Comments on: Win Shares Tweak http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600 NBA & ABA Basketball Statistics & History Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:56:04 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6 By: Hk http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12868 Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:32:19 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12868 "Are you suggesting that a player contributes less to wins the more often takes shots late in the shot clock?"

It doesn't properly adjust for "time" needed to score. Minutes and pace are not enough.

"How exactly should Win Shares take into account shot clock usage?"

Maybe it can't yet Deepak (durvasa? ;])? Oh well.

]]>
By: Hk http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12837 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:20:01 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12837 "I don't think you understand how Win Shares are calculated, and/or what this change means on a mathematical level. He didn't tweak the formula "to account for time", he tweaked it because he realized the number of marginal points required for a high-pace team to win a ballgame is greater than the number of marginal points required for a slow team to win.The conversion between marginal points and wins used to assume a constant mpts/win rate across all teams, which obviously adds up at the league level (pace across all teams evens out to the league average) but was ignoring the fact that every point scored in a high-pace game is less valuable than one in a slow-pace game, because they are less scarce -- they're easier to come by. 2 points in a 85-80 grind-it-out game are more important than 2 points in one of those 80s-era 165-160 shootouts. So if anything, the old formula used to understate the value of taking shots late in the shot clock by undervaluing guys on slower-paced teams."

Dude, I know who "Deepak" is (I believe he is also known as "durvasa" IIRC), I am quite aware of what was tweaked.

Your site is interesting but different from 82games. I simply pointed out a nuance not accounted for. Pace is part of "time", you did indeed tweak for "time".

]]>
By: Neil Paine http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12793 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:04:53 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12793 It's the same thinking that causes people to believe that walk-it-up teams aren't as good offensively as fast-break squads because they score fewer PPG...

]]>
By: Deepak http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12792 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:44:34 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12792 "I disagree, LeBron should not have the lead in Win Shares for the post-season. ...

He takes quite a bit of shots 16-24 seconds into the possession (47% of total shots in the regular season and 50% in the post-season). It is very clear to me that you are not measuring time usage correctly.

Posessions is simply not good enough. LeBron is one of the few All-Stars in this league that takes 45+% (usually stars hover around 30-35%) of his shots between 16-24 seconds left. 82games.com is the source."

Are you suggesting that a player contributes less to wins the more often takes shots late in the shot clock? How exactly should Win Shares take into account shot clock usage?

]]>
By: Neil Paine http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12790 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:48:11 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12790 I don't think you understand how Win Shares are calculated, and/or what this change means on a mathematical level. He didn't tweak the formula "to account for time", he tweaked it because he realized the number of marginal points required for a high-pace team to win a ballgame is greater than the number of marginal points required for a slow team to win. The conversion between marginal points and wins used to assume a constant mpts/win rate across all teams, which obviously adds up at the league level (pace across all teams evens out to the league average) but was ignoring the fact that every point scored in a high-pace game is less valuable than one in a slow-pace game, because they are less scarce -- they're easier to come by. 2 points in a 85-80 grind-it-out game are more important than 2 points in one of those 80s-era 165-160 shootouts. So if anything, the old formula used to understate the value of taking shots late in the shot clock by undervaluing guys on slower-paced teams.

]]>
By: Hk http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12789 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:16:59 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12789 Anon and Jason, read the original post in this thread. I don't think you noticed the tweak made or forgot about it along the way.

The Hawks with an injured Joe Johnson and Al Horford? Yeah they got even more awful. Kobe had 30 PER in the Conference Finals and locked up Melo after Ariza couldn't guard him, also had 27+ PER against the Rockets who have better perimeter defense than the Magic. Then 27+ PER against the Magic in the Finals, while deferring the ball much more than Bron-Bron had the series before.

Justin Kubatko tweaked Win Shares to account for time. Simple as that, we're not discussing how sweet his stats look, but an objective analysis of the truth which is he handles the ball (good or bad), more than any other Superstar in the league.

Let me quote Justin:

"I was overrating the Warriors players and underrating the Blazers players. In terms of the overall prediction error this did not have a large effect (the overall error did drop, but not by much),"

There is no reason to complain about these issues to me, my comments are completely on-topic. This isn't a love/hate situation, Win Shares has overrated pace-inflated players before according to Justin himself.

]]>
By: Anon http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12786 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:12:19 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12786 @ Hk #14

It doesn't matter who you are, if your teammates either aren't producing or creating shots you're gonna be handling the ball on offense more often than those who play on loaded teams. If you followed Kobe during the '06 season (and he's just one of about a gazillion examples out there that demonstrate this fact) you would know exactly what I mean.

The beauty of WS is not only does it take one's role in the offense into account (i.e., superstars vs. all-stars vs. role players), it is also pace-adjusted. So there's no bias against teams that play at a slower tempo than others -- which, by the way, LeBron's Cavs has played at pretty much his entire career.

