Choosing the MVP, geometrically

• Jason

  +5

  I love this visualization--outstanding work.

  It would be interesting to see how things would change with different weightings factored into the win shares score.  For instance, Hollinger's Game Score approximates PER, but with a simpler formula. KG beats Pierce in that metric, which seems better intuitively.

  Posted 4/25/2008 [reply] [flag]

• Ryne Nelson

  +2

  Very interesting representation. But I can't vouche for Pierce being more instrumental to the Celtics' success than Kevin Garnett. Overall, very well done. =)

  Posted 4/25/2008 [reply] [flag]

• dsparks

  +1

  The thing about Game Scores and PER and the like are that they are time-rated, which Winshares are not. So, per unit of time, I am certain that Garnett is more valuable, but in terms of actual wins produced, Pierce played more minutes, and so had more opportunity to contribute to team success. I think that when measured in this specific way, it's reasonable to view Pierce as more valuable.

  Posted 4/25/2008 [reply] [flag]

  • Jason

    +3

    PER is a per-minute statistic, but Game Score actually uses totals:

    (Points * 1.0) + (FGM * 0.4) + (FGA * -0.7) + ((FTA-FTM) * -0.4) + (OREB * 0.7) + (DREB * 0.3) + (STL * 1.0) + (AST * 0.7) + (BLK * 0.7) + (PF * -0.4) + (TO * -1.0)
    

    The advantage of these weightings is that they account for things like the fact that steals are more valuable than defensive rebounds.  KG had a slighly higher Game Score than Pierce this year (1211.2 vs. 1198.4) despite fewer minutes because he blocked more shots, turned the ball over less, and shot a higher percentage.

    But this is nitpicking--the real story here is your terrific chart.

    Posted 4/25/2008 [reply] [flag]

    • dsparks

      +3

      Thanks Jason, for the clarification. I think it would be possible, then, to use Game Scores to produce a similar graph. Maybe someday, if I get the time... I think the results would likely be pretty similar, although it looks as though slightly more calculating went into creating Game Scores than my metric...

      Posted 4/25/2008 [reply] [flag]

• char6587

  +2

  i wish i could hype this twice

  Posted 4/26/2008 [reply] [flag]

Leave a Comment

Links (4)

Friday Bullets
Published 4/25/2008 at ESPN.com - True Hoop - Blog
... A very cool way to use google maps to show a whole mess of statistics. I'm a big believer that if we want people to use and understand the best statistics out there, we need to find a way to make their presentation more intuitive. (Who loves spreadsheets?) ...

The 10-man rotation, starring Winshares and pretty colors
Published 5/1/2008 at Ball Don't Lie
A look around the league and the web that covers it. It's also important to note that the rotation order and starting nods aren't always listed in order of importance. That's for you, dear reader, to figure out. C: The Arbitrarian. A geometric method for picking the MVP, with a very sweet graph. PF: Straight Cash Homey. A Hooters girl sports a Vernon Maxwell, Rockets jersey. Well done, "Ed in Houston." SF: The Legend of Cecilio Guante. And you thought you hated the San Antonio ...

Hornets-Spurs: Friday News Wrap
Published 5/2/2008 at Hornets247.com Blog
... you do double Duncan what seems to work best is to come late after he's started his move to the middle. If you are going to do this of course you have to overplay the baseline hand and be very smart and timely when your come across the lane with another big man. Come quick. Come hard. Or stay home. Leaving you with the usual warm fuzzies... Here's an NBA mascot blooper video, via HR. A week old but worth checking: Chris Paul is your geometric MVP. Hornets Hype is looking forward to their very own Peja ...

An Arbitrary Interview with an Arbitrarian
Published 5/14/2008 by Chip Crain (noreply@blogger.com) at 3 Shades of Blue
... DS: I'm actually working on a separate individual project, where I am trying to come up with my own, quasi-legitimate system--if you haven't seen it, check out this post: http://arbitrarian.wordpress.com/2008/04/25/choosing-the-mvp-geometrically/ where I introduce it. I like the idea of multiplying a player's contribution by team success to estimate value. I'm happy with that, and convinced of it's theoretical validity. The question arises in identifying the appropriate way to estimate value--that is points*x+assists*y-turnovers*z, etc. The x, y, and z determine ...