View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Jon Nichols
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 370
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:48 pm Post subject: NCAA Plus-Minus |
|
|
At Basketball-Statistics.com, I've published plus-minus data for the NCAA Division I season thus far. It is net plus-minus. The official play-by-play data has a lot of errors, though, so some of the numbers may be off. I've tried to account for these errors as much as possible, but some still slipped through. To see the data, go to:
http://basketball-statistics.com/blog1/2010/01/01/ncaa-plus-minus-01-01-10/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Joe
Joined: 27 Sep 2009 Posts: 94 Location: Long Island, NY
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It would be helpful if you made minutes and total +/- columns (as opposed to just per game).
Awesome stuff, though. Please update this throughout the season, even if intermittently. _________________ http://www.hoopdata.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Crow
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 825
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jon, you say
"By net plus-minus, I mean that the team’s performance with that player on the floor is compared to the team’s performance overall."
So a player who plays 32 minutes gets compared on a 40 minute basis to 32 minutes of the team with him and 8 minutes without?
That ends up being 8 minutes with compared to 8 without though right?
Why not just say on/off then?
And if it is just the 8 minutes on vs. off do we want that "per game" impact or the per 40 minutes version?
I could use some clarification of what you've presented. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jon Nichols
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 370
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Crow wrote: | Jon, you say
"By net plus-minus, I mean that the team’s performance with that player on the floor is compared to the team’s performance overall."
So a player who plays 32 minutes gets compared on a 40 minute basis to 32 minutes of the team with him and 8 minutes without?
That ends up being 8 minutes with compared to 8 without though right?
Why not just say on/off then? |
It's per possession. So if they are +100 on 50 possessions with him on the court, and +100 on 100 possessions with him off the court, his plus-minus is +1 (100/50 - 100/100). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jon Nichols
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 370
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joe wrote: | It would be helpful if you made minutes and total +/- columns (as opposed to just per game).
Awesome stuff, though. Please update this throughout the season, even if intermittently. |
Good idea. I'll add those columns in the next iteration.
Processing the data is very slow on my Mac (it takes over 30 hours to run all the code), but I'll try to do it every 10 days or so. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jon Nichols
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 370
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Crow wrote: | Alright I understand what you did
but that is on/ off
not "the team’s performance with that player on the floor is compared to the team’s performance overall". |
I guess I just tried to word it in a way that was easy to understand. My apologies. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Crow
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 825
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Team’s performance with that player on the floor compared to the team’s performance overall would be
(3* 100/50) - (100/50+100/100)=
3 pts per 150 total team possessions
or =+2 per 100 team possessions at the 1:2 ratio of on vs off playing time. Change that ratio and you change the stated impact. Ok, as long you know what you mean.
On/off is simpler so I'd label & call it that and use that description.
Any interest in presenting a list of values for just those on mock drafts? I didn't recognize any name in the top 250. Luke Sikma was the first name I recognized at #264 on overall +/-. Perhaps the quality of subs is more often real bad at small schools? I scanned the top 1000 and found it hard to find guys I recognized.
Raw +/- against just the top 65 (or some such cut) would be even valuable to me.
A crude form of adjusted +/- might use a power ranking to adjust the data on a team and boxscore basis. If anyone need true, play by play based Adjusted +/- for the NCAA I'd suggest it be against just the top 65 and probably 2 year to get more data and including the Tournament. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jon Nichols
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 370
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Crow wrote: | Team’s performance with that player on the floor compared to the team’s performance overall would be
(3* 100/50) - (100/50+100/100)=
3 pts per 150 total team possessions
or =+2 per 100 team possessions at the 1:2 ratio of on vs off playing time. Change that ratio and you change the stated impact. Ok, as long you know what you mean.
On/off is simpler so I'd label & call it that and use that description.
Any interest in presenting a list of values for just those on mock drafts? I didn't recognize any name in the top 250. Luke Sikma was the first name I recognized at #264 on overall +/-. Perhaps the quality of subs is more often real bad at small schools? I scanned the top 1000 and found it hard to find guys I recognized.
Raw +/- against just the top 65 (or some such cut) would be even valuable to me.
A crude form of adjusted +/- might use a power ranking to adjust the data on a team and boxscore basis. If anyone need true, play by play based Adjusted +/- for the NCAA I'd suggest it be against just the top 65 and probably 2 year to get more data and including the Tournament. |
Actually, I explained it incorrectly before. It isn't simply on/off, although I think that's what I would prefer. I'm going to update the numbers.
Edit: On second thought, I'm trying to think of the best way to approach this. How is it normally done? Is it the difference between on/off or the difference between on and the team's production as a whole? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Joe
Joined: 27 Sep 2009 Posts: 94 Location: Long Island, NY
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jon Nichols wrote: | Crow wrote: | Team’s performance with that player on the floor compared to the team’s performance overall would be
(3* 100/50) - (100/50+100/100)=
3 pts per 150 total team possessions
or =+2 per 100 team possessions at the 1:2 ratio of on vs off playing time. Change that ratio and you change the stated impact. Ok, as long you know what you mean.