Also, the Cavs has played against the Hawks in the playoffs, who were virtually identical to the Jazz defensively, and the Magic who was the best defensive team in the league. LeBron has played like an MVP against both squads.

P.S. I love "Is LeBron the best player in the league?" arguments too. Never gets old lol

]]>
By: Jason J http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12780 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:40:05 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12780 Wow it's annoying to write a post that is hugely complementary of Kobe, even going so far as to contest the notion that increased production diminishes his efficiency - hence suggesting that were he put in a position of carrying a team we could expect better stats all-around - only to have a Kobe-dite come back and try to fight every word with rehashed arguments that Neil has already dissected like a dozen times. So basically, despite LeBron's superior total production, per-minute production, per possession production, FG%, TS% and eFG%, his lack of a reliable midrange j makes him a lesser player? Does that mean Patrick Ewing was better than Shaq? Cause it sounds like that's what we're saying here.

Oh, and I've been watching Phil Jackson coach the triangle offense since 1990. I know whereof I speak. LeBron might not play the same role as MJ or Kobe exactly, but he would be monstrously effective in Tex Winter's system. Scottie Pippen had a suspect jumper too when he didn't use glass, and his post game, while adequate, wasn't anything spectacular either (it got better in their second three peat, but he hardly got to use it because MJ was option 1, 2, and 3). But he was amazing inside the triangle because of his point forward skills. LeBron brings those same assets to bear - except he's better. Like Pip, he's a point forward, but he's a much better playmaker and a much better passer overall. Like Luke Walton, Bron's court vision would be much more of a blessing in an offense designed to create open shots through ball and player movement than it is in a heavy-paced, drive and kick system. Bron is also an excellent post-feeder, a great skill to have in the triple post offense. And LeBron excelled without the ball in the Olympics playing with Paul and Kidd. Moving without the ball is not a concern.

Why am I arguing a hypothetical Bron / PJax pairing, you may ask? Because I'm on my lunch break, and nobody here wants to talk ball!

]]>
By: Hk http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12772 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 07:07:16 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12772 "I think the other error we make when attributing playstyle and clock management to players is the impact of coaches. It's a lot easier for Kobe to get quick hit scores not only because Odom and Gasol demand attention, but also because Phil Jackson runs a precise offense of cuts, post ups, and passes that allows for catch and shoot and quick one on one opportunities."

Kobe has played even better without Gasol and Odom, I don't know what that really has to do with anything.

"If LeBron operated in the triangle, I imagine he would be ridiculously good at it and less likely to pound the ball all day. Kobe would be likely to get more stats (and I'm not 100% sold on the notion that increased usage leads to lower efficiency as regards great players. makes sense for the more skill-limited unwashed masses sure), but even at his most aggressive with his weakest team, he just wasn't on the same level of production as James."

At his most aggressive, he doesn't need nearly as much time as LeBron to score. That's exactly the point. I wouldn't be poo-pooing 28 PER for 41 minutes a night. LeBron's teammates are also better defensively.

LeBron does not have a mid range jumpshot or post moves, he would be more miserable in the triangle. Nor would he handle the ball nearly as much since the Triangle requires constant ball movement.

]]>
By: Hk http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600&cpage=1#comment-12771 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 07:00:23 +0000 http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=3600#comment-12771 "Not sure what shot-clock management has to do with anything, but what I DO know is that players become less efficient when they have to take on more offensive possessions (which is what the WS model is based upon). LeBron has had to carry on a larger burden of the offense throughout the reg season and the playoffs and was STILL more efficient than Kobe. The problem with the Cavs not getting to the Finals in '09? Subpar play from the rest of LeBron's teammates -- just check out Neil's SPM scores from the '09 ECF, LeBron is the only player on the Cavs (outside of Terance Kinsey, who played four minutes in the series) who even had a POSITIVE +/- score!And LeBron's running mates were also pretty subpar using WS as well. I don't know about you, but when the guys around you aren't making shots, I'd be handling the ball on offense more often too :)"

Players on the Warriors and Suns have inflated numbers because (while they may have a nice True Shooting percentage or whatever), they needed more time to score those points. I never said LeBron wasn't a great player, but his PER is indeed inflated because it is not completely penalizing him for time.

Completely ignoring any stat, and just looking at him play I don't know why anyone is surprised. Yes his teammates are spot up shooters and he needs to dribble the ball and waste more shot clock than anyone to run that kind of offense. It works to a degree (we'll see about the Post-season), he's a great player, but 82games adds another time component simply not accounted for on this great website. Regardless of my disagreements with Blog Writer X, I still like having such discussions and reading anyone's thoughts on these subjects. I am not saying he's some crazy hog (he's been given the green light to do this within his offense), but other nuances are not being taken into account.

]]>