NBA Game Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,601
#1,601
bleedorange0037 said:
How exactly is that "Wins" stat calculated, and what does it actually represent? Only curious because when you add everyone's stats up from the Pacers it comes out to about 32.3 wins, and they've actually won 33. Being off by 3/4 of a win can't just be attributed to rounding.
Click to expand...

It's actually a mathematical formula derived from regression modeling based on the relationship with individual stats and winning. It's real stuff, not some PER bull****.

Winning = TS%* + Rebounds + Steals + Turnovers + Assists + Blocks + Fouls

They take the numbers of each individual and make a projection about how many wins they actually produced. So the fact that they predict based on individual stats that the Blazers would have 32.3 wins and the Blazers actually have 33 is an indication of how accurate these predictions are.

It's pretty complicated. I did regression modeling in college and I was so so at it. Definitely not good enough to get paid for it, so I don't pretend to understand it all, but I find it convincing.

The easiest way to get your feet wet is think about winning from a team perspective and put that into a math formula:

Winning = TS% + Rebounding Margin + Turnover Margin

If you win and tied the other team in rebounds and turnovers then you must have outshot them. If they outshot you and you tied on rebounds, then you must have done a lot better in turnovers. Etc.

This always holds true in basketball. It doesn't work like this in baseball (the sport where people tend to associate stats most closely), which is why basketball is so fun for stat nerds.

*True Shooting %...it factors free throws and the extra value of making a 3-pointer.
 
#1,604
#1,604
n_huffhines said:
I'll take Batum, Matthews, and Lillard over Aldridge. Lopez is even having a better season. LA's .519 TS% isn't what's winning them ball games and he's not a great defender. He's finally having a good season on the glass, though.
Click to expand...

I thought you hated Lillard, I remember you giving me ish last for saying hr would be ROY. Also you are drunk if you think Lopez is remotely close to Aldridge.
 
#1,606
#1,606
BadJerry20 said:
I thought you hated Lillard, I remember you giving me ish last for saying hr would be ROY. Also you are drunk if you think Lopez is remotely close to Aldridge.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with Lillard. As most players do, he's improved since his rookie campaign. I knew he would win ROY cause he scored the most. I disputed that he was worthy of ROY. He's having a good year.
 
#1,608
#1,608
BadJerry20 said:
My eyes>>>>>advanced metrics
Click to expand...

Well, can't blame you for thinking that. Research strongly suggests virtually everybody (I would think everybody) overestimates their personal expertise, from professional stock brokers to real estate agents. Amateur basketball analysts are no different. It's in our nature. It's to the point that when we're told our expertise is overestimated we don't believe it.
 
#1,612
#1,612
n_huffhines said:
Well, can't blame you for thinking that. Research strongly suggests virtually everybody (I would think everybody) overestimates their personal expertise, from professional stock brokers to real estate agents. Amateur basketball analysts are no different. It's in our nature. It's to the point that when we're told our expertise is overestimated we don't believe it.
Click to expand...

Who you calling an amateur? Lol Your starting 5 is
PG-Pablo or Calderon
SG- Matthews
SF-Korver
PF-Evans
C-The bad Lopez

My eyes>>>>advanced metrics lol
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top