Proposed method to track performance of our starters

I am using a composite ranked score. Here's how it goes - we are looking at 6 metrics: PPM (points per minutes played), RPG, APG, SPG, TPG and BPG.

totals for 8, 16, (multiple of 8 games) are added up for each of the following positions per team , SF, PF, C, SG, PG and Bench and then averaged (for RPG, APG, SPG, TPG and BPG) PPM is straight foward. The bench is normalized for the averaged number of players played (so in effect we are having a theoretical bench player of 1)

Comparison is done across all 30 teams for the 6 metrics within each position.

the teams are then ranked - the top 3 teams score 10 points, the next 3 9-points and so on until the bottom 3 teams gets only 1 points.

The composite score is the total points accumulated for the 6 metrics for each position.

 

Okay folks - managed to crunch the next batch (after all teams played 16 games - boy was it tedious) - but here's how the Rockets fared based on the stats:

SF(16g) - 37 points - ranked 11/30 (this is roughly at the Good Level)
Top 3 teams in this are OKC (51), MIA (49) and POR (45) - compared to the previous SF(8g) score of 29 this is a great improvement (up 4 levels).

PF(16g) - 27 points - ranked 23/30 this is roughly the level that Needs More Development (NMD). Compared to PF(8g) score of 21 points (BOP) this is up 2 levels. Top 3 teams in this are SAS (53), ATL (43), LAC (41)

C(16g) - 35 points - ranked 15/30 - this is Decent Level - compared to C(8g) 32 points (Average) - it is up 1 level. Top 3 teams are LAL (47), UTA (47), CHI (45).

SG(16g) - 48 points - ranked 1/30 - this is Elite level - compared to SG(8g) of 46 points - no change (but this is already at the top). Top 3 teams in this position are PHI (48), HOU (48), MIA (47).

PG(16g) - 41 points - ranked 7/30 - this is at Star level - compared to PG(8g) of 41 points - no change (but dropped from Superstar level to Star level likely due to other PG improving their plays). Top 3 teams are TOR (47), CHA (46), OKC (46).

Bench(16g) - 37 points - ranked 11/30 this is at Good Level. Compared to Bench(8g) score of 40 points - they have dropped one level. Top 3 teams are MIL (46), PHX (46), DAL (46).

Anyways the total Team Composite Score (for 16 games) for Houston Rockets was 225 - making us amongst the top 3 teams MEM (227), CHA (225) and HOU (225) - which also means that this composite score don't mean anything for prediction of game results against other opponents (please remember the stats I am using is after-the-fact - so it is only useful to gauge how our players have performed and is not useful at all to predict future game results).

Overall, I don't think we need to worry too much, as the team appears to be heading in the right direction - Go Rockets!

 

It's work in progress do we may need to relook over the matrices but I am not worried. The composite was never meant as a predictive tool but you are right that we need to address the apparent mismatch why when our team is scoring high but the results aren't showing it? One obvious thing is that the composite is an average over multiple games 4 good games + 4 bad games will yield a similar result to 8 average games. You can have a good game and still lose (because your opp. Just happens to play better than you). You win despite playing poorly if your opp. Suck even more.

I am thinking a few things to look through - one is of course a weightage issue currently all 6 sub-matrix is equal weight.

Another impact may simply be although we have a reasonably talented squad they may be used inappropriately (I.e. would that score display this by the discrepancy we are observing?)

I am using equal weightage because it shouldn't matter much if we are comparing apples to apples. I.e. we ar only ranking sf to sf on their rebounds, steals etc. we aren't comparing it to other positions so whatever unknown weightage we may need to apply should rightly cancel out.

Let's continue to see what happens after 24 games and see how we ar faring - What I am seeing so far is that we shouldn't be too worried about our players they are developing fine or holding their own against their peers and for the first year if they hold a decent level performance I think it would alright.

 

If you are intending to make this into a lof vs loh thread please go and visit the other threads that focus on specific players. Here we are trying to discuss if we will be able to develop some kind of assessment of our team performance.

