01-01-2022, 02:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2022, 02:23 PM by BackToSquareOne.)
(01-01-2022, 12:59 PM)mavsluvr Wrote: Well, if you want to go in that direction --
With Luka, the Mavs are winning 57% of their games (more than the 53% that opponent winning percentage would predict).
Without Luka, the Mavs are winning 36% of their games (less than the 43% that the opponent winning percentage would predict).
My point isn't that people can't cobble together some stats to try to make it look like Luka isn't contributing much, or might even be dragging this band of merry men down. It is that even the stats being offered don't actually show that, the whole premise doesn't pass the smell test, and the most important thing is that the Mavs are a winning team with Luka and a losing team without him.
Haters gonna hate. (Not accusing you in particular, BTSO).
My point was that stats are typically hard(ish) and wins-x-losses is also one of those stats and not some touchstone that one can turn to when one is confronted with a different stat (whether or not that stat is telling one something).
(For what it's worth the Mavs "expected" win %ages against teams with those winning percentages are 51.7% and 41.3%.*)
But, as ever, the same sizes are tiny and there is a huge amount of texture not accounted for either in brute win-x-loss or in adjusting it for strength of schedule. (E.g., I certainly didn't take home-away records into account, which is a known factor, and so on. And it's a crude way of going about things even for such an adjustment for s-o-s: one should 'really' calculate the "expected" win probability for each game and then sum those (and divide by #ofgames).)
--
* See, eg, https://sabr.org/journal/article/probabi...-matchups/