PDA

View Full Version : Update alltime ppg leader list with +/-



JordansBulls
12-08-2008, 02:00 PM
Saw this posted elsewhere.

http://s11.directupload.net/images/081203/yzvf45ju.gif

Any Surprise here.

theuuord
12-08-2008, 02:06 PM
what does this chart represent?

DenButsu
12-08-2008, 02:44 PM
+/- is basically just the differential of points for/against while a player is on the court.

For example, in the last Nuggets game, in which the Nuggets almost never led by less than 20 points, Anthony Carter somehow managed to log a +/- of -5, which basically means he really sucks bad. (Most of the other players who regularly get playing time were in the +20 to +35 range)

superkegger
12-08-2008, 02:54 PM
So other than melo and ray allen, everyone in the top 40 is -. this means nothing to me then, unless I'm reading it wrong.

theuuord
12-08-2008, 02:59 PM
+/- is basically just the differential of points for/against while a player is on the court.

For example, in the last Nuggets game, in which the Nuggets almost never led by less than 20 points, Anthony Carter somehow managed to log a +/- of -5, which basically means he really sucks bad. (Most of the other players who regularly get playing time were in the +20 to +35 range)

I know what +/- is, but that chart doesn't seem to actually represent plus minus stats. It looks like it's a representation of how much a player's points per game has changed based on this season's stats, which doesn't really say much.

MoBASS
12-08-2008, 03:14 PM
I highly doubt Tim Duncan has a negative +/- over the course of his illustrious career.

This is questionable data.

DenButsu
12-08-2008, 03:21 PM
Okay, theuuord, I thought you were just asking what it meant.

Still, the numbers are strange. No way they're straight up points-based +/- numbers there... No way TD's in the minus in that regard. The problem here is we can see what the parameters that whoever put this together was using. It might make sense if we knew. Then again, maybe it's just off. But I kind of doubt it. It looks like too detailed of a breakdown to miss the mark that badly.

superkegger
12-08-2008, 03:27 PM
Okay, theuuord, I thought you were just asking what it meant.

Still, the numbers are strange. No way they're straight up points-based +/- numbers there... No way TD's in the minus in that regard. The problem here is we can see what the parameters that whoever put this together was using. It might make sense if we knew. Then again, maybe it's just off. But I kind of doubt it. It looks like too detailed of a breakdown to miss the mark that badly.

Agreed. I don't get this table at all. It looks completely worthless to me. Maybe JB can explain it somewhat, but it pretty much looks worthless.

theuuord
12-08-2008, 03:28 PM
Guys I explained the table in my last post. It represents the change in player's career points per game based on their performance this season.

superkegger
12-08-2008, 03:34 PM
Guys I explained the table in my last post. It represents the change in player's career points per game based on their performance this season.

Ok, I see that now.

And then the table really is pointless

theuuord
12-08-2008, 03:36 PM
Ok, I see that now.

And then the table really is pointless.

Pretty much.

DenButsu
12-08-2008, 03:39 PM
Pretty much.

Unless JB's submitting it as evidence in the case for Wade's MVP-ness.

MoBASS
12-08-2008, 03:40 PM
Ok, I see that now.

And then the table really is pointless

Agreed.

A career +/- would be awesome though. They didn't keep track of that until recently, so someone would have to do a LOT of research.

theuuord
12-08-2008, 03:40 PM
Unless JB's submitting it as evidence in the case for Wade's MVP-ness.

I mean... even then it would be pointless.

superkegger
12-08-2008, 03:41 PM
Unless JB's submitting it as evidence in the case for Wade's MVP-ness.

If he is then its a waste of time, since Wade will not be MVP unless Wade starts piling up the W's like he is stats.

superkegger
12-08-2008, 03:42 PM
Well. This thread has been a pretty big waste of time. :sigh:

lakers4sho
12-08-2008, 08:13 PM
Having Duncan as 32nd all time makes this list worthless garbage...

theuuord
12-08-2008, 08:54 PM
Having Duncan as 32nd all time makes this list worthless garbage...

I mean, this is basically just an updated list of career points per game. Duncan is 32nd all time in that category.

pippsux
12-08-2008, 09:34 PM
Malone should have played a little more, he could have passed Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

DenButsu
12-08-2008, 10:13 PM
If he is then its a waste of time, since Wade will not be MVP unless Wade starts piling up the W's like he is stats.

Okay, let me re-phrase that, then as making a case for Wade's badassitude this season.

theuuord
12-08-2008, 10:15 PM
Malone should have played a little more, he could have passed Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

Eh. It's unlikely. He was injured for the majority of his final season and was still 2,000+ points short. He would have needed to play at a mildly respectable level for three years at that point, and he would be 43 by the end. For a first ballot HoF'er who wasn't going to win any titles where he was, it doesn't seem worth it.

lakers4sho
12-08-2008, 10:44 PM
Then why is this thread worthy?? I could just go on google and get the list within 30 seconds.

superkegger
12-08-2008, 11:22 PM
Then why is this thread worthy?? I could just go on google and get the list within 30 seconds.

It's probably not thread worthy...its just JB trying to make a subtle nod toward wade's play.