So you think the eye test shows Layman has a much greater positive impact than Collins? And that Meyers has a greater positive impact than Nurk? This looks like another worthless advanced statistic. I'll stick with reality.
Not really at all. Though i understand your basic premise. The starters play against starting caliber players. So using common sense does have to come into play. I understand also that this is a fan forum and common sense kind of goes out the window.
In both cases, you're comparing a player with limited minutes played (Layman & Meyers) versus someone who has played significantly more (Collins & Nurk). You're not comparing similar situations. I understand that not everyone gets math & statistics, but there is value here when you look at it in the correct light. There are limitations to any advanced stat & there are almost always outliers ("noise") in the data set. I'm fully a Collins supporter. I think he's going to be a stud... however right now, it's obvious that he's struggling on the offensive side of the ball. There should be no argument with that - and this is exactly what the data shows. For as good as Nurk has been on defense, he's also been fairly poor on offense (he's been much better over the last month or so). Low shooting percentage & turnovers will do that for someone. Ultimately, the data shows that: Dame is our star (no surprise); Aminu, Hark, & CJ are playing very well; Napier, ED, Meyers, & Nurk have been average; and Pat, Zach, & ET have been poor
Too bad FiveThirtyEight already has their Carmelo ratings. This stat could also be named after him. This stat apparently does not favor inefficient chuckers who don't play defense. Sounds like my kind of stat. BNM
So bizarre that after 75 games, and nearly 2000 minutes of playing time, Nurk's OPA and DPS EXACTLY cancel out, right down to the 1/100th of a point. BNM
You might want to amend that... Westbrook is ranked 3rd best in the league by the same stat. It sounds like TPA simply values the players that directly create the most offense, be it points, assists, or offensive rebounds. It doesn't take into account indirect stuff like floor spacing and lineup +/-.
Westbrook's OPA looks about right, for a high volume low efficiency chucker. However his DPS doesn't pass the eye test. He doesn't even guard anyone. He rarely even bothers to contest a 3-pointer, yet if you believe this stat, he should be in the running for first team all defense. No fucking way. We still don't have a meaningful way to measure defensive performance. All of the advanced stats we have are highly influenced by teammates, opponents, etc. They have gotten better, but there are still too many outliers that don't correlate with reality. BNM
BTW, it's not just Westbrook that blows the whole DPS stat out of the water. Does anyone really believe Nicola Jokic is every bit as good defensively as the Greek Freak and nearly twice as good defensively as Steven Adams? BNM
