That certainly sounds plausible, but it's ultimately an empirical question, right? For example (whenever you have a few minutes to spare), I think it would be informative to see a comparison of RAPM rating for each of the OKC players with and without the coaching adjustment. Does Brooks's whopping +6.2 coaching effect simply get distributed on a minutes-weighted basis across the entire roster, or are some players disproportionately "penalized" by the Brooks coaching adjustment?JE wrote:I think you can just divide the coach rating by 5 to get the impact of the coaches' rating on the player rating.
In fact, I think most of us are ultimately interested in knowing, for each NBA player: (a) what is his actual +/- impact on offense/defense?; (b) how much of that impact is attributable to coaching/team context variables?; and (c) how much is fully attibutable to the player after adjusting for such coaching effects? After all, when we look at other advanced metrics (e.g., true shooting %), we never adjust for coaching effects . . . and even if we did/could, we would still also want to know what the actual unadjusted metric value was, since that's the number that tells us what the player ACTUALLY DID. Make sense?