Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Fife's 2009 season-end report

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Fife's 2009 season-end report

    I apologize in advance for the length of this entry, folks, but I thought it made sense to keep the sections in one thread. Anyway, now that another season is behind us, I will offer my magnum opus: a summary report of a league analysis I generate (twice) each year. It’s my thanks to the entire PD community. I hope that in reviewing where we and other teams have been, and in forming opinions on “where we’re going,” you will find some of this information interesting.

    The analysis uses a normalization-based regression algorithm grouping most of the league’s players to suggest a salary based on overall productivity. I emphasize that save for a few obvious exceptions, the comments below are based entirely on the output from commonly-collected statistics and what they imply in terms of overall value as determined by the salary structure. Note, too, that injuries (in terms of number of games played) affect a player’s value.

    The Pacers
    No big surprises here. It’s no secret that Danny Granger played his way into elite status and, with an overall rank of 14th, certainly deserves all-star status, though not quite the nearly $10-million salary he’ll be receiving starting next season. As Danny mentioned in his MIP acceptance speech, Troy Murphy certainly improved a lot as well – as did Jarrett Jack, Marquis Daniels and (to a lesser extent) T.J. Ford – though as many complain, Ford (not to mention Murphy and Jeff Foster) continues to be significantly overpaid. Also of note, if not surprising, is that in terms of overall productivity, Daniels, Foster, Rasho Nesterovich, Travis Diener, Josh McRoberts and Stephen Graham all fell off rather sharply over the second half of the season (although Foster – and Jack – performed at a similar level two years ago), while Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert remained steady. In fact, Rush easily “earned” his first-year salary. Jack, with a salary-value of $4.85 million, was the only other Pacer whose value exceeded his ($2m) salary this season. However, as has been discussed, the figures of his next contract are a key to upcoming team decisions. As for picking up Daniels’ $7.35 million option, my unequivocal answer is “no” because Daniels’ value was $4 million this season and although we would like to have him next season as insurance toward Mike Dunleavy’s uncertain health status, we can find better ways to spend/save the $3 million premium, especially when considering someone with injury questions of his own. In terms of salaries, Josh McRoberts’ value warrants roughly a $450,000 contract for next season, but he’ll certainly get more due to the p-word (potential). Travis Diener’s value this season was $1.2 million, but had he produced at the ’07-‘08 level, he would have been worth $2.1 million. Therefore, his agent likely will be pushing for more money through more playing time … which makes the T.J. Ford/Jarrett Jack situation all the more interesting.

    The Rookies
    Nearly everyone at PD seems pleased with the performances (and developmental potential) of our rookies and while not deserving of ROY honors, both have exceeded expectations predicted by the numbers. Those of you who appreciate Count’s analysis …

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...t=43186&page=2

    … will be gratified to know that my analysis, though done in quite a different manner, concurs. It also supports Count’s contention that “on the whole, you should be able to snare a decent career player [at #13], perhaps starter, with maybe a little All-Star potential.” While drafting in the NBA is far from a sure thing, and the supply of talent varies from year to year, a GM generally can be confident that a player chosen at #13 will quickly find his way into the rotation and be a top bench player after four years. A player chosen at #17 (e.g., Hibbert) can be expected to become a solid bench player. To date, both Rush and Hibbert are exceeding those expectations, playing in line with selections taken at #9 and #14, respectively. Incidentally, if we were to treat Josh McRoberts as a rookie, his value would suggest that of someone taken at the end of the first round … with a chance of being a regular contributor (9th or 10th man) in a few years.

