enigmac every miss was 0 points for 2 points attempted just as every TO was 0 points for 2 points attempted
nautic No. Like i say there are effects of double teams that can not be handled by numbers unless someone sits there and counts every double team and out come. AND PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE the point of this thread is to say that Yao Ming is not the most effective player on our team as people use numbers to prove. Not a starting line up. Numbers if anything only prove he is not very effective.
Sura made the same pass at the same spot to Tmac twice, Tmac made one and missed one. We can say Sura created the same opportunity, why did he get 2 points at one time but 0 at another time for doing the same thing? If you want to make a formula, please at least make it sound reasonable.
Now that double team effect is also very important, is it logic to exclude this very factor solely to determine how not effective Yao is?
It depends on what numbers you are talking about. True numbers or false numbers. So far, it looks like your numbers look false to most of the people here.
Real Egal, thank you for the constructive post. your two flaws 1 that TOs dont equal points for opponents thats right. but it does mean we didnt score at least two on offense which is what this is measuring 2 that a no TO is not neccesarily a miss or make True but is in the equation as an attempt and made, or freethrows meaning they are in the equation.
nautic please read my entire initial post. but briefly, you can not measure the effect of a double team. but what this equation does measure is the opportunity a player had and what he made of it.
In your equation, counting TO as 2 minus points is totally bull. Why? Because you are assuming our team's shooting percentage is 100%. More logic caculation is to count TO as many as (2 x shooting%) points.
chouje t mac makes x percent of his shots no matter who passes he will make shoot an x percent. so any pass sura makes to tracy in a scoring position is statistically worth any pass yao makes to tracy in a scoring position.
Where is rebounds and blocks, steals in this great formula? And where is shooting percentage weighted in it? This formula surely favors the guards more to the big men. All the worse thing about it is that it favors ballhogs. A guy averaging 25 spg is most likely deliver more points using this formula than guys averaging 12 spg. Case closed.
nautic TO is given a value No matter who misses its the same value. I gave it a value of two because it guarantees we cant make two points. Maybe you can suggest a better value, say fg% total possible points. but guess what. it will effect everyone the same. think it out.
What's your point here? Did I say Yao's pass worth 2 points? that's why you say you know logic? What I'm saying is: 1. You shouldn't reward 4 points to one basket no matter it is assisted or not. A bastet is a baskte, that's 2 points. 2. One TO doesn't equal to 2 points on OFFENSIVE END becasue there is no guarentee that you'll score 2 points without that TO. 3. A TO caused by Offensive foul is just the same as a missed shot without offensive rebound. So it's wrong to put TO in "points delivered" category but put missed shot in "points attempted" category.
BTW, according to your statistical formular, player A who is 8-30 from the floor, dishes out 8 assists with 3 TOs is almost twice as efficient as player B who is 7-7 from the floor, grabs 10 boards, blocks 3 shots with 3 TOs. LOL!
fa steals and rebounds lead to offensive oppt. this measures offense and that is where you find them. Shooting percentage last time i checked was shots made over shots attempted. guess what? its there. and as far as guards vs. big men? exactly how? so i can answer
fa of those players give me how many were threes attempted and made and how many field goals attempted and made. how many free throws attempted and made. keep in mind when a player goes to the line he has had a missed field goal attempt when it is a shooting foul and ill show you where you messed up.
I would use NBA 's formula for Efficiency Efficiency Formula: ((PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK) - ((FGA - FGM) + (FTA - FTM) + TO)) / G I know this formula is not perfect but IMHO it is a better formula. McGrady 23.14 Yao 19.11 Sura 15.13 Howard 9.86 Barry 8.77 Wesley 8.73 Taylor 7.68 Mutombo 7.51 Ward 7.07 Barrett 4.14 Padgett 3.60 Weatherspoon 2.91 Gaines 2.10 Bowen 1.92
rblh good find. If i knew that existed i wouldnt have wasted my time. but as far as offensive efficieny this model still stands. that model is for both offense and defense
