Comments on: John Hollinger Responds

By: sportsreport.de

sportsreport.de — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 11:13:52 +0000

First of all: I love what you are doing.
at the end of the day this looks like a lot of fun.
(better than using the same economic datasets again and again)
where do you guys get the stats / data from? I mean Hollinger has Elias Sportsbureau but where do you get it from ?

Have you ever thought about weighting ?

By: Juan Dixon, Superstar-in-Waiting « WoW Bits

Juan Dixon, Superstar-in-Waiting « WoW Bits — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 08:25:58 +0000

[...] Hollinger then responded: [...]

By: Statistics for MVP « Stutter Step

Statistics for MVP « Stutter Step — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:59:49 +0000

[...] the web in evaluating players. I side with Dave Berri of the Wages of Wins Journal in saying that PER is not a good measure. Berri’s reasoning can be found here, but a simple explanation is that players can raise [...]

By: Sullivan Naima

Sullivan Naima — Sun, 06 May 2007 22:50:39 +0000

I love this article…

Will refer to my friends

http://www.blazingro.com

By: Matthias Stacey

Matthias Stacey — Sat, 05 May 2007 10:25:55 +0000

You’re the master man…

http://www.mexicoweb.com.mx/busca/buscador.cgi?query=%22%3E%20%3Ca%20href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ordercredit.info%22%3ESmall%20Business%20Credit%20Card%20Application%3C%2Fa%3E

By: Shane Makayla

Shane Makayla — Fri, 04 May 2007 03:24:52 +0000

Great…

A spanish translation about this topic might be found in here

http://www.buscaparejaenlinea.es

By: Caleb

Caleb — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 20:39:40 +0000

If a missed shot is NOT rebounded by a particular player, what happens to it? It seems like the value lost is only some fraction of the value of a posession (and thus the value of getting that rebound is only a fraction of a posession).

Doesn’t WP in fact consider that rebound to be as valuable as a full posession?

I could be wrong, as I am no statistician…

By: Rob Allen

Rob Allen — Tue, 05 Dec 2006 23:20:17 +0000

I just did a search for the word “league” on this page and found that the only hits were in Hollinger’s response. I think that’s the thing you’re missing. PER is a comparison and doesn’t rise or fall in a vacuum.

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 03 Dec 2006 18:12:33 +0000

That’s more or less true. The defensive rebound gets assigned to one person regardless of what caused the missed shot, who boxed out for the rebound. Many things go into it, but one person gets the credit. Just as a point of reflection, a steal is credited to one person when the other 4 players who have their men bottled up such that the guy with the ball doesn’t have any options and allows himself to be picked. Perhaps these aren’t equal, but all stats in some way reflect more than the single event.

But that’s a critique that tries to rationalize the value rather than obtain the value. And the critique is positioned at the level of the individual credit rather than the value as it goes to the team where a defensive rebound and a steal are both changes of possession without a score and could reasonably assumed to be equal. The ‘critique by rationalization’ doesn’t actually address whether or not the values credited to individuals in the model are or are not valid *as they relate to a forecasting model.* If they are not valid, then there should not be a lower level of consistency in the wins produced between players and players changing supporting casts should not bring their actual value since a large part of the ‘credit’ is misassigned. If the values are acceptable then it should work as a reasonable forecast even if rationally we know that there’s more to each of the stats. But that’s an emprirical matter of how the model fits to the data rather than one of rationalization. It’s important to keep the distinction in mind.

By: Ian

Ian — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 18:17:36 +0000

I must be missing something. It seems to me that according to this system, the entire value of the change in posession that results from a defensive rebounder is being assigned TO the rebounder, despite the fact that the rebounder itself couldn’t get that rebound unless an opposing player missed the shot, which has to at least be partially attributed to the defense played on that player. Thus, defense+defensive rebound=value of one change of possession. A steal alone=value of one change of possession, so how can a steal=defensive rebound in value?