List away.
Although I respect some of Chinook ' commentary, he is not an expert on stats, educational or professional, and virtually every published article on relevance of box plus minus in sports would not side with him.
But whereas standard plus/minus stats are unreliable insofar as they are highly influenced by who a player is sharing the floor with – both teammates and opponents – RPM attempts to isolate each individual’s performance to give a measure of their true value....
Since the invention of basic plus minus, the plus-minus technique has been developed in order to get more accurate results. At the moment, there are 4 advanced plus minus metrics that derived from basic one.
Net Plus-Minus*(NPM)Adjusted Plus-Minus*(APM)Statistical Plus-Minus*(SPM)Regularized Adjusted Plus-Minus*(RAPM)
Are you?
I wouldn't say I'm an "expert," but I am an actuary and my day job is statistical modeling. Among my nerdy hobbies are playing with R on my home computer and reading and contributing to online math forums. I'll soon be publishing a paper on the underlying statistical functions for generating stochastic equity and interest rates. I majored in math, competed in math compe ions in college, and was president of my university's math club, although this is barely relevant because I'm in my mid-30's now.
But, so what? What does that qualify me to say? Well -- as someone who deals with math and statistics day in and day out, both professionally and recreationally, in my opinion it means I'm vastly overqualified to say that you have very little idea what you are talking about.
Then you would agree kevin Durant is the 62 best nba player... thanks plus minus
I'm not going to list away, but as an example, I'll use something from your first post:
Plus minus has absolutely no correlation to a SINGLE PLAYER
First of all, that's a nonsensical statement. Correlation is a numerical measure of the dependence, or relationship, of two measurable items. But let's assume you meant a single player's *performance* and forgot to say that word. If that's the case, to say it has no correlation is so obviously wrong that if you can't see that, I really have no hope for you.
Wow, I take it all back, you have shown me the error of my ways. Many wisdom. Such brain. Wow.
Then you also agree Andrew Wiggins was the worst player in the league? Over 400 players ahead of him. He's dead last. But plus minus box is an individual stat.
For you to pretend you didn't know what I meant and avoid the argument with name calling is telling. Explain why plus minus had to be adjusted multiple times to estimate an individual's worth or performance and renamed.
Who is better Andrew Wiggins or Jeremy lin? Is Wiggins really not better than anyone who played a minute of nba games? How exactly does plus minus box determine individual performance?
Yeah, just FYI, most of us gave up on tholdren long ago. Like, around the time he made his 3rd or 4th post, when it became readily apparent that he didn't know what was talking about, which isn't that bad of a problem, but the fact that he would never, ever, admit that he's wrong about anything, which is actually quite hilarious.
Inb4 he makes some off-color quip about me, since, yanno, he's already lost this debate pretty soundly and is going to try to be an ass to save face.
That's not accurate at all, because "traditional" stats don't account for a lot of plays that are made on the court. For instance, Bruce Bowen was a terrible player with traditional stats. His best season using those numbers were 9.3 ppg, 3.9 rebounds, .8 steals, and .5 blocks per 36 minutes. His actual numbers are even lower than that. Those are pedestrian, at best, given his 32 mpg. Yet no one would ever say that Bowen wasn't key to the success of the Spurs through the 2000s. His game in, game out contributions were not at all measurable by points, rebounds, blocks, steals, and assists, but by the defensive presence he had on the court that could so thoroughly shut down a weapon on the other team.
Similarly, Duncan's defense is even better than indicated for much of his career because of what an incredible help-side defender he has been that often alters a shot before it even becomes a shot.
Boban did't get the rebound and deserves to be -2.
If Bonner played in the playoffs like he did in the regular season, he would have been a massive weapon to have. Unfortunately he doesn't play well when it counts.
The same reason ERA became adjusted to FIP in baseball, which later led to xFIP and then SIERA. ERA has been "adjusted"/improved upon to a great degree... but it doesn't mean ERA is useless, it's just not as predictive as the others.
