re: this entire +/- discussion

It really is a subtle point that I’ve been trying to make here … and I don’t think that I’ve managed to convey it well.

Thus, I will choose discretion over valour … in this instance … and simply let it go.

——————————————————–

There is no such thing as “being too limited” … when attempting to analyse correctly how something actually works.

For the most part, it’s when “generalities” creep into the conversation that things can go haywire and “what really isn’t” can sometimes be accepted by others as “what really is”, in error.

——————————————————–

re: “It’s not a meaningful stat in terms of assessing which players in general cause“ … a team to play well

With my addendum, and the word I’ve bolded, I can then agree with your observation, 100%.

IMO, however, actually viewing the games this year with a well-trained eye would indeed be a good and sound way to make this type of assessment, re: Nowitzki’s standing/place on this Mavs team. ”

Re-read what I wrote. There’s no conflict with my statement. Still, I don’t know why you’d think that +/- can be used to compare what happened against what might have happened if things had been done differently. +/- is not a predictive measure and I didn’t say it was. Feel free to keep arguing the point, but it’s silly.

Re. “IMO, the type of +/- stats which are being kept today in the NBA are only meaningful when considered in the overall context of the game and what specifically happened on the floor during those exact possessions.” I think that’s too limited…

Unfortunately … Yes, you do need to say precisely that, in this instance, because you do not happen to know yet whether a specific combination of players which the Mavs have so far decided not to try together might well be as effective as one of the combinations they have already used to this point which includes Nowitzki.

In my experience … things that others think might be “implied” are, in fact, frequently far from being the case at all.

——————————————————–

I’m not saying that Dirk is something the Mavs best player.

What I’m saying is that … it’s an incorrect assessment to make that specific observation based solely on his individual +/- score [as kept by the NBA].

IMO, however, actually viewing the games this year with a well-trained eye would indeed be a good and sound way to make this type of assessment, re: Nowitzki’s standing/place on this Mavs team.

——————————————————–

+/- Fallacy Exhibit A

In the first few minutes of the Raptors’ games vs Denver, Toronto was able to take a 7 [or 8] point lead [15-8, I think].

At this point, Triano removed Bargnani [with 2 PFs] from the game … in favour of Johnson … with the Raptors’ starting Center having an individual +/- score of +7.

As such … Calderon, DeRozan, Wright and Bosh each had individual +/- scores of +7, as well, at that exact point in the game.

If the Nuggets would have scored the next 8 points and, then, Bargnani was subbed back into the game, the individual +/- scores for the 6 Raptors who had been in the game to that point would have looked like this:

Calderon -1
DeRozan -1
Wright -1
Bosh -1
Johnson -8
Bargnani +7

Correct?

But … is that really an accurate assessment of the contributions of these 6 players to the Raptors’ cause up to that point in the game?

IMO, it is NOT … when you you consider that the first 8 points which were scored by Denver were all attributable to the defensive/rebounding short-comings of Andrea Bargnani, while only 2 of the Raptors’ initial 15 points had come from him.

IMO, the type of +/- stats which are being kept today in the NBA are only meaningful when considered in the overall context of the game and what specifically happened on the floor during those exact possessions.

——————————————————–

IMO, Bargnani’s occassional forays to the hoop off the dribble DO NOT make up for the degree of agility and coordination which he lacks, in comparison with Nowitzki; not by a long shot.

- You don’t need to say that. When he’s off the floor either another 5-man combo is on the floor or the game is not being played. That’s implied.

Re. “it is NOT accurate to say that no other Mavs’ player positively effects the performance of their team as much as Nowitzki does.”

- Every measure and viewing Mavs games would tell you that. He’s very, very clearly the Mav’s best, most important and hardest to replace player. If not him, then who and how can you prove it?

Re. “Have you ever seen Bargnani make an “off-balance, wrong-footed step-back, twisting-sideways, fall-away-while-being-heavily-contested jumpshot”?” No - his step-back and back to the basket moves are far behind Dirk’s. I see what you’re saying re quickness and agility - I guess Bargs makes up for it on his drives from the perimeter with very good ball-handling skills for his size.

1. re: Dirk’s +/- number being so far above the rest of his teammates probably means that the team’s much worse off when he’s not on the floor and that no other Dallas player positively impacts the team’s play like he does.

I do not agree with this observation.

IMO …

i. it is accurate to say that the Mavs play at a positive score differential whenever Dirk is on the floor;
ii. it is NOT accurate to say that the Mavs are much worse off when Dirk’s off the floor”

[i.e. in place of the wording in ii. it would be accurate to say that the Mavs are worse off when Dirk's off the floor AND one of the other 5-player combinations they have used to this point is on the floor instead];

iii. it is NOT accurate to say that no other Mavs’ player positively effects the performance of their team as much as Nowitzki does.

Select stats, watching the games attentatively, and developing a high degree of basketball acumen each contribute to a thorough understanding of the game.

