Thanks for the feedback. I was thinking about including some other aspects, but like JAE mentioned that would be too similar to “Win Score”. Also after thinking about it I wasn’t really after getting a players overall impact on the game, just a breakdown of what happens when he tries to make a play on offense. Maybe I should change the name to reflect that better.

It’s aimed more at determining who’s hands you want the ball in on offense. Our current situation (not having a legitimate PG) was kind of the inspiration. CJ scored the best, which I guess shouldn’t have surprised me as much as it did, and Jackson scored the second best (which kind of shows that despite his faults he is basically the best we have to run the offense through). This isn’t so much an argument for Jackson as it is against the construction of our team.

I should go back and do Monta’s numbers from last year to see how he scored.

enough said

i dont no y your suprised

I dont no y you’re grammar be bad

I guess it depends how you read it. LeBron is a +5.7 and CJ is a +2.7 which given the rest of the results is pretty significant. The ratios are similar but if you look at the huge number of positive outcomes for LeBron I think that the stat shows that he is a much bigger part of the game. The higher the raw positive outcomes the harder it would be to keep your ratio up because as you become a central part of your teams offense you also become a central part of the oppositions defensive scheme.

Remember this isn’t designed or intended to measure any of the other ways that LeBron helps his team get wins, but even without factoring in those things I think these numbers show that he is miles better than CJ (as they should).

By my hasty math, anyway. Same range as Baron, a lot better than this year’s Marco or Crawford … which sounds about right.

I agree with your assessment. I included one big-man in the original list to show that even the best bigs won’t score well (though I should have explained that).

I included all three aspects (PO/NO, Playmaker Rating and Playmaker Ratio) because I think that when you use all three it is more effective. If you just look at the ratio you will see that the most efficient (safe) players are more highly rewarded. If you look at the Rating you get a better idea at a players impact on the game. But even then you really have to see the entire number of outcomes to get the whole picture.

It’s definitely limited as far as it’s usefulness but I think it’s been very successful (to me at least) in judging guards and wing players as far as what they can accomplish when you put the ball in their hands and ask them to create or facilitate on offense. I think that it’s no coincidence that our player with the best Playmaker Rating (Monta, with the only respectable rating pre-injury) being out has really hurt the team. CJ has done a commendable job with this part of his game but he just doesn’t produce the volume of positive outcomes that a better player would. The thing to look at is his raw number of positive outcomes per 36 minutes. He only manages ten which means he isn’t nearly as involved when he is on the floor. I suspect that if he got more involved and forced the issue his ratio would fall a bit.

Thanks to everybody who commented. I have been pretty busy lately so I haven’t really been able to work on this but I might compile some more numbers next week.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond. That is the big question. Does it correlate with wins? I’m not sure. It definitely rewards efficient offensive play over “volume” players, but my biggest question is how helpful is an assist?

Obviously something you did contributed to your team earning at least 2pts, but I’m not sure if it’s a really good measure of creating an advantage on offense. I mean if you drive the lane, bring a second defender and dump it off to a big-man at the rim you’ve obviously created an advantage and it should count just as much as if you’ve scored yourself. Of course you could just be the last man rotating the ball to an open three point shooter in the corner. He could be open because of a double team in the post or dribble penetration that caused the defense to collapse. If that’s the case you shouldn’t really get as much credit as the player who really created the advantage.

Interesting stuff, but I’m clearly in over my head at this point. It was a fun exercise and it did just about what I expected it to, but it doesn’t tell me anything that I didn’t know by looking carefully at the stats that I used to create it. If anything it would be more convenient than looking at FG%, FGA/36min, FTA/M, TO’s and the like but I don’t know if anyone would really find it helpful. It’s kind of like a more complicated assist to turnover ratio. For whatever reason some people seem to find that more useful than looking at assists per minute and turnovers per minute which would actually give you a better idea of what is really going on.

Anyway thanks again.