Just replied to a couple of your posts, DocMJ. PM me if you wish, however; currently busy and can't respond to every post in detail here.
Doctor MJ wrote:I know exactly why all of these stats exist. I understand the pros and cons of all of them. I understand why Engelmann does what he does, I understand his goals, and I understand that his goals are not the only goals out there.
You, on the other hand, just tried to use a stat that included previous season performance to talk about this year's MVP without acknowledging that the guy you argued against would be underrated by the stat due to the clear improvement that we both agree he's made this year.
I say this as someone who respects your knowledge, and things you have far more to offer than most: Either you don't understand these stats as well as I do, or you're purposefully cherrypicking to try to prove you point...or both.
Lets make this crystal-clear before I proceed: throughout his exchange (or elsewhere, for that matter), I have not considered you to be an idiot.
Now, with regards to the priors: you're right, the introduction of the priors muddies the validity of the metric. If I JUST want to see what the player in quesiton has done, then yes; non-prior data is more useful and I'll concede your point. But in actuality, stats that are great at telling you what happened don't exactly have any significant, practical purpose. (Per Alex's from Sports Skeptic great rundown on the various metrics available for public consumption, RAPM isn't even the most useful metric here). It's far better for a model to be able to predict things instead. We're halfway through the season, and Durant's "clear improvement" in 35 games or so is dwarfed by his track record from '10-'12. I cannot simply assume his much smaller sample size from this season is the new "norm". I want to know what he'll do going forward, and therefore I want those priors.
We're specifically talking about a player who we both agree has changed significantly from the previous year.
Can't agree with that. His production is certainly superior (so far) but in essence his role hasn't changed significantly; he's simply refined the facets of his game at the SF position.
RE: box score priors. These aren't a big issue with regards to Durant, but you brought them up relating to Nash who is tremendously underrated by box score metrics. That's the problem. If box score metrics were better then they could be used as an excellent prior...of course if box score metrics were better, why would we even bother with +/- data in the first place?
Since the goal is to make better predictions using this single stat (xRAPM), it's better to use the box score and +/- together. People do it all the time anyway, since the box score and +/- metrics present their own unique limitations in analysis. But this is a segue into your next post...
Well, by mashing everything into a black box, what he's done is create a flawed stat which can't really be used in an informed manner in conjunction with anything else with a great deal of confidence. Whereas, if you keep the the box score and the +/- separate, you've got two orthogonal indicators than an experienced analysis can factor based on their knowledge of how the two tend to work along with a variety of other factors.
Fair point. On that note, it would be interesting to see if the xRAPM blend would lead to better predictions in blends with other metrics than pure +/- and other metrics, and whether it's increased predictive power over RAPM makes up for the possible overfitting.
Then again, I use everything in analysis anyway (and this is not restricted to the metrics), so it's a bit of a "meh" issue from my point of view. And I still like xRAPM more than RAPM as a predictor despite your reservations.
If Player A has a weaker supporting cast than Player B, but Player A's team does better than Player B, then Player A has "lifted" his team more than Player B.
This statement doesn't consider the interactive effects and the phenomenon of diminishing returns in basketball. It's easier to "lift" a weaker supporting cast; harder to lift a stronger one. (It's also harder to lift a supporting cast that doesn't "fit".) One must account for these things before making any player comparison.
Doctor MJ wrote:Lazy about it? We're already writing tomes.
If we were to focus on guys other than the Big 3, what would be the intent? Is it to say that LeBron has a weak supporting cast other than the two Top 10 players he's playing next to? Okay, granted.
I'll hold you to this. Go on.
I feel like the crux of the point is this:
You say we don't really know anything about LeBron's limitations because the fit in Miami is so terrible.
If you're talking about "fit" with Wade and Bosh, Bosh is playing his best offensive season since '10 in Toronto; and since Barkley infamously called out Wade in the Knicks blowout win vs. the Heat, Wade's skill curve has been near his performance during the '10 season. This is despite Wade being limited by with knee injuries since LeBron joined the Heat, LeBron and Wade sharing similar skill sets, and all three players changing their roles to some degree in a new system under Spoelstra. For the entire '13 season, the Big 3 together are close to what they did individually on offense by some metrics. It isn't all about RAPM (which you poster earlier), since that stat IS LIMITED. When you consider all the metrics, gametape, and diminishing returns in basketball, they're playing quite well.
No, DocMJ; what I'm referring to is your criticism of the Heat's ortg since LeBron joined the team. The Big 3 have played well, but you grossly overrate the rest of the supporting cast (players who have significant input into any team's ortg), which I will show later on.
