This is Google's cache of viewtopic.php?t=16&sid=da2f8443e546c0da4df03d1d2cc10d9e. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Apr 10, 2011 22:43:37 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more

Text-only version
These search terms are highlighted: ed küpfer  
APBRmetrics :: View topic - Team similarity
APBRmetrics Forum Index APBRmetrics
The statistical revolution will not be televised.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Team similarity

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    APBRmetrics Forum Index -> General discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin


Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 2:23 am    Post subject: Team similarity Reply with quote

I finally got to one of the many projects on my to-do list: A team similarity system based on Dean Oliver's Four Factors going back to 1979-80. I equally weighted each of the four factors on offense and defense, as well as pace, squaring the differences.

To take it for a test run, I decided to look at two of the "surprise" teams of 2004-05, Phoenix and Seattle.

Code:
Team       Year   Sim
---------------------
Atlanta    1990  97.2
Portland   1984  96.8
Seattle    1989  96.3
Seattle    1992  96.3
Milwaukee  2000  96.2
Atlanta    1986  95.8
Houston    1980  95.2
Atlanta    1988  95.1
Miami      1994  95.1
Seattle    1993  94.9
---------------------
AVerage          46.3
Gol State  1993  96.1*


Well, as a Sonics employee, it's disappointing to see that the comparable teams only averaged 46.3 wins. The projection for +.500 teams is likely to underestimate, but that's still disappointing.

It's interesting to see so many Sonics teams on the list. Milwaukee is one of the teams I've mentioned as a comparable team in terms of perimeter orientation, and Golden State circa TMC (though by 1993 Mitch Richmond was gone) was a team Dean mentioned when we talked about similar teams. They shoot up when you factor out pace (I have one score with, and one without.)

Now, the Suns:

Code:
Team       Year   Sim
---------------------
LA Lakers  1981  92.1
Sacramento 2004  91.9
LA Lakers  1996  90.6
S Antonio  1984  90.1
Charlotte  1993  89.3
LA Lakers  1982  89.2
Sacramento 1999  89.2
Orlando    1996  88.9
Orlando    1995  88.7
Dallas     2000  88.6
---------------------
Average          50.1


Phoenix's comparable teams, alas, faired somewhat better. You'll notice a pair of Showtime Lakers teams, as well as a pair of Shaq-Penny Orlando squads and two recent Sacramento teams. Still, the 2004-05 Phoenix combination appears to be pretty rare; I haven't looked at a lot of team similarity scores, but 92.1 seems to be a pretty low top score. Things don't get much better when you factor out pace.

Dan Rosenbaum has talked about the oddity of having such a good team that's so weak on the glass, and apparently that does show up numerically.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ed Küpfer



Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 3:43 am    Post subject: Re: Team similarity Reply with quote

admin wrote:
I finally got to one of the many projects on my to-do list: A team similarity system based on Dean Oliver's Four Factors going back to 1979-80. I equally weighted each of the four factors on offense and defense, as well as pace, squaring the differences.

I have found that similarity depends crucially on the weights. This is why I am not a big fan of similarity scores, as the weights chosen are essentially arbitrary.

Not necessarilry so with the four factors. Recently, I regressed WIN% against the four (times 2) factors (standardized), and came up with the following weights:

Code:
O_EFG%   1.0
O_FOUL%  0.3
O_OR%    0.4
O_TO%   -0.6
D_EFG%  -0.9
D_FOUL% -0.4
D_OR%   -0.3
D_TO%    0.6

where FOUL% = (0.44 * FTA) / POSS, and TO% = TO/POSS.

The team similarity idea is a good one. I'll see if I can look into it on the weekend.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
kjb



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 865
Location: Washington, DC

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's the similarities list for this year's Wizards using the method you applied to the Sonics and Suns?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin


Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 2:12 pm    Post subject: Re: Team similarity Reply with quote

Ed Kupfer wrote:
Not necessarilry so with the four factors. Recently, I regressed WIN% against the four (times 2) factors (standardized), and came up with the following weights

The thing is ... those weights are great for finding teams of similar overall ability, but I'm not that concerned about doing that. If teams with similar skills had wildly different overall performance, that's interesting to me. I want to see if certain types of teams fare better the following season, or aren't as successful as they should be in the playoffs (a claim many have made about both Phoenix or Seattle), etc.

Code:
Team       Year   Sim
---------------------
Denver     2004  97.7
New Jersey 1999  97.1
Gol State  1986  96.9
Portland   1989  96.9
Charlotte  1992  96.7
Indiana    1980  96.6
Denver     1985  96.3
Gol State  1996  96.3
Cleveland  1980  96.1
Washington 1995  95.9
---------------------
Average          35.2

Atlanta    1996  98.9*
NewOrleans 2004  98.0*
Indiana    1981  97.8*

The similar teams to the Wizards aren't very good, and that does illustrate some of the weakness of using my method; the reason for that is their eFG% ratings are relatively low compared to their other ratings. Intriguingly, taking out pace changes the scores dramatically (and improves the quality of the comparable teams).

Denver 2004 is an interesting comp, in that it was another team that improved after being terrible the year before. This is something experts know to be a "hidden indicator", but I have no idea what it means.

Code:
Team       Year   Sim
---------------------
SanAntonio 2004  98.5
Detroit    1990  95.6
New York   1992  95.6
Miami      1997  94.7
New York   1994  94.7
Portland   1999  94.6
SanAntonio 1992  94.6
Phoenix    1983  94.6
Portland   1991  94.1
Indiana    2004  93.7
---------------------
Average          56.6

I decided to throw in San Antonio's more conventional style to see if they showed up winning more games, and the answer is a resounding yes. If one name comes to mind looking at that list, that name is "Pat Riley".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
KnickerBlogger



Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 180

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 6:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Team similarity Reply with quote

[quote="Ed Kupfer"]
admin wrote:
where FOUL% = (0.44 * FTA) / POSS


Just curious, why use FTA *.44 instead of FTM?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Ed Küpfer



Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Team similarity Reply with quote

KnickerBlogger wrote:
Ed Kupfer wrote:
where FOUL% = (0.44 * FTA) / POSS


Just curious, why use FTA *.44 instead of FTM?

I see getting to the line as the skill of interest.

From a defensive standpoint, you have no control over whether your opponent makes a FT shot (although you may have some control over who you foul). It doesn't make much sense to me to look at defensive FTMs. I use FTAs on offense to be directly comparable to defense.

I'm pretty sure using FTM or FTA will give similar results, especially for unstandardised numbers. There simply isn't much veriation between teams to make any difference.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    APBRmetrics Forum Index -> General discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group