Big 12 Roland Ratings leaders (conference only)

[michigancat]

Explanation: The on court +/- number repesents the team's net points with the player on the floor per 48 minutes, while the off court number is the team's net with the player off the floor per 48 minutes. The Roland Rating is the difference between the two, with a positive number indicating the team has played better with the player than without.

It's per game (would be awesome if tempo free), but interesting nonetheless.


http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/stats/roland_avg?games=2&conf=big-12&season=2009-2010&min=

[sys]

that list is actually better looking than i would have thought.  maybe these conf. season-long rolands aren't such a garbage stat.  not sure how useful between schools comparos are though.

[michigancat]

that list is actually better looking than i would have thought.  maybe these conf. season-long rolands aren't such a garbage stat.  not sure how useful between schools comparos are though.

They really aren't too useful when comparing individual players from different teams.  But you can see how balanced a team is - a team with relatively small RR's would have little drop off from bench players.

And I think Christopherson's is completely wrong:

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/iowa-state/scott-christopherson/plus_minus

Like I said, it still needs some work, but it's a great start.

[Pete]

that list is actually better looking than i would have thought.  maybe these conf. season-long rolands aren't such a garbage stat.  not sure how useful between schools comparos are though.

They really aren't too useful when comparing individual players from different teams.  But you can see how balanced a team is - a team with relatively small RR's would have little drop off from bench players.

And I think Christopherson's is completely wrong:

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/iowa-state/scott-christopherson/plus_minus

Like I said, it still needs some work, but it's a great start.

I'd have zero stats to back this up, but I'd wager that "balanced" teams really don't win any more than "unbalanced" teams, particularly when it comes to the NCAA tournament.  My gut tells me that an "unbalanced" team probably has some studs.

[sys]

re. christo - yeah looks like they don't have data on him for most games for some reason (isu irrelevancy, prolly).


i just assumed it was cause they had to bring in a walkon or something for him.

[Trim]

[Saulbadguy]

Next year?

[steve dave]

 

[michigancat]

re. christo - yeah looks like they don't have data on him for most games for some reason (isu irrelevancy, prolly).


i just assumed it was cause they had to bring in a walkon or something for him.

I think it's purely a function of his last name being too long to show up in NCAA play by play data:

http://stats.ncaa.org/game/play_by_play/93102

[sys]

I think it's purely a function of his last name being too long to show up in NCAA play by play data:

http://stats.ncaa.org/game/play_by_play/93102

that's hilarious.