share

Regular Season Positional Rankings

dmo21
dmo21's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 1053
Points: 994
Offline
Regular Season Positional Rankings

Okay, so I am back again with my positional rankings based on this formula I made which puts together your normal stats, true shooting percentage, winning percentage, and minutes played. I think this works as it is not based on just stats but also winning and how much the player is needed by their team (so this drops guys putting good numbers on a bad team). These are just based off of this year. This does not include potential or how they usually play, just based off of this seasons performance. I'll do a top 10 for each position. Here they are:

PG:
1. Paul
2. Westbrook
3. Curry
4. Parker
5. D.Williams
6. Lawson
7. Conley
8. Felton
9. Hill
10. Wall

SG:
1. Wade
2. Harden
3. Bryant
4. JR Smith
5. Iguodala
6. J.Johnson
7. Thompson
8. Ellis
9. Crawford
10. Martin

SF:
1. James
2. Durant
3. Anthony
4. George
5. Gallinari
6. Gay
7. Pierce
8. Deng
9. Parsons
10. Leonard

PF:
1. Bosh
2. Lee
3. Griffin
4. Ibaka
5. Randolph
6. West
7. Aldridge
8. J.Smith
9. Faried
10. Nowitzki

C:
1. Duncan
2. Howard
3. Horford
4. Chandler
5. Gasol
6. Noah
7. B.Lopez
8. Jefferson
9. Asik
10. Hibbert


brennenrund
Registered User
Joined: 05/28/2009
Posts: 48
Points: 34
Offline
Winning %

How heavily weighted is the player's team's record? As far as point guards go, Holiday and Kemba had better years than half ot the players on the list. They couldn't choose their teammates.

dmo21
dmo21's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 1053
Points: 994
Offline
winning %

Winning % was the main problem I have in my system as it does put some players ahead of others that I don't think should be. But if you have a guy like Kemba putting up good numbers on a horrible team, what is the chances that he would get the same minutes and produce the same numbers on a better team? So my formula promotes being good on a playoff team rather than putting up even better numbers on a bad team.

I did change the weighting in my formula for these standings as it was giving me weird results before. The formula is different for each position, but the first part is a combination of PPG, RPG, APG, SPG, BPG, and TPG weighted on their positional needs. This is then multiplied by their TS% and MPG. The winning percentage is multiplied by 0.75 to reduce its weighting and is then multiplied to the rest of the equation.

I'm not trying to prove a point or anything with this, its just something I do for fun while seeing how "accurate" I can get a ranking system based on many variables without being biased in an opinion.

NickWayne87
Registered User
Joined: 12/03/2008
Posts: 626
Points: 599
Offline
yeah

very flawed formula

mini_marz
mini_marz's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/15/2010
Posts: 201
Points: 299
Offline
Even as a Knicks fan I could

Even as a Knicks fan I could never put Chandler above Gasol. I would also take pierce and deng over gallinari

BigMac12111
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2012
Posts: 112
Points: 112
Offline
Curious

I'm curious as to what the formula is. If it's simply a plug-and-play one, I would suggest maybe looking into changing the winning % for WS or WS48 but that may just be me. I do think that you, for the most part, have the right 10 guys at each position but the rankings might be a bit off on some of them imo.

Tiger1313
Registered User
Joined: 01/04/2012
Posts: 114
Points: 247
Offline
Agree to disagree but ok!

Agree to disagree but ok!

Entropy
Entropy's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/05/2010
Posts: 338
Points: 444
Offline
I don't think these lists are

I don't think these lists are worth doing, the further you go down a list the harder it is to put one person above another.

I think teirs might be better.

dmo21
dmo21's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 1053
Points: 994
Offline
Tiers

This is why I only did a top 10, because as you get further down winning percentage really dictates where guys are. I could do tiers as there is a numerical value for every player. For example these are the point guards with values:

10.190 Paul
9.613 Westbrook
8.723 Curry
8.651 Parker
7.493 D.Williams
7.112 Lawson
6.693 Conley
5.487 Felton
5.414 Hill
5.053 Wall
4.984 Jennings
4.953 Teague
4.836 Holiday
4.685 Lillard

BO-Lieve
Registered User
Joined: 11/28/2012
Posts: 489
Points: 758
Offline
I promise you, Knicks or

I promise you, Knicks or Pacers would swap Felton or Hill for Wall in a nano-second. Both teams would be better with Wall instead of their current PG.

dmo21
dmo21's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 1053
Points: 994
Offline
pg

Well it's only based off of this season in which Wall only played 49. Plus Wall averages a lot of turnovers.

domeico7
domeico7's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/29/2010
Posts: 122
Points: 155
Offline
gotta be kidding

stopped reading when I saw Wade as number 1 SG!

domeico7
domeico7's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/29/2010
Posts: 122
Points: 155
Offline
now took a second glance

OMG!! Bosh is number 1 PF? Now I'm really angry

dmo21
dmo21's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 1053
Points: 994
Offline
Bosh

Bosh gets put ahead of guys like Lee and Griffin because he averages more blocks, less turnovers, and has a high TS%. I don't like it either (as a Raptors fan) but he is a very good and skilled player.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8306
Points: 11870
Offline
Poor Parker He's never going

Poor Parker

He's never going to get the respect he deserve.

And Bosh at #1 isn't much of a surprise, there are only a handful of good PFs in the league. And even less of them better than Bosh. I mean, outside of an aging Gasol, who's more skilled than Bosh?

Thenilonator
Registered User
Joined: 04/15/2013
Posts: 78
Points: 284
Offline
Here's a couple to start

Here's a couple to start with:
Nowitzki
West
Smith
Randolph

RSS: Syndicate content