Also, and I never mentioned this in the post, but in MDS the vertical scale doesn’t necessarily have to be perfectly vertical. It can have a slope in either direction depending on the best fit model. If you draw a line from Dwight Howard to Peja, it looks like the vertical dimension could also incorporate threes as well. I could run a regression to test that theory, but I’m lazy at the moment.

well looking at it, it seems it has something to do with fg, ft and the amount that they take.

at the top are the high volume guys, who will really affect either your fg or ft due to the amount that these guys take

at the bottom are the low volume but efficient guys (that’s why they still crack top 100).

And thanks guys for all the complements. It was a fun little exercise and the fact that the results make a little bit of sense is gravy. Seeing Brad Miller in the middle of the map makes me smile.

I may try it again including each guy’s rank from this past season. That should make it a more useful drafting tool than it currently is.

!!!!!!!

Here’s a fun exercise: Looking for little guys who are most like big guys (Anthony Carter?!) and bigs who are littlest (Sheed?).

In the end it all comes down to the categories each league uses. For example Howard is a great asset but you’ll be have a serious disadvantage in FT% and maybe TOs.