Tweet
[quote="SB Shock"]
Seems to be an oversimplification to me - but if you want to run with that go ahead. Might remind you WSU is 7-11 and 1-6 in conference and the implications that come with it by using your metric.
What implications? My use of this measurement does not influence the record. Those hilighted portions in the graphics I've posted under Prouty Ratings thread show those better than the team's score. Subtracting the two scores, in fact, eliminates the perception contributed to by a winning record or losing record. As such, it identifies players better than the team average and by how much as well as players below the team average and by how much.
I'm not suggesting that this method is perfect but it does seems to eliminate some of the more serious flaws of the Prouty, for example, which produces a very high rating for a high field goal percentage, as discussed on that other thread.
Yeah, the prouty doesn't make much sense to me. But there are never any perfect method when you try to quantify and model various parameters, especially when there certain parameters that are not measurable. Also each method has different objective.
My plus/minus (player contribution) calculation only goal is to capture a players contribution and quantify how his play in other parts of his play (that are documented in the box score) affect the team scoring. It's easy to value a player who scores consistently, but I think we sometime overlook other players who contribute in a lot of ways beyond just scoring - my method just tries to quantify that contribution.
I don't claim it's a perfect metric, but it does seem to provide useful information (at least to me).
Overall he was a positive for the game (even though he had some negatives) and his total contribution been a positive in 13 out of 18 game for the season.
Your screen is too large. Go back to the 15" size.
Originally posted by im4wsu
Originally posted by SB Shock
Originally posted by im4wsu
Tell me one statistic that is more important than the final score.
What implications? My use of this measurement does not influence the record. Those hilighted portions in the graphics I've posted under Prouty Ratings thread show those better than the team's score. Subtracting the two scores, in fact, eliminates the perception contributed to by a winning record or losing record. As such, it identifies players better than the team average and by how much as well as players below the team average and by how much.
I'm not suggesting that this method is perfect but it does seems to eliminate some of the more serious flaws of the Prouty, for example, which produces a very high rating for a high field goal percentage, as discussed on that other thread.
My plus/minus (player contribution) calculation only goal is to capture a players contribution and quantify how his play in other parts of his play (that are documented in the box score) affect the team scoring. It's easy to value a player who scores consistently, but I think we sometime overlook other players who contribute in a lot of ways beyond just scoring - my method just tries to quantify that contribution.
I don't claim it's a perfect metric, but it does seem to provide useful information (at least to me).
I don't know which of those comes through in the plus/minus score, but it shows Murry had a significant positive contribution to the win.
Comment