+/- Stats for MSU (and other math/analytics)

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-13, 18:19

Not sure how meaningful these are, and some surprised me...so, let's see who can match the player with the stats (not going to put the top 4 in there...Walker +15, Akins +10, Hall +9, Hoggard +8)

Team: 1st half +3, 2nd half +5, Total +8

Player A: 0, +3, +3
Player B: -10, +10, 0
Player C: +10, -6, +4
Player D: -1, -1, -2
Player E: -6, -1, -7

Choices are Carr, Cooper, Holloman, Sissoko, Kohler

by **Cameron** 2024-02-13, 18:24

I'm gonna guess:

Holloman
Cooper
Kohler
Sissoko
Carr

If I have even one of those right, I'll be impressed with myself.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-13, 18:46

Cameron wrote:I'm gonna guess:

Holloman
Cooper
Kohler
Sissoko
Carr

If I have even one of those right, I'll be impressed with myself.

3. Not bad.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-13, 18:49

For the year (in basically an equal # of possessions):

Player 1: +171
Player 2: +92

Choices are Mady and Cooper.

by **InTenSity** 2024-02-13, 18:55

I was told there would be no math on this board.

by **Cameron** 2024-02-13, 18:58

NigelUno wrote:For the year (in basically an equal # of possessions):

Player 1: +171
Player 2: +92

Choices are Mady and Cooper.

I am very surprised that the difference is so large. I am probably misevaluating player 1, based on that. I'm guessing that's Mady, because I've been drinking that haterade lately.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-13, 19:15

Cameron wrote:
NigelUno wrote:For the year (in basically an equal # of possessions):

Player 1: +171
Player 2: +92

Choices are Mady and Cooper.

I am very surprised that the difference is so large. I am probably misevaluating player 1, based on that. I'm guessing that's Mady, because I've been drinking that haterade lately.

Well...I was a little surprised as well. I didn't think the difference would be that large, and I thought Cooper should get more time. I think he's better offensively, and if +/- and/or analytics are important...

Cooper should get more time (He is Player 1).

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-13, 19:21

Cameron wrote:I'm gonna guess:

Holloman
Cooper
Kohler
Sissoko
Carr

If I have even one of those right, I'll be impressed with myself.

Update

by **duffy munn** 2024-02-13, 19:51

NigelUno wrote:For the year (in basically an equal # of possessions):

Player 1: +171
Player 2: +92

Choices are Mady and Cooper.

1 mady 2 cooper

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-13, 20:20

duffy munn wrote:
NigelUno wrote:For the year (in basically an equal # of possessions):

Player 1: +171
Player 2: +92

Choices are Mady and Cooper.
1 mady 2 cooper

Spoiler Alert:

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-14, 10:03

This site has a lot of info (some free...you have to play with it a little to tweak settings).

https://evanmiya.com/?player_ratings

https://evanmiya.com/?team_breakdown_overview

This one surprised me a bit. Cooper is every lineup, and no Akins.

Top Lineups Efficiency (I removed the numbers):

Two Man
C. Cooper / T. Walker

Three Man
C. Cooper / A. Hoggard / T. Walker

Four Man
C. Cooper / M. Hall / A. Hoggard / T. Walker

Five Man
C. Cooper / M. Hall / A. Hoggard / T. Holloman / T. Walker

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-15, 10:42

One thing seems to stand out from last night.

Team: 1st half +14, 2nd half -6, Total +8

Hall: +10, -3, +7
Mady: -4, -7, -11
Walker: +10, -3, +7
Akins: +16, -5, +11
Hoggard: +3, 0, +3
Holloman: +15, -2, +13
Cooper: +10, +7, +17
Carr: -2, -8, -10
Kohler: +7, -4, +3
Booker: +5, -5, 0

Cooper was the only + player in the 2nd half. Some garbage time points impact players like Booker (-5 was in less than a minute in the 2nd half).

by **Cameron** 2024-02-15, 11:28

Carson Cooper is the hero we didn't know we needed. Give him all of Mady's minutes.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-15, 11:59

Cameron wrote:Carson Cooper is the hero we didn't know we needed. Give him all of Mady's minutes.

