Reply With Quote
Not sure who you're speaking to on this issue. I personally put that idea to bed the first time it suggested that Matt Bonner was a decent basketball player.
Matt Bonner, the King of the +/-, was a freaking +14 in tonight's game in Denver. He didn't do jack .
David West, who played tough all game and had 17 points, 7 boards, and 5 blocks... 5 blocks! He was a -14.
Can we FINALLY put to bed the idea of trying to use +/- as a measure of player performance? I mean, isn't that enough to tell anybody that it's a ridiculous, meaningless stat? You might as well just pull a random number out of a hat, and THEN look at the actual game to see if it was right.
Not sure who you're speaking to on this issue. I personally put that idea to bed the first time it suggested that Matt Bonner was a decent basketball player.
I wasn't talking about Bonner specifically. It's the people who just KEEP insisting that the +/- can be a useful stat. I don't know why they keep bringing it up, but tonight's box was about as good an example as you could ever get. The +/- NEVER tells you anything. If you have to look at the game anyway (to see if the +/- was "right"), just skip looking at the +/- and use your head. And your head has to tell you that Bonner didn't contribute tonight, while West kicked ass and took names.
Perhaps your anger about this should be directed at ESPN, Yahoo, and the NBA since they are the ones who track and publish this in the boxscores.
LOL... angry? Worn out maybe. I would think that after this game, nobody who watches Spurs games could ever think that +/- means anything again.
But I bet some will.
What kind of +/- are you talking about?
Single game plus/minus is relatively meaningless, but season long metrics like RPM, RAPM, and even BPM are rather accurate. Like any stat, they have their flaws, but those metrics usually seem to be in line with eye-test evaluation.
It's a useful stat when looking at the performance of lineups, but individual +/- is pretty much useless, I agree.
Inb4 "Porker -35, Patty +45" posts in the next game thread
Doubt anyone's angry. It's a legitimate stat. Why shoot the messenger? It's the people with an agenda that misuse stats to try to fit a narrative that are frustrating.
chinook is angry
no, and you are dumb for suggesting it.
+- can't be wrong
lol chinook jr
Of course single game +/- isn't a valuable measure of a player's impact. But if you look at +/- over the course of the season (specifically models such as RPM or RAPM that adjust for strength of teammates and opposing lineups), it can be useful. Obviously it's not perfect, but I'd certainly say it's a more accurate gauge of a player's impact compared to metrics like PER or WS.
All +/- tells you is that the team does better or worse then a player is on the court. Over the course of a single game, yeah, that's going to be seriously flawed. But if you're looking at 82 games and the team seems to always do better when that guy is on the court, there might be something there. You just have to use context and dig deeper sometimes to determine whether that player is actually the driving factor for the team doing better, or if there's other stuff going on (i.e. DJ has crazy on-off numbers, but then you realize he plays 80+% of his minutes with CP3...when CP3 isn't on the court and DJ is still playing, the Clippers aren't that good).
As the le of the thread says - they try to use it as a measure of player performance (and therefore player value). If you look at last night's +/- it looks like Bonner was great, and West was .
The ONLY thing that individual +/- shows is that the player was in the game at a time when their team outscored the other. That's it. People constantly try to use it to say one guy "contributes more than people think". And, worse than that, they try to say that playing a guy more would result in more wins.
I don't think you can EVER look at the +/- after a game and know for sure who played well and who didn't. You have to look at other stats and, preferably, the game itself. So if you have to look at those things anyway... why not just look at them and eliminate the damned +/- altogether? I don't care who publishes what stats. Vegas publishes a lot of to help the losers ship in their money night after night. Last night's game was just one of the best examples of why looking at individual +/- is such a waste of time.
It's a completely useless stat. I agree.
Not Really - DRPM has Ricky Rubio leading the league from PG ... FAIL
Its not useless at all. Its a great stat to look at when eveluating performance relative to their teamates. Thats not to say it doesnt have its flaws, but supplemented with watching the game..its useful. Bonner was a plus for a very long time because he always fell in the line of extreme due to the matchuls available when he was playing, when he played and other variables.
Not a fail actually. He's a fine defender. Can't shoot worth a lick, but defense is something he's quite good at.
I don't think he is a good defender, nor do I think he is the best PG in the league. I know you think he's a good defender, but tops out of all the PGs?
Who do you have as the best defensive pg? Idk if he's the best, maybe top 3-5. But it's a pretty good indicator stat to use. Obviously there are other things to consider and no 1 stat tells the whole story. But it's a solid one to use to get an idea
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bonner