Crow wrote:If the explanation of the model in some or many cases is limited to mentioning most or all the variables included but not the exact formula with all the individual weights then there won't be enough shared information to really analyze all and improve the methodologies as much as with that information (unless someone or some stat package is really good at reverse engineering). It is a voluntary choice to reveal but do the participants want to push each other on at least a certain minimum level of openness or possibly total openness?
Is the agreement though to just share rankings? It was mentioned that different ratings formats could muddy things. They also could help more if kept on same scale or revealed in their distinctions. Perhaps more could be revealed optionally offsite by the authors at their own locations or in future contests?
Amp, in the write up of the contest, perhaps ask that the reference is to "members of the APBRmetrics bulletin board" and not loosely to "APBR", as that is a pre-existing and distinct association. I dunno if anyone would actually mind or if many care about the distinction but why not be precise.
Since some or many of the participants may be open to work with a team or major media, maybe the submissions- and the writeup- should include a sentence or two about the author's background, at their option. I assume that was likely; but if desired, why not specifically ask for it ahead of time instead of at last minute.
Is there going to be an official, planned scoring of the methods after 1/2 season, 1, 2, 3 of more years? At DX, here or elsewhere? By BPM, RPM, a blend? I hope a composite avg. ranking is calculated and tracked along with the individual ones. (If a composite is included, the article could mention where the suggestion came from, unless it was already planned.)
Anyone want to do a podcast (or more) to support the article? Any chance Grantland basketball show invites a couple to tape something about it or appear?
Any chance a sponsor- team, major media or other- could offer a prize in future?
What's on DE is not there to supplant APBR. I hope this will serve as a launching pad for further discussion.
You raise a good point that I completely forgot to bring up before - how should everyone be rated. If its possible to have everyone using the same units, that would obviously be ideal, but I understand that this likely is not possible. Can some of the people doing their models now speak to the feasibility of this?
At the very least, I will make a combined/consensus ranking based on how each player is ranked (rather than rated) across the board.
Yup, the write up will refer to the APBR board, as hopefully this can increase awareness of this community.
There will forsure be a short bio on each individual with a link to further information on them.