Cooper is getting better on both ends. Booker even got a little time at the 5 (or as the biggest guy on the floor) last night. I wouldn't be surprised if Mady moves on after this year.

by **DWags** 2024-02-15, 13:12

NigelUno wrote:
Cameron wrote:Carson Cooper is the hero we didn't know we needed. Give him all of Mady's minutes.

Cooper is getting better on both ends. Booker even got a little time at the 5 (or as the biggest guy on the floor) last night. I wouldn't be surprised if Mady moves on after this year.

Cooper has a very low vertical from a standing position. He also lacks a sense of where he is in regards to the basket when he’s fed the ball with his back to the basket, nor does he have a feel for defenders on him or near him. After one year and a half the game seems to be “too fast” for him still. A good big man coach and many more reps will improve his feel for the floor and he will be a great asset by his senior year, but face it guys, he is who he is. Some people just have a sixth sense for who is around them and where they are.

As far as his vertical. Plyometrics and hard work. But he’ll never be Carr.

by **duffy munn** 2024-02-15, 14:45

DWags wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Cooper is getting better on both ends. Booker even got a little time at the 5 (or as the biggest guy on the floor) last night. I wouldn't be surprised if Mady moves on after this year.

Cooper has a very low vertical from a standing position. He also lacks a sense of where he is in regards to the basket when he’s fed the ball with his back to the basket, nor does he have a feel for defenders on him or near him. After one year and a half the game seems to be “too fast” for him still. A good big man coach and many more reps will improve his feel for the floor and he will be a great asset by his senior year, but face it guys, he is who he is. Some people just have a sixth sense for who is around them and where they are.

As far as his vertical. Plyometrics and hard work. But he’ll never be Carr.

good break down Wags. We miss DJ

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-15, 14:55

DWags wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Cooper is getting better on both ends. Booker even got a little time at the 5 (or as the biggest guy on the floor) last night. I wouldn't be surprised if Mady moves on after this year.

Cooper has a very low vertical from a standing position. He also lacks a sense of where he is in regards to the basket when he’s fed the ball with his back to the basket, nor does he have a feel for defenders on him or near him. After one year and a half the game seems to be “too fast” for him still. A good big man coach and many more reps will improve his feel for the floor and he will be a great asset by his senior year, but face it guys, he is who he is. Some people just have a sixth sense for who is around them and where they are.

As far as his vertical. Plyometrics and hard work. But he’ll never be Carr.

Mady is what he is. Cooper is a work in progress, and improving (more noticeable on defense).

Do not come for my narrative.

by **Nordic** 2024-02-15, 15:01

DWags wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Cooper is getting better on both ends. Booker even got a little time at the 5 (or as the biggest guy on the floor) last night. I wouldn't be surprised if Mady moves on after this year.

Cooper has a very low vertical from a standing position. He also lacks a sense of where he is in regards to the basket when he’s fed the ball with his back to the basket, nor does he have a feel for defenders on him or near him. After one year and a half the game seems to be “too fast” for him still. A good big man coach and many more reps will improve his feel for the floor and he will be a great asset by his senior year, but face it guys, he is who he is. Some people just have a sixth sense for who is around them and where they are.

As far as his vertical. Plyometrics and hard work. But he’ll never be Carr.

Offensively he has a lot of work as noted above. Dead on re: the part in bold. He often spins or dribbles himself to far under the basket. That said his positioning on D and rebounding is outstanding. He knows how to square his shoulders. He knows where his feet should be. Not incredibly athletic and a bit stiff. But makes up for it by getting a good initial position. Long and lean. Dudes with his type of frame are a pita to play against.

I don’t think any of our bigs can dunk. Maddening at times.

Broken record time. I don’t give two shits if our bigs can create their own shot/play back to the basket/hit jumpers (they can’t). Play D, rebound, put backs and be scrappy.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-15, 15:23

Nordic wrote:
DWags wrote:

Cooper has a very low vertical from a standing position. He also lacks a sense of where he is in regards to the basket when he’s fed the ball with his back to the basket, nor does he have a feel for defenders on him or near him. After one year and a half the game seems to be “too fast” for him still. A good big man coach and many more reps will improve his feel for the floor and he will be a great asset by his senior year, but face it guys, he is who he is. Some people just have a sixth sense for who is around them and where they are.

As far as his vertical. Plyometrics and hard work. But he’ll never be Carr.

