RICYDE Herramientas de lectura

En esta investigación presentamos una nueva forma de interpretar las estadísticas individuales de la Liga ACB de baloncesto. Para ello, proponemos un enfoque probabilístico de los números individuales obtenidos por cada jugador al final de la temporada regular. Esto convierte a cada valor conseguido en un estimador del valor real teórico, por lo que tiene un error asociado que, en función de su magnitud, influye en los rankings de líderes estadísticos de la ACB. Asimismo, realizamos una aproximación paramétrica para cuantificar un tamaño de error máximo admisible, que debe servir como criterio para considerar si un jugador debe ser incluido en los rankings de cada apartado estadístico. Dada la importancia creciente que la utilización de la estadística está teniendo en el baloncesto profesional, este método presenta una contribución novedosa al análisis del desempeño de los jugadores, análisis que repercute en su valor económico y mediático, es decir, en el valor de mercado de éstos.

Palabras clave: estadísticas: baloncesto; liga ACB; valor de mercado.

Abstract

We introduce a method to re-elaborate the rankings of individual stats in the ACB League. The method is based on a probabilistic approach to interpret the individual performance achieved by each basketball player at the end of the regular season. Therefore, each individual record is an estimate of the real value of the parameter, with the corresponding associated error. The size of this error influences the final elaborated ranking. Under a parametric approach, we quantify the size of a maximum admissible error. Because of the growing interest of statistics in basketball, our proposal is a valuable contribution to analyse the performance of players, which is highly related to their market value.

Key words: statistics; basketball; ACB league; market value.

doi:10.5232/ricyde2010.01802

Texto completo en PDF

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Referencias/references

Anderson, D. R.; Burnham, K. P., y Thompson, W. L. (2000). Null hypothesis testing: Problems, prevalence, and an alternative. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 64, 912-923.
doi:10.2307/3803199

Belloni, A., y Didier, G. (2008). On the Behrens--Fisher problem: A globally convergent algorithm and a finite-sample study of the Wald, LR and LM Tests. Annals of Statistics, 36 (5), 2377-2408.
doi:10.1214/07-AOS528

Berri, D. J. (1999). Who is most valuable? Measuring the player’s production of wins in the National Basketball Association. Managerial and Decision Economics, 20 (8), 411-427.
doi:10.1002/1099-1468(199912)20:8<411::AID-MDE957>3.0.CO;2-G

Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist 45 (12), 1304–1312.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.45.12.1304

Cooper, W. W.; Ruiz, J. L., y Sirvent, I. (2009). Selecting non-zero weights to evaluate effectiveness of basketball players with DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 195 (2), 563–574.
doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2008.02.012

Lumley, T.; Diehr, P., Emerson, S., y Chen L. (2002). The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annual Review Public Health, 23, 151-169.
doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.23.100901.140546
PMid:11910059

McGoldrick, K., y Voeks, L. (2005). We got game! An analysis of win/loss probability and efficiency differences between the NBA and WNBA. Journal of Sports Economics, 6 (1), 5-23.
doi:10.1177/1527002503262649

Nickerson, R. S. (2000). Null hypothesis significance testing: A review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychological Methods, 5, 241-301.
doi:10.1037/1082-989X.5.2.241
PMid:10937333

Olejnik, S., y Algina, J. (2000). Measures of effect size for comparative studies: Applications, interpretations, and limitations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 241-286.
doi:10.1006/ceps.2000.1040
PMid:10873373

Ree, M. J., y Carreta, T. H. (2006). The role of measurement error in familiar statistics. Organizational Research Methods, 9 (1), 99-112.
doi:10.1177/1094428105283192

Rosnow, R. L., y Rosenthal, R. (1996). Computing contrasts, effect sizes, and counternulls on other people’s published data: General procedures for researchconsumers. Psychological Methods, 1, 331-340.
doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.4.331

Rothman, K. J. (1990). No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons. Epidemiology, 1 (1), 43-46.
doi:10.1097/00001648-199001000-00010
PMid:2081237

Savitz, D. A., y Olshan, A. F. (1998). Decribing data requires o adjustment for multiple comparisons: a reply form Savitz and Olshan. American Journal of Epidemiology, 147, 813-814.
PMid:9583710

Sterman, J. (2002). All models are wrong: reflections on becoming a systems scientist. System Dynamics Review, 18 (4), 501–531.
doi:10.1002/sdr.261

---------------------------------------------------------------------