The one thing I'm not as fond of with it is that I suspect it overrates post players slightly, or perhaps underrates guard efficiency, but I can't really quantify how.  Hmm.  Perhaps if I also subtracted steals from possessions ...

That formula doesn't work well for sparsely used guys, but is pretty good for guys who have high distro.  The reason is that guys who aren't used much can have a lot of more turnovers relative to FGAs, but it's not really their fault.  Or on the other side they can have a lot of offensive boards but never shoot, and have a ridiculously high value.  I think it also overrate bigs because they get a lot of points on putbacks rather than in the halfcourt offense, but then it could also overrate any fastbreak players for the same reason.  

It's just a rule of thumb thing for me mostly. If a guy with medium or higher distro does really well over among period, it might be worth looking at bumping him up or at east thinking about it. If on the other hand he does really bad with medium r higher possessions, might want to throttle back a bit. Also look at what they do on pure scoring possessions, without o-rebounding or turnovers. It's just one quick calc guideline.

And getting points on out backs is still getting points. For example if a guy gets a ***, missed the shot rebounds it and put it back in he still generated points that I likely would not have had without his presence.

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/2/2015 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Mine is generally Pts/(Fg+(.44*fta)-orb+to)

He comes out as 1.056, which is generally a somewhat marginally efficient but acceptable scorer.  However, the fact that its at such volume makes it more than acceptable.  Still, I think with slightly less distro he would go up significantly.

I was using .4*FTA, and I don't subtract ORb.  I don't know why you would.  It has nothing to do with offensive efficiency; if anything, you should adjust in the other direction for offensive rebounding, since FG% on putbacks is substantially higher for most guys than on shots in play.

I use this system:  if the player is shooting well, bump up his distro.  If he's not, lower it.  Give the ball (more distro) to your better players and sit back and make subtle adjustments here or there as the season goes along.  Simple as that.  Sometimes I think some coaches make the game a little more complicated than they really need to.  Better players, higher distro.  Not so good, lower distro.  Win.  Easy money.

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 3:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/2/2015 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Mine is generally Pts/(Fg+(.44*fta)-orb+to)

He comes out as 1.056, which is generally a somewhat marginally efficient but acceptable scorer.  However, the fact that its at such volume makes it more than acceptable.  Still, I think with slightly less distro he would go up significantly.

I was using .4*FTA, and I don't subtract ORb.  I don't know why you would.  It has nothing to do with offensive efficiency; if anything, you should adjust in the other direction for offensive rebounding, since FG% on putbacks is substantially higher for most guys than on shots in play.

And? Their rebounding skill is getting them easy shots which they then convert - often enough off of their own misses.

Posted by emy1013 on 4/3/2015 8:13:00 AM (view original):
I use this system:  if the player is shooting well, bump up his distro.  If he's not, lower it.  Give the ball (more distro) to your better players and sit back and make subtle adjustments here or there as the season goes along.  Simple as that.  Sometimes I think some coaches make the game a little more complicated than they really need to.  Better players, higher distro.  Not so good, lower distro.  Win.  Easy money.

I use this method, too, I usually look over my roster and when I say to myself, wow, this guys pretty awesome, I let him shoot. Sometimes I look at a guy and think, that guy sucks offensively good thing he can play defense and rebound. That guy gets very little distro.

Then again I play zone defense, so I don't really know what I'm doing.

Well, keep in mind that now the work is cut, paste into a sheet, look, see if anything interesting pops out. Takes no time at all.

Here is a guy in my conference in Tark who's even more efficient than Swick, and aside from above average but sub-elite PER, he's definitely nothing to write home about.  Against a weak schedule, admittedly, but still.

I think it's pretty clear that guards are more important than bigs in this game, particularly at the lower levels.

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/3/2015 9:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 3:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/2/2015 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Mine is generally Pts/(Fg+(.44*fta)-orb+to)

He comes out as 1.056, which is generally a somewhat marginally efficient but acceptable scorer.  However, the fact that its at such volume makes it more than acceptable.  Still, I think with slightly less distro he would go up significantly.

I was using .4*FTA, and I don't subtract ORb.  I don't know why you would.  It has nothing to do with offensive efficiency; if anything, you should adjust in the other direction for offensive rebounding, since FG% on putbacks is substantially higher for most guys than on shots in play.

And? Their rebounding skill is getting them easy shots which they then convert - often enough off of their own misses.

