(09-13-2023, 01:42 PM)omahen Wrote: I don't think the valuation is that off. You decided to take one season data to compare their values. Obviously the season by season data fluctuate based on many factors and data from one season clearly doesn't represent the overall value of the player. It just represents the value for that season. I think it is pretty obvious the result of a single season needs interpretation exactly because of that fluctuations. Everyone knows Wiggins is a better player than THJ. But, he missed more than half of last season, which greatly impacted his value calculation for that single season.
A bit more explanation of the players you mentioned. Text under Klay seems off, as if they accidentaly copy pasted wrong text under it. He was paid almost 40 mil, not 30 mil as they state in the text. Also, his stats in last season doesn't indicate a value of just 8.7 mil, compared to production and availability of other players. Barnes production last season was evaluated at a bit over 15 mil, which is very close to what he actually earned and quite on par compared to THJ production (THJ is valued at 10 mil). Wiggins value (11 mil) is greatly reduced because he was missing so much time last season. Hayward missed a lot of time (again) and his estimated value based on that and his production in last season is quite correctly at 8.8 mil. Conley production last season was valued at 12 mil, which is again quite ok considering his overall production, especially in the Utah "half" of the season. Adams missed half the season, which also greatly impacted his overall value.
I totally agree this calculation doesn't represent the exact dollar figure a certain player was worth. But it does serve as an indication of a value and as s useful comparison between players which is easy to understand to everyone. Which is basically the purpose of the article. The purpose was not to create an ultimate advance stat covering everything. Which is not possible anyway.
I did misread the Barnes one, and it would make sense that the Klay one is some kind of typo as that is the most egregious. My points are this:
1. If you are looking for a good overall rating of an NBA player, there are much better options than this. As far as I know, the best available to the public are EPM and DPM. They do a much better job of capturing a players overall impact on the court.
2. If you are looking for a decent estimate of player dollar value, I don't think this is very accurate. There is another one out by Holinger that is also boxscore driven. Its notorious for being wildly off on predicting free agent signings. I think part of the problem is that there are different markets. There are rookie contracts, there are early extensions and there are max contracts signed with significant surplus value. There is also the difference between RFA and UFA markets. The reality is that free agency is the most expensive market to operate in, unless you are one of the few destination markets that can attract surplus max (or in some cases min) contracts. When comparing Timmy's contract to high performing rookies, RFAs, and surplus max contracts, his contract looks like a significant overpay. When you compare it to other UFA, it does not look that bad. If you look at the rest of his UFA class, he was probably at least average. In my mind, if you are representing a player value, it should be what his value would be on the open market, and I think in most cases these kinds of estimates are baking in the max and rookie guys, greatly depressing what actual UFA value is.
![[-]](https://www.mavsboard.com/images/collapse.png)