You can see the problem. Hollinger’s system spreads the value mostly created by O’Neal and Wade among all of the Heat free throw attempts. Further, Shaq and Wade have created 73.8% of the BFTA, but only 62.9% of the FTA for the Heat. Which leads us to two fairly obvious conclusions:
1. Not all players create BFTA at the same rate.
2. Players who can create BFTA are undervalued.
Joined: 30 Dec 2004 Posts: 533 Location: Near Philadelphia, PA
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:44 am Post subject:
We looked at this for, I think, the Lakers a few years ago when Stu had some similar data. It is certainly true and we should perhaps look to improve the estimation. Sounds like a good project for someone. Or did KevinP do something that I'm vaguely remembering? _________________ Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
http://www.basketballonpaper.com
Joined: 31 Dec 2004 Posts: 23 Location: North Carolina
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:38 pm Post subject:
Wouldn't the raw data that Roland has be able to help us out with this? I believe I remember somewhere, although I may be wrong, that Roland draws his data from play by play information. It seems relatively simple to record the context of every foul a player receives, since it would be part of the play-by-play. That why, you can divide it into several categories: shooting foul with missed shot, shooting foul with made shot, and non-shooting foul. If you wanted to get even more detailed, you could divide non-shooting fouls into two categories: bonus situation fouls that lead to free throws, and those that don't. And of course, you could toss technical and flagrant fouls into the mix as well, although they aren't as important because of their relative rarity.
All free throws do not equal the same the number of possessions. Many free throws are not worth any possessions at all.
If Dwyane Wade gets fouled going to the basket, misses the shot, and gets two free throws, then those two free throws are meant to equate with the missed scoring opportunity caused by the foul. But if Wade hits the shot, and gets sent to the line for one free throw, then that one free throw isn’t meant to equate to any possessions at all. It is a bonus opportunity rewarded to Wade for making the shot while still being fouled. Anyone can take a shot, and anyone can get fouled and miss their shot, but the extra free throw is just that, it’s FREE, not compensation, a bonus that Wade created outside of the Heat’s normal possession opportunity.
Now, you may be thinking that this is not news, that this is the exact thing that Hollinger was trying to deal with having One Free Throw = 0.44 Possessions. But the problem with that number is that it takes all free throws taken everywhere and assigns them an equal, tiny share of the “bonus” value created by a much smaller number of shots. Wouldn’t it be better to reward that “bonus” value on just those shots where it was earned, and leave all other free throws equaling 0.50 free throws? Sure it would, but there’s only way one way to do that.
EDIT** -nevermind, I did not read carefully. Seems like an interesting point, now that I thought about it a bit.
And technically shouldn't these BTFA stats be easily accesible as Yyzlin said?
Last edited by Nikos on Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:13 pm; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 31 Dec 2004 Posts: 23 Location: North Carolina
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:09 pm Post subject:
Nikos wrote:
I know this is a simple concept and all, but isn't making an AND 1 just like making a three pointer? Why should those who create BFTA's matter if the player is not neccesarily MAKING the shot? Obviously an off reb could be had if the player misses the free throw, so that could skew things up as well.
Doesn't the .44 number seem just as reasonable, as opposed to giving credit to those who simply attempt bonus free throws after a made shot?
This is from what I gather. The 0.44 possessions per free throw coefficient is derived from team numbers, which tend to be heavily skewed by a few players. If someone like Damon Jones doesn't create any BFTA's (or 1 in his case based on the article), then his possessions per free throw rises to 0.5, while players like Wade and O'Neal would theoretically have lower coefficients.
Yes I agree and this is a good point, notice my edit.
I wasn't reading carefully and posted prematurely. I was trying to cover it up before anyone noticed (I figured no one probably would in time) -- but I was wrong )
As an aside, should players be penalized or have their efficiencies altered if they are awarded penalty FT's based on technicals and illegal defenses? Or is the fact that they were asked to shoot them the bonus of it self, and also has value of its own? Similiar to having a go to guy on a possesion or example, going to a teams strength, in this case having the best FTer.
Bottom line: -- what if a player gets a penalty or technical FT, why should that specific FT be 0.44 considering it is not within the context of a 'convetional possesion' as it is defined in the PSA or PPFGA? Shouldn't it carry a different weight considering the only potential is to gain 1 point, and a not a full 2pts or 3 that might be obtained through a TRUE POSSESION?
Hi everybody. I'm new to this site, and I appreciate everyone weighing in. I actually recorded all of the free throws based on Technicals and illegal defenses too, and then decided they weren't part of the "bonus" free throws I was looking for. In the end, technical fouls are like any other possession - your team has the ball, someone has to shoot it. If you're the shooter, then you are credited with one attempt, which becomes half of a possession, which is fair.
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily. _________________ The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Crazy are you saying that tech Fts should be multipled by 0.50, and 3pt play FT's should count as .44?
Also wouldn't this whole concept hurt those who DO get to the line a lot and even for those who create BFTA? Because most FTs are normal ones anyway, so this tends to favor guys who shoot a better field goal %, as opposed to guys who get to the line a lot and convert reasonably well.
This will tend to sway more towards FG% types. For example Wade and Maggette won't seem as efficient anymore, because they get to the line a lot even without BTFA. Those extra FT's they get only represent a small percentage of their TOTAL FTA. And since they do not hit that many three pointers, they will seem less efficient than the tradional PSA indicates right now.
