RealGM

The bright side is that Arturo seems to mess up all his stats.
I'm not sure how, yet.

i dont think i can even read that with my glasses

It's David Berri, so it doesn't worry me the least. The guy is a tool and Wins Produced is a flawed stat.



Hey look, Dennis Rodman and Jayson Williams were so much more valuable than Michael Jordan in 1999 ...

I can't argue that he's not a tool. As pointed out previously, he lives in Utah.

How exactly is WP a flawed stat (past the fact that all catch-all stats are inherently flawed, of course)? I say the same about PER. SMACKDOWN COMIN'!

Yeah, PER is flawed also.

I'm not a stats guy per se, but even without looking too much into it it's clear that WP pretty much ignores defense, while largely overrating (defensive) rebounding.
Looking at some of the top WP players, I'm sure there are plenty other flaws.

"based on 2010-2011 performance"

how exactly does that work?

jts10 wrote:"based on 2010-2011 performance"

how exactly does that work?

Time travel. Clearly time travel.

Either that, or he's a buffoon.

It does ignore defense in favor of .. essentially calculating efficiency vs. possessions.
Defense affects the other team's efficiency, thus improving up the defending player/team's relative offensive efficiency.

Some notes:

- Jordan did not play in either 98-99 or 99-00.
- Rodman was CRITICAL to the second trifecta - replacing Horace Grant's production and then some.
- Bo Outlaw was a fairly effective player, but not as effective as that chart shows. One of a few gripes I do have with Berri (and especially his subordinate posters) is that they seem to have a lot of miscalculations. The same time period for the same player in a different source will frequently show different numbers. The same applies to Jayson Williams.

I did read the article that the image was from [http://mgoblog.com/content/sports-economists-always-wrong-about-everything], and he has some very valid points. I do think that Berri tries to overstretch what he's capable of saying fairly often (if the comments are to be remotely believed, so does Berri). However, at the end of the day - I think shooting efficiency and posession generation are going to result in most of a team's wins. The question is how those two factors are most positively affected.

Anyway, back to OT.
One thing our team doesn't have is either a dominant rebounder (3-4 decent ones, mind you, but no dominant one) or strong guard rebounding (AB / KM, anyone?). Further, our shooting efficiency is subpar (or at least was last year). So we're average in rebounding, steals, blocks, turnovers, subpar in efficiency, and the only guy who could make a difference on that is coming back from injury and limited to maybe 22mpg?

I have higher hopes for our team than that chart showed, but it certainly prompted me to step back and reality check.

moofs wrote:It does ignore defense in favor of .. essentially calculating efficiency vs. possessions.
Defense affects the other team's efficiency, thus improving up the defending player/team's relative offensive efficiency.

That's the problem. The 'impact' of a players defense is shared among all teammates.

As for the Rockets, looking at the roster, I'm quite confident that they'll be one of the top teams in shooting efficiency this year, which will offset the average rebounding.