01-15-2013, 02:01 PM
You clearly have a bias toward offense. It doesn't matter if we score 100 points a game, if we let the opponent score 101. One could make an equally strong case about defense. My favorite statistic still remains the scoring delta rate while a player is in versus when they are out of a game. But you quickly see that the data is noisy. But to my mind, that sums up everything that a player does or doesn't do to help her team win. (Noise includes the problem that both teammates & opponents change, some games may be high scoring, some low, and for players with limited playing time, the granularity of scoring.)
In the numbers below, the first 3 columns of numbers represent the time the player is on the court: their number of minutes, the scoring delta during that time, and that delta adjusted to 40 minutes of playing time (NetP/G = Net Points/game). I think it should be clear that the higher the last number is, the better the player was helping (vs hurting) their team. The second set NetP/G are for when they are on the bench. That shows how well the team does without the player in the game. Low playing time or low bench time distort the NetP/G. Likewise, high playing time means the NetP/G will be just about the games differential.
I've highlighted the most interesting numbers (ignoring numbers for less than 5min). Against C.al, Sara's limited playing time corresponds mostly to the first 1/4 of the game when we were doing well. With her out, we did poorly. We did poorly with Bonnie in the game.Â
Against UConn, we did so poorly with Amber in the game, that we actually were leading for the 11+ minutes she was on the bench. Mikaela also seemed to be ineffective.  On the other hand, in the Tenn win, we did well with Mikaela in the game. In the Baylor game, we did well when Taylor was in the game.
To get a sense of a single player vs the rest of her team, look at the Playing NetP/G minus Bench NetP/G. Modulo very limited times for either, this number gives a general guide as to how effective the player was versus the rest of her teammates.
Comparing our guards:Â Parentheses indicates < 5min on bench (so questionable stats)
Toni:Â (-28), +20, (+70), -58
Amber: (+1), -47, -34, -36
In the numbers below, the first 3 columns of numbers represent the time the player is on the court: their number of minutes, the scoring delta during that time, and that delta adjusted to 40 minutes of playing time (NetP/G = Net Points/game). I think it should be clear that the higher the last number is, the better the player was helping (vs hurting) their team. The second set NetP/G are for when they are on the bench. That shows how well the team does without the player in the game. Low playing time or low bench time distort the NetP/G. Likewise, high playing time means the NetP/G will be just about the games differential.
I've highlighted the most interesting numbers (ignoring numbers for less than 5min). Against C.al, Sara's limited playing time corresponds mostly to the first 1/4 of the game when we were doing well. With her out, we did poorly. We did poorly with Bonnie in the game.Â
Against UConn, we did so poorly with Amber in the game, that we actually were leading for the 11+ minutes she was on the bench. Mikaela also seemed to be ineffective.  On the other hand, in the Tenn win, we did well with Mikaela in the game. In the Baylor game, we did well when Taylor was in the game.
To get a sense of a single player vs the rest of her team, look at the Playing NetP/G minus Bench NetP/G. Modulo very limited times for either, this number gives a general guide as to how effective the player was versus the rest of her teammates.
Comparing our guards:Â Parentheses indicates < 5min on bench (so questionable stats)
Toni:Â (-28), +20, (+70), -58
Amber: (+1), -47, -34, -36
| Cal loss by 12 | | | UConn loss by 27 | ||||||||
| Play | Bench | | | Play | Bench | ||||||
Player | Min | NetPts | NetP/G | Â NetP/G | | | Player | Min | NetPts | NetP/G | Â NetP/G |
Camp, Jasmine | 4:52 | -3 | -24.66 | -10.25 | | | Camp, Jasmine | 4:48 | -1 | -8.33 | -29.55 |
Greenfield, Taylor | 18:33 | -8 | -17.25 | -7.46 | | | Greenfield, Taylor | 16:51 | -9 | -21.36 | -31.10 |
James, Sara | 8:39 | 6 | 27.75 | -22.97 | | | James, Sara | 1:13 | 0 | 0.00 | -27.85 |
Kokenis, Toni | 37:18 | -13 | -13.94 | 14.81 | | | Kokenis, Toni | 31:32 | -18 | -22.83 | -42.52 |
Lakhian, Kiran | 0:34 | 0 | 0.00 | -12.17 | ||||||
Ogwumike, Chiney | 39:26 | -12 | -12.17 | 0.00 | | | Ogwumike, Chiney | 36:49 | -25 | -27.16 | -25.13 |
Orrange, Amber | 36:56 | -11 | -11.91 | -13.04 | | | Orrange, Amber | 28:41 | -29 | -40.44 | 7.07 |
Payne, Erica | 2:47 | -1 | -14.37 | -11.82 | | | Payne, Erica | 1:13 | 0 | 0.00 | -27.85 |
Picknell, Tess | 0:34 | 0 | 0.00 | -12.17 | | | Picknell, Tess | 2:35 | 0 | 0.00 | -28.86 |
Ruef, Mikaela | 8:13 | -1 | -4.87 | -13.84 | | | Ruef, Mikaela | 18:45 | -23 | -49.07 | -7.53 |
Samuelson, Bonnie | 6:37 | -7 | -42.32 | -5.99 | | | Samuelson, Bonnie | 25:39 | -17 | -26.51 | -27.87 |
Tinkle, Joslyn | 35:31 | -10 | -11.26 | -17.84 | | | Tinkle, Joslyn | 31:54 | -13 | -16.30 | -69.14 |
| Tenn win by 13 | | | Baylor win by 2 | ||||||||
| Play | Bench | | | Play | Bench | ||||||
Player | Min | NetPts | NetP/G | Â NetP/G | | | Player | Min | NetPts | NetP/G | Â NetP/G |
Camp, Jasmine | 4:58 | 4 | 32.21 | 10.28 | | | Camp, Jasmine | 0:46 | 2 | 104.35 | 0.00 |
Greenfield, Taylor | 7:50 | 2 | 10.21 | 13.68 | | | Greenfield, Taylor | 29:19 | 10 | 13.64 | -29.95 |
James, Sara | 0:25 | -1 | -96.00 | 14.15 | ||||||
Kokenis, Toni | 36:56 | 17 | 18.41 | -52.17 | | | Kokenis, Toni | 30:39 | -9 | -11.75 | 47.06 |
Ogwumike, Chiney | 39:35 | 14 | 14.15 | -96.00 | | | Ogwumike, Chiney | 36:52 | 1 | 1.08 | 12.77 |
Orrange, Amber | 29:38 | 3 | 4.05 | 38.59 | | | Orrange, Amber | 28:24 | -6 | -8.45 | 27.59 |
Payne, Erica | 1:30 | -2 | -53.33 | 15.58 | | | Payne, Erica | 1:28 | 0 | 0.00 | 2.08 |
Picknell, Tess | 0:25 | -1 | -96.00 | 14.15 | | | Picknell, Tess | 1:59 | 1 | 20.17 | 1.05 |
Ruef, Mikaela | 27:38 | 19 | 27.50 | -19.41 | | | Ruef, Mikaela | 29:51 | 5 | 6.70 | -11.82 |
Samuelson, Bonnie | 15:08 | -1 | -2.64 | 22.52 | | | Samuelson, Bonnie | 10:27 | 3 | 11.48 | -1.35 |
Tinkle, Joslyn | 35:57 | 11 | 12.24 | 19.75 | | | Tinkle, Joslyn | 30:15 | 3 | 3.97 | -4.10 |