Offensively he has a lot of work as noted above. Dead on re: the part in bold. He often spins or dribbles himself to far under the basket. That said his positioning on D and rebounding is outstanding. He knows how to square his shoulders. He knows where his feet should be. Not incredibly athletic and a bit stiff. But makes up for it by getting a good initial position. Long and lean. Dudes with his type of frame are a pita to play against.

I don’t think any of our bigs can dunk. Maddening at times.

Broken record time. I don’t give two shits if our bigs can create their own shot/play back to the basket/hit jumpers (they can’t). Play D, rebound, put backs and be scrappy.

His defense has improved. He slides well on drives. Has better hands than some other guy (I realize that's not saying much).

#2 in the Big Ten in DBPR (Mady is #20)

https://evanmiya.com/?player_ratings

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-20, 14:31

Cooper is now the #1 player in DBPR in the Big Ten.
Hoggard has replaced Walker on the most efficient 2 man line up. All others remain the same.

Two Man
C. Cooper / A. Hoggard

Three Man
C. Cooper / A. Hoggard / T. Walker

Four Man
C. Cooper / M. Hall / A. Hoggard / T. Walker

Five Man
C. Cooper / M. Hall / A. Hoggard / T. Holloman / T. Walker

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-20, 14:53

New stat I've never heard of, but I like it.

Kill Shots per game (10 points or more run on offense):

MSU is .72 (72% of games we go on a 10+ point run). 43rd in the country.
#1 is Houston with a 1.16. For comparison...Arizona/Auburn/UCONN 6/7/8 (all around 1.00)...so they basically go on a 10 point run every game. Purdue is .77...Illinois is .76.

Kill Shots conceded per game (Give up a 10 point run):
MSU is .08. 8% of our games (so twice this season), we give up a 10+ point run. #1 in the country. For comparison...Houston 16, Tennessee 17, Duke 18 (all at .20). Wisconsin is .19...Purdue is .23. UM is worst in Big Ten at .58.

by **Cameron** 2024-02-20, 15:09

I don't understand the 1.16 number for Houston. I read that to mean they go on a 10+ point run in 116% of their games, so I must not be understanding that correctly.

by **InTenSity** 2024-02-20, 15:12

Cameron wrote:I don't understand the 1.16 number for Houston. I read that to mean they go on a 10+ point run in 116% of their games, so I must not be understanding that correctly.

I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-20, 15:22

InTenSity wrote:
Cameron wrote:I don't understand the 1.16 number for Houston. I read that to mean they go on a 10+ point run in 116% of their games, so I must not be understanding that correctly.
I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.

Correct

by gomersbro 2024-02-20, 15:25

InTenSity wrote:
Cameron wrote:I don't understand the 1.16 number for Houston. I read that to mean they go on a 10+ point run in 116% of their games, so I must not be understanding that correctly.

I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.

That is my understanding. It is an average, so if you have a game against SW Missouri State School of the Blind and do multiple 10 -0 runs it can skew the stats.

Edit: Quoting on mobile sucks.

by AvgMSUJoe 2024-02-20, 15:50

gomersbro wrote:
InTenSity wrote:

I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.
That is my understanding. It is an average, so if you have a game against SW Missouri State School of the Blind and do multiple 10 -0 runs it can skew the stats.

Edit: Quoting on mobile sucks.

Well shit... that's why Houston is leading the country.

This would only be useful if it were used in conjunction with the SOS/defensive efficiency ratings of the opponents.

Also, this feels like on that can be skewed based on the "pre league" beatdowns you lay on barely D1 teams. You win 105 to 50, good chance you have 4-5 in the game.

by **Cameron** 2024-02-20, 16:44

InTenSity wrote:
Cameron wrote:I don't understand the 1.16 number for Houston. I read that to mean they go on a 10+ point run in 116% of their games, so I must not be understanding that correctly.
I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.

I see. So it's less that we average a 10+ point run in 72% of our games, and more that we average 0.72 10+ point runs per game. Makes sense now.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-20, 17:04

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
gomersbro wrote:
That is my understanding. It is an average, so if you have a game against SW Missouri State School of the Blind and do multiple 10 -0 runs it can skew the stats.

Edit: Quoting on mobile sucks.

