PDA

View Full Version : What Stat is Most Important when evaluating the Greatness of a Player?



JordansBulls
08-19-2009, 02:21 PM
Let's say you never had a chance to see basketball in your life and you wanted to know more about the sport. You read up on how things are calculated regarding points, rebounds, assists, blocks, fg%, PER, win Shares, etc.


What career stat would you look at first and foremost to have have an idea if a player was a great player or not?


Points Per Game
Rebounds Per Game
Assists Per Game
Blocks Per Game
Steals Per Game
Field Goal %
3 Point %
Free Throw %
Win Shares
Player Efficiency Rating

black1605
08-19-2009, 02:23 PM
Per

ink
08-19-2009, 02:24 PM
The stat they don't test for: IQ. lol.

Havoc Wreaker
08-19-2009, 02:26 PM
Other - Minutes Played

lakers4sho
08-19-2009, 02:29 PM
MVP awards (both regular season and Finals MVP)

If he gets regular season MVPs then his team must be consistently doing well, and if he gets Finals MVPs then that means his team wins the championships as well.

black1605
08-19-2009, 02:34 PM
how was that off topic?

JordansBulls
08-19-2009, 02:38 PM
how was that off topic?

Read the thread.



What career stat would you look at first and foremost to have have an idea if a player was a great player or not?

black1605
08-19-2009, 02:39 PM
and i was bringing up why i thought MVPs was not a good way to judge greatness

JordansBulls
08-19-2009, 02:46 PM
and i was bringing up why i thought MVPs was not a good way to judge greatness

I don't think you would have any argument if you looked at Finals MVP's or Season MVP's.


Because the guys with the most in either are all top 10 players all time. I don't think any other stat is like that. If you see someone with multiple mvp's and finals you would know instantly how great they were.

atl_braves_fan
08-19-2009, 02:48 PM
If you work for ESPN, the only stat that matters is how many games you played for either the Lakers or Celtics.

However, to respond to the thread, I think it varies depending on the player. It doesn't really make sense to try to judge a PG on how many blocked shots he has and it doesn't make any sense to judge a PF by how many assists or steals he has. I think you have to look at all of the stats in their proper context in order to truly judge a player relative to his peers.

black1605
08-19-2009, 02:48 PM
but do you think its the best way? can a player be great without any mvps? of course they can

JordansBulls
08-19-2009, 02:49 PM
but do you think its the best way? can a player be great without any mvps? of course they can

The Thread is not hard to understand. If you have only one stat to look at to determine how great a player was then what stat would you look at?

black1605
08-19-2009, 03:11 PM
exactly, and i am saying that MVPs isnt that stat

if you ONLY have MVP awards to judge greatness by, you miss a ton of great players


Elgin Baylor wasnt great?
John Stockton wasnt great?
Ewing?
Wilkens?

bagwell368
08-19-2009, 03:37 PM
problem with MVP's is that only helps with the big time elite guys. what about everyone else. at least win shares is a comprehensive enough stat to use from scrubs to stars.

points per game will give you guys that don't play D

rebounds per game will give you big guys - and many can't shoot.

assists gives you point guards and larry bird.

blocks gives you Hakeem and would have been Wilt and Russell if they had the stat back then, sorry buy a team of those guys won't do too well with the little guys.

each too narrow on its own - win shares or offensive and defensve ratings and win shares please.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
08-19-2009, 03:42 PM
None of them!

It's obviously basketball IQ!
You have to know every aspect of the game!

Mavrix
08-19-2009, 03:43 PM
It obviously depends on the position.

Mavrix
08-19-2009, 03:44 PM
I'd say PER

JayW_1023
08-19-2009, 03:48 PM
How much a player contributes to winning...and Chronz assessments of stats per possession is pretty accurate too.

rjvacad
08-19-2009, 03:51 PM
It is how he gets others involved and makes others on the court better.

Gibby23
08-19-2009, 03:54 PM
Free throw %

Gibby23
08-19-2009, 03:56 PM
I don't think you would have any argument if you looked at Finals MVP's or Season MVP's.

Because the guys with the most in either are all top 10 players all time. I don't think any other stat is like that. If you see someone with multiple mvp's and finals you would know instantly how great they were.

You do know that MVP's and Finals MVP's are not stats.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
08-19-2009, 03:58 PM
Free throw %

You might as well have said that Lebron sucks!

JordansBulls
08-19-2009, 04:02 PM
exactly, and i am saying that MVPs isnt that stat

if you ONLY have MVP awards to judge greatness by, you miss a ton of great players


Elgin Baylor wasnt great?
John Stockton wasnt great?
Ewing?
Wilkens?


