Career Net On/Off Ratings of Notable Players

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Q, why wouldn't you use a stat like BPM that accounts for the quality of team these players are on and how much better or worse a player is compared to what's average? In my opinion, it's a better indicator of how good or bad a player is in comparison to his peers regardless of situation. And like your system it's easy to differentiate between superstars, stars, role players, bench players, etc.

+10.0 is an all-time season (think peak Jordan or LeBron)
+8.0 is an MVP season (think peak Dirk or peak Shaq)
+6.0 is an all-NBA season
+4.0 is in all-star consideration
+2.0 is a good starter
+0.0 is a decent starter or solid 6th man
-2.0 is a bench player (this is also defined as "replacement level")
Below -2.0 are many end-of-bench players

Edit: What BPM does not account for is playing time. I feel like that's also important to note.

[TheFuture]

Rubio is a better player than D'lo career/team wise thus far. There isn't a large argument here. People are making something from absolutely nothing.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Rubio is a better player than D'lo career/team wise thus far. There isn't a large argument here. People are making something from absolutely nothing.

Sure, but Rubio isn't a better player than Russell in recent years, which makes sense considering where these two guys are at in their careers.

[TheFuture]

Rubio is a better player than D'lo career/team wise thus far. There isn't a large argument here. People are making something from absolutely nothing.

Sure, but Rubio isn't a better player than Russell in recent years, which makes sense considering where these two guys are at in their careers.

He actually has proven to be in recent years.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Q, why wouldn't you use a stat like BPM that accounts for the quality of team these players are on and how much better or worse a player is compared to what's average? In my opinion, it's a better indicator of how good or bad a player is in comparison to his peers regardless of situation. And like your system it's easy to differentiate between superstars, stars, role players, bench players, etc.

+10.0 is an all-time season (think peak Jordan or LeBron)
+8.0 is an MVP season (think peak Dirk or peak Shaq)
+6.0 is an all-NBA season
+4.0 is in all-star consideration
+2.0 is a good starter
+0.0 is a decent starter or solid 6th man
-2.0 is a bench player (this is also defined as "replacement level")
Below -2.0 are many end-of-bench players

Edit: What BPM does not account for is playing time. I feel like that's also important to note.

The problem with BPM is mostly the same one you get with PER. It doesn't measure defensive impact adequately. It also can miss things on offense, like screen-setting, movement without the ball, spacing, etc. Anything not in the individual box score is not captured.

That's why On/Off and +/- are important, along with their more complicated derivatives. It looks beyond the box score and to overall team performance while the player is on or off the court. It's also more noisy than box score stats which is why I like to look at it over multiple years and thousands of minutes.

It should be no coincidence that the LeBrons, Currys, and Jokics do incredibly well in both types of stats. Generally speaking, great box score performers also positively impact team success.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

By the way, the point of this was not to create a Ricky Rubio vs. DLO debate. We all know that Rosas believes DLO is one of his two stars and is trying to surround him and KAT with additional talent. Ricky happens to be a great complementary piece in my opinion and can absolutely play with DLO versus compete with him for minutes.

Having said that, I am hoping DLO takes a more mature and professional approach to playing defense. He doesn't even have to be great. Just freaking show you aren't a turnstile 80% of the time.

[TheFuture]

The Elite Role Player Net On/Off Ratings:

Draymond Green = +9.8
Robert Covington = +7.1
Davis Bertans = +5.9
Ricky Rubio = +5.1
Patrick Beverley = +4.8
Michael-Kidd Gilchrist = +4.8
Andre Iguodala = +4.2
Kyle Korver = +3.5
Al-Farouq Aminu = +3.4

I was really surprised by the KAT stat. Now to think we could have had Ricky and RoCo around him?

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Q, why wouldn't you use a stat like BPM that accounts for the quality of team these players are on and how much better or worse a player is compared to what's average? In my opinion, it's a better indicator of how good or bad a player is in comparison to his peers regardless of situation. And like your system it's easy to differentiate between superstars, stars, role players, bench players, etc.

+10.0 is an all-time season (think peak Jordan or LeBron)
+8.0 is an MVP season (think peak Dirk or peak Shaq)
+6.0 is an all-NBA season
+4.0 is in all-star consideration
+2.0 is a good starter
+0.0 is a decent starter or solid 6th man
-2.0 is a bench player (this is also defined as "replacement level")
Below -2.0 are many end-of-bench players

Edit: What BPM does not account for is playing time. I feel like that's also important to note.

The problem with BPM is mostly the same one you get with PER. It doesn't measure defensive impact adequately. It also can miss things on offense, like screen-setting, movement without the ball, spacing, etc. Anything not in the individual box score is not captured.

That's why On/Off and +/- are important, along with their more complicated derivatives. It looks beyond the box score and to overall team performance while the player is on or off the court. It's also more noisy than box score stats which is why I like to look at it over multiple years and thousands of minutes.

It should be no coincidence that the LeBrons, Currys, and Jokics do incredibly well in both types of stats. Generally speaking, great box score performers also positively impact team success.

I disagree with that primarily because PER does not include team performance into its equation whereas BPM does. Those little important things that don't show up in the box score are included regardless of it not having a specific numerical value. It's accounted for in Team Adjusted Efficiency per 100 possessions which is then used to find BPM.

