I sometimes take requests.

Reader Tundra Gator commented:

“Nobody has yet answered my question about how Bynum could be considered the most valuable Laker in the Nuggets series. He had a couple of good games but more terrible games in which he didn’t care on the defensive end and allowed numerous (that’s being too conservative, maybe plethora?) defensive breakdowns due to his laziness on defense.”

My answer for this is Opponent Adjusted Wins Produced. The difference is that for regular Wins Produced we assume that you are facing average opposition and all the adjustment are treated like team activities . This is for the most part a good approximation.

The error on it increases when we have a small sample size or an egregiously bad defender. I’m looking at you Bynum.

One of the ways we attack this is by working out opponent adjusted stats. In the simplest terms, I’m calculating a player’s numbers against the direct opposition he’s facing. So Opponent adjusted Points over Par is how many points better or worse than the opposition you were.

Opponent adjusted looks at how much you outplayed or got outplayed by the other guy.

And by Team:

And given how horrible the Jazz guards were, We have a new First round MVP in Tony Parker.

-Arturo

“Search for the truth is the noblest occupation of man; its publication is a duty.” -Madame de Stael

Pretty sure I forgot something while I was doing all my picks for round #2…

Oh! I forgot to wrap up round 1 of the playoffs!

That’s the Best Players for round 1 in the playoffs as a word cloud. There is a clear mvp for Round #1 and It’s a surprising member of everyone’s favorite up and coming team (that is to everyone who does not read this blog).

From our old friend at http://www.bouncex3.com/

Mr. Harden continues to improve in the playoffs for the second straight year. Every time I remember that the Perkins trade was originally for Harden, as a Celtics fan, I wanna punch a wall. Remember kids, Here’s the top seasons for guards 22 and under ranked by win shares per 48. Harden only trails CP3. Yeah.

Let’s get to the boxscores and recaps.

Continue reading →

“Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.” – William Shakespeare  from Macbeth

I got into a heated twitter debate the other day. The reason behind it was the Chris Bosh injury.

Specifically it was my belief that Bosh being out and LBJ playing at the 4 makes Miami more not less likely to win. Why you ask?

To win or contend for a championship a team must:

• Win 52 or more games (or 42 this year)
• Have two star points (either >2 Stars, > Star + Superstar or > 2 Superstars) in your Playoff Top 6. A star is >2.5 Point over Par per 48 player, a Superstar is a >5.0 Point over Par per 48 player.
• Have at least one > +1 Point over Par per 48 player who plays PF or Center in your Playoff Top 6 (This is the Suns Corollary)
• A superstar puts you in the conversation if you can make it into the playoffs and surround him with talent (i.e no duds) in the top 6 (This is the Hakeem Factor).

You need a quality big to win it all and Miami seemed to be all out this year. They have the wins and the stars but the quality of the bigs in their rotation has been the fly in the ointment with this team (as it was last year).

But a funny thing happens when you take out Chris Bosh.

Moving the MVP to power Forward makes everything better. The rotation is better with Lebron at 4. We know nobody’s won with 4/5s as bad as Miami in their top 6. Lebron at the 4 changes that. Add in the possibility of Joel Anthony sneaking into the top half of the rotation and it could become even better.

Nevermind, the idea of James on the block and Wade at the top of the key is frightening. As a point of reference, Miami was +15 in 20 minutes with lineups using LeBron James at power forward.

So if I try to guess what Pat Riley is saying to Chris right now it goes something like this: “No,Chris, take your time, we don’t want you risking your future. we’ll make due. Somehow”

-Arturo

“Sometimes we make guesses because we wish,with our limited knowledge, to say as much as we can about a situation.”
― Matthew Sands ”Feynman Lectures on Physics/Vol 1 Ch 06 – Probability”

However much we may argue against it, there is a great degree of randomness to the universe. We can set up a set of general rules and parameters to model and identify most anything but the randomness of the universe guarantees that prediction and modeling are only approximations. We can only really tell you were something might be within a certain level of probability given a certain set of of conditions but really no plan of action survives first contact with the enemy or with ourselves.

Case in point, when I ran the model for every series and every outcome for Round 1 of the 2012 NBA playoffs for Year 6 of the ESPN Stat Geek smackdown, now featuring 100% more Arturo, the model kept insisting that Derrick Rose would not be able to stay on the court. I read all the scouting and thought I knew better and we all know how that turned out.

With that said, My round 1 picks have done well. I’m still at 5-1 thru six series with a real chance at the outright lead (and yes I realize I am relying on George Karl and Vinnie del Negro). Now yesterday I got an email from Mr.Abbot requesting the round 2 picks for all the series that are set and those that are not  by two pm today.

Did I mentioned my laptop died, taking all my work of the last month with it, last thursday night? With my monthly backup scheduled on that Friday?

Yeah, Life is random but Murphy is a bitch. Let’s talk picks

That is  the full slate of probability for every possible series and every outcome for Round 2 of the 2012 NBA playoffs.

Continue reading →

“Consistency is the foundation of virtue.” – Francis Bacon

The story for me was one of Consistency.

We receive constant stimulation and information in our day to day lives. To manage that overwhelming amount of input  our brain puts up filters on what sensory information it deals with. We focus on new stimuli, on changes, on differences. So much so in fact that the brain has the capacity to erase that which remains consistent. This is called the Troxler Effect, or Troxler Fading. We lose sight of what’s always there and see things that are not.

If you focus on the red dot below, after less than thirty seconds, the circle should just fade away.

Your brain is erasing that which is consistent. It really shouldn’t, because that fact that the  Spurs are consistently good should not blind you to the fact that this year they are in fact great.

Let’s get to the boxscores and recaps. There will be a surprise as well.

Continue reading →