Below is a snapshot of the Web page as it appeared on 4/3/2011 (the last time our crawler visited it). This is the version of the page that was used for ranking your search results. The page may have changed since we last cached it. To see what might have changed (without the highlights), go to the current page.
Bing is not responsible for the content of this page.
APBRmetrics :: View topic - Ron Harper's W-L -- Drastic jump
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 

Ron Harper's W-L -- Drastic jump

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    APBRmetrics Forum Index -> General discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Nikos



Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:37 am    Post subject: Ron Harper's W-L -- Drastic jump Reply with quote
Anyone else notice how much more effective/efficient Harper was when MJ came aboard for a full season?

He went from .345%W to .850+ on average for three straight seasons (the THREE PEAT years). Interestingly enough Kerr and Kukoc both had good W-L% and were still very efficient BEFORE MJ came back in 1994-95.

Why is it that Harper saw such a HUGE jump in comparison with others? He was awful the year before as a Bull, and even WORSE as a Clipper in 1993-94. What gives? Was Harper with the injuries, really just a truly very good role player, who had no business taking tons of shots, even for a poor team ala LA Clippers in the early to mid 90s?

Thing is, that would still not explain the HUGE jump from .345 to .850+ the next three years (even though others like Kerr and Kukoc did improve, they did not do so ANYWHERE NEAR the rate Harper improved).

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/harpero01.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HoopStudies



Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 705
Location: Near Philadelphia, PA
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:03 pm    Post subject: Re: Ron Harper's W-L -- Drastic jump Reply with quote
Nikos wrote:
Anyone else notice how much more effective/efficient Harper was when MJ came aboard for a full season?


Ron Harper is the best example of someone who completely changed roles. He completely moved leftward on his skill curve, going from the lead scorer to 4th or 5th option. On that Bulls team, he had to change roles in order to be a positive player. And MJ wasn't going to let him play if he weren't a positive player.

A player's win-loss record is a product of their skill, their role, and their team. Harper did this role very well. As a lead scorer, he was not as good. It's obviously easier to handle that lesser role, but that doesn't mean there is less value in doing it. He cut his turnovers during these years to career lows because he didn't have to create shots for MJ, but some players couldn't do this.

It's also interesting to me to hear some arguments in favor of giving MJ more credit for those teams and other arguments in favor giving him less credit (mainly having to do with the team record before and after retirement, arrivals of Kukoc and Rodman). Overall, individual win-loss records are meant to be like pitcher win-loss records -- good measures of career effectiveness, but they can be variable from season to season (esp because of team influence). You have cases of mediocre win-loss pitchers making the Hall (Nolan Ryan is the first to come to mind) and you will see the same with NBA players. I would also suggest that basketball players who put up a lot of wins increase their odds of going to the Hall even if their record isn't great, whereas guys with few wins and high win% don't necessarily give themselves a chance.

Bill James chronicled some of the problems with pitcher win-loss records but still called them a very good stat. I think basketball individual win-loss records have similar strengths and flaws.
_________________
Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
The postings are my own & don't necess represent positions, strategies or opinions of employers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos



Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What specifically would you say are flaws, the fact that you cannot compare a TEAM leader to a role player who plays with good team leaders, and thus is more efficient in a lesser role (without a huge amount of possesions)?

And examples that have low turnover guys have over inflated WIN %? Are they weighted too high? Is that a potential flaw?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HoopStudies



Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 705
Location: Near Philadelphia, PA
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikos wrote:
What specifically would you say are flaws, the fact that you cannot compare a TEAM leader to a role player who plays with good team leaders, and thus is more efficient in a lesser role (without a huge amount of possesions)?

And examples that have low turnover guys have over inflated WIN %? Are they weighted too high? Is that a potential flaw?


Flaws include
- in-season comparisons are not necessarily reflections of quality (pitchers win the Cy Young with a single season of 20 wins even if they're not good, some hoops guys win a net of 10 games in just one year)
- team influence is fairly large (pitcher win-loss is impacted strongly by run support, basketball players impacted by team defense)
- not generally predictive (ERA is more predictive for pitchers, offensive ratings more predictive for basketball)

I'm not sure your first thing is a flaw. A team leader on a bad team isn't a very good player for that team. They may be if they go to another team. Depends on what you're trying to do.

Low turnover guys do not have overinflated win%s unless they consistently play in times of the game where the game is essentially decided (they don't impact team win% much). Turnovers are highly understated by nonquantitative people in their negative impact on the game. What can happen is that low turnover guys put pressure on teammates to score. I account for that when I'm putting together a team, but I'd say that other people don't account for the guys who can cut down their turnovers in looking at these players. Hoiberg is the classic example again. He adds tremendous value in a very small role. If that role is not needed, he adds nothing. If the team needs someone who can create shots, Hoiberg is a bad player. So his win-loss record fluctuates.
_________________
Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
The postings are my own & don't necess represent positions, strategies or opinions of employers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kneepad



Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 17
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Ron Harper's W-L -- Drastic jump Reply with quote
Nikos wrote:
Anyone else notice how much more effective/efficient Harper was when MJ came aboard for a full season?


Harper reported to the Bulls out of shape and with a bum knee. Jerry Krause didn't require Harper to take a physical before signing him and during that first season rumors were that he had signed damaged goods. The following summer Harp dedicated himself to getting in peak shape, and those rumors were put to rest.

He also supposedly struggle mightily learning the Triangle offense and didn't really grasp it until his second year with the team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
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