On/Off and +/- are heavily influenced by quality of teammates and other factors that players can't control -- so much so that the values can be misleading. Take Anthony Davis for example. We'd all agree he's a top-five player in the league -- top-10 if we're being safe. Does anyone actually think the Lakers were better with him off the court this year? No shot, right? Well, that's what his -3.0 On/Off would indicate.

Meanwhile, his 8.0 BPM plants him sixth in the entire league -- accurately depicting his value on the court.

Stats are a matter of preference and there's no perfect one to be used. They can be used to debate whichever side of the argument depending on the person. I get all of that. To me, BPM is a much better indicator of a player's impact.

[TheFuture]

Q, why wouldn't you use a stat like BPM that accounts for the quality of team these players are on and how much better or worse a player is compared to what's average? In my opinion, it's a better indicator of how good or bad a player is in comparison to his peers regardless of situation. And like your system it's easy to differentiate between superstars, stars, role players, bench players, etc.

+10.0 is an all-time season (think peak Jordan or LeBron)
+8.0 is an MVP season (think peak Dirk or peak Shaq)
+6.0 is an all-NBA season
+4.0 is in all-star consideration
+2.0 is a good starter
+0.0 is a decent starter or solid 6th man
-2.0 is a bench player (this is also defined as "replacement level")
Below -2.0 are many end-of-bench players

Edit: What BPM does not account for is playing time. I feel like that's also important to note.

The problem with BPM is mostly the same one you get with PER. It doesn't measure defensive impact adequately. It also can miss things on offense, like screen-setting, movement without the ball, spacing, etc. Anything not in the individual box score is not captured.

That's why On/Off and +/- are important, along with their more complicated derivatives. It looks beyond the box score and to overall team performance while the player is on or off the court. It's also more noisy than box score stats which is why I like to look at it over multiple years and thousands of minutes.

It should be no coincidence that the LeBrons, Currys, and Jokics do incredibly well in both types of stats. Generally speaking, great box score performers also positively impact team success.

I disagree with that primarily because PER does not include team performance into its equation whereas BPM does. Those little important things that don't show up in the box score are included regardless of it not having a specific numerical value. It's accounted for in Team Adjusted Efficiency per 100 possessions which is then used to find BPM.

On/Off and +/- are heavily influenced by quality of teammates and other factors that players can't control -- so much so that the values can be misleading. Take Anthony Davis for example. We'd all agree he's a top-five player in the league -- top-10 if we're being safe. Does anyone actually think the Lakers were better with him off the court this year? No shot, right? Well, that's what his -3.0 On/Off would indicate.

Meanwhile, his 8.0 BPM plants him sixth in the entire league -- accurately depicting his value on the court.

Stats are a matter of preference and there's no perfect one to be used. They can be used to debate whichever side of the argument depending on the person. I get all of that. To me, BPM is a much better indicator of a player's impact.

Ok, now go look at the BPM of Rubio and Russell.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Q, why wouldn't you use a stat like BPM that accounts for the quality of team these players are on and how much better or worse a player is compared to what's average? In my opinion, it's a better indicator of how good or bad a player is in comparison to his peers regardless of situation. And like your system it's easy to differentiate between superstars, stars, role players, bench players, etc.

+10.0 is an all-time season (think peak Jordan or LeBron)
+8.0 is an MVP season (think peak Dirk or peak Shaq)
+6.0 is an all-NBA season
+4.0 is in all-star consideration
+2.0 is a good starter
+0.0 is a decent starter or solid 6th man
-2.0 is a bench player (this is also defined as "replacement level")
Below -2.0 are many end-of-bench players

Edit: What BPM does not account for is playing time. I feel like that's also important to note.

The problem with BPM is mostly the same one you get with PER. It doesn't measure defensive impact adequately. It also can miss things on offense, like screen-setting, movement without the ball, spacing, etc. Anything not in the individual box score is not captured.

That's why On/Off and +/- are important, along with their more complicated derivatives. It looks beyond the box score and to overall team performance while the player is on or off the court. It's also more noisy than box score stats which is why I like to look at it over multiple years and thousands of minutes.

It should be no coincidence that the LeBrons, Currys, and Jokics do incredibly well in both types of stats. Generally speaking, great box score performers also positively impact team success.

I disagree with that primarily because PER does not include team performance into its equation whereas BPM does. Those little important things that don't show up in the box score are included regardless of it not having a specific numerical value. It's accounted for in Team Adjusted Efficiency per 100 possessions which is then used to find BPM.

On/Off and +/- are heavily influenced by quality of teammates and other factors that players can't control -- so much so that the values can be misleading. Take Anthony Davis for example. We'd all agree he's a top-five player in the league -- top-10 if we're being safe. Does anyone actually think the Lakers were better with him off the court this year? No shot, right? Well, that's what his -3.0 On/Off would indicate.

Meanwhile, his 8.0 BPM plants him sixth in the entire league -- accurately depicting his value on the court.

Stats are a matter of preference and there's no perfect one to be used. They can be used to debate whichever side of the argument depending on the person. I get all of that. To me, BPM is a much better indicator of a player's impact.

Ok, now go look at the BPM of Rubio and Russell.

Ricky Rubio

2017-18: 0.7
2018-19: -0.2
2019-20: 1.0

D'Angelo Russell

2017-18: -1.2
2018-19: 3.4
2019-20: 1.9