That's why I don't try to adjust against putbacks, though I've seen people do it.  But I certainly wouldn't count ORb against total possessions.  They're adding a possession, but they aren't really part of the offensive, so I don't see how they should factor into offensive efficiency.  Gaining you another possession is gaining you another possession, whether you do it via ORb, DRb, steal, causing the opposing shooter to miss via superior defense, etc.  Obviously other than ORb and Stl, the weights aren't the same, as gaining a possession has multiple factors (IE the miss + the rebound).  But if you're going to include gaining possession, you're not talking PPP anymore, and you're moving toward something similar to PER.

If you're using PPP to calculate distro, if anything, you should be reducing the PPP value for players who get a lot of ORb, because they're getting easy points outside the flow of the offense and it doesn't reflect their efficiency in a standard half-court possession, which is what you should care about in setting distro.

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 4:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/3/2015 9:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 3:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/2/2015 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Mine is generally Pts/(Fg+(.44*fta)-orb+to)

He comes out as 1.056, which is generally a somewhat marginally efficient but acceptable scorer.  However, the fact that its at such volume makes it more than acceptable.  Still, I think with slightly less distro he would go up significantly.

I was using .4*FTA, and I don't subtract ORb.  I don't know why you would.  It has nothing to do with offensive efficiency; if anything, you should adjust in the other direction for offensive rebounding, since FG% on putbacks is substantially higher for most guys than on shots in play.

And? Their rebounding skill is getting them easy shots which they then convert - often enough off of their own misses.

That's why I don't try to adjust against putbacks, though I've seen people do it.  But I certainly wouldn't count ORb against total possessions.  They're adding a possession, but they aren't really part of the offensive, so I don't see how they should factor into offensive efficiency.  Gaining you another possession is gaining you another possession, whether you do it via ORb, DRb, steal, causing the opposing shooter to miss via superior defense, etc.  Obviously other than ORb and Stl, the weights aren't the same, as gaining a possession has multiple factors (IE the miss + the rebound).  But if you're going to include gaining possession, you're not talking PPP anymore, and you're moving toward something similar to PER.

If you're using PPP to calculate distro, if anything, you should be reducing the PPP value for players who get a lot of ORb, because they're getting easy points outside the flow of the offense and it doesn't reflect their efficiency in a standard half-court possession, which is what you should care about in setting distro.

But officially with an offensive rebound they "keep" that possession, they aren't adding another one.  A possession ends when the other team gets that ball, a shot is made, or the half ends.

And.... whatever your argument.... I feel I had a pretty efficient D3 guard in DeBerry... http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Stats.aspx?tid=3088&pid=2861652

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 4:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/3/2015 9:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 3:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 4/2/2015 8:56:00 PM (view original):
Mine is generally Pts/(Fg+(.44*fta)-orb+to)

He comes out as 1.056, which is generally a somewhat marginally efficient but acceptable scorer.  However, the fact that its at such volume makes it more than acceptable.  Still, I think with slightly less distro he would go up significantly.

I was using .4*FTA, and I don't subtract ORb.  I don't know why you would.  It has nothing to do with offensive efficiency; if anything, you should adjust in the other direction for offensive rebounding, since FG% on putbacks is substantially higher for most guys than on shots in play.

And? Their rebounding skill is getting them easy shots which they then convert - often enough off of their own misses.

That's why I don't try to adjust against putbacks, though I've seen people do it.  But I certainly wouldn't count ORb against total possessions.  They're adding a possession, but they aren't really part of the offensive, so I don't see how they should factor into offensive efficiency.  Gaining you another possession is gaining you another possession, whether you do it via ORb, DRb, steal, causing the opposing shooter to miss via superior defense, etc.  Obviously other than ORb and Stl, the weights aren't the same, as gaining a possession has multiple factors (IE the miss + the rebound).  But if you're going to include gaining possession, you're not talking PPP anymore, and you're moving toward something similar to PER.

If you're using PPP to calculate distro, if anything, you should be reducing the PPP value for players who get a lot of ORb, because they're getting easy points outside the flow of the offense and it doesn't reflect their efficiency in a standard half-court possession, which is what you should care about in setting distro.

And I do use both, actually.  I have the spreadsheet set up to show a nuber of things, look at them quickly and use them to eyeball things.

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/3/2015 4:49:00 PM (view original):
Here is a guy in my conference in Tark who's even more efficient than Swick, and aside from above average but sub-elite PER, he's definitely nothing to write home about.  Against a weak schedule, admittedly, but still.

I think it's pretty clear that guards are more important than bigs in this game, particularly at the lower levels.

Interesting you say that about guards.  I have very recently come to that conclusion based on poor performances of some of my teams who have all been weak in the backcourt.