How has SCHOENE performed?
Honestly, not great. Of the six pure statistical projec- tion systems tracked last year on the APBRmetrics message board, SCHOENE had the largest mean er- ror, pegging teams wrong by an average of 5.0 wins over the 66-game schedule. However, when I studied possible adjustments over the summer, I found noth- ing that would have improved SCHOENE’s results
over multiple previous years. So the system remains unchanged from last season, which is essentially the third incarnation of SCHOENE. (The first was used only in 2008-09. The second, rolled out for the first edition of Pro Basketball Prospectus in 2009-10, be- gan incorporating multiple years of past player per- formance.)
Historically, SCHOENE has proven more effective at pegging the direction teams are heading than their specific win total. So a different measure--which sys- tem was closest to each team’s final record--showed SCHOENE performing as effectively as any of the other systems. SCHOENE was closest to the pin on six teams; only a set of projections using regularized adjusted plus-minus as tracked by poster EvanZ did better, with seven.
The moral of the story is to temper the most extreme projections. When SCHOENE projects that the Min- nesota Timberwolves will be an elite team this year, the appropriate conclusion is that the Timberwolves are closer to contending than conventional wisdom would indicate, not that they are as good as anyone in the Western Conference.
I'm predicting mid to high 40s this year. BTW, SHOENE predicted 48 wins for the Knicks last year, which is three more wins than ESPN predicted. Both predictions were off.

BigDaddyG wrote:Here is a snippets from FAQ section of last year's basketball Prospectus to put SCHOENE in perspective.

How has SCHOENE performed?
Honestly, not great. Of the six pure statistical projec- tion systems tracked last year on the APBRmetrics message board, SCHOENE had the largest mean er- ror, pegging teams wrong by an average of 5.0 wins over the 66-game schedule. However, when I studied possible adjustments over the summer, I found noth- ing that would have improved SCHOENE’s results
over multiple previous years. So the system remains unchanged from last season, which is essentially the third incarnation of SCHOENE. (The first was used only in 2008-09. The second, rolled out for the first edition of Pro Basketball Prospectus in 2009-10, be- gan incorporating multiple years of past player per- formance.)
Historically, SCHOENE has proven more effective at pegging the direction teams are heading than their specific win total. So a different measure--which sys- tem was closest to each team’s final record--showed SCHOENE performing as effectively as any of the other systems. SCHOENE was closest to the pin on six teams; only a set of projections using regularized adjusted plus-minus as tracked by poster EvanZ did better, with seven.
The moral of the story is to temper the most extreme projections. When SCHOENE projects that the Min- nesota Timberwolves will be an elite team this year, the appropriate conclusion is that the Timberwolves are closer to contending than conventional wisdom would indicate, not that they are as good as anyone in the Western Conference.
I'm predicting mid to high 40s this year.

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between usage and efficiency."

so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.

the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.

this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?

this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?

Did you vote?

i am not going to vote on two options that are both varyingly extreme and irrational. lets say that the truth lies somewhere in between, ie the knicks should win 43-47 games... unless they implode. of greater concern is how to capture the 3rd seed and avoid falling below the fifth seed. third seed is the best way to ensure a second round appearance. anything lower and a first round exit is probable.

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between usage and efficiency."

so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.

the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.

this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?

this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?

Did you vote?

i am not going to vote on two options that are both varyingly extreme and irrational. lets say that the truth lies somewhere in between, ie the knicks should win 43-47 games... unless they implode. of greater concern is how to capture the 3rd seed and avoid falling below the fifth seed. third seed is the best way to ensure a second round appearance. anything lower and a first round exit is probable.

We know you think the Knicks are a mediocre team, but do you think they are a 37 win team? True or False? It's a pretty simple answer.

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between usage and efficiency."

so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.

the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.

this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?

this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?

Did you vote?

i am not going to vote on two options that are both varyingly extreme and irrational. lets say that the truth lies somewhere in between, ie the knicks should win 43-47 games... unless they implode. of greater concern is how to capture the 3rd seed and avoid falling below the fifth seed. third seed is the best way to ensure a second round appearance. anything lower and a first round exit is probable.

We know you think the Knicks are a mediocre team, but do you think they are a 37 win team? True or False? It's a pretty simple answer.

no i think they are going to win 43-47 games like i said... unless they implode... in which case 37 wins is a distinct probability.

Lol come on man, answer the question already!

Dagger wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between usage and efficiency."

so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.

the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.

this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?

this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?

Did you vote?

i am not going to vote on two options that are both varyingly extreme and irrational. lets say that the truth lies somewhere in between, ie the knicks should win 43-47 games... unless they implode. of greater concern is how to capture the 3rd seed and avoid falling below the fifth seed. third seed is the best way to ensure a second round appearance. anything lower and a first round exit is probable.

We know you think the Knicks are a mediocre team, but do you think they are a 37 win team? True or False? It's a pretty simple answer.

no i think they are going to win 43-47 games like i said... unless they implode... in which case 37 wins is a distinct probability.

Lol come on man, answer the question already!

The answer is he that doesn't believe we are a 37 win team, but he doesn't want to say it without that little tagline at the end "in case we implode". I don't think you're going to get more from him.

you're right i have given my answer and spoken plainly. the schoene system has some holes in it from what i have seen in a cursory study of it so i don't believe the knicks are only capable of 37 wins.

the only way they lose 45 games this season is if they implode, and without strong leadership they could very well implode-- so who is going to hold this team together? who is/are the leader/s?

losing kidd was a blow because he provided cohesion and leadership. prigioni provides some cohesion and i suppose udrih will help here too. but neither are leaders... even as felton pretends to be.

again i ask-- who will provide both cohesion AND leadership in his absence?

