Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Player Ratings

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Player Ratings

    I was doing some searching to see if I could find any kind of player ratings sort of like how they rate quarterbacks in football. I found a couple of things.

    One is the Player Efficiency Rating (PER) used in the NBA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Efficiency_Rating gives a explanation of it. You almost have to be a math major to figure some of it out.

    Another one I found is the Prouty rating system. It's a little simpler. http://www.sportsstats.com/jazzyj/prouty.htm give an explanation for it.

    Using the Prouty rating system, here are the ratings for our 5 starters for the Illinois State game.

    Code:
    Ellis  = 0.103 
    Mantas = 0.242 
    Phil   = 0.445 
    Gal    = 0.197 
    PJ     = 0.412
    I think all my calculations were correct. I used what the team winning percentage was through this game (0.5385).

  • #2
    Here are the ratings for the others that played.

    Code:
    Wendell = 0.097 
    Graham  = 0.177 
    Bret    = 0.145 
    JT      = 0.287

    Comment


    • #3
      Here are everyone's ratings through the Illinois State game.

      Code:
      Matt Braeuer     =  0.371
      Phil Thomasson   =  0.368
      JT Durley        =  0.354
      PJ Couisnard     =  0.353
      Ramon Clemente   =  0.340
      Gal Mekel        =  0.298
      Mantas Griskenas =  0.236
      Wendell Preadom  =  0.160
      Bret Michael     =  0.145
      Aaron Ellis      =  0.143
      Graham Hatch     =  0.011
      Arbry Butler     =  0.000
      Lance Harris     = -0.038
      Brett Burley     = -0.078
      Only Matt and Phil's ratings have improved from last year.

      Comment


      • #4
        For reference, here are last year's player ratings.

        Code:
        PJ Couisnard    = 0.424 
        Kyle Wilson     = 0.398 
        Ryan Martin     = 0.356 
        Matt Braeuer    = 0.354 
        Sean Ogirri     = 0.351 
        Karon Bradley   = 0.340 
        Phil Thomasson  = 0.312 
        Gal Mekel       = 0.309 
        Ryan Bradley    = 0.272 
        David King      = 0.257 
        Wendell Preadom = 0.254 
        Chris Brown     = 0.234 
        Lance Harris    = 0.133 
        Derek Brown     = 0.072

        Comment


        • #5
          Not sure what these rankings are supposed to mean for us or what can be done with them.......unless you are pointing out that three of the players from last year's team that left could have contributed better than the new players we recruited?????????

          Returned back to 6700 miles away from CKA

          Comment


          • #6
            The ratings, according to the second link above, take points, FG and FT attempts, assists, turnovers, rebounds, steals, blocked shots, personal fouls, and number of minutes played, to come up with a number that shows how a player is doing.

            Of course these ratings don't take into account what kind of competition we're up against.

            Comment


            • #7
              I would watch posting facts like that about Gal in here. They're not high enough. I'm surprised Gal's homies haven't jumped all over this one yet.
              Deuces Valley.
              ... No really, deuces.
              ________________
              "Enjoy the ride."

              - a smart man

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 1979Shocker
                The ratings, according to the second link above, take points, FG and FT attempts, assists, turnovers, rebounds, steals, blocked shots, personal fouls, and number of minutes played, to come up with a number that shows how a player is doing.

                Of course these ratings don't take into account what kind of competition we're up against.
                Good job.

                What score level indicates the following:

                EXcellent
                Good
                Average
                Fair
                Nada/Never Mind

                Comment


                • #9
                  From what I have seen, think of it being similiar to a shooting percentage, but for overall effiency.

                  So, 50-60 range is excellent (example showed JJ Redick #1 with .60)

                  On 'off years' the #1 player might have a rating of high 40's or low 50's, on good years closer to 60's. That is only indicative of the year efficiency for players. In other words, when considering only 1 year, WHERE a player falls in the ranking for players of a league is more important than the actual number.