    Regarding the rest of the rookie class, I will offer grades based on comparing their overall productivity this first year to expectations from where they were selected:

    A+ M Chalmers (34th), B Lopez (10th), M Gasol*
    A A Morrow**, L Mbah a Moute (37th)
    A- E Gordon (7th)
    B+ C Lee (22nd), R Westbrook (4th), K Weaver (38th), OJ Mayo (3rd)
    B N Batum (25th), D Arthur (27th), D Jordan (35th), A Randolph (14th), D Rose (1st), R Anderson (21st), J Thompson (12th)
    B- J McGee (18th), G Hill (26th), M Speights (16th), B Rush (13th), C Douglas-Roberts (40th), D.J. Augustin (9th), G Dragic (45th)
    C+ K Koufos (23rd), R Hibbert (17th)
    C D Greene (28th), K Love (5th), JJ Hickson (19th)
    C- B Walker (47th)
    D+ R Lopez (15th)
    D J Bayless (11th), M Beasley (2nd), J Alexander (8th)
    F D Gallinari (6th), JR Giddens (30th)

    * It may be a stretch to treat Marc Gasol (drafted #48 in 2007) as a rookie, but he clearly played very well.
    ** Anthony Morrow wins the “undrafted ROY award” in a landslide!

    In terms of Rookie of the Year, the best-performing player was Derrick Rose, of course, but in terms of “Draftee of the Year,” Mario Chalmers takes the prize (although Brooke Lopez did darn well, even for a #10). Note: Don’t berate me for Chalmers’ disappearing act in the first-round of the playoffs; this report is based on regular-season stats only!

    Around the League
    One way to measure a team’s level of talent is to use a valuation system of individual players. (For a fabulous article that touches on the dissonance between the team and the individual, see Michael Lewis’ February 2009 New York Times article on Shane Battier:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/ma...r&st=cse&scp=1.)

    While Jeff Sagarin and Wayne Winston offer the ultimate system – tracking sets of players on the floor throughout a game – my analysis used correlations with team records to show that the Pacers’ talent level is (only) slightly below average: ranking 18th in the league. Inversely, then, they should be picking 13th in the upcoming draft. The Lakers have the most talent (Cleveland is third; Orlando, fifth; Denver, ninth), while the Kings have the least. In fact, in terms of talent need – again, “talent” based on individual productivity throughout the regular season – the top three draft picks should go to 1) Sacramento, 2) Memphis and 3) Milwaukee.

    Another detail to squeeze out of this part of the analysis is to assess coaching by the relative record compared to relative talent. From this angle, Doc Rivers deserves Coach-of-the-Year honors for getting this year’s Celtics to finish at 0.756. (While the Lakers and Cavaliers finished with better records, they had even more talent.) Mike Dunleavy, Sr. gets the “Ax-of-the-Year” award for leading the Clippers to a 0.232 finish.

    As far as other standard awards are concerned:

    Most Valuable Player – LeBron James.

    Most Improved Player – This was a very close race, but much to my chagrin, it was not Danny Granger (who finished fourth), nor was it Devin Harris, nor David Lee. In terms of scaled improvement in overall productivity from last year, it was Kevin Durant (MrSparko’s and Hoop’s objections to considering 2nd-year players noted), who raised his level of performance in more areas than Danny, also increased his scoring average by five points, and rose to the league’s top ten. (Think of it as the hill getting steeper as you near the top.) On the other end of the scale, Allen Iverson declined the most.

    Defensive Player – Dwight Howard.

    Sixth-man (my version: the highest-ranked player of those who finished sixth on his team in both rank and minutes played) – Antonio McDyess.

    Individuals of note
    Several players have shown strong, continuous improvement over the last few years (some of whom various Posters have been clamoring for at one time or another):
    Boston – Rajon Rondo and Kendrick Perkins
    Chicago – John Salmons and Tyrus Thomas
    Dallas – Brandon Bass
    Golden State – Kelenna Azubuike
    Indiana – Our very own Marquis Daniels
    New York – Nate Robinson
    Oklahoma City – Thabo Sefolosha
    Portland – LaMarcus Aldridge and Joel Przybilla
    Utah – Ronnie Brewer and CJ Miles
    Washington – Andre Blatche

    [Personal commentary: John Salmons’ excellent play makes one wonder how Chicago will play its Ben Gordon/Luol Deng cards…. Portland fans, salivating over their team’s rosey (pun intended) future, must be wondering whether they want to endure Greg Oden’s dubious health history. (Buy low, sell high?) I imagine GM Kevin Pritchard will be going hard after a veteran PG. (Andre Miller?) … Utah may be in line for an adjustment or two; with the right moves, I believe they could be championship contenders in the next year or two.]

