Yesterday I made a fanpost which pointed out that Blazers are getting more notoriety for some of the all-NBA awards,
I began the process of tracking these awards with some Coach of the Year analysis. The formula for that award is still in progress, help me out if you have ideas.
Today I want to broach the MVP discussion. This one is sticky because there are multiple definitions people use to decide who is the Most Valuable Player, and not all of them are easy to quantify. Some say it should be given to the best all-around player statistically, some say the best player from the best team, others say give it to LeBron James no matter what, others make different statistical arguments.
Since most of the statistical material (advanced and otherwise) is readily available, I'm going to make it as quantifiable as possible.
First of all, to be MVP, we know that you need to excel statistically. Second, we know your team has to be good. Third, many of the straight statistics (Points, Rebounds, Assists, etc) have become less valued recently, but they are still considered and discussed. Many of the more advanced stats that measure a player's performance (Rebounding Rate, Assist Ratio, Pace, and True Shooting%) are built into efficiency stats such as ESPN's PER, and NBA.com's PIE. ESPN also has a stat called Value Added which is the equivalent to baseball's WARP (Wins over replacement player).
My initial approach will combine 4 scores that try to encompass the above pieces. The first score will take each of the main 5 straight statistics (Points, Rebounds, Assists, Blocks, and Steals), and record each players percentage of the league leader. So the league leader gets 1.000, and everyone below him gets whatever percentage they are to that value. Here's an example based on points per game:
|Player||PPG||% of Leader|
Since the straight stats shouldn't be given too much weight, I took the average of the 5 stat percentages for my first score.
Score 1 = percentage of league leader average for points, rebounds, blocks, steals, and assists
The top 10 in this category is interesting:
|Player||Raw Stats Score|
You can see that Davis is just a monster statistically, and MCW has been really good in his rookie year. He is the league leader in steals (not close currently), gets decent assists and points, and rebounds well for a guard.
The second score used the same percentage approach to the combination of PIE and PER. Here is the top ten:
Starting to look more like MVP type candidates. You can see a few players from bad teams up there though.
Score 3 evaluates team success. Instead of translating straight win%, I used the same percentage of league leader approach. When I built this yesterday, the Pacers had the highest win%. As of today its the Blazers. So I made the adjustment. I'm not going to paste in the leaders since that it would just be all Blazers. :)
The 4th score is value added. It seems like giving this score 25% of the weight is too much. And that's one area where I may need more suggestions about how to change the formula. Anyway, here are the top ten based on Hollinger's value added:
Don't forget, value added is the equivalent of value over replacement player.
That completes the 4 scores I used for my MVP calculation. The scores are then added together to provide the MCP score. Here is the top ten as of today 12/17/2013:
|Player||MVP Score||Score 1 (Straight Stats)||Score 2 (Efficiency)||Score 3 (Team Success)||Score 4 (Value Added)|
Interestingly Indiana's loss yesterday to the Pistons dropped George below Aldridge. Kevin Durant gets a very slight nod over LeBron according to this score. I am ok with that considering that LeBron's team success has been a little down this year, and despite great efficiency, he isn't putting up the numbers KD is. The team success is the big one though. Would the Heat be better if LeBron exerted himself even just a little more? Then again, LeBron is likely the better player... makes for a great discussion.
Where can I improve this calculation? How did I screw it up?