As much as I dislike lists created by biased media outlets, I'm trying to create a legitimate, stat-based list of as many top players as I can find. By nature, this will exclude a few valuable role-players, but I want this project to be as accurate as possible.
I'm probably being a bit overambitious,
but I started a project during my "free time", and gathered a few names of the top players from each team in the league. If there was any grey area about a player's statistical skill, I added him to the list. My list came out to 163 players. I'm now compiling all of their major stat areas into Excel, and I was looking for some input as to how I should weight each stat in the final formula.
Here is a list of the stats I am including:
PPG, Ast%, Drb%, Orb%, Steal%, Blk%, Ftr, Ft%, eFG%, Ortg, Drtg, OWS, DWS, OBPM, DBPM, VORP, USG%, PER, Games Played, Wins, Playoff wins, and my own projection of improvement from last year on a scale from 0-10.
So far, in a hastily made formula, that I put together just to test if I'd be able to actually make this work, it seems very easy to overrate big men. Some stats (especially eFG% and PER, to name a few) are very useful in comparisons, yet tend to heavily favor big men who only take only efficient shots under the rim, and pick up tons of rebounds. I'm looking for a way to equalize it. For all of you who do statistical calculations, what would you advise?
Some ideas might be:
-Including 3pt rate as a heavily weighted value,
-Going through and subtracting a predetermined percentage from the final results of PF's/C's,
-Making those already-overweight stats matter less in the final outcome,
and that's kind of where my ideas stop.
So please, any input is greatly appreciated.
For the sake of the quality of this project, if you have any knowledge on the subject, or any ideas, I ask that you'd please comment.