lot as well, but i don't watch him play. when Derozan and Lowry were piling up those calls the last few years i always thought it was BS and kinda dumb. So i'm glad they are calling less of those silly fouls. Bet you Harden fans don't like it though.
On November 29 2017 10:48 JimmiC wrote: ("Is Kyle Korver really the second best SG in the league? I need to investigate."
i already covered the case of players who play limited minutes. you can't compare a guy who plays 32+ minutes as a starter to a bench player like Korver who plays 21 minutes a game. i explained it with the curious case of Kyle Anderson. You can't directly compare Demar Derozan to Kyle Korver. You can only compare Korver to other limited minutes bench players. Likewise, you can only compare Derozan to other 32+ minute-a-game starters.
Comparing Korver to Derozan using this metric would be like trying to use ERA to compare a baseball starting pitcher to a lefty side armer relief specialist who throws 2 innings a week. The manager carefully hand picks who the side arming lefty will face... The Starting pitcher faces everyone all the time. NBA coaches want to win so they protect their weaker non-starting players by using them judiciously throughout a game.
A million relievers have a better ERA than Nolan Ryan's 3.19. ERA is useful for comparing starters against other starters and relievers against other relievers. Same applies with Real Plus Minus.
Real Plus Minus is good for comparing starters against other starters of the same position. Bench players versus other bench players of the same position. The bigger the difference in minutes played between the 2 players you are trying to compare... the weaker the comparison is.
Although OG Anunoby has the best RPM of any Raptor small forward he only plays 19 minutes per game. So we can't say for certain he is truly the best. Everything is very encouraging though.. both with the eye-test and with all metrics including ESPN RPM. Therefore, the most prudent course of action for Coach Casey is to experiment with larger #s of minutes and give OG increasingly difficult assignments LIKE GUARDING HARDEN ! ! ! and see what happens. If he continues to produce at the rate he has been at 18 minutes a game.. keep on increasing his work load. Start him a few times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBq7TVbv1G4 i project OGs # of minutes per game to rise this year above the ~18.5 minutes he is getting now.
Choosing one sentence out of a post and arguing it is pointless when you take that point out of context. Perhaps go back and read at least the sentences around it. That was a small example or how you can look for outliers in RAPM and do further investigations to see if it was true.
The part of your post I have bolded I believe is your main point in that post and about RAPM in general. Sadly it is not true. At least not according to the articles I read or the info on the players year to year. Their minutes did not change but their performance changed DRASTICALLY. It is not a ranking system at all, using it as such is a mistake regardless of if they both play 18 mins or not. I think I did a decent job of saying why in my other posts so I won't re write here or quote my own post again, but the links I attached do a great job if you feel like keeping and open mind and getting a better understanding of how RAPM actually works and what it is and isn't capable of telling you.
Like it is not true that gerald harris is the best starting SG or Covington is the best starting SF. It doesn't take a heck of a lot other statistical analysis to figure this out. It also doesn;t pass the smell test. Deandre Jordon didn't all the sudden become a bad starting center this year from the 3rd best starting one one last year, his teammates drastically changed. Same with all the people I showed the numbers from year to year, they didn't ALL get way better or way worse, they changed situations.
The main point of both those articles and the data within them was that if you are using RAPM as a ranking tool you are doing it wrong. Comparing people based on minutes does not change that.
If RAPM worked how you think it does and told the value of a player while removing the noise of teammates and systems then people who changed systems and teams but kept similar minutes would keep similar scores. This clearly is not the case.
it best usage is as a way to compare starters... the more data the better. the stat is best at picking out players at the extremes and figuring out who the very best and very worst offensive and defensive players are.
many years ago a guy came up with a technique to use PLus/Minus to evaluate coaches. basically it considers the coach to be an imaginary 6th player always on the court at all times.. and you examine the +/- of that imaginary player and then assess the coach accordingly.
long before i ever found this i viewed Casey as a good, maybe very good.. but not great coach. the casey haters who frequent the raptors reddit and other raptor convo places are wrong. its interesting that this stat backs him as being a good coach.
plus-minus isn't going away. quite the opposite is happening. more and more research is being done to refine and evolve the stat. its moving forward in both basketball and hockey. interestingly, the stat has pretty much failed in european football/soccer.
Scotty Bowman, the original pioneer of the stat is an analytics genius and a man ahead of his time.
Coach +-??? Wow that's genius! Could you explain it in detail.
People who know about it, don't talk about it. People who don't know about it, talk all the time about it. People who know they know just barely enough about it talk about it as reasonable people do, that they don't know everything, there is much to learn, and that it is not perfect.
looks liek Terrence Ross will be coming off the bench for Orlando in the foreseeable future. Magic fans are pissed off but i think its the right move. you can't have him and Fournier on the floor at the same time.
On November 27 2017 22:40 Twinkle Toes wrote: And JJ, how does this RAPM etc. explain why Harden and CP3 can be productive even with high usage rate, all on a similar position, but Westbrook and PG13 and Me70 cant even if they are playing well?
I would wager that the problem, as usual, lies with Me70 being one of those players.
Powell moved to SG... OG starting @ SF. i wonder what fan suggested experimenting with that change last week? lolololol. to all the reddit haters i continue to say: "Casey is a good coach"
looks like Ross's move to the bench for Orlando is permanent. I think its a good idea to keep him and Fournier separated giving 2 separate units a wing spacer. I think he'll keep playing ~25 minutes a game.
On November 27 2017 22:40 Twinkle Toes wrote: And JJ, how does this RAPM etc. explain why Harden and CP3 can be productive even with high usage rate, all on a similar position, but Westbrook and PG13 and Me70 cant even if they are playing well?
I would wager that the problem, as usual, lies with Me70 being one of those players.
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/fVIbR78.jpg)