On/off is simpler so I'd label & call it that and use that description.
Any interest in presenting a list of values for just those on mock drafts? I didn't recognize any name in the top 250. Luke Sikma was the first name I recognized at #264 on overall +/-. Perhaps the quality of subs is more often real bad at small schools? I scanned the top 1000 and found it hard to find guys I recognized.
Raw +/- against just the top 65 (or some such cut) would be even valuable to me.
A crude form of adjusted +/- might use a power ranking to adjust the data on a team and boxscore basis. If anyone need true, play by play based Adjusted +/- for the NCAA I'd suggest it be against just the top 65 and probably 2 year to get more data and including the Tournament. |
Actually, I explained it incorrectly before. It isn't simply on/off, although I think that's what I would prefer. I'm going to update the numbers.
Edit: On second thought, I'm trying to think of the best way to approach this. How is it normally done? Is it the difference between on/off or the difference between on and the team's production as a whole? |
It's probably best to copy 82games' model, since it's widely accepted and what people are used to/will expect from you.
http://www.82games.com/0910/0910ATL.HTM
I could be wrong, but I believe On refers to the margin for every 48 minutes played by a player, Off refers to the margin for every 48 minutes the team plays without the player, and Net is the Net of the two.
For offense/defense splits ( http://www.82games.com/0910/09ATL8.HTM ), they do it per 100 possessions, but using the same On/Off principles as the above. _________________ http://www.hoopdata.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Crow
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 825
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In trying to explain, I guess I might have made it murkier, not doing the equations properly. Sorry.
I wanted to try to display what the statement meant, but I could or should have said
"Team’s performance with that player on the floor compared to the team’s performance overall",
if you wanted explicitly that, would be
100/50 (rate with) * 150 possessions with = +300 +/- (if he played 150 possessions)
minus
100/50 (rate with) * 50 possessions with +100/100 (rate without) *100 possessions without = +200 +/- (for 150 possessions)
or 300-200= 100
divided by 150 team possessions= 0.67 per team possession
or +67 difference in team’s performance with that player on the floor compared to the team’s performance overall per 100 team possessions (at that 1:2 with / without time ratio)
If you had a 150 possession game (implied in the original scenario) then this player has a +100 team’s performance with compared to the team’s performance overall +/- impact per 150 possession game.
Of course this example is extreme.
The simple on/off would be (skipping the detail) +200- +100= +100 per 100 possessions. You originally stated the +/- per possession of +1, without a unit designation, but that is comparable to the simple on/off when you recognize the unit of your original +/- statement.
So your calculation is simple on / off and the original description, for which I provided the calculation to match the description, is something very different.
Most places like 82 games just use simple on /off. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Crow
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 825
|
Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is shifting the focus
and what Adjusted +/- is for
but
you could look at a player's top 5 or 10 lineups (or more if you have the data and want to go further) and then construct a sample of lineups otherwise the same but for him being out and weight the minutes the same way and compare the average +/- with the player and without, everything else comparable.
Another estimate of his distinct impact. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jmethven
Joined: 16 May 2005 Posts: 51
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that adding minutes played would be a good step once you are able to get around to it. With NCAA Plus/Minus, the raw data will have even more noise than in the NBA, given the divergent strengths of schedule between teams, and even between players on a team! For Illinois for example, the bench players have the best plus/minus numbers on the team, but I suspect that is just a combination of both not having played many minutes and having played the majority of their minutes against the weaker teams on Illinois' schedule. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jon Nichols
Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 370
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jmethven wrote: | I agree that adding minutes played would be a good step once you are able to get around to it. With NCAA Plus/Minus, the raw data will have even more noise than in the NBA, given the divergent strengths of schedule between teams, and even between players on a team! For Illinois for example, the bench players have the best plus/minus numbers on the team, but I suspect that is just a combination of both not having played many minutes and having played the majority of their minutes against the weaker teams on Illinois' schedule. |
Agreed. Every time I post an update, I'm going to try to remind the reader that these numbers are very noisy and cannot be taken without a large grain of salt.
By the way, I made a few changes to the plus-minus, which should be available tomorrow. Every team and player that I have records of will be included, and the plus-minus will be in the form of on/off, as we discussed earlier. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DSMok1
Joined: 05 Aug 2009 Posts: 611 Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jon Nichols wrote: | Agreed. Every time I post an update, I'm going to try to remind the reader that these numbers are very noisy and cannot be taken without a large grain of salt.
By the way, I made a few changes to the plus-minus, which should be available tomorrow. Every team and player that I have records of will be included, and the plus-minus will be in the form of on/off, as we discussed earlier. |
Where are you getting the data from, Jon? I run statistical +/- data for the NBA (I've set a spreadsheet to import all data daily), and I have run statistical +/- for college (properly adjusting for schedule strength via Ken Pom's numbers), but I haven't found a reasonable data source for the current season. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DLew
Joined: 13 Nov 2006 Posts: 224
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jon,
What source did you use for these numbers? Are you parsing play-by-play, and if what play-by-play source did you find that has all the substitution data? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|