Jump to content

Coach Miles and Advanced Stats Metrics


Shuttlesworth

Recommended Posts

Some of you may find this interesting, some may not.

As most probably know, Tim Miles has some Billy Beane in him. He doesn't allow perception to argue against numbers. Win Shares Per 40 is a stat that estimates the number of wins contributed by a player per 40 minutes. (It's basically basketball's equivalent to baseball's WAR). Here's where it gets interesting.

Let's examine the key contributors throughout the season:

Pitchford (.163)

Petteway (.119)

Shields (.106)

Rivers (.090)

Parker (.077)

Okay, stop right there. Notice something? I'll continue:

Smith (.070)

Gallegos (.058)

Hawkins (.049)

Pause. Continue:

Biggs (.028)

Webster (.000)

For the record, this is not intended to take shots at Biggs and Webster. It's a consensus amongst close followers that PG play has been our weakness. However, it also illustrates how valuable Benny and Rivers have been. Does Miles look at WS/40 to determine rotation and minutes? After looking at these numbers, it would not surprise me in the least. Does anything surprise you about these numbers? Discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shuttlesworth, you're always good for a thought-provoking post.  I think you try to be an under-the-radar type but I'm not fooled. 

 

Yes, surprised only that Hawkins rates higher than Webster.

 

What goes into this?  Is it just offensive numbers or defensive as well?

 

Basically, it says that Miles is pretty much right on it in terms of rotations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good description taken from Sportingcharts.com WS/40 is essentially the equivalent of the NBA's WS/48.

"The statistic is based on 48 minutes because that is the exact length of an NBA game. As such, the statistic can measure how much the player contributes to a winning effort on a per game basis based on their per minute performance. The idea for win shares comes from famous baseball sabermetrics expert Bill James and was perfected for basketball by Dr. Dean Oliver in his book, "Basketball on Paper." The formula is a bit complicated, but takes into account a player's offensive and defensive efficiency as well as their points produced."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would question some of the methodology used to determine those numbers because of one of the keys to winning games is FT/FGA percentage. The direct benefit is that you have the chance to shoot free throws.  The indirect benefit is that the other team's players might have to sit when normally they would play.

 

Tai Webster has attempted more FTs than Rivers, Pitchford, Gallegos, and Parker COMBINED. (73-71)

He's done so in 601 vs their 1748 minutes.

 

I'm not saying that Webster isn't underperforming or that he doesn't deserve a low metrics rating.  I'm speculating that this metric doesn't either account for or under appreciates the value of being able to draw fouls in regards to winning games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shuttlesworth, you're always good for a thought-provoking post.  I think you try to be an under-the-radar type but I'm not fooled. 

Appreciate the kind words, Norm. I've been a lurker since the birth of HHC and have always appreciated the discussion and passion of the members over here. This year I decided to sign up for membership because I wanted to take part in the discussion. It's a pretty special bunch over here. Although I don't have the whiskers of some of you long-timers over here, I've felt nothing but welcomed to take part in the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would question some of the methodology used to determine those numbers because of one of the keys to winning games is FT/FGA percentage. The direct benefit is that you have the chance to shoot free throws.  The indirect benefit is that the other team's players might have to sit when normally they would play.

 

Tai Webster has attempted more FTs than Rivers, Pitchford, Gallegos, and Parker COMBINED. (73-71)

He's done so in 601 vs their 1748 minutes.

 

I'm not saying that Webster isn't underperforming or that he doesn't deserve a low metrics rating.  I'm speculating that this metric doesn't either account for or under appreciates the value of being able to draw fouls in regards to winning games.

 

I'm a fan of sabermetrics in concept, but you clearly pointed out a flaw in the system in relation to "winning" basketball.  I'd go one step further, and the metrics need to account for when/how they occur, i.e. score (W/L), time left, opponent, venue (H/A).  

 

I would imagine Walt is the top performer because he rarely turns the ball over & Terran has known to turn it over (although, he had ZERO @MSU).  It's a fascinating way to track production, even if it has a few flaws in the nuts & bolts of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...