    Concerning possible free agents to acquire, here are the values for several players of interest to PDers. While young players often secure inflated contracts due to their potential, veterans’ values can often be used as estimates for next-year salaries (assuming that the lowered adjustment in new salaries for ’09-’10 will roughly cancel out the typical yearly increase, but this year all bets are off):

    Andre Miller – $7.5 million
    Shawn Marion – $7.0 million
    Ben Gordon – $6.9 million
    Mike Bibby – $6.7 million
    Ron Artest – $6.6 million
    David Lee – $6.6 million
    Rasheed Wallace – $5.3 million
    Paul Millsap – $4.9 million*
    Charlie Villaneuva – $4.6 million
    Trevor Ariza – $4.2 million
    Antonio McDyess – $4.0 million
    Chris Anderson – $3.8 million
    Luc Mbah a Moute – $2.9 million
    Drew Gooden – $2.4 million
    Brandon Bass – $2.3 million
    Joe Smith – $1.9 million
    Jason Maxiel – $1.7 million
    Leon Powe – $1.4 million
    Marcin Gortat – $1.3 million

    *more next season, I think, because of projections as a starter

    The Draft
    I waited to post the report until after our draft position was finalized so that this section, which so often fills us with anticipation for the future, would be accurate. A top-three pick would have bent our minds hard right (in a good way!), but as things stand, my analysis – which assesses the theoretical value of draft picks by sorting according to ranked value from the previous year(s) – suggests that the 13th pick in the draft should develop into a sixth man/potential starter. While everyone hopes to uncover a hidden gem, embracing the notion of likely drafting a solid player with a limited ceiling may color one’s perspective (in a good way) on whom to select at 13 … or, when the moment arrives, whether to trade up or down.

    I’ll post my own opinions/desires elsewhere on how the top half of the draft might unfold and who/what I’d like the team to draft. However, Speed raised a point (http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...postcount=1048) about getting a player who can play two positions (3/4), which reminded me of a template of “interchangeable parts” that a former coach (who shall remain nameless) espoused. The dedicated-position-versus-interchangeable-parts debate rages on, but perhaps a solution is to imagine a team whose starters are ideal for one particular position, and yet whose bench players can “fill the gaps” by playing multiple positions. The point here is that by assuming that the 13th (or lower, should we trade down or acquire another late-first-round) pick will become a top bench player/borderline starter – and no more – we might be more inclined to draft a “tweener” (such as Terrence Williams, should he show well in workouts; or perhaps Earl Clark, should he fall during the draft). Given our current roster and barring a significant trade, however, will anyone we draft this year at 13 contribute immediately and ascend to a starter position over the next three years (when several large contacts expire)? Will TPTB instead use free agency (and trades?) to plug gaps with multi-position players and use the 13th pick to draft someone less ready, but perhaps with more potential to be a starter, or even a star, down the road?

    Chad Ford at ESPN offers a titillating current perspective: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2...aftTour-090518).

    Whomever the Pacers choose, some PDers will be skeptical if not downright furious. Disparate opinions already have been expressed about Earl Clark, DeJuan Blair, Jrue Holiday, Terrance Williams, Gerald Henderson … everyone after Blake Griffin, it seems. That’s a good thing: it illustrates the yearly challenge to GMs, and it makes it fun for us. However, of special note amidst the myriad possibilities for how this year’s draft will unfold is that the 13th pick seems roughly equivalent in (three-year) value to, say, Minnesota’s 18th and 28th picks. (With three first-round picks this year, Minnesota may be the center of trade attention throughout the league.) By the same token, Memphis’ 2nd and 27th picks are approximately equal in value to the Clippers’ 1st pick, and from a team-need standpoint (Memphis needs Griffin, the Clippers would benefit from Thabeet and depth), such a trade is not inconceivable (though, IMO, highly unlikely). Needless to say, given the number of teams with multiple first-round picks as well as ones with financial concerns, this draft may prove particularly interesting with pick-swap possibilities.


