Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arturo from Wages of Wins released his season predictions - Raps looking good

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arturo from Wages of Wins released his season predictions - Raps looking good

    http://wagesofwins.com/2012/10/09/th...early-preview/

    Wins Produced has its problems with overvaluing certain stats and undervaluing others, but if there's one thing you can say about it: it's a remarkably good model for predicting wins at the team level. I'm feeling better and better about this season.

    (Biggest 'lol, yup' moment of the article: Jose ranks as the 6th most efficient offensive player...but he's 319th on D.)

    Other highlights:

    - Lowry ranks 21st overall, without being in the top 30 in any category. What? It's because he rates pretty good at everything.
    - Landry Fields 27th on defense.
    Last edited by tkfu; Tue Oct 9, 2012, 05:59 AM.

  • #2
    tkfu wrote: View Post
    Wins Produced has its problems with overvaluing certain stats and undervaluing others, but if there's one thing you can say about it: it's a remarkably good model for predicting wins at the team level.
    Hey tkfu. I agree with you, I really like the WP community since they contribute so much data, tools and analysis, but I also have my issues with WP, though still think it's quite valuable.

    The system is remarkable good at predicting wins at the team level because it is based upon regressions from wins to box score stats, the problems arise when you try to attribute wins to individual players.

    I used to think the problem's with WP where based on a lack of efficiency stats for rebounds in boxscore, causing them to overvalue high-rebound, low-shot-attempts players. But now I think the problems are much bigger than just that.

    The trouble is not all teams play the same, and thus league wide regressions may not explain how a given-team's players win games, and what contributions players make to the wins a given team has. To clarify the picture we need something along the lines of a "Relative Wins Produced," regressions based on a given team, not league wide. IMO, that could help clarify individual performance significantly.

    Comment


    • #3
      I mean, I think the biggest problem is the lack of evaluation of defense. The single greatest contributor to the offensive portion of most players' WP is thier shooting efficiency, which is fine (up to a point, shot creation, blah blah blah, &c.) But on the defensive side, an individual player only gets credit for steals, defensive boards, and blocks. Just like the essence of good offense is taking efficient shots, the essence of good defense is making your opponent take inefficient shots, and WP completely ignores that on the level of the individual player. There is a team adjustment added, but it is simply divided among all players, pro-rated by minutes.

      All that said: on the team level, WP is very good, and there is a higher season-to-season correlation for an individual player's WP than for any other advanced stat I know of. Those two facts mean that WP is the best publicly available tool out there for projecting a team's winning percentage.

      (of course, no stat is infallible, predictions are prone to a fairly wide margin of error, &c.)

      Comment


      • #4
        tkfu wrote: View Post
        Wins Produced has its problems with overvaluing certain stats and undervaluing others, but if there's one thing you can say about it: it's a remarkably good model for predicting wins at the team level. I'm feeling better and better about this season.
        We have one fatal flaw in our team right now.

        According to WP:
        - we have 5 players in the top 50 in the league (Kyle Lowry, Ed Davis, Jose Calderon, Amir Johnston, Landry Fields)
        - we have the best PG pair in the league (Kyle, Jose)
        - we have one of the best front courts in the league (Ed, Amir, Aaron Gray, likely big Val)
        - we have decent options at the wings (Landry, Chris Wright, Dominic McGuire, likely TRoss)

        However, we are likely to play a lot of players 11-15 in our depth chart. Two of them are considered our 'stars'. You know, the two who went a combined 11/29 yesterday against Real Madrid. Fatal. Flaw.

        Comment


        • #5
          Kuh wrote: View Post
          We have one fatal flaw in our team right now.

          According to WP:
          - we have 5 players in the top 50 in the league (Kyle Lowry, Ed Davis, Jose Calderon, Amir Johnston, Landry Fields)
          - we have the best PG pair in the league (Kyle, Jose)
          - we have one of the best front courts in the league (Ed, Amir, Aaron Gray, likely big Val)
          - we have decent options at the wings (Landry, Chris Wright, Dominic McGuire, likely TRoss)

          However, we are likely to play a lot of players 11-15 in our depth chart. Two of them are considered our 'stars'. You know, the two who went a combined 11/29 yesterday against Real Madrid. Fatal. Flaw.
          I would not put so much faith on a system which ranks Ed Davis (42) higher than James Harden (67), Tony Parker (91), Marc Gasol (119), Russel Westbrook (137), Rudy Gay (157), LaMarcus Aldridge (169), and does not list Kobe Bryant as a top 180 player in the league.

          It fails the eye test, bigggggg time.

          Comment


          • #6
            So the Raps are predicted to be anywhere from a 5-8 seed in the East, with 8 seed being most likely. Sounds about right to me.

            Comment


            • #7
              Kuh wrote: View Post

              However, we are likely to play a lot of players 11-15 in our depth chart. Two of them are considered our 'stars'. You know, the two who went a combined 11/29 yesterday against Real Madrid. Fatal. Flaw.
              Is what you are saying here that AB and DD are in the bottom quarter of our players on a wp scale/depth chart as determined by this system?

              The fatal flaw in this system is it obviously isnt worth shit at predicting what an individual player is worth to the team. Does anyone really believe that Ed or Amir are better players than Andrea? Or that running wright out there for 35min is going to win you more games than DeMar?
              LET'S GO RAP-TORS!!!!!

