Anji wrote:"If basketball had a definitive value system like Homerun/4bases to strikeout, then it would be great. But the Three ball isn't a Home run and there isn't 27 outs to position these plays against."

This is my argument, and this thread is my point. Novacks win share is totally inflated because the 3 ball basically carries all his stats like he hits 2 homers a game, it's the only thing he does at a high level and it tells me nothing about him as a player.

I don't get it either. Can you point to the formula for calculating W/S where it gives undue weight to three pointers? I think you are saying it gives the same value to a three pointer that it would give to a home run in baseball, and I thought it counted number of wins a player participated in. I will review the formula posted on Wikipedia again, I don't think it's a bad stat, but I would like to understand your argument better.

VCoug wrote:If you're claiming that Novak is more valuable than Amare and Melo because of win shares, then you are claiming that Ryan Anderson is the 4th best player in the league and better than Dwight Howard at 11th; Joakim Noah, 9th, and Carlos Boozer, 14th(!), are better than Derrick Rose; James Harden is the 7th best player in the league; Paul Milsap is 12th; Ersan Ilyasova(!) is 20th; and that all these guys are better than Kobe, Pau and Marc Gasol, everyone's favorite Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, everybody on the Pacers, Tony Parker, and a lot of other great players I'm forgetting.

Maybe you need to read the thread first? I am so tired of people jumping to conclusions. Right now I am trying to understand why Anji thinks Win Shares is a bad statistic.

loweyecue wrote:

VCoug wrote:If you're claiming that Novak is more valuable than Amare and Melo because of win shares, then you are claiming that Ryan Anderson is the 4th best player in the league and better than Dwight Howard at 11th; Joakim Noah, 9th, and Carlos Boozer, 14th(!), are better than Derrick Rose; James Harden is the 7th best player in the league; Paul Milsap is 12th; Ersan Ilyasova(!) is 20th; and that all these guys are better than Kobe, Pau and Marc Gasol, everyone's favorite Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, everybody on the Pacers, Tony Parker, and a lot of other great players I'm forgetting.

Maybe you need to read the thread first? I am so tired of people jumping to conclusions. Right now I am trying to understand why Anji thinks Win Shares is a bad statistic.

I have read the thread and you said

That brings me to the best forward on the Knicks this season - at least the data supports it. Yeah I am talking about Novak.

Basically, in baseball advance statistics take things that we already record, like average, obp, homeruns, etc., and compiles them and weights them so that the tangible, recorded effects of each player can be compared. They also, for the most part, don't factor in team success, which is more than just the effects of one player. In basketball, these stats take the tangible results and are then used as a replacement for intangibles. They also, usually, factor in team success.

VCoug wrote:If you're claiming that Novak is more valuable than Amare and Melo because of win shares, then you are claiming that Ryan Anderson is the 4th best player in the league and better than Dwight Howard at 11th; Joakim Noah, 9th, and Carlos Boozer, 14th(!), are better than Derrick Rose; James Harden is the 7th best player in the league; Paul Milsap is 12th; Ersan Ilyasova(!) is 20th; and that all these guys are better than Kobe, Pau and Marc Gasol, everyone's favorite Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, everybody on the Pacers, Tony Parker, and a lot of other great players I'm forgetting.

The reason Novak has a better WS score than Amare and Melo is that he is helping the team more on offense than those players are. People just don't understand the statistics of offense. It's really not complicated though. Any team is going to get about 85 shots a game and an effective offense is going to make as many of those 85 as possible. Or put differently, an effective offense is going to get a lot of points from those 85 shots. Clearly, someone taking close to 20 shots a game and shooting around .400 is not going to be helping with that goal. Just to make up for that, you're going to have a particularly high percentage in the remaining 65 shots. Melo has a pretty good A:TO ratio, which partly but not fully compensates for the inefficient shooting.

This isn't rocket science.

loweyecue wrote:

VCoug wrote:If you're claiming that Novak is more valuable than Amare and Melo because of win shares, then you are claiming that Ryan Anderson is the 4th best player in the league and better than Dwight Howard at 11th; Joakim Noah, 9th, and Carlos Boozer, 14th(!), are better than Derrick Rose; James Harden is the 7th best player in the league; Paul Milsap is 12th; Ersan Ilyasova(!) is 20th; and that all these guys are better than Kobe, Pau and Marc Gasol, everyone's favorite Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, everybody on the Pacers, Tony Parker, and a lot of other great players I'm forgetting.

Maybe you need to read the thread first? I am so tired of people jumping to conclusions. Right now I am trying to understand why Anji thinks Win Shares is a bad statistic.

That brings me to the best forward on the Knicks this season - at least the data supports it. Yeah I am talking about Novak. The Melo lovers will be irate no doubt...ask me if I care
Novak has been instrumental in bringing this team back when down by double digits time after time. THIS IS WHAT STARS GET PAID TO DO. Now be honest and ask yourself. When th eteam's down 15 like in the Raptors game - who are you rooting for to bring us back? Amare? Melo? or Novak? Here is role player who is putting up numbers consistently on the offensive side, on defense he is nothing great but neither are the other two. Their defensive effciencies (points allowed per 100 possessions) are almost exactly the same. On offense there is no question who is having he most efficient scoring season. So that makes him the best forward on the team.

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Anji wrote:"If basketball had a definitive value system like Homerun/4bases to strikeout, then it would be great. But the Three ball isn't a Home run and there isn't 27 outs to position these plays against."

This is my argument, and this thread is my point. Novacks win share is totally inflated because the 3 ball basically carries all his stats like he hits 2 homers a game, it's the only thing he does at a high level and it tells me nothing about him as a player.

Can you define "definitive value system"? I don't have any idea what you mean.

If you make a shot behind the arc, you get 3 points. In front of the arc, 2 points. The point value is definite in basketball. That's why I don't understand your claim about "definitive value systems"

How does that work in basketball, is a three point shooter at 50% worth the same as a player who shoots 44% and gets to the line 5 times a game??? How about 7 assists verse 4 offensive rebounds??? How about 4 offensive rebounds verse 50% from three??? You can't uniformly attach a number system to the many ways that players help there teams Win.

Depending on the team those same players W/S goes up and down depending on too many factors. What you consider bad can be great in the right fit in basketball for the right team and ability of the player. While hitting .220 for the Yankees is still hitting .220 on every team, there is no right fit for not hitting the assumed statistical bench marks in baseball. But shooting 42% can make you Ben Gordon or it can make you Allen Iverson in basketball. That's why say W/s is bull****, because the players success isn't totally adherent to a number system in basketball because of all of the many ways they effect the game and there teammates.

1)There is no equation in sports that ever takes in player fatigued, so I don't see the point of bring that up at all. We get told games played or minutes logged, but never if the player is tired or not.

2)There is a difference between not being recorded and not being credited as a value in the equation. I can find out from any game from the log how many pitches a player fouls off or if a play is assisted, because it's all recorded in baseball. They just don't give those plays any value. And more to the point, baseball is so much a sport were everything can be graded, they have a value for plays a player should make and do not for what ever reason.

Can you tell me how make shots Tyson Chandler almost blocked last night??? How many Offensive rebounds did he fight for and another teammate got??? Who's recording that? How many blocks and rebounds should he have gotten and got an E for not making those plays??? This something that can "go on and on".

3)If you see that a Three pointer, a offensive rebound and a assists can be giving a uniform value like a single, a walk and a steal, I think you're wrong. And that is why you can think a player like Novack, who does nothing but hit threes, is your best forward and not a marginal bench player.

W/S will never take off of in basketball.........because it's bull****.