(12-17-2020 12:33 PM)macgar32 Wrote: (12-17-2020 12:24 PM)Stammers Wrote: (12-17-2020 12:20 PM)macgar32 Wrote: (12-17-2020 11:49 AM)memtigbb Wrote: (12-17-2020 11:29 AM)salukiblue Wrote: Yeah, Lomax played straight from 9:02 until 0:55 to go in the game.
He came in with it being a 1 point Tigers lead and left with it a 12 point lead, so he got +11 in that stretch.
His contribution:
2 ft's
0 FGA
2 assists
1 foul
Basically, he just stayed out of the way.
And that's not a bad thing.
yeah that is the downside of the +/-
At one point, ALo and Williams came in together. Within 30 seconds William scored 4 pts. ALo had yet to even touch the ball, but in the +/= ALo was +4.
We all know though, you can throw all the numbers out and just watch. We are in desperate need of a PG.
+/- is a terrible statistic to compare players on different teams...There is no doubt about that. I prefer points per possession but it really is the same thing and it makes it simple for people to see...Because +/- is obviously skewed based on the number of minutes you play.
But honestly it is not bad for comparing players on the same team...Especially if the coach isn't platooning.
When you have a stat from last night that shows Lomax +16 and LQ +13, or even Lomax +16 from last night's game, under any scenario; it should never be used.
There wasn't anything +16ish about Lomax last night.
That shows Lomax was much better than the players you were replacing him with.
So the 10 minutes LQ played with Baugh and Boogie without Lomax he was -7. When Q played with Lomax he was plus 20.
It is not a comparison of Q vs. Lomax. It is a comparison of Lomax vs. His replacements.
If you were on the Tigers and we subbed you for 20 minutes for Lomax...And You had a -20...Everyone else who played with you +/- would be affected by that -20 except Lomax. That is what we are seeing here to a lesser extent because there is some overlap.
The less data you use the less reliable as with anything.
But if your argument is +/- is poor for comparing players on the same team...What stat would you use.
I think more than anything, you look at outcomes for stuff like that. I would be more inclined to look at numbers based on what happens when X player plays more than 20 minutes. What happens when X player scores X amount of points or gets X amount of assists or gets X amount of rebounds.
Using that as an indicator, we win a higher percentage of games when Lomax has 3 assists or more than we do when Baugh or Boogie do it.
In hockey, plus/minus is much more accurate. They play 80 games, the goalie is a constant for everyone and defensemen and forwards play as a unit. When a coach changes the lines up, you can often see a trend based on the changes.
In golf, you can see how each stat, whether it's driving accuracy, greens in regulation or putting are determinants for each golfer.
Not making excuses, but I can see where our team is the absolute worst when it comes to valuing +/-. Why?
Nolley
4 games, 16 points or more
2 games, 5 and 3 points
LQ
5 games, 14 points or more
3 games, 5 points or less
Boogie
6 games, 10 points or more
2 games, 1 and 0 points
DJ
5 games, 15 points or more
3 games, 8 points or less
Our core of scorers are so wildly inconsistent, that Baugh and Lomax can play exactly the same game, and be +16 in one game, and -9 in another. So if Lomax lucks out when Williams and LQ get hot, and Baugh has the misfortune of Boogie and Nolley missing 5 shots in a row, it has nothing to do with either of them and vice versa.
So the short of it is, that IF Lomax was any better than Baugh or vice versa, we would see a greater discrepancy in the overall numbers and more importantly, we would be undefeated instead of having 3 losses. We wouldn't need to break down +/- numbers. Lomax and Baugh have a huge negative impact on most of our games.
/
***Official Memphis @ Tulane Game Thread*** (12/16)
