dhsilv2 wrote:.
Outside wrote:.
scabbarista wrote:.
Doctor MJ wrote:.
Dr Positivity wrote:.
SactoKingsFan wrote:.
Clyde Frazier wrote:.
penbeast0 wrote:.
pandrade83 wrote:.
Quoting just the handful who have been at least sporadically voting of late.....
I put out a brief and basic comp of Walker and Anthony a few posts back, I'll throw out some additional new information here.
A handful of votes and mentions presently appear strongly fueled or influenced by RAPM. Few things I'd like emphasized when looking at RAPM (or other impact metrics).......
1) I've stated before (as have others) and I'll state again to not lose sight of the fact that RAPM (or any impact measure) is
not a direct measure of how good a player is: it's also measuring the quality of his fit on a team, how he is being utilized (is the role he's made to play a role he is ideally suited to?), and how seamlessly the team around him is built so he can play to his strengths (do the pieces around him help potentiate his impact?).
2) I'll further point out that certain player types are in shorter supply or are less "replaceable". I'll provide a hypothetical as to why this is relevant: suppose Player A averages an RAPM of +1.8, Player B averages RAPM of +2.5 (let's say somewhat similar minutes). Pretty straight-forward so far: Player B looks like the more impactful player. But then let's further suppose that players who can fit Player A's role are less prevalent in the league (let's say by half or so); i.e. it's much easier to find/obtain a "Player B". Avoiding for now questions like portability or contract size, etc, who do we now say is more valuable?
I'm not necessarily trying to imply anything about a specific player type at this time. Merely putting a consideration that should not be overlooked out there.
2b) Somewhat indirectly related to #2.......how capable [theoretically] is Player A of filling Player B's role if asked to (or rather, if he'd been
developed/coached/nurtured to fill that role) vs how capable is Player B of filling Player A's role if asked? Just another consideration worth pondering, imo.
With those considerations stated, I'd further point out that RAPM is not the only means available for scrutinizing impact. I'd brought this up in my vote post for Carmelo Antony, as well as a few threads ago in a comparison with Elton Brand. Brand has a little better RAPM scores; but if one looks a WOWY studies, he appears utterly unimpressive through most of his career, at times appearing to provide no lift at all.
Owly had questioned the value of these types of studies [when after all: we have RAPM available for these players], given the noise that can be inherent in WOWY studies (the comparison I'd provided did list other relevant roster changes and speculated on the imprint of those changes too, fwiw). Well idk, and fwiw I think RAPM is the best of the impact measures; just not to the degree that we ignore all others.
And the counter-question I'd asked is that if Brand is as big an impact player as his RAPM suggests, why is this not reflected in the lift he provides for his teams on game-level (as apposed to play-by-play) study? I'd suggested (more by way of asking "could it be that...." rather than firmly suggesting this is the case) that maybe Brand (among others) subtly and inadvertently nurture a culture of dependency in their teammates......such that teams who can function/play at a certain level WITHOUT Brand (especially if he's absent for an extended period----like after he leaves a team, or in the season before he arrives) tend to function
below that standard when Brand is around. Just speculating, but that would account for impressive RAPM's that are not fully reflected in a game-level analysis of impact.
Is game-level analysis of impact (like WOWY) worthwhile? Well, one of the best-respected minds this community has to offer, seems to think so. Enough that it becomes a significant component of the analysis he's laying out for us in his Backpicks Top 40 project. Elgee's regressed WOWY scores (which DO attempt to filter out line-up noise and other player injuries/absences) are right there at the top of the page in big letters/numbers for each player analysis. His interest in this type of analysis tends to make me feel I'm not way out in left field in placing some sort of value in it.
As such, I thought it would be worthwhile to list Anthony's WOWYR (prime, career) vs that of other players, some already inducted, some currently gaining traction (some who share some of the same criticisms as Melo: good offensively, poor defensively)......
Carmelo Anthony (whose prime is listed as a whopping 11 seasons in his study): +2.9, +2.7
Elton Brand (#87): +2.3, +1.2
Terry Porter (#88): +2.5, +2.4
Grant Hill (#73): +2.6, +1.8
Shawn Marion (#77): +2.9, +2.6
Dan Issel (#80): +2.3, +2.1
Manu Ginobili (#54): +3.0, +2.5
Pau Gasol (#48): +2.4, +1.9
Mookie Blaylock: +1.1, +0.7
Amar'e Stoudemire: +1.7, +0.4
Jerry Lucas: +/- 0, -0.6
Tim Hardaway: +3.2, +1.5
Chet Walker: +1.9, +2.0
Maurice Cheeks: +1.0, +1.4
Food for thought, I hope.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