—————————————————-

2.

i. I do not share that same presumption. i.e. yes, when working vs Closers; but, not necessarily, yes, when working vs Starters.

ii. Although “OPTION 1, Combo 1″ has the most positive individual +/- score, “OPTION 2″ [collectively] generates a better overall +/- score for the entire team. Therefore, “OPTION 2, Combo 1″ may actually be a better alternative for the team to use, by comparison.

—————————————————-

3. Have you ever seen Bargnani make an “off-balance, wrong-footed step-back, twisting-sideways, fall-away-while-being-heavily-contested jumpshot”?

There are isolated examples within this video clip of Dirk.

These are shots that Nowitzki makes on a fairly routine basis.

He has always been a thinner, more lithe, more agile, better coordinated athlete than Bargnani, who is thicker, more mechanical, and less coordinated.

I’m not sure what Wade = JO means. I’d like to do research before I respond. Just saying I’m surprised.

Re. “+/-, in isolation, doesn’t reveal effectiveness.” I said “in combination with other metrics” and, of course, watching the games. The stats show you that watching the games isn’t enough, however.

2. “it is powerful evidence that the Raps are best when the Killer Bs are on the floor” … “When facing which specific combinatons of opponents?”

While playing against the best the other team has to offer, presumably. Usually starters and closers in the NBA are a team’s best players. Not always, but usually.

Not in comparison with what other combinations that have yet to be used by Toronto or in comparison with future players. How could +/- tell you that?

I can’t comment on your scenario - it looks like a GMAT question. Please administer the psychometric test first.

3. What defines Dirk’s agility and finesse? Do you have a youtube selection? I don’t get to see him play too often but from what I recall of the playoffs last year his game is based more on back to the basket play and mid-range jumpers. Is that the finesse you’re referring to?

re: 1

Elite level coaches frequently do both.

There’s no distinction between qualitative and quantative in the mind of an elite level coach, who knows full well that the notion of “vaild sample size” is almost useless in the NBA environment … which is predicated upon individual match-ups and mis-matches.

True “power” comes from knowledge … but true “knowledge”, itself, must exist first.

Unfortunately, in today’s numerical-obsessed basketball environment TOO many of the “stats” in-use are NOT accurate, or do NOT actually reflect properly what many in “the business” will try to tell you they claim to represent.

e.g. when you say this:

“Certainly +/- is useful within a team. I was shocked to see Dirk’s +/- so far above the rest of his teammates when D-Wade’s +/- is the same as JO’s (as of when I looked). Not saying D-Wade and JO are equal, it’s interesting to look at the effectiveness of certain combinations.”

What are you actually trying to say?

[i.e. according to you:

i. What does it MEAN that Dirk's +/- number is so far above the rest of his teammates, while Wade's +/- number is the same as J-Neal's?

ii. Instead of saying what you're "not saying", re: this disparity, instead, try saying what you really think this desparity actually MEANS.

according to me:

iii. +/-, in isolation, doesn't reveal effectiveness.]

IMO, “true knowledge” about the game is missing in a great deal of today’s pseudo basketball commentary/analysis.

——————————————————–

re: 2

“it is powerful evidence that the Raps are best when the Killer Bs are on the floor” …

When facing which specific combinatons of opponents?

In comparison with what other combinations that have yet to be used by Toronto?

or, What about a scenario like this one:

OPTION 1
Combo 1 = +20; Combo 2 = -10; Combo 3 = -5; and, Combo 4 = -8
TOTAL = -3

vs

OPTION 2
Combo 1 = +8; Combo 2 = +4; Combo 3 = -2; and, Comb 4 = - 4
TOTAL = +6

IYO, which OPTION is really the MOST effective for the Raptors?

——————————————————–

re: 3

Please eliminate Dirk’s name from any future comparison with Bargnani, as Il Mago simply does NOT have the type of agility and finesse-based offensive game that Nowitzer has, in spades.

Bargnani is a good offensive player who is continuing to improve. He is nothing like Nowitzki.

[i.e. Bosh is an elite level player; but, Bargnani is not ... at least, as of yet.]”

Are those actually stats, or observations and mental notes? The difference between those types of analysis is quantitative vs. qualitative analysis. Even if coaches don’t do it, it may be a powerful measure of effectiveness (in combination with other metrics). Certainly +/- is useful within a team. I was shocked to see Dirk’s +/- so far above the rest of his teammates when D-Wade’s +/- is the same as JO’s (as of when I looked). Not saying D-Wade and JO are equal, it’s interesting to look at the effectiveness of certain combinations.

2. If the Raps best 3-man units and 5-man units (based on +/- and other measures) include Bosh/Bargnani combos and those units typically face the best the other team has to offer, it is powerful evidence that the Raps are best when the Killer Bs are on the floor, qualitative views of experts notwithstanding. So far, the #s bear that out. It’s worth watching as the Raps face tough opponents who can also rebound well.

3. I agree that Bargnani is not an elite player. He’s not a good rebounder or help defender. If he could become slightly above average in those areas and continue to improve his man D, I’d argue that he’d be very close to joining the league’s elite. His game would then surpass the Okur level and approach the Dirk level. As an aside, I don’t like the Okur comparisons at this stage b/c Bargnani has so many more “wing” skills and so many fewer “big” skills.