Comments on: 2009-10 APBRmetric Awards NBA & ABA Basketball Statistics & History Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:56:04 +0000 hourly 1 By: Neil Paine Fri, 23 Apr 2010 13:04:58 +0000 The criteria was (GS/G)<50%, which has typically been the cutoff point in the past for the 6th man Award.

By: Thezzaruz Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:42:18 +0000 Great work Neil, very interesting.

But I have to ask, am I the only one that has quarrels with a 6th man award going to a player that has been a starter for almost a 1/3 of the season? And that has played his best and most important ball mainly in that 1/3?

I like Manu and think he's been great but really, shouldn't 6th man come with a cut off point on starter minutes (or something)?

By: Mike G Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:34:21 +0000 ".. no team plays better defense when a player is sitting vs. when he plays than the Thunder do when Jeff Green is riding pine."

But Okl is 8.6 Pts/100 possessions better than Toronto on defense.
So being 10 pts worse (defensively) than an avg Okl 100 poss
is equivalent to being 1.4 Pts/100 worse for Tor.
Is this right?

If so, any player with on/off worse than -1.4 for Tor would be worse than Jeff Green?
(Assuming +/- actually measures something).

By: AYC Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:08:24 +0000 Terrence Williams has played extremely well over the last 6 weeks or so; his play was a big reason the Nets won 5 of their last 12

By: Jason J Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:30:27 +0000 More on Anon # 8:

adjusted +/-, as it regards defense, seems to be way too heavily linked to team performance to be any sort of measure of individual ability / contribution.

I remember looking at the numbers back when Scott Skiles was coaching the Bulls, and most of their rotation players had terrific defensive +/- numbers - even guys like Gordon who really weren't that special at the defensive end.

This season a lot of the Bucks look like terrific individual defenders based on +/-.

Scheme just seems to be too determinate to really measure player by player contribution.

By: Neil Paine Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:20:01 +0000 Agreed. The "expected wins" formula is very crude, and doesn't factor in injuries, team age, or a million other factors. I basically picked it because it's been around for a while, Hollinger came up with it, and I didn't really have time to create a better one of my own. Not an excuse, but that was the thought process involved... This summer, I'll have to look into developing better methods to evaluate coaches.

By: JP Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:55:03 +0000 Got to admit, I like most of what I see here. Only exception I have (and know this wont be popoular with the consensus) is that of Brooks as COY.

I know Hollingers method is trying to elminate opinion/bias out the equation but to just use previous winning percentage in the way he does as deducing the crucial "expected wins" figure misses out some big factors that coaches have to actually handle.

Brooks may still be deserving the award (and should definitely be in the conversation)but theres now way Id accept that hes achieved so much more then expected then his peers.

I mean, not only is he benefitting in this calculation by the 3-27 start he had at the start of last season but he hasnt had the injury problems that Skiles (Michael Redd) and McMilan (Oden, Przybilla etc) have had to deal with.

By: Neil Paine Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:19:02 +0000 It's not really a formula, though -- it's more of a fact... Plain and simple, the Thunder play much better on defense when they aren't in the game. Now, there are circumstances that can influence this, notably the ability of a player's teammates and his backups, but facts are facts, and no team plays better defense when a player is sitting vs. when he plays than the Thunder do when Jeff Green is riding pine.

By: Doobie Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:19:01 +0000 Can't trust any formulas that try to tell me that Thabo Sefolosha or Jeff Green are bad defenders

By: Ray Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:28:41 +0000 Does Wins above Expected (for Coaches) reflect injuries? Not sure how else McMillan can be so low..