    "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

    - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

    Great post.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

      I think Gooden will get offered more than $2.4 million
      "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

        Fantasic, well thought out post. I appreciate the analysis and willingness to go against the grain with evaluations.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

          Originally posted by DrFife View Post

          Concerning possible free agents to acquire, here are the values for several players of interest to PDers. While young players often secure inflated contracts due to their potential, veterans’ values can often be used as estimates for next-year salaries (assuming that the lowered adjustment in new salaries for ’09-’10 will roughly cancel out the typical yearly increase, but this year all bets are off):

          Andre Miller – $7.5 million
          Shawn Marion – $7.0 million
          Ben Gordon – $6.9 million
          Mike Bibby – $6.7 million
          Ron Artest – $6.6 million
          David Lee – $6.6 million
          Rasheed Wallace – $5.3 million
          Paul Millsap – $4.9 million*
          Charlie Villaneuva – $4.6 million
          Trevor Ariza – $4.2 million
          Antonio McDyess – $4.0 million
          Chris Anderson – $3.8 million
          Luc Mbah a Moute – $2.9 million
          Drew Gooden – $2.4 million
          Brandon Bass – $2.3 million
          Joe Smith – $1.9 million
          Jason Maxiel – $1.7 million
          Leon Powe – $1.4 million
          Marcin Gortat – $1.3 million

          *more next season, I think, because of projections as a starter

          .
          I'd like to place an order for some David Lee and Antonio McDyess, please, with a side order of Trevor Ariza. Ordinarily I would have liked an order of Leon Powe as well, but I'm full of players with a long term recovery ahead of them before they can return to our lineup. I'd like to make that a "to go" order because we would be going to the playoffs with a deep run towards the LeBron's.

          In my opinion, anyone on this list besides Andre Miller, Artest, Rasheed, Gooden, and Joe Smith would be absolute steals at the salaries being projected here, and these players would only be omitted due to their past issues and significant attitude problems, not by what they bring to the floor.

          We should feel like kids in a candy store with all of these affordable players coming on the market. If this is true, it should be quite an off season for us, and many other teams around the league who are in need of upgrades on the cheap, despite all of the cap difficulties facing the league. The problem is that any of their respective teams are capable of seeing this as well, and will gladly pay these prices for as long as they are able to lock the players in for, and in most cases it wouldn't surprise me if they get significantly more than that.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

            Originally posted by Saruman
            The analysis uses a normalization-based regression algorithm grouping most of the league’s players to suggest a salary based on overall productivity. I emphasize that save for a few obvious exceptions, the comments below are based entirely on the output from commonly-collected statistics and what they imply in terms of overall value as determined by the salary structure. Note, too, that injuries (in terms of number of games played) affect a player’s value.

            Could you post more of this? I'd like to see the top few and bottom few players, and also how many (if any) of the mega-salary players earn their salaries according to your model. I presume you have a table comparing your model to the players' actual salaries.
            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

              Originally posted by Putnam View Post
              Could you post more of this? I'd like to see the top few and bottom few players, and also how many (if any) of the mega-salary players earn their salaries according to your model. I presume you have a table comparing your model to the players' actual salaries.
              I'd be interested in seeing this as well but also...

              Originally posted by DrFife
              It’s no secret that Danny Granger played his way into elite status and, with an overall rank of 14th, certainly deserves all-star status, though not quite the nearly $10-million salary he’ll be receiving starting next season.
              I'd be interested in seeing how Danny compares to Andre Iguadala and Luol Deng, the two wings who established the Granger's price.
              This is the darkest timeline.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                I'm going to join the call for more data.

