PDA

View Full Version : Determining player value?



speakout4
09-18-2010, 08:10 PM
In order to determine player value to a team of course stats are used but another measure would be player replacement.

For example, which player would you REALISTICALLY accept in a trade for
Granger
Hibbert
Dun
Foster
McRob
Rush
Jones'
Trades with multiple players are allowed such that Granger can be traded for two players.
I'm leaving out Tyler and the new guys because they are hard to assess and no need to say Ford for a hamburger with fries.

pacer4ever
09-19-2010, 01:07 AM
In order to determine player value to a team of course stats are used but another measure would be player replacement.

For example, which player would you REALISTICALLY accept in a trade for
Granger
Hibbert
Dun
Foster
McRob
Rush
Jones'
Trades with multiple players are allowed such that Granger can be traded for two players.
I'm leaving out Tyler and the new guys because they are hard to assess and no need to say Ford for a hamburger with fries.

id give duns away lol same with tj got to let the younger guys have duns playing time he is gonna be in south beach this time next year after signing for the veterns minum book it his days as a pacer are numbered

Kstat
09-19-2010, 01:25 AM
I don't think there is such a thing as a definite "player value." It all depends on the type of team you're talking to. A 35-year old vet might be totally unwanted by a lottery team, but worth a 1st round pick to a title contender.

speakout4
09-19-2010, 08:58 AM
I don't think there is such a thing as a definite "player value." It all depends on the type of team you're talking to. A 35-year old vet might be totally unwanted by a lottery team, but worth a 1st round pick to a title contender.
Let's just use trade equivalence as an indicator of player value with all teams looking for equal value rather than special circumstances such as the one you propose.

Kstat
09-19-2010, 12:58 PM
There's no such thing. Every trade has "special circumstances.'

speakout4
09-19-2010, 01:01 PM
There's no such thing. Every trade has "special circumstances.'
whatever.

Kstat
09-19-2010, 01:04 PM
The NBA doesn't exist in a vacuum. Every NBA team has unique needs that will affect trade value. There's no chart to look at.

speakout4
09-19-2010, 01:09 PM
The NBA doesn't exist in a vacuum. Every NBA team has unique needs that will affect trade value. There's no chart to look at.
The idea wasn't to be as literal as you suggest but to make comparisons between player abilities. For example would we trade Granger for Gerald Wallace straight up or would another young player need to be involved. This is strictly player dependent and team needs independent.

Kstat
09-19-2010, 01:15 PM
Not at all. The Bobcats are a defensive-oriented team in need of another offensive scorer, so Granger for Gerald for Granger would be more attractive to them, where other teams might not do the swap.

joew8302
09-19-2010, 05:10 PM
I hear what kstat is saying. There are just way too many variables for there to be even a somewhat universal opinion on some of this.

That said, it is all for fun, so carry on. For what it is worth I would trade anyone on the team given it makes sense. I don't see any "untouchables".

Hicks
09-19-2010, 05:22 PM
Has any forum or website attempted to give players an "overall score/rating" akin to NBA 2K or NBA Elite does? I guess you can say PER, but I'd prefer something different.

Stats are great, but I'd be more interested in a rating that had more defensive stats and was attempted to be more balanced with educated, subjective "expert opinion".

Note that I'd never claim such a thing would be universally accepted. I'm just saying I'd be interested in seeing and perhaps even trying (with a lot of help) to create one that would be on a scale of either 1-50 or 1-100.

Sookie
09-19-2010, 05:37 PM
Has any forum or website attempted to give players an "overall score/rating" akin to NBA 2K or NBA Elite does? I guess you can say PER, but I'd prefer something different.

Stats are great, but I'd be more interested in a rating that had more defensive stats and was attempted to be more balanced with educated, subjective "expert opinion".

Note that I'd never claim such a thing would be universally accepted. I'm just saying I'd be interested in seeing and perhaps even trying (with a lot of help) to create one that would be on a scale of either 1-50 or 1-100.

It would be interesting to do, but also very hard, as obviously people who watch basketball all come with a different set of biases, see the games differently, and rate different skills as more important than others.

But still..very interesting though.

Hicks
09-19-2010, 05:41 PM
It would be interesting to do, but also very hard, as obviously people who watch basketball all come with a different set of biases, see the games differently, and rate different skills as more important than others.

But still..very interesting though.

I wonder if you could assemble a small 'council' with varying biases, let them all generate their scores, then average them out for one final, 'official', mean average score?

I'm not saying it'd be 'perfect' or perhaps even close, but it might be nice.

speakout4
09-19-2010, 07:12 PM
I hear what kstat is saying. There are just way too many variables for there to be even a somewhat universal opinion on some of this.

That said, it is all for fun, so carry on. For what it is worth I would trade anyone on the team given it makes sense. I don't see any "untouchables".
Of course there will not be universal opinion because this is a forum of diverse opinions. This is team independent meaning each team has a complement of players and the way any particular team plays is not relevant.

If you build too much complexity into the system you defeat the exercise which is merely to assess the value of players. If you favor offense or defense that will be reflected in your trade choices. This doesn't have to require stats or algorithms, just a fun exercise.

Putnam
09-19-2010, 07:32 PM
I wonder if you could assemble a small 'council' with varying biases, let them all generate their scores, then average them out for one final, 'official', mean average score?

I'm not saying it'd be 'perfect' or perhaps even close, but it might be nice.


A single, all-encompassing value is the Holy Grail if it really is all-encompassing. But there is also value in the disparity among several outcomes. No single number, be it scoring average, PER, win% or whatever, captures what the measures of dispersion do in statistics.

For example, there is probably one expert who would rate Ron Artest very highly. But many others would rank him middle or low because of his personality. If you looked only at his collective average ranking, he'd look like a decent player. But if you saw the dissonance between the one who rated him a 10 and the several others who rated him lower, you'd know there was something suspicious.

It is the same thing with individual scoring. Two players average 15 points per game. One of them actually gives you from 12 to 18 points night in and night out. The other lights it up for 30 one night and then disappears the next. the average number obscures that there significant feature.


So, if you ever could assemble that council of experts, you might want to preserve the range of their opinions rather than lumping them all together.

Kemo
09-19-2010, 07:33 PM
There's no such thing. Every trade has "special circumstances.'


+1
"One man's junk , is another man's treasure"

I think that most definitely applies to NBA teams ..

Putnam
09-19-2010, 07:53 PM
This doesn't have to require stats or algorithms, just a fun exercise.

I know how it feels to have a thread go flat, so I'll try to play.

I would keep Granger, Hibbert, George, Collison, and Hansbrough. It isn't that I think they are better than other players for whom we might trade, but that I like those players and would like to see the Pacers succeed WITH them around.

Dunleavy
Foster
McRoberts
Rush
Jones

I would trade any combination of those guys for Matt Bonner, just to get some Spurs professionalism into the Pacers locker room. Ditto Shane Battier for his own ethic rather than anything unique to Houston. I think Foster is a really good guy, but I don't think he's done as much, nor has as much left to give as Battier does.