No one said they weren't great. However you have only one stat to look at to determine this.

If you use PER then you will miss great PG's and some other great players.

The point is how would you know how GREAT a player was if you could look at only one stat.

still a fan
08-19-2009, 04:13 PM
Its not a stat but the way i've always judged players greatness is how they make there teammates so much better...

Guy's like LBJ and Kobe have that talent....Look what MJ did, yes he had Pippen but would Pippen be a top 50 player if he didn't play on the same team with MJ?

Another player that is just really starting to get the star recognition he deserves is Billups, he won't put up MVP stats but he will make every player he plays with better as well as the team...

theuuord
08-19-2009, 04:40 PM
true shooting percentage is the best to evaluate pure scoring ability. assist rate and pure point ratio are good for evaluating point guards and passing. offensive rating (one you didn't list, although it does affect offensive win shares) is good for evaluating a player's entire offensive output, as long as you contextualize it with usage rate and pace. PER is too. there aren't any great defensive metrics out there that are used on a "regular" basis (although teams do track a lot of defensive numbers that we don't see).

unfortunately, there is no one catch-all stat.

theuuord
08-19-2009, 04:41 PM
The point is how would you know how GREAT a player was if you could look at only one stat.

you wouldn't.

D-Will4Prez
08-19-2009, 04:44 PM
PER and IQ

Hawkeye15
08-19-2009, 06:45 PM
Per

Raps08-09 Champ
08-19-2009, 06:50 PM
Efficiency.

lakerfan 4 life
08-19-2009, 07:02 PM
Free throws of course :P

ko8e24
08-19-2009, 07:04 PM
PPG i think can be attributed to greatness.

IBleedPurple
08-19-2009, 07:06 PM
Leadership :shrug:

Hawkeye15
08-19-2009, 07:07 PM
PPG i think can be attributed to greatness.

it can be. Look at the list of all time scorers. BUT, I think guys who show up in multiple top 30 lists are better than just a guy whose only job was to score 27 ppg.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/default_all_time_leaders/AllTimeLeadersPPGQuery.html?topic=4&stat=0

mikantsass
08-19-2009, 07:38 PM
Playoff WINSSSSSS

ink
08-19-2009, 07:49 PM
Isn't the whole point not to use one single indicator to assess with? Isn't that the whole reason guys like Hollinger are innovating new assessment tools? There is no single best stat. The best stat would be the one that combines as many different variables as possible.

An MVP is probably the most subjective measure you could use, so the least reliable. Why not just say "the best stat is when everyone agrees on who's the best" because that's all an MVP is. It's an award, not a stat.

I still think IQ is the most important of all. The most creative, resourceful, intelligent players will consistently rise to the top.

DCSportsIsPain
08-19-2009, 11:04 PM
Efficiency Per 48 Minutes is the one I would start with. Obviously, one stat can't be used to conclusively prove or disprove anything in any sport, but that is a start.

DCSportsIsPain
08-19-2009, 11:07 PM
I still think IQ is the most important of all. The most creative, resourceful, intelligent players will consistently rise to the top.

The IQ scale doesn't go low enough for some of these players. I think it bottoms out at 0.

Over 140 - Genius or almost genius
120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence
110 - 119 - Superior intelligence
90 - 109 - Average or normal intelligence
80 - 89 - Dullness
70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency in intelligence
Under 70 - Feeble-mindedness
50-70 - Mild mental retardation
35-50 - Moderate mental retardation
20-35 - Severe mental retardation
< 20 - Profound mental retardation

PJAF
08-19-2009, 11:42 PM
Well, the best player of all time was MJ so whatever category he excelled in is the most important one.

Lakersfan2483
08-19-2009, 11:56 PM
I don't think one stat alone is the most important when evaluating the top players. The best players have the ability to lead, make others around them better and rise to the occassion on the biggest stage. Generally speaking, the top players produce the best all around stats and the best of the best produce when it really counts (Postseason)

AKA TheMamba
08-19-2009, 11:58 PM
Other.... a combination of everything proves the greatness of a player

Lakersfan2483
08-20-2009, 12:01 AM
Other.... a combination of everything proves the greatness of a player

:clap:

kidfury
08-20-2009, 12:31 AM
it's a combination of definitely several categories but if you need to choose just one then it'd have to be mvp since it should implicitly include several categories when deciding nominees. There's many very good players that will never win an mvp in their careers that any gm would love to have on their rosters. Mvp awards or using only one category to base a decision on, isn't a fair way to judge a 'great' player but maybe ok for an elite player. Maybe another topic of conversation would be what defines a great player?

CELTICS4LYFE
08-20-2009, 09:41 AM
total mvps....