I say that I still expected better, and that I'm cautious about making assumptions about what ultra-outlier offensive performances LeBron could have given we haven't seen it, and that the issue of talent redundancy that we see in Miami would seem to be something that exists with any team capable of reaching those unheard of levels.
You then say "But you don't really know for sure", and I say "You're right".
I don't think you're just merely being skeptical. It's one thing to wonder how a player would hypothetically perform with a good offensive team with the ideal ingredients in place, but from what I've been reading in your posts you seem to go as far as to assume that that player isn't capable of this (LeBron) compared to another player who is playing with these ideal ingredients (Durant). And no, don't keep insisting that Durant/Westbrook is a bad "fit". Even with Westbrook's flaws, those players have more distinct, complementary games than James/Wade. This IS NOT a fair comparison, and you know it.
Hence my use of "just taken as an ideal". Clearly you're saying we have to do more than that, and clearly based on the amount of my writing, I am doing more than that, but we're also having issues with fundamental agreement on basic semantics so I have to lay these things down from time to time.
Writing a lot doesn't mean you're actually doing sound analysis. I'll get to that later.
Would the team be better if Wade was a more capable playmaker? Surely.
Do you think Westbrook is an elite level playmaker?
I mean it's working well with the two of them, but I can't really fathom the idea that if you've got a world-class off-ball player you wouldn't love to have the best playmaker you can next to him.
Let me take this same post and change some words here:
Would the team be better if Wade was a more capable shooter? Surely.
Do you think Wade is an elite level shooter?
I mean it's working well with the two of them, but I can't really fathom the idea that if you've got a world-class playmaker you wouldn't love to have the best shooter you can next to him.Now, if you still claim that you cannot imagine how this can help LeBron and the Heat, you're not being honest.
Let's consider Battier here.
This is a guy long considered probably the single greatest role player in the entire league. Does all the little things. Phenomenal defender, and certainly capable of hitting the open trey. I understand he's getting older, and maybe that's your point, but isn't he in theory exactly the type of guy you'd try to slot in next to the Big 3?
Chalmers? Hey, if you're going to have your 2 & 3 be the dictators of the offense, what are you expecting to get at the 1?
Haslem? The Big 3 took paycuts specifically so that he would stay because he seemed the precise type of player they needed.
I feel like you're looking at the things going wrong and saying "If those weren't going wrong, it would all be great", and I'm looking at them and saying "I don't think it's as easy as you think to reliably build better".
Haslem, who is usually a solid midrange shooter, is shooting -8% (compared to '12) on jumpers this season. Chalmers has never been a traditional PG even before LeBron joined the Heat, he would run the occasional play but his main talent comes from playing off-ball and shooting open shots. He hasn't shot the ball as well either compared to '12 and has even taken a step back in his free throw shooting (-10% from the line despite having the same free throw rate as '12). Are you blaming LeBron for Chalmers's regression from the line, too? Battier has shot the ball better, but he's been more of a black hole on offense and has not rebounded the ball as well. You could put some of that on Spo's insistence on small ball, but that means that the coaching staff is not utilizing Battier properly; only a fool would blame LeBron for this. LeBron loves to find the open man, and Battier doesn't have to shoot over 80% of his shots from 3 when he's not a Ray Allen from that range and he's a good mid-range shooter. He showed he could hit the mid-range shot playing with the Big 3 in '12!
Excuse you, but while you've been going on about "what-ifs" with Durant here and "easily" imaging him playing with a player with better skills and playing in a better offense; you somehow fail to see how a better Chalmers, Haslem, and Battier wouldn't help the Heat's offense. Those players have never been asked to do alot on offense and their roles in Miami are clearly defined. The world's best players are taking away attention away from them and they're not capitalizing on their shot opportunities, and in Battier's case he's not being used properly by Spoelstra who is responsible for being his team's talents together. And this is what I'm talking about when I say that you're not doing as much sound analysis as you think. You look at numbers and draw conclusions, I look at numbers AND watch the on-court actions on the floor AND the coaching personnel decisions that produce those numbers you look at and draw conclusions from. And these are good examples of how the Heat's ortg above league average is being affected by things that LeBron literally has no control over. These role players help the Heat with the lineups they can put around the Big 3; when 5-man lineups are weak in these areas it limits the effectiveness of the team, even while playing with stars.
Talking about changes to aspects in the Thunder offense and personnel as it pertains to Durant while ignoring the Heat offense with LeBron (which is what you've been doing, sorry DocMJ) is biased thinking.
I'll leave it there. Too busy to type up more lengthy, 30-page replies; and perhaps too lazy to type up everything otherwise