Plus/Minus for the Season

PurpleWhiteBoy

Redshirt
Feb 25, 2021
5,303
0
0
PlayerMinutesNU ptsOpp PtsTeam +/-Player AdjustNet +/-PerfPerfAdjWinShares
Pete Nance59010501068-18+43.2+25.20.9831.0240.136
Boo Buie64511181148-30-25.5-55.50.9740.9520.113
Ryan Young374589653-64+41.0-23.00.9020.9640.106
Robbie Beran486821893-72+24.3-47.70.9190.9460.084
Chase Audige60410431110-57-38.8-95.80.9400.9060.056
Julian Roper420685725-40+19.3-20.70.9450.9710.060
Ty Berry446777799-22-28.0-50.00.9720.9390.081
Ryan Greer392682690-8-25.0-33.00.9880.9530.041
Elyjah Williams424418407+11-1.4+9.61.0271.0240.057
Casey Simmons141234263-31-10.6-41.60.8900.852-0.032
Brooks Barnhizer5890112-22-0.7-22.70.8040.798-0.020
Matt Nicholson407882-4+2.1-1.90.9510.9760.166


Yes, thats a lot of numbers, but its the whole season. Its only for NU games against the Big Ten.
The season-ending blow out loss really tanked several players' Plus/Minus.
Perf is NU pts / Opponent Pts. PerfAdj is the same ratio after the adjustment for individual performance.
By any reasonable measure, Pete Nance was the best player on the team.
Chase Audige was the worst performer in the rotation, while playing the 2nd most minutes.

I put the "WinShares" column in there since it isn't my statistic, so something to compare to. A WinShare of 0.1 means you are an average player in the Big Ten. If you multiply it by 5 you can equate it to a winning percentage that your team deserved based on your play. So Pete Nance played at a level that deserved 68% wins. Of course, WinShares is based purely on the box score itself - its a projection - and misses all the intangibles.

The two worst combinations from a Plus/Minus perspective were Ryan Young with Robbie Beran (0.785) and Julian Roper with Ty Berry (0.80).
Those numbers do not bode well for next year, when Young and Beran project as the starting frontcourt. Perhaps the chemistry will improve...

Lineups that consisted of 5 players not named Greer, Nance or Williams played a total of 98 minutes and got beat 176-152.
 

Sec_112

Junior
Jun 17, 2001
6,600
201
63
Official NU +/- for the conference season

Total +/- before the Iowa debacle are included in (parentheses).

Buie … -25 (-1)

Audige … -67 (-37)

Nance … -23 (7)

Beran … -48 (-30)

Berry … -23 (-16)

Roper II … -39 (-17)

Greer … -25 (-13)

Young … -72 (-57)

Williams … -4 (-1)

Simmons … -37 (-28)

Barnhizer … -30 (-30)

Nicholson … -3 (-3)

Dixon III … -8 (-8)
 

Purple Pile Driver

All-Conference
May 14, 2014
27,132
2,568
113
Official NU +/- for the conference season

Total +/- before the Iowa debacle are included in (parentheses).

Buie … -25 (-1)

Audige … -67 (-37)

Nance … -23 (7)

Beran … -48 (-30)

Berry … -23 (-16)

Roper II … -39 (-17)

Greer … -25 (-13)

Young … -72 (-57)

Williams … -4 (-1)

Simmons … -37 (-28)

Barnhizer … -30 (-30)

Nicholson … -3 (-3)

Dixon III … -8 (-8)
So RY has the worse +/- on the team?
 

PurpleWhiteBoy

Redshirt
Feb 25, 2021
5,303
0
0
Official NU +/- for the conference season

Total +/- before the Iowa debacle are included in (parentheses).

Buie … -25 (-1)

Audige … -67 (-37)

Nance … -23 (7)

Beran … -48 (-30)

Berry … -23 (-16)

Roper II … -39 (-17)

Greer … -25 (-13)

Young … -72 (-57)

Williams … -4 (-1)

Simmons … -37 (-28)

Barnhizer … -30 (-30)

Nicholson … -3 (-3)

Dixon III … -8 (-8)
Its cool that Northwestern is now putting out +/- numbers.
Where did you find them?
Obviously the stat is catching on because it has significant value, not found in the box score.
Their numbers likely contain garbage time and free throw shooting contests.
I took efforts to remove them because they are not representative of a players ability.

I also added an adjustment for individual player performance. This was something that the most vocal critics were focused on. The adjusted +/- better reflects performance than the raw +/-.

Young's numbers look worse than they should be because the pairing with Beran was so ineffective.

Nice to see the board coming around.
 

PurpleWhiteBoy

Redshirt
Feb 25, 2021
5,303
0
0
I think that's a stretch. I simply want to get the correct numbers out there.

There's MANY better stats, and the +/- stat was killed by the stats world a long time ago.

Interesting perspective.
Not going to link me to your source?

As I mentioned, I throw out garbage time to improve the numbers.
I also suspect that the "official" +/- numbers mishandle substitutions during free throws.
I correctly attribute the points for or against to the lineup on the floor when a foul is committed, NOT the lineup on the floor when the free throw is taken.

Then I make the adjustments based on player contribution.

My approach is better, though dependent on the play-by-play I use as input.

Here's some help...

 
Last edited: