Updated Ben Ball + / - Numbers

by LVBruin on Jan 19, 2011 6:49 PM PST

Bumped. Cool analysis leading to good discussion. See BruinEngy's post for more fun data. -BN

Five games into conference play and 17 games into the season, I think we all have pretty well-formed opinions on our basketball team. So, of course, the mods asked me to bring some numbers into the conversation to see if our opinions match the statistical reality.

As per usual, the + / - numbers should be taken with a grain of salt as there are many factors that play into individual and team success but at this point in the season, I think the sample size (19 games with exhibition games included) and CBH's substitution patterns make the raw + / - numbers a little more credible.

First, lets take a look at individual + / - numbers. I decided to rank our players according to their per-40-minute + / -, so basically the number to the right of the player indicates what our average margin of victory this season would be if that player had played every minute of every game (based on the numbers from the minutes they have played):

I arrived at the above numbers by simply dividing each player's total + / - by their total minutes played and multiplying the quotient by 40 (that might be the first time I used the word quotient in a sentence in 20 years).

As for the top lineups, here's a look at the per-40-minute + / - for our most commonly used lineups:

So again, the number at the right represents what our average margin of victory would be if that particular lineup had played every minute of every game (based on the numbers from the minutes they have played).

So far I think I've looked at + / - from a different angle in every post, so if anyone would rather see a different version of the + / - numbers (adjusted for quality of opponent, conference vs. non-conference etc.) give me a formula and I'll plug in the numbers.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 3 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Wow, great work.

There’s been a lot of talk of playing TH more at the 4. Is it worth seeing lineups with him at the 4 or is there not enough data?

Go Bruins!

by uclaluv on Jan 18, 2011 9:41 PM PST reply actions

It looks like

TH has spent about 42 minutes at the power forward, in those 42 minutes we’re +29.

by LVBruin on Jan 18, 2011 10:53 PM PST up reply actions

Wow

Go Bruins!

by uclaluv on Jan 19, 2011 6:45 AM PST up reply actions

oh god LVBruins

I just finished publishing my own +/- stats, didn’t know you were still working on this. I was going to message you but I didn’t see any email listed. Should I take mine down?

by BruinEngy on Jan 18, 2011 9:50 PM PST reply actions

I don't think so

unless everyone else finds it too redundant. Maybe the mods could combine them somehow. I don’t mind if no one else does.

by LVBruin on Jan 18, 2011 10:56 PM PST up reply actions

I think both +/- posts have made it clear

that the lineup of Jones, Honeycutt, Lee, Nelson, Lane is definitely the worst. Maybe this is due to the fact the Brendan Lane isn’t much of a scoring threat and sometimes get beat in the paint.

Troy is burning

by bruinbasketball on Jan 18, 2011 10:34 PM PST reply actions

The crazy part is

that’s our second most frequently used lineup after our starting lineup! They’ve fallen behind to their opponents by 63 points over 86 minutes this season.

I’m thinking that CBH might start using Reeves as a backup center and TH as a backup power forward more often down the stretch.

by LVBruin on Jan 18, 2011 11:06 PM PST up reply actions

Honestly

I don’t see the aversion to using Stover/Lane as the 5/4, but I admit that the lack of post scoring with that lineup is glaring… hmm. Is there a right answer?

by OswegoBruin on Jan 19, 2011 9:22 AM PST up reply actions

BL as a center

BL has played roughly 241 minutes as a center this season, in that time we should have gained about 24 points on our opponents (based on our average gains against those opponents in those segments of game time), instead we fell behind by 34.

Naturally, this is in part afunction of BL suffering in comparison to JS but I think it’s also a byproduct of Lane bringing very little to the table as a center. He is neither a post threat on offense nor a sufficient rebounder when matched up against an opposing big man.

by LVBruin on Jan 19, 2011 11:14 AM PST up reply actions

does he EVER play the center?

per CBH, my understanding was that he is designated at the 4 when playing with Nelson…

by britishbruin on Jan 19, 2011 11:47 AM PST up reply actions

He's been playing Center with Reeves

I agree with LV, he’s a terrible choice for CBH to put in place of Smith. He’s never been a great rebounder, but I think Ben is trying to see if he can defend 5s… he can’t. We need to go with Stover/Reeves or Stover/Honeycutt. I, pending matchups, prefer the latter.

by OswegoBruin on Jan 19, 2011 12:30 PM PST up reply actions

LV, what are you using to generate these numbers?

