Berri: Mo is top 15 at his position; Redd/Bogut are not

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #1 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:31 pm

http://dberri.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/ ... -position/

smauss · Post #2 » by **smauss** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:39 pm

This is great news, we should attach this report to every team we contact for a possible trade........

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #3 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:41 pm

I think a fair amount of weight needs to be put into this though, given that Berri does a better job than pretty much everyone else of predicting team records. His statistical system seems to do a very good job of capturing reality.

LUKE23 · Post #4 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:48 pm

Interesting analysis, but obviously need to be taken with a grain of salt as well. Look at some of the names that are in the top five of some of the lists (Calderon over Billups, Davis, D. Williams, Biedrins over Yao, Bosh, Gasol, David Lee over Sheed, David West, Josh Smith, Jamison). Some of the guys on the list aren't even starters, but 15-20 minute hustle guys.

In short, interesting reading, but definitely not a ranking of who is better as a player.

smauss · Post #5 » by **smauss** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:49 pm

I still think it unlikely that we begin next season with the same back-court and I think Mo is the most likely to go.

midranger · Post #6 » by **midranger** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:52 pm

Double post.

LUKE23 · Post #7 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:53 pm

midranger wrote:Epi posted this in some other thread.

I'll say what I said there. It's hard to produce wins on a team that loses so much.

Redd was awful this year. Bar none, one of the 2 or 3 worst "best players" in the NBA. After this past season, I don't think there is anyway you could call Redd a top 50 (possibly 60 or higher) player in this league.

RE: Bogut. Everyone has to remember that his statistical production came as the team bottomed out. It was great to see him play well individually but it correlated rather negatively to team success. In fact, our high point recordwise of the season came while Bogut was struggling offensively. At that point, he did look like a DPOY candidate though, and although he stayed decent defensively all year that effort wained a bit as he focused offensively.

Agreed, and also, this formula seems to highly value the %'s, which is more than fine, I like efficient players as well, but if a lot of the guys near the top of the list were the focal point of their team offensively, they would be facing better defenders and taking more shots, lowering their FG% and their ranking on this list. Biedrins is a good example of this. Yes, the guy shoots a ridiculous %, but that is because nothing is ever run for him and he just cleans up garbage baskets in GS' open style.

midranger · Post #8 » by **midranger** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:53 pm

Epi posted this in some other thread.

I'll say what I said there. It's hard to produce wins on a team that loses so much.

Redd was awful this year. Bar none, one of the 2 or 3 worst "best players" in the NBA. After this past season, I don't think there is anyway you could call Redd a top 50 (possibly 60 or higher) player in this league.

RE: Bogut. Everyone has to remember that his statistical production came as the team bottomed out. It was great to see him play well individually but it correlated rather negatively to team success. In fact, our high point recordwise of the season came while Bogut was struggling offensively. At that point however, he did look like a DPOY candidate, and although he stayed decent defensively all year that effort wained a bit as he focused offensively.

AussieBuck · Post #9 » by **AussieBuck** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:55 pm

If I said the following:

Jason Kidd is the third best player in the league.
Jameer Nelson is better than Tony Parker.
Rondo is better than Andre Miller.
Calderon is better than Deron Williams.

I don't think people would care what my opinions of Mo Williams or any other PG's were.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #10 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:01 pm

If his rankings are obviously wrong, how do said rankings accurately predict overall team rankings so well?

For instance, Iverson was traded for Miller and draft picks, so obviously the two teams involved (as well as most fans) thought AI was the better player. Berri did not - his numbers said Miller was the more productive player, so he stuck with it and predicted more wins in Philly than anyone else did.

AussieBuck · Post #11 » by **AussieBuck** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:07 pm

adamcz wrote:If his rankings are obviously wrong, how do said rankings accurately predict overall team rankings so well?

For instance, Iverson was traded for Miller and draft picks, so obviously the two teams involved (as well as most fans) thought AI was the better player. Berri did not - his numbers said Miller was the more productive player, so he stuck with it and predicted more wins in Philly than anyone else did.

His rankings are terribly wrong as he has Kidd as the number 3 guy in the whole league. Not even Kidd himself would agree. Look I'm not trying to be an ass here, I'm into stats and love that this guy is working at ranking guys in a meaningful way relative to wins. I just don't think it will ever be done in basketball.

jerrod · Post #12 » by **jerrod** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:10 pm

AussieBuck wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

His rankings are terribly wrong as he has Kidd as the number 3 guy in the whole league. Not even Kidd himself would agree. Look I'm not trying to be an ass here, I'm into stats and love that this guy is working at ranking guys in a meaningful way relative to wins. I just don't think it will ever be done in basketball.

so then, what's the point of any stat if you just dismiss it if it doesn't match the opinion you already have?

AussieBuck · Post #13 » by **AussieBuck** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:12 pm

jerrod wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

so then, what's the point of any stat if you just dismiss it if it doesn't match the opinion you already have?

That stat doesn't match anyone's opinion. I think stats help but they can't do it all no matter how you try.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #14 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:14 pm

So AussieBuck, do you have a way to explain how his wins produced accurately predict and correlate with real life results?

paul · Post #15 » by **paul** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:17 pm

I thought this an interesting topic, then I read his list of rankings.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

ETA - The title of this thread is misleading - he clearly doesn't say 'best players at position', he says 'by wins produced'. There is a difference.

trwi7 · Post #16 » by **trwi7** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:18 pm

Mo Nation accepts the apology of this board.

LISTEN2JAZZ · Post #17 » by **LISTEN2JAZZ** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:21 pm

AussieBuck wrote:If Kidd really was the number 3 guy in the league, the Mavs would've swept the Hornets.

How does that make any sense, when he says Paul is the #1 guy in the league?

AussieBuck · Post #18 » by **AussieBuck** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:22 pm

adamcz wrote:So AussieBuck, do you have a way to explain how his wins produced accurately predict and correlate with real life results?

I'd say that they would sometimes as his method is very thorough. I'm really not saying his work is rubbish, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be used to definitively say that x-player is better than y-player in a lot of cases. If Kidd really was the number 3 guy in the league, the Mavs would've swept the Hornets given the massive gap between him and Devin Harris.

jerrod · Post #19 » by **jerrod** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:22 pm

trwi7 wrote:Mo Nation accepts the apology of this board.

i thought only people that were listed in pp's post were allowed to make announcements

AussieBuck · Post #20 » by **AussieBuck** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:22 pm

And in this particular case I'm not actually bashing Mo. I rank him ahead of Jameer Nelson and Antonio Daniels on that list. Just thought I'd get that out there to save me from the Mo gang.