Cavsfansince84 wrote:lessthanjake wrote:I do also just want to note that a few threads ago, there was a whole big discussion in which I was criticized at length for citing to single-year playoff EPM because that was purportedly not as good of information as RAPM over larger samples/timeframes. And of course, while I wouldn’t characterize it as criticism of me (since the discussion was cordial), there was a lot of discussion prior to that in which people basically asserted that my reliance on what happened in the 2006 playoffs in voting for Wade was probably just relying on noise because the sample is small and Garnett looks better in RAPM over larger timeframes. And I’ve also been criticized in this project for being too focused on rings, and have been characterized as the person most focused on that.
So yeah, I feel a bit whiplashed here. It feels like over time I’ve been criticized/critiqued as being too focused on a whole host of different things—including for being too focused on multi-year RAPM *and* for not being focused enough on it. And I think that should perhaps be a really good sign to people that maybe when I say that I’m aiming to weigh a whole host of different factors/information, that may *actually* be exactly what I’m doing!
I think everyone is doing the best they can within their own frame of reference/criteria etc and I understand why you say you are feeling whiplashed a bit. Keeping in mind that epm is basically the cousin of rapm afaik. So it feels almost like the same argument being made to some degree. Personally, I would just to see more discussion which is not based entirely on on/off or +/-. Because it seems like a lot of your pro Wade argument was based in epm.
Okay, so a few things:
EPM has both a box component and impact component, so it may be a “cousin” of RAPM but it definitely outputs significantly different results because of the box component (indeed, it’s that exact kind of delta that I’ve been discussing regarding Nash). In any event, your stated issues here with using multi-year RS RAPM are that “playoff performance is a huge part of [things]” and that “5 year rapm is not a good starting point at all for a single year peaks project.” On its face, single-year playoff EPM is focused on the playoffs and is focused on the specific peak year in question. So it actually is a measure that does not have the issues you raised with multi-year RAPM. I was criticized for citing it because career playoff RAPM was purportedly better, and I repeatedly made the point that career playoff RAPM is completely unfocused on a player’s peak. So yeah, there’s still a real whiplash here, where you’re criticizing me for being too focused on multi-year data, while I was criticized before for citing to single-year data. In reality, as discussed previously at length, there’s competing issues of reliability and validity and I’m trying to look at the information while keeping in mind both of those issues.
I also think it’s not true *at all* that my arguments for Wade were “based in epm.” Here’s a link to my voting post in the first thread I voted for Wade: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=119560294#p119560294. My explanation literally did not mention EPM. I voted for Wade in two more threads after that, and my explanation in those threads did not mention EPM either: see https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=119615132#p119615132 and https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=119643740#p119643740. Nor was my discussion about Wade particularly based on on-off or plus-minus stats. Anyways, at one point in discussions about Wade, I did briefly discuss various pieces of data, including playoff EPM, BPM, and WS/48 in response to someone challenging the notion that Wade played better than Garnett in the playoffs. But yeah, given that I gave a lengthy explanation in multiple voting posts and they did not mention EPM, I don’t think it’s even remotely fair to say my arguments were “based in EPM.” Ironically, to add to my whiplash, in that above-referenced discussion, I was actually critiqued for focusing too much on TS%, not EPM! Anyways, I’ll also note that, outside of that particular discussion or my voting posts, I set forth a lot of additional information about Wade that specifically zeroed in on what he did at key moments in the playoffs. See for instance this post, in which I went over how the relevant players did in the 4th Q + OT in the playoffs with the games within single digits: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=119602168#p119602168. I talked about this same thing with Wade in an earlier post as well: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=119564406#p119564406. So yeah, not only was I not focused on EPM, but I set forth a lot of new information that did not relate to that at all. People didn’t actually respond to that data I provided though. There could’ve been more “discussion which is not based entirely on on/off or +/-” if people had discussed that information!
So yeah, I just really feel like I’m being whiplashed and straw manned here. Over the course of this project, I’ve been criticized/critiqued for being overly focused on a whole bunch of different things. Which pretty clearly means that I must not be particularly focused on any of those things! And the notion that I was focused on EPM in voting for Wade is like actually just completely false. Not only that but I set forth a bunch of new information that had nothing to do with on-off or plus-minus data (i.e. the data on the relevant players’ production in key moments in the playoffs), but it just didn’t end up sparking any discussion.