It "determines" individual perform in that it is an indicator of an individual's contribution. Going back to the ERA example, which like plus/minus is a stat used on individuals but is to some degree team-dependent, Clayton Kershaw had a not-very-good ERA the first half of this season. Did that tell us that Shelby Miller was better than Clayton Kershaw? No, of course not, just like your NBA example.
You seem to be missing the point. It is an indicator of individual performance, yet when used exclusively and on its own, it suffers from enormous limitations. You are speaking about it as if it is entirely useless.
Thank you for taking the time to let us know.
I completely agree. But what I meant was that traditional stats tell us how the player did in those particular areas.
Can +/- do that for a single game?
At this point in time, I guess anybody could use eye test and advanced stats to show how valuable Bruce Bowen was,
by going away from the regular box scores..
It seems like most people here agree that +/- is useful as it is observed over time, and that one single game will tell almost nothing.
So I'm wondering then, how useful is it to have it listed for every single game?
Can we put it in the same level of reliability of the other stats in the box score?
what a meltdown from.this moron that doesn't understand a single thing about using stats, tbh..
I'm a statistician, yet I'm the same person that cited Rasual Butler's Playoff PER from 7 minutes of playing time as an argument against him
Advanced stats are an attempt to take objective data and finagle them to fit a subjective evaluation. Sometimes, the new numbers correlate better. RAPM and PER are examples of this. Sometimes, they don't correlate very well. DRtg is an example of this. While they are improvements over counting stats in the sense that they often make better models, they do NOT replace those stats.
Plus-minus is not an advanced stat. It wasn't invented by someone looking to make a point or conform to a standard view. It doesn't have to correlate to performance any better than points do. In that way, the articles you're linking make perfect sense. No one would build a model based on points alone. So anyone who bases a model off plus-minus will probably be inaccurate.
But just as we care about how many points a player scores in a given game and as an average across a season or career, we should care about plus-minus. Because it matters. People who are good at it over a long career are good for a reason, and people who are bad at it for a career are bad for a reason.
Bonner may not be a great player, but you can argue that he's one of the most pivotal guys is modern NBA history. His ability to space the floor and guard opposing bigs has led to a movement toward stretch-bigs that eventually became the small-ball movement we have today. The entire league changed because guys like Bonner started to break teams like the 2010 Lakers. A team like Memphis is a paper tiger because they're allergic to spacing. Golden State got away with playing a 6-7 center because they spaced the floor. It's insane how much the NBA has changed because Bonner and guys like him absolutely own in plus-minus.
nvm
tbh...
"MathematicianS" plural ? So you admit that you're not alone in your head ?
Yeah, well, whatever you're talking about, I'm just glad Jimmer came into his own in the Heat game. His +/- was a respectable 0, while Patty Mills fell off a cliff at -10. I always knew Jimmer was the better player. Bye bye Patty, here comes Jimmer!
Unfortunately, you are missing the point.
First of all, ERA cannot be linked to plus minus. Terrible analogy. Pitcher has to throw the ball to get ERA. Basketball player doesn't have to touch the ball the whole time he is on the court and he will end up with a plus minus - whether he does good or not - his plus minus will more than likely be based on the actions of 9 other players more-so than the player himself in many instances.
Take the Knicks. Carmelo Anthony is ball dominant. He goes down and shoots 6 times in a row. Based upon his 6 shots and the defense of the man defending him. 8 other players get added or subtracted values based upon the outcome of that shot. How can these numbers give me an indication of the 8 other players. It can't. Now take that in combination with the 48 minutes of play, where some plays 2 players are involved and other plays 10 players are involved. Plus minus is adjusted after every point. Ignorant to think you can decipher individual performance.
Jason Washburn played against the clippers stellar game - he played 3 minutes, recorded one turnover and no other in game statistics, and finished with a plus minus of +6
in the same game CJ wilcox (4 min) had the same stats, one turnover, with a -6.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