                  The actual number is only that important when considering multiple years, indicating an 'up' efficiency year or 'down' one. But, higher the rating, generally, better the player, so when considering the pro level, a player with a .60 rating one year should be better than a 50 rated player from another year going into the pros.

                  So, to put into today's terms, JJ Redick would be twice as efficient as Gal, or twice as good.

                  If you keep your own stats (or copy from internet) in an Excel worksheet, then on a 2nd workpage, you could have the Prouty formulas on the 2nd page and auto-calc them from the 1st page of stats.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ShockerFever
                    I would watch posting facts like that about Gal in here. They're not high enough. I'm surprised Gal's homies haven't jumped all over this one yet.
                    Dude, let it go already... jesus.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      As an aside form this discussion, has anyone figured out player ratings for the 5 or so that were left out of NCAA 2k8? I'd do it myself, but I don't know a lot about basketball...
                      Deep in the heart of couldn't give a crap about college basketball-land and I miss the SHOX.
                      Students > Alumni
                      If you EVER want to open your damn mouths about Selection Sunday, READ THIS FIRST: http://www.midmajority.com/p/1296
                      The ONLY document that means ANYTHING: http://www.bbstate.com/schools/WICH/sheet

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by t7017s
                        Originally posted by ShockerFever
                        I would watch posting facts like that about Gal in here. They're not high enough. I'm surprised Gal's homies haven't jumped all over this one yet.
                        Dude, let it go already... jesus.
                        Dude, I'm long over it. It's just when you get people like RipEmUpShox continually pming you like a drunken idiot, it's hard not to.
                        Deuces Valley.
                        ... No really, deuces.
                        ________________
                        "Enjoy the ride."

                        - a smart man

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ShockerFever
                          Originally posted by t7017s
                          Originally posted by ShockerFever
                          I would watch posting facts like that about Gal in here. They're not high enough. I'm surprised Gal's homies haven't jumped all over this one yet.
                          Dude, let it go already... jesus.
                          Dude, I'm long over it. It's just when you get people like RipEmUpShox continually pming you like a drunken idiot, it's hard not to.
                          You mean the Caped Crusader?
                          "You Just Want to Slap The #### Outta Some People"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Snapshot9
                            From what I have seen, think of it being similiar to a shooting percentage, but for overall effiency.

                            So, 50-60 range is excellent (example showed JJ Redick #1 with .60)

                            On 'off years' the #1 player might have a rating of high 40's or low 50's, on good years closer to 60's. That is only indicative of the year efficiency for players. In other words, when considering only 1 year, WHERE a player falls in the ranking for players of a league is more important than the actual number.

                            The actual number is only that important when considering multiple years, indicating an 'up' efficiency year or 'down' one. But, higher the rating, generally, better the player, so when considering the pro level, a player with a .60 rating one year should be better than a 50 rated player from another year going into the pros.

                            So, to put into today's terms, JJ Redick would be twice as efficient as Gal, or twice as good.

                            If you keep your own stats (or copy from internet) in an Excel worksheet, then on a 2nd workpage, you could have the Prouty formulas on the 2nd page and auto-calc them from the 1st page of stats.
                            Thanks. If point six is the standard of excellence, we are in deep do-do.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by WstateU
                              Originally posted by ShockerFever
                              Originally posted by t7017s
                              Originally posted by ShockerFever
                              I would watch posting facts like that about Gal in here. They're not high enough. I'm surprised Gal's homies haven't jumped all over this one yet.
                              Dude, let it go already... jesus.
                              Dude, I'm long over it. It's just when you get people like RipEmUpShox continually pming you like a drunken idiot, it's hard not to.
                              You mean the Caped Crusader?
                              :rofl: The one and only.
                              Deuces Valley.
                              ... No really, deuces.
                              ________________
                              "Enjoy the ride."

                              - a smart man

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X