                I'd also like to know who the most overpayed and underpaid big-minute (25+) players in the NBA are.
                "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                - Salman Rushdie

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                  Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                  I'd like to place an order for some David Lee and Antonio McDyess, please, with a side order of Trevor Ariza. Ordinarily I would have liked an order of Leon Powe as well, but I'm full of players with a long term recovery ahead of them before they can return to our lineup. I'd like to make that a "to go" order because we would be going to the playoffs with a deep run towards the LeBron's.

                  In my opinion, anyone on this list besides Andre Miller, Artest, Rasheed, Gooden, and Joe Smith would be absolute steals at the salaries being projected here, and these players would only be omitted due to their past issues and significant attitude problems, not by what they bring to the floor.

                  We should feel like kids in a candy store with all of these affordable players coming on the market. If this is true, it should be quite an off season for us, and many other teams around the league who are in need of upgrades on the cheap, despite all of the cap difficulties facing the league. The problem is that any of their respective teams are capable of seeing this as well, and will gladly pay these prices for as long as they are able to lock the players in for, and in most cases it wouldn't surprise me if they get significantly more than that.
                  First, I'm making some assumptions on methodology here, but I'm sure Doc will correct me if I'm wrong.

                  I don't think he's trying to project what theywill be paid...he's trying to project what they should be paid. Of course, there are a lot of intervening factors that will result in some players being paid more and some being paid less.

                  There will be inflationary factors, such as competition for services, intangible considerations, existing inflated contracts on comparable player. There will be deflationary factors in the form of the salary cap/luxury tax, the limited size of exceptions, and the limited number of teams with both the means and the interest to sign players.

                  These factors tend to not balance or soften each other. That is to say that a player's situation tends to either be inflationary or deflationary. As a result, you tend to end up with a lot of players who are either greatly overpaid or greatly underpaid.

                  There's a gap created between the scientific method being employed by Doc here and the actual market, and it's primarily because the decision makers tend to not be scientific when making their decisions.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                    Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                    I'd be interested in seeing this as well but also...



                    I'd be interested in seeing how Danny compares to Andre Iguadala and Luol Deng, the two wings who established the Granger's price.
                    Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                    I'm going to join the call for more data.

                    I'd also like to know who the most overpayed and underpaid big-minute (25+) players in the NBA are.
                    I'd also be curious about the entire Pacer roster.

                    Jarrett Jack, specifically.

                    How do rookie and min contract players impact the analysis? About 1/4 of the players in the league are on rookie contracts, and I'm guessing that guys like Danny and Derrick Rose blow the curve.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                      Originally posted by count55 View Post
                      First, I'm making some assumptions on methodology here, but I'm sure Doc will correct me if I'm wrong.

                      I don't think he's trying to project what theywill be paid...he's trying to project what they should be paid. Of course, there are a lot of intervening factors that will result in some players being paid more and some being paid less.

                      There will be inflationary factors, such as competition for services, intangible considerations, existing inflated contracts on comparable player. There will be deflationary factors in the form of the salary cap/luxury tax, the limited size of exceptions, and the limited number of teams with both the means and the interest to sign players.

                      These factors tend to not balance or soften each other. That is to say that a player's situation tends to either be inflationary or deflationary. As a result, you tend to end up with a lot of players who are either greatly overpaid or greatly underpaid.

                      There's a gap created between the scientific method being employed by Doc here and the actual market, and it's primarily because the decision makers tend to not be scientific when making their decisions.
                      Perfect. I admire your exceptional clarity of thought and attention to detail, Count – here and elsewhere. Thank you, and thanks to all for your supportive comments and inquiries.

                      Here are the corresponding data to questions so far:

                      Top players (Putnam) –
                      1) LeBron James, Value = 15.5, ’08-’09 Salary = $14.4m
                      2) Dwyane Wade, Value = 15.3, Salary = $14.4m
                      3) Chris Paul, Value = 14.1, Salary = $4.6m ($13.8m for ’09-’10) … what a deal!

                      No other mega-salaried player is “earning” his money, value-wise. In fact, the next player whose value exceeds his salary is Devin Harris, with a value of 8.0 and an ’08-‘09 salary of $7.8 million. While many of those contracts were given before last year’s correction, my interpretation is that such contracts were/are given based on the expectation that the player would perform like a superstar.

