sansterre wrote:1) When it comes to Possession Advantage, is it more useful to have it more accurate to the team (and aligned with the pace the team played at) or to have it pace-neutral so it is more easily compared across eras?
2) Since I seem to be building an increasing number of stats for the playoff matchups, I was thinking that it might be more helpful to have the matchup stats in the body of the post where I talk about that round of the playoffs, not in the stat-section. It seems more topical to me, but it could easily disrupt the flow of reading. I'm open to thoughts here.
1) I think you could completely leave it out. There are multiple issues. Turnovers have been kept since 1976-77 season. A good chunk of the history doesn't have that. Turnover description changed over time, that's an another issue. Imagine a loose ball, when it was first introduced, a player losing control of the ball was enough even though his team kept the possession at the end of the sequence. Now, a defender might intercept but if his team can't get control, then it's not a turnover.
Also, that approach can make your work already too crowded. It's already full of content, I'd suggest even if you want to have some sort of that, just post total true shooting attempts in a series. For example in 1972, the Lakers had 679.4 tsa and the Bucks 672.08 tsa. Posting tsa also considers extra fouls which is good. Shooting advantage already covers worth of a single possessions. I think just tsa alone would solve your question.
2) I think that depends on what you want to talk about. For example, your heliocentrism numbers are great things to calculate and talk about. If it's something like that, it's indeed awesome.
Though if it's something requiring footages, infos on injuries and surrounding environment, leaving out them is probably the better choice. What I mean is; it'd be hard to explain why a team did better or worse than expected.