I thought you were reading the data off the play-by-plays and entering them manually into spreadsheets, but maybe I am wrong

by BruinEngy on Jan 18, 2011 10:36 PM PST reply actions

Pretty much

I’ve been pasting the play-by-plays from uclabruins.com into a spreedsheet and going from there. It’s sorta tough though, as the scorekeepers occassionally flub the substitutions (three subs go in and only one player comes out etc.) in those situations I go to my DVR for help.

by LVBruin on Jan 18, 2011 10:59 PM PST up reply actions

I really appreciate the incredible effort both of you are putting in

You add substance to our discussions and quality to our analysis.

Thank you.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Jan 19, 2011 7:44 AM PST up reply actions

No problem, I enjoy it

Ever since I switched over to North Campus (English) back in ‘97, I’ve made a habit of finding ways to exercise my South Campus muscles as often as possible, lest they begin to atrophy : )

by LVBruin on Jan 19, 2011 9:07 AM PST up reply actions

I'm impressed by the number-crunching you do.

(Especially for a fellow North Campus major!) I throw a bunch of stuff out there sometimes, and it takes a lot of research…but you do a lot of work creating the specific stats. It’s appreciated.

Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.

by KSBruin on Jan 19, 2011 9:36 AM PST up reply actions

Here's what strikes me

First, one-by-one JA +10.83 vs. LJ +4.11. I wouldn’t have guessed that.

Then, some lineup comparisons.
JS/BL/TH/ML with JA +34.2
JS/BL/TH/ML with LJ +27.48
Pretty much equal to the JA/LJ solo difference.

Take that and switch out BL for RN, though…
JS/RN/TH/ML with JA +17.79
JS/RN/TH/ML with LJ +19.88
So much for Jerime’s 6.72-point advantage.

More surprising to me was when you switch out the 4. Solo BL’s +/- is slightly under 4 points more than RN’s, but:
JS/TH/ML/JA with BL: +34.2
JS/TH/ML/JA with RN: +17.79
A huge difference.

Even with Zeke…
JS/TH/ML/LJ with BL: +27.48
JS/TH/ML/LJ with RN: +19.88
Still noticeable.

I’ve certainly been among those questioning why Lane was getting a lot of playing time. Given this, it seems he should be on the floor more. LVBruin, is it easy for you to check how many total minutes were played in computing these last two BL/RN lineups I compared here?

Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.

by KSBruin on Jan 19, 2011 10:10 AM PST reply actions

well, I wouldn't assume that a player stays productive in all 40 minutes they are in the game

Anderson may perform decently coming off the bench but he does so in limited minutes, meaning success is amplified.

I think we’ve all seen how Anderson crumbles under pressure so if he were playing all 40 minutes, there’s no guarantee he would look as good.

I’m aware a lot of people felt Jerime has had been improving and breaking out, but I will feel more comfortable upon seeing him perform in some more games

by BruinEngy on Jan 19, 2011 10:34 AM PST up reply actions

Chicken or egg

Your question led me to an interesting discovery, the two lineups JS/RN/TH/ML/JA and JS/BL/TH/ML/JA have played almost identical minutes, 26.9 each. However, the first lineup, the one featuring Reeves, has played 23 of those 27 minutes in losing efforts (Nova, Kansas, Montana, Washington, USC) while the same lineup with Lane has played only 7 minutes in losing efforts.

The question then becomes, did the lineups fail because of the opponent or did our team fail because of the lineups.

The scond comparison had our standard starters with 106 total minutes (39 of which resulted in a negative + / -) and the starting group with BL subbed in with 35 total minutes (9 of which were losers).

by LVBruin on Jan 19, 2011 10:41 AM PST up reply actions

Good point.

For the 27 minutes you mention that include RN, three of the five opponents are in Pomeroy’s top 11 as of Jan 18. That makes a difference.

Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.

by KSBruin on Jan 19, 2011 11:38 AM PST up reply actions

Hey LVB

I have a couple of thoughts re methodology that I’d like to run by you via email. If you’re interested, shoot me an email, which is my BN handle at-gmail-dot-com.

by britishbruin on Jan 19, 2011 11:50 AM PST reply actions