Well shit... that's why Houston is leading the country.

This would only be useful if it were used in conjunction with the SOS/defensive efficiency ratings of the opponents.

Also, this feels like on that can be skewed based on the "pre league" beatdowns you lay on barely D1 teams. You win 105 to 50, good chance you have 4-5 in the game.

Really good offensive teams probably have more 10+ point runs in general. Not sure how skewed it would be for 362 teams. Good teams are generally decent (and it seems to be reflected a bit) in both stats.

As an FYI...MSU has played some of the top offensive teams in the country (like Baylor, Arizona, Illinois, Duke). I would think it helps that we don't give up a lot of 10 point runs.

We gave up one against Minnesota (which we lost), and one against Southern Indiana in the 2nd half (which we won).

For tonight:

Iowa is 16/173 in OBPR/DBPR.
MSU is 21/13 in OBPR/DBPR.

Iowa is .58/.42 in OKill/DKill
MSU is .72/.08 in OKill/DKill

Iowa is #25 in Tempo Rank. We are #295.

So they like to get a lot of shots up. But, aren't necessarily efficient...or play great defense.

Lies...damn lies...and statistics....

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-20, 17:26

Cameron wrote:
InTenSity wrote:
I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.

I see. So it's less that we average a 10+ point run in 72% of our games, and more that we average 0.72 10+ point runs per game. Makes sense now.

Yes. I think. +/- Stats for MSU (and other math/analytics) 502811600

We had one against UM (@Crisler) at the end. One (the game before) vs. Penn State.

Another one vs. Michigan at home, Rutgers, Baylor. OK. Hurting my eyes. No more looking.

by **DWags** 2024-02-20, 17:48

InTenSity wrote:
Cameron wrote:I don't understand the 1.16 number for Houston. I read that to mean they go on a 10+ point run in 116% of their games, so I must not be understanding that correctly.
I don't know the answer and I failed statistics once or twice. Maybe they have had mulitple 10 point runs in the same game? So out of 15 games, maybe they've done it 18 times? I'm just spitballin though.

I just look at it like it means they’re really fucking good

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-21, 09:57

Plus/Minus last night:
1st half, 2nd half, Total

Team -12, +5, -7

Hall -16, +7, -9
Mady -2, -4, -6
Walker -12, +5, -7
Akins -11, +7, -4
Hoggard -8, +2, -6
Cooper +3, -4, -1
Kohler -8, +5, -3
Holloman -6, +7, -1
Carr +1, DNP, +1
Booker -1, DNP, -1

Only minus players in the 2nd half: Mady and Coop

KillShot Analysis: Iowa went on a 10 point run in the 1st half.

by **duffy munn** 2024-02-21, 10:48

NigelUno wrote:Plus/Minus last night:
1st half, 2nd half, Total

Team -12, +5, -7

Hall -16, +7, -9
Mady -2, -4, -6
Walker -12, +5, -7
Akins -11, +7, -4
Hoggard -8, +2, -6
Cooper +3, -4, -1
Kohler -8, +5, -3
Holloman -6, +7, -1
Carr +1, DNP, +1
Booker -1, DNP, -1

Only minus players in the 2nd half: Mady and Coop

KillShot Analysis: Iowa went on a 10 point run in the 1st half.

We played as bad defensively in the first half as I can ever remember. At half time I was thinking we needed 50 more points to have a chance. I didn't like our chances.

by **Nordic** 2024-02-21, 13:21

duffy munn wrote:
NigelUno wrote:Plus/Minus last night:
1st half, 2nd half, Total

Team -12, +5, -7

Hall -16, +7, -9
Mady -2, -4, -6
Walker -12, +5, -7
Akins -11, +7, -4
Hoggard -8, +2, -6
Cooper +3, -4, -1
Kohler -8, +5, -3
Holloman -6, +7, -1
Carr +1, DNP, +1
Booker -1, DNP, -1

Only minus players in the 2nd half: Mady and Coop

KillShot Analysis: Iowa went on a 10 point run in the 1st half.

We played as bad defensively in the first half as I can ever remember. At half time I was thinking we needed 50 more points to have a chance. I didn't like our chances.