Wouldn't this be a pretty drastic change in many players scoring efficiencies? Now players who hit a lot of threes and get to the line are more valuable than those who might shot a real high % and get to the line (but don't hit many 3pt shots).
Last edited by Nikos on Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
I volunteer. My primary interest is Raptors games, but this can be done from play by play logs, right? _________________ ed
Wish me luck with the "quotes" thingy. If it doesn't come out well I'll do it again.
Nikos wrote:
Crazy are you saying that tech Fts should be multipled by 0.50, and 3pt play FT's should count as .44?
Tech fouls by 0.50, 3pt FT are counted as part of the "bonus" ones, more completely defined as "free throws after made shots".
Nikos wrote:
CrazyAlso wouldn't this whole concept hurt those who DO get to the line a lot and even for those who create BFTA? Because most FTs are normal ones anyway, so this tends to favor guys who shoot a better field goal %, as opposed to guys who get to the line a lot and convert reasonably well.
This will tend to sway more towards FG% types. For example Wade and Maggette won't seem as efficient anymore, because they get to the line a lot even without BTFA. Those extra FT's they get only represent a small percentage of their TOTAL FTA.
The data shows the opposite, but you may be thinking that because the formula hasn't been posted here. Here it is:
Shooting Efficiency = Total Points divided by [FGA + ((FTA - BFTA) divided by two)]
So what happens is, a whole mess of Wade's free throws gets lopped off of his attempts (because they weren't part of the possession), making the number we're dividing by less, which then makes his final Scoring Efficiency Rating higher.
Nikos wrote:
CrazyWouldn't this be a pretty drastic change in many players scoring efficiencies? Now players who hit a lot of threes and get to the line are more valuable than those who might shot a real high % and get to the line (but don't hit many 3pt shots).
It wouldn't change the ratings much at all, except for those guys who score and get fouled a lot. If there were one main conclusion I could draw from this whole thing, it would be that players who can draw fouls and still score are being undervalued.
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
I volunteer. My primary interest is Raptors games, but this can be done from play by play logs, right?
Cool! Thanks Ed! Yes, it's all on play logs. Email me and I'll break it all down for you. To throw in a little of my Boston lingo, it's wicked easy. _________________ The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
What I am saying is that this might all EVEN out, even if you factor BTFA. Because BTFA usually are a small portion of the players FTs. So how can it really help THAT much? If most of the FTs they take are regular and multipled by .50, then its more likely it could hurt them, unless players who get to the line a lot less are getting a much less proportinal BTFA's while still taking a lot of FG's.
Or perhaps its a bell shape thing that affects certain people who might have a high or low BTFA relative to FTA. I wonder if there is a somewhat linear relationship for those who get lots of FTA in relation to BTFA's.
Can you give us the old and new PSA's for the Miami Heat so we can apply this example and to see which players might be undervalued or overvalued?
I ran a quick PSA comparison based on your BTFA's. It all depends I guess on the frequency with which you get to the line and your % when you get there. And if there is a close relationship to guys who take a lot of FT's relative to FGA's, then it makes sense that guys who get fouled and MAKE FTs are undervalued.
Damon Jones got affected the most in terms of the starting 5. I'll try and post my chart using Tabs2Spaces, but Im not sure how to.
From what I have Shaq's NEW PSA took a larger dip than Wade's because of his poor FT shooting %. So I guess it is more sensitive to those who get to the line a lot and miss.
So I guess in general it may be true that it does undervalue those who get a lot of BFTA, and especially those who shoot a good %. From Miami, it seems that whoever gets to the line a lot seems to have between 10-12% BFTA. If this holds true, than for the most part all good FT shooters who get to the line a lot are undervalued. Unless there are some bizarre cases where players get to the line and a lot, but have hardly any BTFA's. I guess we would have to study all the teams to find this out.
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: I can't believe it
Here are the raw numbers on bonus free throws for the Heat:
Shaq 49
Wade 41
Haslem 14
E Jones 11
Laettner 3
Doleac 1
D Jones 1
Butler 1
Anderson 1
So we obviously have guys accumulating bonus free throws at different rates, right? And that's bound to make a difference, right? Well, I ran the numbers for my system and Hollinger's, and the results are remarkable. All numbers are points per possession.
Shaq - me 1.17, JH 1.17
Wade - me 1.14, JH 1.14
Haslem - me 1.17, JH 1.17
EJ - me 1.05, JH 1.05
DJ - me 1.20, JH 1.21
Laettner - me 1.22, JH 1.23
Butler - me 1.06, JH 1.07
Doleac - me 1.00, JH 1.01
Dooling - me 0.87, JH 0.89
Anderson - me 0.94, JH 0.95
Allen - me 1.08, JH 1.09
Person - me 1.04, JH 1.04
Wang - me 1.25, JH 1.28
If anything, the 0.44 number overcompensates, so that what happens is that players who don't get to the line see their number drop a little with my system, but no one benefits. Very discouraging. I thought there would be more of a difference, but I guess not.
Maybe the positive is that I've proven the effectiveness of Hollinger's 0.44 number. _________________ The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Yea the differences are not very large, if at all. Thats why I started before, that it all pretty much levels out even though the .44 doesn't make sense in the sense of when your watching the game.
The guys who are affected the most on the Heat are Laetner and D.Jones I beleive.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 1 of 4
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
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
)