Official Trade Thread - Part XXIX

[TheSecretWeapon]

might have just found my answer--doesn't take into account assists or field goal percentages at all. also negatively impacted by offensive rebounds.

It absolutely does account for FG% and assists, and offensive rebounds are a positive factor. You must have been looking at team ORtg. The formula for individual ORtg is here:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ratings.html

Fournier looks better than Beal because turnovers hurt a lot more than assists help.

Yes. Also, Fournier has a better efg (shooting from the floor) and better FT%.

The primary inputs for individual ortg are shooting from the floor, shooting from the FT line, offensive rebounds, assists and turnovers. Comparing Fournier and Beal, Fournier is shooting better from the floor and FT line, and committing fewer turnovers. Beal has slightly more assists and offensive rebounds, but as nate points out -- those matter less than shooting and turnovers.

[tontoz]

IBTL

[AFM]

Haw haw, nate's slacking!

[tontoz]

another head scratching ORTG difference:

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/6588/evan-fournier
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/6580/bradley-beal
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bealbr01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/fournev01.html


Fournier- 110 ORTG
Beal - 101 ORTG

Evan - 16 ppg, 2.4 apg on 45/39/81 on 2.9 FTA and 1.6 TOV
Brad - 20 ppg, 3.3 apg on 44/41/77 on 3.5 FTA and 2.8 TOV

difference between 110 ortg and 101 ortg is night and day but the core stats don't suggest it. I'm about to lose faith in the stat completely unless someone can tell me whats going on

Using per game stats to argue against ORTG isn't a good look. Per 36 minutes Fournier is averaging 17.6 and Beal 19.9. That is a 2.3 point differential as opposed to a 4 point differential.

[nate33]

Continued here