Keeping the Oden angst in perspective.

[andalusian]

It's +/- but with the amount of + or - stripped off. Having a positive +/- over a segment of play gives a player a "win" and having a negative +/- over a segment of play gives a player a "loss."

This is not exactly true. +/- accumulates over the season and you can see averages - but what +/- does not tell you is how it is actually translated to wins/losses - because a win of 1 point and a loss of 15 are worth the same in the +/- column. If you just think of win% as +/- without the margins you lose the big picture - and the big picture is that W/L are the final determining factor for a team, not margin of difference. Margin of difference can give you a good idea about the relative worth of the team as a whole against teams close to it in the W/L column - but it is less important to consider the fit and true impact of individual players within a team.

Not that it matters much for Durant - his +/-, on/off and win% all stink even compared to his own team.

 

[andalusian]

Appreciate the explanation. So as I understand it, this stat is sort of similar to the +/- stat, where it's totally dependent on the lineup the player played with?

And the opponents they play against.

Basketball only makes sense in this context. They do not play one on one against a chair. If they did - Yi would have been GOAT.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Appreciate the explanation. So as I understand it, this stat is sort of similar to the +/- stat, where it's totally dependent on the lineup the player played with?

Yes, that's correct. It's essentially the percentage of games played in which his individual +/- figure for that game was positive.

 

[Minstrel]

This is not exactly true. +/- accumulates over the season and you can see averages - but what +/- does not tell you is how it is actually translated to wins/losses

I was speaking of calculation, not interpretation, though it's true that they are accumulated differently. But they are done identically over a segment of play...win% simply strips off the magnitude.

And I agree +/- doesn't tell you how it translates to wins and losses. It's a comparative measure between players. Players with a higher +/- contribute more to winning (if you have a large enough sample size). I don't think win% actually translates well to how a player contributes to winning, though.

If you have a player who has a +/- of +1 in every segment he plays, he'll have a 1.000 win%. Another player who has a +/- of +10 in every segment he plays will also have a 1.000 win%. Assuming they both play the same (and a significant) number of minutes, it's pretty clear to me that player 2 did a LOT more to help his team win. Since players don't play every minute of the game, point margins while they're on the floor DO matter. Building a 10 point lead while you're on the floor is much better than building a 1 point lead while you're on the floor, because a 10 point lead is much more resistant to being wiped out while you're off the floor.

If every player played every minute of the game, I'd see much more logic to win% removing the magnitude from +/-, because in that eventuality, "winning" your time on the floor by 1 point is all that would be necessary to win the game. But since players don't play every minute, the margin of the lead or deficit you build while on the floor does matter in terms of the likelihood of your team winning.

 

[andalusian]

If you have a player who has a +/- of +1 in every segment he plays, he'll have a 1.000 win%. Another player who has a +/- of +10 in every segment he plays will also have a 1.000 win%. Assuming they both play the same (and a significant) number of minutes, it's pretty clear to me that player 2 did a LOT more to help his team win. Since players don't play every minute of the game, point margins while they're on the floor DO matter. Building a 10 point lead while you're on the floor is much better than building a 1 point lead while you're on the floor, because a 10 point lead is much more resistant to being wiped out while you're off the floor.

First you are right about calculation vs. interpretation. Sorry about that - I got carried away and muddied the water by going OT.

But - the way I look at it - regarding the quoted piece above - you check the win% first - and if they are close - the +/- numbers are of interest. I would much rather have a higher win% guy than a lower win% guy with better +/- - since edge conditions can make +/- more volatile.

Win% provides a better picture of the player's worth in the line-up the coaching staff chooses to play him - it shows fit and correct use better than +/- imho.

What I am trying to tell you is that when I look at Durant's bad win% - I do not think he is a bad player or a bad prospect - I just think that he is used in the wrong way by his team. There is no way this guy with his talent and scoring ability can not be used in a way that will help him team win more. They must be doing something wrong with him.

Likewise - In Portland - I am looking at Sergio's miserable win% - this does not lead me to think Sergio has no value or talent - but that his fit in Portland is just bad and we need to trade him. He does not mesh with Roy and with the 2nd team - he just does not have enough fire-power to distribute to and compensate for his own limited offense. He just does not fit.

 

[STOMP]

Simply an observation on human nature. Portland is probably the only NBA team whose fanbase (or at least a large junk thereof) wouldn't want Durant on their team.

the chatter among this group shouldn't be confused with being a large section of the Blazer fanbase... we're a small fraction of a single percentile.

anyhoo, I'd love to have Durant on the club. If the price to add him was free I'm sure that the vast majority of the S2 Blazer posters would too.

STOMP

 

[drexlersdad]

oden with a full offseason to practice rehab and work out will be alot better next year.

with pryz here we dont need him to play 40 mpg, so who cares.