APBRmetrics

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 806

Bob, right or wrong defensive adjusted has Miller as the 14th best defensive impact player on adjusted over the 6 year period for big minute guys and in strong contrast to some other main Kings. Hawes and Salmons in the bottom 20 for the group. Kevin Martin in the under 2000 minute group but 10th worst overall. Nocioni at almost -3 is a wash with Salmons.

**Ilardi** · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 263 Location: Lawrence, KS

battaile · Joined: 27 Jul 2009 Posts: 38

edit: never mind, realized my comment makes no sense given how these ratings were calculated

DSMok1 · Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:20 pm Post subject:

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 806

I merged a demographic file with Steve's dataset and for 335 players found the following

(using a crude age determination since I lost the month and didn't want to recreate):

removed

to be replaced below

**Ilardi** · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 263 Location: Lawrence, KS

That's really interesting stuff, Crow. It's surprising to see APM peak in the 33-35 age window, since I recall an analysis by Ed Kupfer a while back that showed peak productivity on most boxscore metrics somewhere around age 27.

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 806

I wanted to see what it would show.

DLew · Joined: 13 Nov 2006 Posts: 224

It's worth noting that because of selection bias it is possible that the peak age for any given player is 27, while the age with the highest average APM is 35.

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 806

I was going to mention selection bias explicitly but instead I shifted a bit and just hinted at it by using the word "remaining".

A quick check of most contenders last season showed at least 2 30-something starters.

Except for slight misses by 2 of the championship versions of the Pistons that has been the case also for 20+ years of title winners.

Which contenders for the next title lack this?

Cavs is close if Moon starts but might miss officially unless Parker starts. Or they go big in the playoffs.

Joe Johnson is getting close to being the 2nd but isn't yet. Utah doesn't fit the pattern either but they have several close. Miami is close but doesn't have 2 fully 30 either. Miller would do it for Portland (assuming Joel P still starts) but Blake is close anyways.

Kevin Pelton · Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:57 am Post subject:

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but wouldn't the bigger factor here simply be that if we're looking at the entire six-year sample we're including many prime years of the 30-plus players and many development years of the players currently in their prime?

BobboFitos · Joined: 21 Feb 2009 Posts: 193 Location: Cambridge, MA

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 806

Very good point.
I slept on that factor.
It would be better to use another flavor of adjusted. 2 year or the 6 year that is largely the most recent year.

Kevin Pelton · Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:33 am Post subject:

I do suspect, given some of DanR's early findings, that adjusted plus-minus will show a slightly older peak age than boxscore stats.

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 806

Using the 6 year adjusted that is mostly this past season

Age Off Def Total+/-

<23 -1.37 -0.68 -2.05
24-26 0.18 0.20 0.38
27-29 -0.01 -0.11 -0.11
30-32 0.56 -0.09 0.47
33-35 0.42 0.29 0.71
>36 0.49 0.56 1.04

Things are flatter, except for the 23 & under, with the mid and late 20 somethings doing better than the first dataset. But the remaining 30 somethings are better on offense on average and those are still around 33 & beyond are better on defense on average too.

The 6 year adjusted data input is largely the past season but the earlier seasons have some (distorting? from an age perspective) effect.

This may not be the ideal approach but it is what I could easily assemble.

Sorry for the problem with the earlier results.

schtevie · Joined: 18 Apr 2005 Posts: 409

Perhaps, the most striking fact leaping from these APM tables has not been remarked upon because the 6 year average essentially repackages what are familiar facts from previous APM estimates spanning shorter durations. But I think it is worth pausing to appreciating the basketball greatness that is Kevin Garnett.

Taking LeBron James off the list - a phenomenon in his own right, but one of a different generation - KG has been 75% better than the next best player who can be described as his contemporary. And that is Tim Duncan. Tim Duncan! 75%!

A moment of silence, please.