Very strange game. I was live again, which sometimes skews your view/opinion. But I didn't think we played bad. Iowa just played better. Casual observer observation, they looked more loose and we looked a bit tight. Their sets looked chaotic and they got shots off quick in the shot clock (good or bad), but it worked. They built a deceiving lead (probably to your point on not playing great D). I kept looking up at the scoreboard and saying 'how are we down 9'. Even when we punched back, they just never let up.

Maybe I'm green colored glasses guy, but I was not overly discouraged in last night's lose. The lineups are starting to take shape.

The minutes shifting from Mady to Coop/Kohler is becoming more and more glaring the last three games. Three minutes to start each half and he's out. Two early fouls ain't helping, but I think he would be out regardless. Coop is essentially the starer and you can tell Izzo is trying to force more minutes with Kohler.

Booker even had multiple sets. Including back-to-back in first half (with a small 2 min spell in between), which I haven't seen yet. He looked better last night. But when he was in I was watching him specifically on the offensive end. He's not sure where to be or what to do. You can see they haven't game planned much for him yet. He just stood o/s the lane on the baseline and was not very active. That said, he looked pretty good on a couple of defensive stops and rebounds. Which IMO has been his biggest issue. Baby steps.

IMO Carr still needs more minutes. Hard to pull Hall right now and when they do, they go with the double bigs with Coop/Kohler or Kohler/Booker. Izzo is also really pushing the three guard lineup, which makes it difficult as you'd need to sit Aikens or Holloman. And both are playing well. But I think he could provid a spark at the three. Especially when things got stale early/midway through the second half.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-21, 14:21

Nordic wrote:
duffy munn wrote:

We played as bad defensively in the first half as I can ever remember. At half time I was thinking we needed 50 more points to have a chance. I didn't like our chances.

Very strange game. I was live again, which sometimes skews your view/opinion. But I didn't think we played bad. Iowa just played better. Casual observer observation, they looked more loose and we looked a bit tight. Their sets looked chaotic and they got shots off quick in the shot clock (good or bad), but it worked. They built a deceiving lead (probably to your point on not playing great D). I kept looking up at the scoreboard and saying 'how are we down 9'. Even when we punched back, they just never let up.

Maybe I'm green colored glasses guy, but I was not overly discouraged in last night's lose. The lineups are starting to take shape.

The minutes shifting from Mady to Coop/Kohler is becoming more and more glaring the last three games. Three minutes to start each half and he's out. Two early fouls ain't helping, but I think he would be out regardless. Coop is essentially the starer and you can tell Izzo is trying to force more minutes with Kohler.

Booker even had multiple sets. Including back-to-back in first half (with a small 2 min spell in between), which I haven't seen yet. He looked better last night. But when he was in I was watching him specifically on the offensive end. He's not sure where to be or what to do. You can see they haven't game planned much for him yet. He just stood o/s the lane on the baseline and was not very active. That said, he looked pretty good on a couple of defensive stops and rebounds. Which IMO has been his biggest issue. Baby steps.

IMO Carr still needs more minutes. Hard to pull Hall right now and when they do, they go with the double bigs with Coop/Kohler or Kohler/Booker. Izzo is also really pushing the three guard lineup, which makes it difficult as you'd need to sit Aikens or Holloman. And both are playing well. But I think he could provid a spark at the three. Especially when things got stale early/midway through the second half.

Iowa gets shots up quick. They are #25 in Tempo. I wish we did that more often (we're #295).

Too often we let the shot clock wind down and then panic.

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-21, 15:37

BPR last year/this year with Big Ten Rankings (most players improved or somewhat the same):

Improved:
Walker 32 to 6
Hoggard 16 to 7
Hall 50 to 33

Similar:
Akins 14 to 17

Improved (but had to expand the criteria):
Cooper 120 to 12 (321/500 necessary possessions last year) #1 in DBPR this year
Holloman 126 to 68 (470/500 possessions last year)
Kohler 109 to 103 (132/400 possessions this year)

Struggling:
Mady 48 to 80

by **Nordic** 2024-02-21, 15:45

NigelUno wrote:
Nordic wrote:

Very strange game. I was live again, which sometimes skews your view/opinion. But I didn't think we played bad. Iowa just played better. Casual observer observation, they looked more loose and we looked a bit tight. Their sets looked chaotic and they got shots off quick in the shot clock (good or bad), but it worked. They built a deceiving lead (probably to your point on not playing great D). I kept looking up at the scoreboard and saying 'how are we down 9'. Even when we punched back, they just never let up.

