Location of Repository

A stakeholder assessment of basketball player evaluation metrics

By José Antonio Martínez García and Laura Martínez Caro


In this research we examined the opinions of basketball stakeholders regarding several questions of special interests to valuate players. Players, coaches, agents, journalists, editors, bloggers, researchers, analysts, fans and chairs participated in this macro-research. After analysing their opinions using the content analysis methodology, we found that current player evaluation systems are insufficient to fulfill the expectations of stakeholders regarding the definition of value, because they fail to rate intangibles. In addition, the importance of qualitative thinking is prominent and should be considered in valuating such intangibles. The current system of valuation used in Euroleague and Spanish ACB League (Ranking) is acknowledged as deficient, but stakeholders think that other advanced metrics do not significantly outperform Ranking. Implications for management, decision making and marketing in basketball are finally discussed

Topics: Player evaluation metrics, Basketball, Stakeholders, Decision making, Educación Física y Deportiva
Publisher: Universidad de Alicante. Área de Educación Física y Deporte
Year: 2011
DOI identifier: 10.4100/jhse.2011.61.17
OAI identifier: oai:rua.ua.es:10045/16880

Suggested articles



  1. (2004). A manual for repertory grid technique. Second Edition. doi
  2. (2002). A note on consistent players’ valuation. doi
  3. (2004). An evaluation of human and computer-based predictions of the 2003 rugby union world cup.
  4. (2008). Analyzing media messages. Using quantitative content analysis in research. doi
  5. (1990). and other tests of signifcance: A new look at evaluating interpretive research,
  6. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures. doi
  7. (2009). APER: Player Efficiency Ranking adjusted for Assisted Field Goals. Retrieved from http://www.hoopdata.com/recent.aspx?aid=39;
  8. (2004). Basketball on paper. Rules and tools for performance analysis.
  9. (2009). Calculating Win Shares. Retrieved from http://www.basketballreference.com/about/ws.html;
  10. (2006). CARRETA TH. The role of measurement error in familiar statistics. Organizational Research Methods. doi
  11. (2000). Causality: Models of Reasoning and Inference. doi
  12. (2006). Concept Maps: a methodology for identifying brand association networks. doi
  13. (2004). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. 2nd ed. Sage publication. Thousand Oask,
  14. (1998). Decribing data requires o adjustment for multiple comparisons: a reply form Savitz and Olshan. doi
  15. (2007). Does One Simply Need to Score to Score?
  16. Effect sizes for research. A broad practical approach. doi
  17. (2009). Explanation of Composite Score. Retrieved from http://basketballstatistics.com/aboutcs.html;
  18. (2004). Fanatical consumption. An investigation of the behaviour of sports fans through textual data. In Kahle Riley (Ed), Sports marketing and the psychology of marketing communication.
  19. (2005). Freakonomics: A rogue economist explores the hidden side of everything. doi
  20. (2006). Frequentists statistics as a theory of inductive inference.
  21. (2001). Geometric approach to statistical analysis on the simplex. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment doi
  22. (2003). How Customers Think: Essential Insights into the Mind of the Markets. doi
  23. (1997). Interpreting Consumers: A Hermeneutical Framework for Deriving Marketing Insights from the Texts of Consumers Consumption Stories, doi
  24. (2009). ISO 9000/1994, ISO 9001/2000 and TQM: The performance debate revisited. doi
  25. Marketing management and strategy. Fourth edition.
  26. (1996). Measurement error in psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods. doi
  27. (2010). Measuring performance in the National Basketball Association. Working paper; doi
  28. (2004). Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research. Findings. 2nd Edition. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; doi
  29. (2008). Modern Epidemiology. Third edition.
  30. (2003). Moneyball: The art of winning an unfair game. doi
  31. (1990). No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons. Epidemiology. doi
  32. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. doi
  33. (2005). Pro Basketball Forecast.
  34. (2008). Relative Measurement and Its Generalization in Decision Making Why Pairwise Comparisons are Central in Mathematics for the Measurement of Intangible Factors The Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process. Review of the Royal Spanish Academy of Sciences. doi
  35. (1988). Saving the appearances; Study in idolatry (2nd edition).
  36. Scoring and shooting abilities of NBA players. doi
  37. (2009). Selecting non-zero weights to evaluate effectiveness of basketball players with DEA. doi
  38. (1999). Simple Heuristics That Make. Us Smart. doi
  39. (2010). Stumbling on wins: Two economists expose the pitfalls on the road to victory in professional sports. doi
  40. (2009). The art of a beautiful game. Simon & Shuster:
  41. The content analysis guidebook. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks,
  42. (2009). The no-stats all stars. Downloaded from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html;
  43. (2007). The pot calling the kettle black. Are NBA statistical models more irrational than “irrational” decision-makers? New England Symposium on Statistics in Sports.
  44. (2010). The Price of Anarchy in Basketball. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports. doi
  45. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge.Garden City, doi
  46. (1982). The statistical analysis of compositional data (with discussion). doi
  47. (2006). The wages of wins: Taking measure of the many myths in modern sport. Palo Alto,CA: doi
  48. Un método probabilístico para las clasificaciones estadísticas de jugadores en baloncesto. doi
  49. Una revisión de los sistemas de valoración de jugadores de baloncesto (I). Descripción de los métodos existentes.
  50. Una revisión de los sistemas de valoración de jugadores de baloncesto (II). Competiciones oficiales y ligas de fantasía.
  51. Una revisión de los sistemas de valoración de jugadores de baloncesto (III). Discusión general.
  52. (2010). When more alternatives lead to less choice. Marketing Science. doi
  53. (1999). Who is 'most valuable'? Measuring the player's production of wins in the National Basketball Association. Managerial and Decision Economics. doi
  54. Working in the land of metricians. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.