My apologies if i have wasted your time, thanks for reading anyways.

 

I am likely to abandon the composite score (I have tried other adjustments composite rank-scores) it still doesn't gel with results.

One of the thing I could observe was for SAS (although they are above average) in terms of the scores - they don't really score high but yet they are at the top of our div. This may be due to great coaching (i.e. the coach knew how to best use his available talents) - which might be another consideration that never pops up in any of our statistics. (So one idea may be to downgrade the scores by half if the team did not win - would that bring the scores closer to reality? - I am not sure - but I might try that later).

The other thing (I may need to look at the stats again) - it seems to me a lot of teams seem to play better somehow when they play against Houston (not sure if this is because of Harden or Lin or because no one wants to lose to the youngest team in the league).

 

I think you may be right but here's how it looks from a statistical point of view:

The teams we have played so far (and how they are faring when they aren't playing us):

e.g. Lakers against Houston (avg 112 points) - against other teams (avg 100.4 points).

Spurs against Houston (avg 124) - against other teams (avg. 104.1)

I haven't got time to check through the rest yet - but will try and see if there is some pattern.....

 

Okay here's a rough breakdown of the teams that had played against houston (point vs H) and (average points against all other teams).

Pistons 89 (H) - 94.8 (O)
Hawks - 102 (H) - 96.6 (O)
Blazers - 107 (H) - 97.1 (O)
Nuggets - 93 (H) - 101.0 (O)
Grizzlies - 93 (H) - 98.5 (O)
Heat - 113 (H) - 103.7 (O)
Hornets - 96 (H) - 91.3 (O)
Lakers - 112 (H) - 100.4 (O)
Jazz - 109 (H) - 100.5 (O)
Knicks - 103 (H) - 102.6 (O)
Raptors - 101 (H) - 95.3 (O)
Thunder - 120 (H) - 105.4 (O)
Spurs - 124 (H) - 104.1 (O)
Mavericks - 116 (H) - 99.3 (O)

So aside from Pistons, Nuggets and Grizzlies - the rest of teams fared better than their average against other teams when playing against Rockets.

 

Just waiting for ATL, MEM, MIA and WAS to complete 24 games before I crunch the third set of comparisons - this time round I may drop the total composite as we can observe it doesn't really serve much use (when we see the final result) - so I may propose another way to look at the stats (maybe choosing the best 3 out of 6 sub-measures to take a look).... shucks after the next round only MIA is missing 1 game to 24.....

until then happy holidays in case I slipped in my posting or is unable to get onto the boards!

 

Okay with MIA finally playing their 24th game here is how our rockets are holding out in various positions in comparison to the rest of the NBA...

At SF(24g) - 36 points - still holding out at 11/30. (Still at the GOOD level). Top teams are OKC (50), MIA (47), POR (45), MEM (45) and MIN (45)

At PF(24g) - 24 points - now 27/30 - a drop (Now at PTW - painful to watch level). Top teams are SAS (48), UTA (44) and NOH (43).

At C(24g) - 33 points - now at 17/30 - a drop to AVERAGE level. Top teams are UTA (49), LAL (46) and CHI (44).

At SG(24g) - 48 points - is 1/30 - this is at ELITE level. Top teams are HOU (48), PHI (45) and MIL (45).

At PG(24g) - 36 points - is at 12/30. This is at GOOD level (a drop). Top teams are OKC (48), TOR (46) and CHA (46).

At Bench(24g) - 39 points - is at 10/30. This is at GOOD Level. (Maintained). Top teams are LAC (47), DAL (46), UTA (46) and DEN (46).

Of course our rockets have moved onwards and improved themselves subsequently, so will like to see what the comparisons would be like after 32 games. I haven't got time to look through the scores and try to fine-tune - I suspect not all the sub-matrixes are important (might be looking at the top teams in each division and find out which sub-factors are significant and tweak by throwing weights around for example - TPG may not be too significant as compared to say PPM).

Very nice win over MEM - go Rockets!

