Sactown Royalty: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: A New Era, but First Some Goodbye's Bar-right-arrows



Kings franchise history in graphical form

What if the entire history of the franchise could be represented (more or less) in one image? The best teams, the best players, how each player played--all together in one screen... Well, with this Winshare area graphic , it's been done.

87thumb_medium


 

Just scroll to the bottom of the post at The Arbitrarian (read the post if you want to become familiar with the methodology), and click the last thumbnail. Then, scroll and zoom and pan to your heart's content across 50+ seasons of team history.

The basic concept is a geometric representation of player value--the taller a player's rectangle, the more he contributed to his team's success, the wider the rectangle, the better the team performed. Multiplying the two together gives the area of that player's rectangle, or his Winshares. Players with league-best Winshares are often chosen as MVP, and typically, the player with team-best Winshares is considered the most valuable to that team. The color of each rectangle is determined by the extent to which that player can be classified (according to their statistical profile) as a scorer (red), perimeter player (green), or interior player (blue)--and mixtures of each type translate into mixtures in color.

The historical graphic gives an interesting perspective, too. Note, for example, the career arc of Oscar Robertson, and how the team really excelled in Lucas' first season paired with The Big O. It's also interesting to see that Webber, typically an incredibly well-balanced player (his gray color indicates a playing type fairly evenly divided between scorer-perimeter-interior) had his best year in 00-01 when he focused more on the scoring and less on the perimeter stuff. Also interesting is the contrast between Stojakovic and Divac--whose colors appear to be essentially opposites. Stojakovic is close to a purely scoring-focused player, while Divac's tint indicates a clear interior player with a shade of perimeter ability as well. I would be interested to hear other insights gained from this graphical history, as well as whether or not you feel that the players are given appropriate credit by Winshares. For example, is Martin-Miller-Artest-Salmons-Garcia the correct order of value to the team for the 07-08 season?

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

2 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Love your stuff, d, and this is plainly awesome.

by Ziller on May 21, 2008 9:50 AM PDT   1 recs

This -

is awesome!

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 21, 2008 10:13 AM PDT   0 recs

How does it hold up?

Since you guys are the experts on the Kings-and I am not in any way-how would you say this holds up? Was Martin, this year, just slightly more valuable than Miller? Was 2001 Webber’s best year? Was the 2003-04 version of Stojakovic more valuable than the 1999-00 version of Webber? That sort of thing? I’m interested in seeing whether or not Winshares meshes with actual experts’ assessments. Any comments would be appreciated.

by dsparks on May 21, 2008 1:47 PM PDT   0 recs

How does it hold up?

As it pertains to this season, here is a post that I did in March. It lines up almost perfectly with yours, though my analysis was far more basic and simplistic. Also, I completed mine back in late March, a month before the season ended but about the time that we were eliminated from playoff contention.

I think that the 03-04 Peja was more “valuable” than the 99-00 Webber, mainly because 99-00 Webber could also count on Peja, but 03-04 Peja could not count on Webber.

*Note – I cannot place my comments under the heading of “expert assessments.” However, if you were looking for comments from lunatics that spend way too much time rooting for the Kings, then you came to the right place. Me likey!

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 21, 2008 2:13 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Very Nice

I’m no expert.

For example, is Martin-Miller-Artest-Salmons-Garcia the correct order of value to the team for the 07-08 season?

I’d say that at the very least one could make a good argument for that order of value. I might swap Garcia and Salmons just because Garcia is better off the bench and under normal circumstances they are both bench players. But Salmons got a lot of time as a starter and so his value for this year fits. Some here might argue that Artest is more valuable, because of defense, but I don’t have a problem with him being 3rd.

Martin vs. Miller? Martin had a spectacular offensive season, but missed a lot of games, while Miller had a very solid season and played most of the games. Having them end up very close in winshares seems right to me.

Great job and thanks for sharing it. It’s really interesting to see the progression of the team. Theus to Thorpe. Richmond to Webber to Bibby to Martin. Very good stuff.

Section 214 is one lucky schmoe

by Kfan in Korea on May 21, 2008 2:03 PM PDT   0 recs

Not a fan of Win Shares

Why set val to a minimum of 0? Certainly we have all seen players who are so bad they they actually deduct from a team’s chance of winning.

I personally am not a fan of winshares. I’d rather see you develop the val portion of this into a stat like VORP. , as I think it has more value.

Any r^2 numbers from running val values to wins?

by chri5 on May 21, 2008 7:12 PM PDT   0 recs

Regression

Regressing team total val on team wins gives a R2 of about .28. However, regressing team val and opponent val on team wins gives a R2 of about 0.90-which is pretty good. My argument for setting minimum val=0 is that it is not possible to win negative games-even for the worst player in the league, just as a negative area makes no sense in the geometric conception of the statistic. For what it’s worth, there are relatively few players with negative val, and the negative values are rarely particularly low. However, I will admit that this adjustment is not completely justified, except for in the somewhat vague theoretical sense described above. For me, in large part, the proof is in the pudding. The numbers just make sense, and that’s pretty satisfying.

by dsparks on May 21, 2008 9:32 PM PDT   0 recs

You had me at "Regression"

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 21, 2008 10:32 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Sactown Royalty, the best community of Sacramento Kings fans in the universe. That's not my opinion; it's scientific fact.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

2007_01_mooninite2_small
A look at the 2009-2010 salary structure
Finger_huge_small
I'm Worried About Minutes aka Trade Someone Please

Recent FanPosts

Small
Artest will remain a King for now
Small
Should the Maloofs fire Peaches?
Small
Dahntay Jones signs with the Nuggets
Small
Why not aim for Andrew Bynum?
Small
D-League?
Kingslogo_small
Detroit brawl
Nobama-1_small
Artest/Miller for Moon/Bosh
Farworld_water_small
Artest to Detroit?
2007_01_mooninite2_small
The Summer League Formula

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Editor

Tom_toon_small Ziller

S-006_small section214

Associate Editor

1musselman_small rbiegler

ad

Site Meter