Maybe I'm green colored glasses guy, but I was not overly discouraged in last night's lose. The lineups are starting to take shape.

The minutes shifting from Mady to Coop/Kohler is becoming more and more glaring the last three games. Three minutes to start each half and he's out. Two early fouls ain't helping, but I think he would be out regardless. Coop is essentially the starer and you can tell Izzo is trying to force more minutes with Kohler.

Booker even had multiple sets. Including back-to-back in first half (with a small 2 min spell in between), which I haven't seen yet. He looked better last night. But when he was in I was watching him specifically on the offensive end. He's not sure where to be or what to do. You can see they haven't game planned much for him yet. He just stood o/s the lane on the baseline and was not very active. That said, he looked pretty good on a couple of defensive stops and rebounds. Which IMO has been his biggest issue. Baby steps.

IMO Carr still needs more minutes. Hard to pull Hall right now and when they do, they go with the double bigs with Coop/Kohler or Kohler/Booker. Izzo is also really pushing the three guard lineup, which makes it difficult as you'd need to sit Aikens or Holloman. And both are playing well. But I think he could provid a spark at the three. Especially when things got stale early/midway through the second half.

Iowa gets shots up quick. They are #25 in Tempo. I wish we did that more often (we're #295).

Too often we let the shot clock wind down and then panic.

Takes time to set up that weave

by **Nordic** 2024-02-21, 15:46

NigelUno wrote:BPR last year/this year with Big Ten Rankings (most players improved or somewhat the same):

Improved:
Walker 32 to 6
Hoggard 16 to 7
Hall 50 to 33

Similar:
Akins 14 to 17

Improved (but had to expand the criteria):
Cooper 120 to 12 (321/500 necessary possessions last year) #1 in DBPR this year
Holloman 126 to 68 (470/500 possessions last year)
Kohler 109 to 103 (132/400 possessions this year)

Struggling:
Mady 48 to 80

+/- Stats for MSU (and other math/analytics) 4113017228

what's BPR?

by **DWags** 2024-02-21, 15:51

Nordic wrote:
NigelUno wrote:BPR last year/this year with Big Ten Rankings (most players improved or somewhat the same):

Improved:
Walker 32 to 6
Hoggard 16 to 7
Hall 50 to 33

Similar:
Akins 14 to 17

Improved (but had to expand the criteria):
Cooper 120 to 12 (321/500 necessary possessions last year) #1 in DBPR this year
Holloman 126 to 68 (470/500 possessions last year)
Kohler 109 to 103 (132/400 possessions this year)

Struggling:
Mady 48 to 80

what's BPR?

B ud lights
P er
R efridgerator run

by **NigelUno** 2024-02-21, 15:52

Nordic wrote:
NigelUno wrote:BPR last year/this year with Big Ten Rankings (most players improved or somewhat the same):

Improved:
Walker 32 to 6
Hoggard 16 to 7
Hall 50 to 33

Similar:
Akins 14 to 17

Improved (but had to expand the criteria):
Cooper 120 to 12 (321/500 necessary possessions last year) #1 in DBPR this year
Holloman 126 to 68 (470/500 possessions last year)
Kohler 109 to 103 (132/400 possessions this year)

Struggling:
Mady 48 to 80

what's BPR?

BPR: Bayesian Performance Rating is the sum of a player’s OBPR and DBPR. This rating is the ultimate measure of a player’s overall value to his team when he is on the floor. BPR is interpreted as the number of points per 100 possessions better than the opponent the player’s team is expected to be if the player were on the court with 9 other average players. A higher rating is better.

by **Nordic** 2024-02-21, 15:58

NigelUno wrote:
Nordic wrote:

what's BPR?

BPR: Bayesian Performance Rating is the sum of a player’s OBPR and DBPR. This rating is the ultimate measure of a player’s overall value to his team when he is on the floor. BPR is interpreted as the number of points per 100 possessions better than the opponent the player’s team is expected to be if the player were on the court with 9 other average players. A higher rating is better.

The Improved player list went down confused

by Sponsored content