I just sum up the +/- for games since December and divide it by total minutes played to get the per minutes +/- figure... I know nothing about statistic and and don't know if this means anything at all but surprised to see Parsons has the worst +/- number.... Ranking of Rockets players... CD: +0.289 OA: +0.182 JL: +0.142 JH:+0.115 TD: +0.076 PP: +0.050 GS: +0.030 MM: -0.013 CP: -0.060 Code: Games since Dec JH JL OA CP PP MM TD CD GS Games played 16 17 17 17 10 16 17 15 17 Avg minutes 37.5 31.1 28.4 35.4 26 24.7 24.8 25.8 15.8 Total Minutes 600 528.7 482.8 601.8 260 395.2 421.6 387 268.6 +/-……………… 69 75 88 -36 13 -5 32 112 8 +/- per minutes 0.115 0.142 0.182 -0.060 0.050 -0.013 0.076 0.289 0.030
I'm not a huge stats guy, but I'd assume it's because he's our Kobe/KD/Paul Pierce/etc. stopper. So he's generally in the game when the other team's top +/- guy is in the game, and rests when their top guy rests. Just a guess, but it makes sense to me.
What is that? PER is offensive efficiency the more the merrier Defensive efficiency usually has the more negative the better
I enjoyed the little mini game of figuring out our players by their initials. Lets hope JB and CB can make the HOF next week!
Not surprised by the Parsons part, he's had a bad month of play compared to other months of his. He's still a winner though.
I'm not surprised with CD's rating too. I still remember there were couple of games the Rox were down by about 10, and CD came out and made couple of big 3s bringing the Rox back to the race.
you should use RAPM. It stands for regularized, adjusted plus-minus. Adjusted plus minus takes into account everybody elses plus minus on the floor, including your teammates and your opponents. It is regularized so as to provide boundaries for where players should fall (not sure exactly how the regularization process works, it is very complex). Here is the RAPM for all NBA players since the 1990s: http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/
Plus/Minus isn't as important as adjusted plus minus. But even adjusted +/- only carries weight when used over an extended period of time, over short periods you can end up with misleading numbers. Chandler has struggled with his shot recently, but this number really means nothing, Parsons is a player.
That's the problem with adjusted +/-, is that you almost never can have enough sample size due to various floor combinations. +/- IMO is similar to points scored. Yes, it can be widely affected for a variety of reasons, but at its core it does measure something concrete. In this case, team performance when the player's on the court. It's unfortunate, at least from fan stat geeking perspective, that the NBA has learned from Billy Beane and basically keeping the super-advanced metrics proprietary information. So we do have to make do with more simple stuff.
I agree whole heartedly. The plus minus is the best we have IMO, but even that doesn't do a very good job of gauging individual impact, most players ad+/- varies greatly from year to year. We still have no quantifiable way to show how well a guy rotates, shows on a screen, makes the pass before the assist, keeps good spacing or a litany of other extremely important factors in winning. So were stuck with dense people grossly overrating some while underrating others. The Shane Battier conundrum.
It is not realistic to only rely on +/- because of so many different circumstances. It is an ok stat, but there is just too many variables to make it a really useful stat.