              Comment


              • #8
                Highlight of the link:

                The Nets and Raptors are one injury away from contending (Apologies in advance to Bargniani and Lopez)

                Comment


                • #9
                  minks77 wrote: View Post
                  Is what you are saying here that AB and DD are in the bottom quarter of our players on a wp scale/depth chart as determined by this system?

                  The fatal flaw in this system is it obviously isnt worth shit at predicting what an individual player is worth to the team. Does anyone really believe that Ed or Amir are better players than Andrea? Or that running wright out there for 35min is going to win you more games than DeMar?
                  Well, yeah, the wins produced guys believe it. It's kind of amazing: in my view a classic case of 'scientism' in action. But they genuinely believe that Ed Davis (and Reggie evans) are amongst the best players in the league. For one thing, WP makes no allowance for the effect players have on their teammate shooting percentages, which are often quite large. So guys like Evans and Davis, who gum up the whole offense because nobody needs to cover them unless they're standing under the rim, don't get penalized for their lack of offensive versatility.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    minks77 wrote: View Post
                    Is what you are saying here that AB and DD are in the bottom quarter of our players on a wp scale/depth chart as determined by this system?

                    The fatal flaw in this system is it obviously isnt worth shit at predicting what an individual player is worth to the team. Does anyone really believe that Ed or Amir are better players than Andrea? Or that running wright out there for 35min is going to win you more games than DeMar?
                    Strangely, this system is good at matching individual stats to team wins. VERY good.
                    Sure, I believe that Ed and Amir are better players than Andrea.
                    I don't know enough about Wright to comment. I would have an open mind.

                    One thing Wins Produced does is penalise players for missing shots. I think that's fair. If both teams rebound, steal, etc the same, both have the same number of shots each game. Miss more than half of yours and your team loses. AB and DD miss a high percentage of their shots.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      malefax wrote: View Post
                      Well, yeah, the wins produced guys believe it. It's kind of amazing: in my view a classic case of 'scientism' in action. But they genuinely believe that Ed Davis (and Reggie evans) are amongst the best players in the league. For one thing, WP makes no allowance for the effect players have on their teammate shooting percentages, which are often quite large. So guys like Evans and Davis, who gum up the whole offense because nobody needs to cover them unless they're standing under the rim, don't get penalized for their lack of offensive versatility.
                      Yeah, that's definitely a problem. The thing is, it's really hard to address with numbers. The on-off data is much too noisy to be of much use--take a look at adjusted plus-minus and you'll find some pretty ridiculous results too, except that APM is also wildly inconsistent year-to-year.

                      I think that there's some really significant value in WP because of its year-to-year consistency. That at least tells you that you're measuring a real effect. To go beyond that you have to apply real-world basketball knowledge. The challenge is in being able to honestly synthesize and use the information, rather than just pick out the pieces of data that support your conclusion from each source. As Feynman said, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I don't know enough about WP/WS to comment but you can clearly see the difference in a player like Harden over Ed so this system is obviously flawed. It's great that it penalizes for missed shots but does it take usage rates and sample size into account? I have no clue where it is they are coming up with these ranks or where it is they are going so laughably wrong but they are. They may believe in their numbers but Casey and others have consistently spoken of Andrea as their best player, bar none. I'm no Andrea fan but he is the best option when you need a bucket from this squad.

                        The final predictions it makes may be close (horseshoes and hand grenades) but the individual ranks are ludicrous. I love Amir, up until he fouls a guy while jogging across midcourt. ED is a boarding machine, but he can't hit bunnies in an empty gym. Where is the adjustment for boeheadedness?

                        Thanks to injury we've actually seen lineups featuring some of these higher ranked players on the court for extended minutes and the results are ugly ball, anemic offence, mediocre defence and loses with a capital "L".
                        LET'S GO RAP-TORS!!!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I'm a big fan of Wins Produced and Win Probabilities but this is the first time I've seen them so inaccurate from an individual standpoint.
                          your pal,
                          ebrian

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Kuh wrote: View Post
                            Strangely, this system is good at matching individual stats to team wins. VERY good.
                            Sure, I believe that Ed and Amir are better players than Andrea.
                            I don't know enough about Wright to comment. I would have an open mind.
                            What we know about Chris Wright:

                            24 years old
                            Was undrafted
                            Split last season between GS and D-league
                            Played less than 200 minutes in the NBA last season and did not impress GS enough to be offered a contract.

                            Yup, this guy COULD BE better than Andrea Bargnani!!

                            While on the subject of keeping an open mind, maybe you should give some thought about coach Casey being able to recognize basketball talent better than you and me.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Kuh wrote: View Post
                              Strangely, this system is good at matching individual stats to team wins. VERY good.
                              Sure, I believe that Ed and Amir are better players than Andrea.
                              I don't know enough about Wright to comment. I would have an open mind.

                              One thing Wins Produced does is penalise players for missing shots. I think that's fair. If both teams rebound, steal, etc the same, both have the same number of shots each game. Miss more than half of yours and your team loses. AB and DD miss a high percentage of their shots.
                              You got any proof for that?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X