What does Assist/Turnover ratio actually show?

[Jowe]

What does Assist/Turnover ratio actually show?

[fgrep15]

That you get your team more points than you throw away scoring oppurtunities to the other team.

Everytime you give the ball away it means its one less chance of your team scoring, a forced shot is better than a turnover, because with a miss you can get an offensive board, and there is always a chance of it going in. Turnovers also mean a possible chance for the other team to score, or get an easy basket.

[Andrew]

Thus, it can be used as a measure for ballhandling ability and court awareness.

[benji]

I wouldn't say that.

Instead, I'd say Assist/Turnover Ratio is useless. Fred Hoiberg and Kevin Ollie have dominated it the last two years, and Matt Bullard had a streak of dominating John Stockton. Also, it doesn't make any sense to show this as a ratio. Unless someone can come up with some sort of coherent explanation, which I doubt they can, since there isn't one.

An additive rating like John Hollinger's Pure Point Rating [(((AST*(2/3))-TO)*100)/MIN] makes a lot more sense.

Here's the current top ten in Assist/Turnover Ratio.
Gerald Wallace
Richie Frahm
Damon Jones
Antonio Daniels
Reggie Miller
Travis Best
Jason Williams
Trenton Hassell
Ryan Bowen

Some of these guys are good, but I doubt anyone would say these are the top ten ballhandlers/court aware players...

But if we use PPR we get:
Jason Williams
Damon Jones
Jason Kidd
Steve Nash
Antonio Daniels
Eric Snow
Stephon Marbury
Sam Cassell
Earl Watson
Gary Payton

That looks a lot better...and also shows how far Jason Williams has come under Hubie Brown, he wasn't near the top ten two years ago...and has gone from 5.90 his first year in Memphis to his league leading 9.53 (which is more than triple his rookie year) so far this year...

Going back historically, I don't think Stockton ever finished worse than fourth...and certainly never found himself behind Matt Bullard...

Of course, that works wonders for point guards, but for the other positions we need to create two new ratings.

Assist Ratio and Turnover Ratio.

These are simple, just divide assists (or turnovers) by scoring possessions and multiply by 100.

Point Guards dominate Assist Ratio as do guys who never shoot but just pass. This is why PPR is better than Assist Ratio for point guards.

Turnover Ratio on the other hand is dominated by guys who catch and shoot, as it should be, since it'd be pretty bad if they turned it over doing that. However it's useful for comparing similar players like say McGrady and Kobe. McGrady has posted 7.8, 7.8 and 7.1 the last three years while Bryant posted 9.5, 8.9, 9.6. So we can see that McGrady is a better ball handler than Bryant, if only by about 2 turnovers per 100 scoring posessions. Of course that's 2 extra points Bryant is giving up.

[oboeguy]

What's the reasoning for the "2/3" factor?

[benji]

The assister does 1/3rd of the work. He makes the pass, the reciever gets open and makes the shot. And we use 2 points since it's easier than 2.174.

[DipSetVC]

I thought the assist to turnover ratio basically showed how well a player takes care of the ball, it didn't seem that complicated.

[Dramacydal]

i like PPR better, jus because Eric Snow is in the top 10 then

[benji]

I thought the assist to turnover ratio basically showed how well a player takes care of the ball, it didn't seem that complicated.

It sorta does. But there's no logical explanation for expressing it as a ratio. Guys who never penetrate often dominate the A/TO Ratio as evidenced by Matt Bullard dominating Stockton so many years. If we use A/TO Ratio then we'd have to say Matt Bullard was a better ballhandler than Stockton and that Fred Hoiberg was the greatest ballhandler in the league.

[fgrep15]

Yup I was going to say its deciving because of players that don't score, are just shooters, or are strictly passers therefore they don't turnover the ball a lot, Jason Williams I would say is the best turnover to assist player in the league. I don't count those guys like Frahm who get 0.5 assists and 0.11 turnovers, thats just stupid.

But if you just think, you'll know when its relevant and when its not.

[wangster]

Interesting thread

I have renewed respect for Jason Williams.