 

Well, since we can't really start a new thread, thought I would use this opportunity to wish all CF members a very happy new year ahead for 2013 - and looking forward to the Rockets improving on their number of wins. Hey guys and gals, look on the bright side - we are ending the year being on the more positive side of 0.5! And things will only get better as our players mature and gain experience and strength - so the future's looking great! Go rockets!

PS: yeah, I will try and do the next comparison after the 32 games mark - we still need to improve on our PF spot but overall I think our team is on the right track performance-wise.

 

After 32 games (for all teams) - here's how our Rockets is faring in various positions (in comparison to other teams - please note this is a comparison of positions/roles and is not an indication of the performance of any particular player).

At SF(32g) - 36 points we are still holding at the GOOD level. Top teams in this position are OKC 50, MIA 50 and IND 46.

At PF(32g) - 25 points - a very slight improvement of 1 point but still at the Painful-To-Watch (PTW) level. Top teams in this position are SAS 49, ATL 44 and LAC 43.

At C(32g) - 30 points - a further drop and we are now at the Under-Performing (UP) level. This is an area of concern. Top teams are UTA 47, LAL 46 and MEM 44.

At SG(32g) - 48 points - this is our best spot and is at the ELITE level. Top teams are HOU 48, MIA 46 and MIL 45.

At PG(32g) - 38 points - we have moved back to the STAR level. Top teams are OKC 48, TOR 44, LAC & PHI 43.

At Bench(32g) - 33 points - we have dropped one level down to DECENT level but I think its not an area of concern (yet). Top teams are LAC 48, DET 47, DAL & DEN 45.

Seriously, we need to address our PF performance and watch out for our regression in C.

I still think our team is doing fine (by my expectations - I am only expecting them to hit 0.5 for this first year together) - so the team has in fact performed beyond my expectations. But we certainly have areas of growth still needed.

The last game against NOH looked to be an anomaly - we weren't even scoring at our normal levels. Strange game - but if I were to look at the stats - our starters outscored their starters it was really our bench not scoring enough (as compared to their bench) that may have undid us. Guess when the 3-points did not drop our folks should have stuck to 2-pointers (i.e. we lost by 9 points - if 5 of our 3-point attempt that failed were converted to 5 successful 2 pointers we would have won by 1 - overall both teams attempted about the same amount of shots).

Looking forward to the game against Boston - Go Rockets!

 

Okay - finally all teams have completed 40 games so here's how our Rockets is faring in the various positions:

At SF(40g) - 35 points - a point dip but we are still at the GOOD level. Top teams in this area are: OKC (51), MIA (50) and IND (46)

At PF(40g) - 22 points - dropped again and we are BOP (bottom of pile) - yep dead last -sigh.... Top teams in this area are: SAS (48), UTA (46), ATL and POR (44).

At C(40g) - 30 points -holding - and we are still Under-performing. Top teams in this area are: UTA (48), LAL and MEM (44).

At SG(40g) -48 points - still ELITE - no big worries in this department. Top teams in this area are: MIA (49), HOU (48) and DEN (46).

At PG(40g) - 38 points - Holding at the STAR level. Top teams in this area are: OKC (48), TOR (44), LAC, PHI and CHA (43).

At Bench(40g) - 33 points - Holding at DECENT level. Top teams in this area are: LAC (49), DET and DEN (47).

We are still weak in the PF area but looking at PPat's performance for last game - there seem to be promise of improvement (anyways we have no other ways but to go up since we have hit bottom in this category).

The other areas to improve upon would really be a concern for our center - not very stable.

Yeah, I know we went through a bad patch of 7 losses but the way I see it - that's mainly due to a shooting slump - if you take a look closely we have the opportunities to shoot just not making them. Shooting can always be improved so am not too worried. My only other concern might be the coaches may be trying too many things (which may result in confusion on a young squad which can lead to inconsistent results).

Let's hope from the Pelicans game onwards, our team will go on a roll! Go Rockets! Let's break through the NETS!