http://basketballvalue.com/topplayers.php?year=2009-2010&mode=summary&sortnumber=94&sortorder=DESC This website currently lists the Chuckwagon (that's right) as the man with the top "1 Year Adjusted +/-," followed closely by Kobe, Dirk, and D-Wade! For a description of this magical statistic, click the glossary section. This metric is complicated and debatable, but it's still something to feel good (and laugh) about. You'll see that Landry is pretty high on the list too.
I saw Jason Williams after Wade and quickly ran a Google search only to find out he was not a rookie.
I want to know how many Charges the Chuckwagon has drawn this year. It has to be top 5. Nobody keeps that stat apparently, but they keep how many dunks Dwight Howard has gotten. Go figure...
This is a proper use of the +/- stat. Over one game you get too many variables. But over a larger sample size you start to see trends and patterns develop. Course, Hayes is a great defender and with an offense where he isn't a finisher or a decoy(like under JVG) but a distributor the scoring punch doesnt take a hit.
Have to take it with a grain of salt when we're not even a month into the season (these numbers are through 11/18). It reflects what has happened (how Rocket lineups have outscored opposing lineups), and what one may infer is the reason for what has happened (based on who was playing, and how the point differential changes with different combinations of players). I'm a believer in the usefulness of these type of stats (as are many with Rockets, I think), but we can't draw too much from them this early. Though, I will make note of the Rockets APM in the early going: Code: [B]minutes 2-year 1-year[/B] Hayes, Chuck 319.78 +4.35 +36.03 Landry, Carl 292.5 +4.42 +18.03 Scola, Luis 362.2 +3.46 +8.46 Brooks, Aaron 414.38 -4.3 +8.24 Andersen, David 147.9 N/A +0.86 Budinger, Chase 205.12 N/A -1.78 Lowry, Kyle 282.52 -5.29 -4.61 Ariza, Trevor 458.25 +0.94 -15.22 Battier, Shane 393.1 -0.73 -29.98 1-year is a rating strictly on what happened this year, while 1-year is a rating based on what happened so far this year and what we know happened last year (regular season -- I don't think they take into account playoffs).
http://www.hoopdata.com/defrebstats.aspx?team=%&type=tot&posi=%&yr=2010&gp=0&mins=0 He's drawn 9 offensive fouls, which is 10th in the league. Two of his teammates are also in the top ten (Lowry and Scola both have 11). Though a lot of the offensive fouls Lowry draws are not charges, but him ramming into screens and flopping back like he got shot. Amongst players who have played at 15 minutes a game, Chuck is also 4th in blocks+steals+charges drawn per minute, which you can also verify at Hoop Data. For people that are wondering where they got the offensive fouls drawn data, its embedded in the ESPN play by plays. It took me a while to figure that out.
The odd thing I see is that among the Top 50 players in adjusted +/- for this year, nearly 40% are below average players for the past two years combined.
He drew like 3 in the last game and at least 2 the game before. If they are getting it from the internet play by play, it could be off. He draws at least 1 a game. Can't see Scola having 2 more.
But it's a Sacamano the Stalker post. Could he possibly have any other subject that he might find worth posting about? Once Battier gets traded or retires, Mr Sac will quietly fade into the hall of ghosts ... his relentless haunting has finally completed and his soul at rest.
Speaking of stalkers...who the hell are you? And why are you so concerned with who or what I post about? If you're more interested in personal attacks on other posters than discussing the topic at hand, please, just don't bother posting. Some of us are actually trying to discuss Houston Rockets basketball here.
When you say "these type of stats" what are some of the other stats you have in mind? I don't think the Rockets org. takes +/- as seriously as many around here do, especially when trying to upgrade personnel. I would assume that they look at what a player can do to help a team, individually. Some may not realize it but there are specific things that Shane Battier and Chuck Hayes do that others can't or don't do on a consistent basis that makes them elite defenders (and it's not just trying hard). There's no doubt that they look at things that don't show up in the box score, as they should. But, trying to sum up a player's production to a single number seems ridiculous to me. There are too many variables, too many reasons why a player's +/- may be too low or too high, bad coaching, good coaching, quality of opposition, etc. To say the stat is noisy would be an understatement.
Daryl Morey a while ago referenced a concept he called "ground truth" of basketball. What he was describing is precisely what adjusted +/- is attempting measure. Morey has referenced the use of adjusted +/- statistics on different occasions, including in that Michael Lewis NYT piece. The Rockets have a proprietary way of measuring it, but the basic idea is similar and public adjusted +/- numbers available probably give a decent glimpse at what the Rockets are looking at. The Rockets, of course, have a wealth of other information at their disposal which I'm sure they also use. The goal isn't to come up with one be-all, end-all metric, but rather come up with a suite of various measurements to paint a more comprehensive and informative picture of how each player is performing. And by "these type of stats", I'm referring to statistics which attempt to measure the impact a player has on the ball-game beyond a simple tally in the box-score. A good example would be how player's impact their team's rebounding%. This falls in the same class as a +/- stats (which is how a player impacts his team's point differnetial). The Rockets believe that the key to a good rebounding ball-club isn't just bringing in players who put up big rebounding numbers, but rather analyzing how they impact their team's rebounding differential. Just like with +/-, there's no single hard number which you can say with total certainty represents a player's impact on rebounding. But you can try to come up with a model that give you a good idea of whether the players will help your team, hurt your team, or has little impact in that area. This is useful, in the same sense that adjusted +/- is useful.
Yeah, that's the stuff he's willing to talk about. Clearly, Morey dislikes box score stats and adjusted +/- is a very popular stat that doesn't have anything to do with the box score. It would only make sense for him to discuss it as a way of arguing for more advanced metrics without giving out too much information. And, I completely agree with the bolded text, that's why I don't place a high value in adjusted +/-. Maybe the rockets' model is more useful (and i'm sure it is) but I'd bet that other wealth of information they have is much more useful to our organization and the reason why it is not discussed publicly. Well, see I think rebound% IS much more useful because it is more exact. It is exactly what a player contributed in rebounding with respect to total rebounds in the game. It isn't nearly as noisy and while it won't tell you everything (no stat does) it tries to quantify a small piece of an individual player's contributions to a team. I think you learn much more from these various small pieces of information than anything you would gather from something that attempts to lump all production into one number. You can make much better assumptions on how a player will perform in different situations. not sure if i made it clear there but the HUGE difference in rebounding% and a +/- stat is that rebounding% takes into account a player's actual rebounds as opposed to just the rebounds that where grabbed while he was on the court.
