What Stats help more or hurt more?

[PhillyCoach]

First, I know there is a plus/minus for value and playing time. Personally I have not delved into it deep enough to have a clear vision. I know there are some very astute posters who can lay it out in an "easy to understand' fashion. Anyway I just wanted to focus on a few stats that don't get the attention that scoring or rebounds get.
To kill two birds with one stone I want to use Ash & KK as examples. Let me say upfront that IMHO (as many others have stated) BE FOY should be shared with these two outstanding first year players.

Scoring and rebounding are two close stats - Ash - 11.3 pts and KK at 9.6 pts. Ash has 44 rebounds to 41 for KK.

Stats that are talked about less -- Here are two stats where Ash excels-- Fouls and Turnovers.
Ash has 21 total fouls and KK has 46. They both play tough D the entire game without letup.
* Ash has 15 turnovers and KK has 35. (I know KK handles the ball more, but Ash turns over the ball less than once a game. For any player that is exceptional, for a frosh that is special.
These two stats lose possessions and give foul shooting opportunities to the opponents.

Two stats that are more valuable in some eyes (but secondary to scoring) are assists & steals. KK shows up on offense with 62 assists to 28 assists for Ash. Defensively KK has 46 steals to 11 for Ash.
A significant difference.

Which of those stats help more or hurt more?

Don't know if someone can do a plus/minus evaluation on those statistics based on a season average. To be honest I was leaning toward Ash before I got all this info. Now I am hedging a little toward KK. All in all it is super close and I would still vote for a tie!

 

[Next 12]

First, I know there is a plus/minus for value and playing time. Personally I have not delved into it deep enough to have a clear vision. I know there are some very astute posters who can lay it out in an "easy to understand' fashion. Anyway I just wanted to focus on a few stats that don't get the attention that scoring or rebounds get.
To kill two birds with one stone I want to use Ash & KK as examples. Let me say upfront that IMHO (as many others have stated) BE FOY should be shared with these two outstanding first year players.

Scoring and rebounding are two close stats - Ash - 11.3 pts and KK at 9.6 pts. Ash has 44 rebounds to 41 for KK.

Stats that are talked about less -- Here are two stats where Ash excels-- Fouls and Turnovers.
Ash has 21 total fouls and KK has 46. They both play tough D the entire game without letup.
* Ash has 15 turnovers and KK has 35. (I know KK handles the ball more, but Ash turns over the ball less than once a game. For any player that is exceptional, for a frosh that is special.
These two stats lose possessions and give foul shooting opportunities to the opponents.

Two stats that are more valuable in some eyes (but secondary to scoring) are assists & steals. KK shows up on offense with 62 assists to 28 assists for Ash. Defensively KK has 46 steals to 11 for Ash.
A significant difference.

Which of those stats help more or hurt more?

Don't know if someone can do a plus/minus evaluation on those statistics based on a season average. To be honest I was leaning toward Ash before I got all this info. Now I am hedging a little toward KK. All in all it is super close and I would still vote for a tie!

My thoughts will not be a + or = as I am not that articulate. My comment is , it doesn't matter in the context of the game. If Uconn did not have Ashlynn,They might have some more losses. The same applies to KK. if she was not on the team there might be more losses. They are the sum of all the parts that is running this magnificent machine, so they are all plusses. That's my take as to keep comparing one player against another is not beneficial for the team. GO FRESHMEN!!!!! GO HUSKIES!!!!!

 

[diggerfoot]

First, I know there is a plus/minus for value and playing time. Personally I have not delved into it deep enough to have a clear vision. I know there are some very astute posters who can lay it out in an "easy to understand' fashion. Anyway I just wanted to focus on a few stats that don't get the attention that scoring or rebounds get.
To kill two birds with one stone I want to use Ash & KK as examples. Let me say upfront that IMHO (as many others have stated) BE FOY should be shared with these two outstanding first year players.

Scoring and rebounding are two close stats - Ash - 11.3 pts and KK at 9.6 pts. Ash has 44 rebounds to 41 for KK.

Stats that are talked about less -- Here are two stats where Ash excels-- Fouls and Turnovers.
Ash has 21 total fouls and KK has 46. They both play tough D the entire game without letup.
* Ash has 15 turnovers and KK has 35. (I know KK handles the ball more, but Ash turns over the ball less than once a game. For any player that is exceptional, for a frosh that is special.
These two stats lose possessions and give foul shooting opportunities to the opponents.