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Dagger wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

dk7th wrote:"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between usage and efficiency."

so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.

the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.

this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?

this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?

Did you vote?

i am not going to vote on two options that are both varyingly extreme and irrational. lets say that the truth lies somewhere in between, ie the knicks should win 43-47 games... unless they implode. of greater concern is how to capture the 3rd seed and avoid falling below the fifth seed. third seed is the best way to ensure a second round appearance. anything lower and a first round exit is probable.

We know you think the Knicks are a mediocre team, but do you think they are a 37 win team? True or False? It's a pretty simple answer.

no i think they are going to win 43-47 games like i said... unless they implode... in which case 37 wins is a distinct probability.

Lol come on man, answer the question already!

The answer is he that doesn't believe we are a 37 win team, but he doesn't want to say it without that little tagline at the end "in case we implode". I don't think you're going to get more from him.

you're right i have given my answer and spoken plainly. the schoene system has some holes in it from what i have seen in a cursory study of it so i don't believe the knicks are only capable of 37 wins.

the only way they lose 45 games this season is if they implode, and without strong leadership they could very well implode-- so who is going to hold this team together? who is/are the leader/s?

losing kidd was a blow because he provided cohesion and leadership. prigioni provides some cohesion and i suppose udrih will help here too. but neither are leaders... even as felton pretends to be.

again i ask-- who will provide both cohesion AND leadership in his absence?

Metta World Peace!

He has Peace in his name!

i like any player who is brooklyn born-- and raised. and he could provide some leadership but he is not going to take too kindly to the way shumpert is being dicked around. that is going to be an issue for him i assure you. factions and schisms are likely to happen with this team especially with that dark cloud of a contract extension hanging over their heads.

so melo's "supporting cast" are going to have to "step up" or their hero may be gone. ironic, isn't it?

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fitzfarm wrote:really? I didnt say they built the system to hate on the knicks. Just in general that they seem to drink the nyc hatterade. also there predictions from last year and years past have been way off .... looking at last years predictions they had us finishing 6th and we finished 2nd for the regular season... that to me equals way off in my book with phily and boston finishing ahead of us ahahahah that **** is just laughable... do your homework dog

when you get slapped a bit in the first round and snuffed in the second round that amounts to a 6th seed rating. it shows that the knicks were a fool's gold team. 6th seed was a more accurate assessment.

As Reagan said to Carter, "there you go again"...Then at the end of the year you are going to tell us how disappointed u are because the Knicks were projected to reach the ECF...

no-- my expectations for this team are what they are. i think they are 43-47 wins. losing kidd and adding bargnani is a step back. it's about chemistry, defense, leadership. the knicks will lack adequate chemistry and their defense will suffer because felton needs another point guard to help him. that means lots of opponents in the lane and wearing out chandler or getting him in foul trouble.

that is the scenario that will lead to them falling back to a mediocre regular-season team and first round fodder.

they will need more than what woodson can offer in order to secure the 3rd seed, and if they fall to the sixth seed they will be a first round exit, once again.

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fitzfarm wrote:really? I didnt say they built the system to hate on the knicks. Just in general that they seem to drink the nyc hatterade. also there predictions from last year and years past have been way off .... looking at last years predictions they had us finishing 6th and we finished 2nd for the regular season... that to me equals way off in my book with phily and boston finishing ahead of us ahahahah that **** is just laughable... do your homework dog

when you get slapped a bit in the first round and snuffed in the second round that amounts to a 6th seed rating. it shows that the knicks were a fool's gold team. 6th seed was a more accurate assessment.

As Reagan said to Carter, "there you go again"...Then at the end of the year you are going to tell us how disappointed u are because the Knicks were projected to reach the ECF...

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fitzfarm wrote:really? I didnt say they built the system to hate on the knicks. Just in general that they seem to drink the nyc hatterade. also there predictions from last year and years past have been way off .... looking at last years predictions they had us finishing 6th and we finished 2nd for the regular season... that to me equals way off in my book with phily and boston finishing ahead of us ahahahah that **** is just laughable... do your homework dog

when you get slapped a bit in the first round and snuffed in the second round that amounts to a 6th seed rating. it shows that the knicks were a fool's gold team. 6th seed was a more accurate assessment.

As Reagan said to Carter, "there you go again"...Then at the end of the year you are going to tell us how disappointed u are because the Knicks were projected to reach the ECF...

There's a difference between informed projections on the one hand and reasonable fan expectations/requirements on the other. Shouldn't ECF be expected from a veteran team 4 years into its "big 3"? If we're being told that this is well planned out team and it has four max or near max veterans with 40 years experience, shouldn't the requirement be at least a conference finals appearance? If four years into the Melo-Amare pairing and three into the Melo-Amare-Chandler grouping, the team still can't make the conference finals, then wasn't this a failed plan? So DK7 and I will be upset because the team didn't achieve anything that was reasonably expected, not because we were surprised.

Absolutely not, MDA wanted a completely different direction of a PG controlled team...Melo as you primary go to guy is very different than the plan was 2.5 years ago...