## It's a Visual Thing

Okay, so three games into the preseason and I still haven't watched a game live yet. Between birthdays, Taekwondo, volunteering at scouts, baby blessings, and an inexplicable planned television blackout in Boise, it seems as though the fates have conspired against me. So I came to a decision - if I can't watch the games live, then I'll show my game stats in visual format. Thus, I've built some charts for your viewing pleasure.

This first chart is what I'm calling a player effectiveness chart. It shows three "effectiveness" stats together. The stats are (1) the Larry H Miller average (X axis), (2) estimated wins produced per 48 (Y axis), and (3) estimated PER (size of dot). I've limited the results to the nine players who will most-likely be part of the regular team rotation, and I am showing each player's stats for the first three games of the season.

First, some background information. The Larry H Miller average is a simple efficiency measure that is equal to ((Points + Assists + Rebounds + Steals + Blocks – Fouls – Turnovers – Shots) divided by minutes). The average player falls in the .100 to .200 range. It's named after Larry Miller as he would use it as a quick means to assess how a player was doing in a game. Some say that this stat is position biased since big men can rack up a lot of points, rebounds, and blocks, but not have the fouls, missed shots, and turnovers that guards/small forwards have.

Estimated wins produced per 48 takes out position bias; it does this by comparing shooting guards to shooting guards, power forwards to power forwards, etc, and then makes position specific adjustments in the formula. The average player is .100; players producing higher than .100 are producing at a higher level than the average and those below .100 are producing at a lower level than the average.

PER was created by John Hollinger and attempts to measure a player's per minute performance (like the measures above) but then also makes an adjustment for game pace. The average PER rating is 15.

Without further adieu, below is my player effectiveness chart for the first three preseason games:

Player effectiveness is just one part of the picture though. A player can be effective over a short span (i.e. a player might have a 100 PER, but it might only be for one minute), but if the player only played one or two minutes in the game, he most-likely didn't have a significant impact on the overall outcome of the game.

The next chart attempts to quantify a player's value based on his offensive effort (Y axis), defensive effort (X axis), and calculated approximate value (size of dot).

Offensive effort is measured by an estimated offensive +/-. Offensive adjusted +/- is calculated on a 40 minute basis and uses the following weights:

+.6111 PTS
-.33918 TSA (where TSA is .44*FTA + FGA)
+.440814 FTA
+.379745 3PA
+.634044 AST
+.77827 ORB
-1.08855 TOV
+.26262 STL
Intercept = -8.57647 (basically all players start out negative 8.6)

Defensive effort is measured by an estimated defensive +/-. Defensive adjusted +/- is calculated on a 40 minute basis and use the following weights:

+.80195 BLKS
+.413919 DRBS
-.07551 PF
+1.597019 STLS
-.26385 TOV
Intercept = -4.69887 (basically all players start out negative 4.7)

Approximate Value attempts to measure how much an individual player is contributing stat wise to the game; it is equal to (((((Points + Assists + Rebounds + Steals + Blocks – Turnovers – Missed Shots – Missed Free Throws) times 2 if for a half) times 82) raised to the 3/4 power) divided by 21)); and average players are in the 6 to 7 range.

Some observations. First, it looks like Hayward and Burks have been our most consistent effective players in the preseason thus far, followed by Kanter. Secondly, Favors started out strong, but has been inconsistent thus far. Favors has done well defensively; while Burks has done well offensively. Finally, Hayward, Kanter, and Burks have brought value consistently to each game.

------------------------------------------------

And found this quote:

"When I got the job and I talked to them they said `We all liked each other off the court, but didn't seem like we liked each other on the court. That was a big emphasis on us this year, just teamwork. We don't care who scores. Guys have done a nice job of just playing the game and hitting the open guy."

Any guesses who said that?