Two stats that are more valuable in some eyes (but secondary to scoring) are assists & steals. KK shows up on offense with 62 assists to 28 assists for Ash. Defensively KK has 46 steals to 11 for Ash.
A significant difference.

Which of those stats help more or hurt more?

Don't know if someone can do a plus/minus evaluation on those statistics based on a season average. To be honest I was leaning toward Ash before I got all this info. Now I am hedging a little toward KK. All in all it is super close and I would still vote for a tie!

PERS utilizes that type of data, not +/-. The latter is drawn from play by play to determine the scoring differentials while a player is in the game. A higher + value essentially means the team did better as a whole while that player was in the game.

When a position has only two players mutually exclusive, their +/- should be that of the overall score. Thus Clingan was +6 last night, Johnson -5, and UConn beat Villanova by one point.

Comparing +/- between players of different teams is meaningless, since the overall scoring differentials are different. Relative +/- is a little more revealing. If one player has the best +/- on their team and an opponent has only third best on theirs, then chances are the first player helps his/her team more.

((As a side note, there was one year in the WNBA when M. Moore had the highest +/- for her team, yet Parker won the MVP with a +/- that was only 3rd best for hers.)

Comparing between teammates for one or a small sampling of games also is problematic, as anything could throw off the value, such as the teammates with you on the court. For example, a PG or experienced player might be left in at the end of games to stabilize the bench players, thus artificially reducing their +/-. In the previous example, I believe Johnson was in the game at the end when a Villanova player hit a meaningless half court shot, thus reducing his +/- by three.

Also, the amount of time in the game will affect +/- outside of true value. However, the more games played in a season the more reliable +/- becomes to indicate relative impact on a team, at least between players of comparable minutes played.

 

[hoophuskee]

Using +/- isn't as simple as it sounds. Too many vaiables to use it. I don't believe there is a meauremnt to determine who is better between the 2. I'd give the edge to KK but not on stats.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/815181-nba-power-rankings-the-10-most-meaningless-stats-and-arguments-in-basketball

 

[WiseWillie]

Interesting discussion on +/-. Would like to see more. Any BB statisticians out there?

 

[Rowdy831]

+/- is a good stat but sometimes a very misleading stat. If the two players are close in talent then the +/- would be a great stat to show how one did against the other in a particular game. If you have a great player being replaced by an average player then you would expect the +/- to be bigger on a regular basis. Where this stat is particularly good is in the pros when you have a reserve that comes in and has a big +/- over a starter. In that case you might have a stat that helps to see how one team got the better of the other and a win.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

The problem with stats is that they tell you what happened, but not why they happened. And without knowing why, you can't necessarily repeat the outcome or avoid the outcome. I like the eye test...first before I conclude what a stat is telling me. Some stats, like free throw % and steals (for the most part) are pretty reliable on their face. Ball pressure creates steals, but that defender doesn't always make the steal...and that doesn't show up in the stats.

Something like shooting percentage can be deceptive. There are a lot of variables such as is the player primarily a 3 point shooter, mid range or close to the basket shooter? Is the player a focus of the defense or the player they leave open or don't guard as closely? Is the player shooting against double teams. Is the player undersized? And the biggest variable of all...opponent quality.

And then...to me, efficiency matters. And the slower paced your offense runs (half court dominant), then the more efficient your shooters need to be because you generally get fewer possessions. There are corrections, but they are often recognized after you already loss. LSU, SC type teams can shoot poorly and win because they have elite rebounders. Another team can have an elite scorer (USC/Iowa), but is less efficient and the team isn't elite at rebounding. The year Syracuse played UCONN in the national championship, Q just had his team shoot more 3s because it was obvious they weren't efficient. So his remedy was...get more shots up. It was his option to not having elite rebounders.

In a nutshell, stats shouldn't mean the same thing to fans as they do a coach. And you can't just look at stats because there's a stat for everything now. That can be a full-time job.

 

[OldSchooler]

Here's one that could end up hurting us. How many made FTs are we going to have to forfeit for jumping the line early, before this is recognized as a problem? (I believe that's one stat that isn't reflected in the box score; not a "miss," nor even recorded as a FTA.) Football isn't the only sport where a simple off-sides can ruin a gain.