                      All the bottom feeders are overpaid; the lowest-rated player whose value exceeds his salary is what-should-be 11th man on the Clippers, Mike Taylor (Value = 0.8, Salary = $0.7m).

                      Most overpaid (Mellifluous) –
                      1) Jermaine O’Neal (by $18.5m)
                      2) Tracy McGrady (by $18.3m)
                      3) Kevin Garnett (by $17.9m)

                      Most underpaid (Mellifluous) –
                      1) Chris Paul (by $9.6m)
                      2) Brandon Roy (by $6.9m)
                      3) Danny Granger (by $6.5m)

                      Top rookies (Count55) – As you can see, you’re right about rookies who quickly rise to stardom. The top contracts appropriately seem to describe a “potential star,” not an “already-a-star.”
                      1) Derrick Rose (Value = 7.3, Salary = $4.8m)
                      2) OJ Mayo (Value = 5.9, Salary = $3.9m)
                      3) Russell Westbrook (Value = 5.5, Salary = $3.5m)

                      Top 2nd-year players (Count55) –
                      1) Kevin Durant (Value = 10.2, Salary = $4.5m)
                      2) Jeff Green (Value = 5.9, Salary = $3.3m)
                      3) Al Horford (Value = 5.8, Salary = $4.0m)

                      Pacer roster & comparisons (Count55, Avoidingtheclowns) –
                      1) Danny Granger* (Value = 8.9, Salary = $2.3m, ’09-’10 Salary = $9.9m) … so he does need to get better!
                      2) Troy Murphy (Value = 6.5, Salary = $10.1m)
                      3) TJ Ford (Value = 5.3, Salary = $8.0m)
                      4) Jarrett Jack (Value = 4.9, Salary = $2.0m) - Count, in between your & Tbird's estimates
                      5) Marquis Daniels (Value = 4.0, Salary = $6.9m)
                      6) Jeff Foster (Value = 2.5, Salary = $6.2m)
                      7) Brandon Rush (Value = 2.2, Salary = $1.7m)
                      8) Mike Dunleavy (Value = 2.0, Salary = $9.0m)
                      9) Rasho Nesterovic (Value = 1.5, Salary = $8.4m)
                      10) Roy Hibbert (Value = 1.2, Salary = $1.5m)
                      11) Travis Diener (Value = 1.2, Salary = $1.6m)
                      12) Josh McRoberts (Value = 0.4, Salary = $0.7m)
                      13) Stephen Graham (Value = 0.4, Salary = $0.8m)
                      14) Maceo Baston (Value = 0.2, Salary = $2.0m)

                      * Granger comparisons (Avoidingtheclowns) –
                      Andre Iguodala (Value = 9.5, Salary = $11.3m)
                      Luol Deng (Value = 5.1, Salary = $9.4m … but note that his production has fallen off the past two years)
                      Last edited by DrFife; 05-21-2009, 08:52 PM.


                      "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                      - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                        Does games played/missed factor into this?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                          Do we really think Danny Granger is overpaid? I think he would probably be getting a max deal this summer if we hadn't locked him up.


                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                            Originally posted by count55 View Post
                            Does games played/missed factor into this?
                            Yep: "Note, too, that injuries (in terms of number of games played) affect a player’s value."


                            "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                            - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Fife's 2009 season-end report

                              Originally posted by Indy View Post
                              Do we really think Danny Granger is overpaid? I think he would probably be getting a max deal this summer if we hadn't locked him up.
                              Gotta be careful. Take a look a LeBron's value: 15.5

                              Would you bat an eye at paying $20? $25?

                              I wouldn't.

                              My suspicion is that if we saw a distribution graph (hint-hint), the majority of players would skew overpaid.

                              Or, more accurately, the majority of veteran starter/rotation players would skew overpaid. The majority of the producers on rookie contracts would skew underpaid.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X