Gators123

08-23-2010, 04:22 PM

How do you feel about them?

View Full Version : Per 36 stats

Gators123

08-23-2010, 04:22 PM

How do you feel about them?

Hawkeye15

08-23-2010, 04:43 PM

eh, they are a bit fishy honestly. Because it just depends on how said player is used. In spurts, or do they get continuity in their playing time. Most of the time, you wouldn't expect the 2nd 18 minutes to be as efficient as the first 18 minutes a player is in the game. So if you are comparing two players, and they are relatively close, they don't provide evidence of much.

They are a nice tool though, to see around what production you get out of a player with starters minutes.

And they are for sure better than per 48 stats

They are a nice tool though, to see around what production you get out of a player with starters minutes.

And they are for sure better than per 48 stats

abe_froman

08-23-2010, 04:54 PM

i dont care for it.its hard to extrapolate with any sort of accuracy.say player gets 10 mins or less a game,he did ok in garbage time but per36 projections him having similar stats of wilt...now would this earl barron type of player be wilt if given starter mins,doubt it

IndyRealist

08-23-2010, 05:17 PM

i dont care for it.its hard to extrapolate with any sort of accuracy.say player gets 10 mins or less a game,he did ok in garbage time but per36 projections him having similar stats of wilt...now would this earl barron type of player be wilt if given starter mins,doubt it

One season when he was on the Pacers, Stephen Graham's per 36 numbers worked out to 24.5ppg and 6.2rpg on 58% FG and 50% 3's. He played less than 6 minutes per game.

One season when he was on the Pacers, Stephen Graham's per 36 numbers worked out to 24.5ppg and 6.2rpg on 58% FG and 50% 3's. He played less than 6 minutes per game.

Hawkeye15

08-23-2010, 05:19 PM

One season when he was on the Pacers, Stephen Graham's per 36 numbers worked out to 24.5ppg and 6.2rpg on 58% FG and 50% 3's. He played less than 6 minutes per game.

this is what I mean. Its an iffy stat, unless you are comparing a guy like Love to David Lee for example. The comparisons have to have some sort of relation. It can't be a dude who plays 4 minutes a game.

this is what I mean. Its an iffy stat, unless you are comparing a guy like Love to David Lee for example. The comparisons have to have some sort of relation. It can't be a dude who plays 4 minutes a game.

DCSportsIsPain

08-23-2010, 05:21 PM

Per One Minute stats are the only ones that really tell anyone anything useful.

IndyRealist

08-23-2010, 05:23 PM

Per One Minute stats are the only ones that really tell anyone anything useful.

Actually per possession stats seem to be the most useful.

Actually per possession stats seem to be the most useful.

Hawkeye15

08-23-2010, 05:29 PM

Actually per possession stats seem to be the most useful.

by far the best way to look at stats. Again, they need to meet a minimum sample size, but yes, this is the way to do it

by far the best way to look at stats. Again, they need to meet a minimum sample size, but yes, this is the way to do it

td0tsfinest

08-23-2010, 06:10 PM

Not a fan of them. They don't take into consideration fatigue which often leads to skewed results. I do agree with per possession stats though.

DCSportsIsPain

08-23-2010, 06:13 PM

Actually per possession stats seem to be the most useful.

Agreed, however I was under the impression this thread was in the context of minutes rather than possessions. Possession statistics are absolutely the least arbitrary.

Agreed, however I was under the impression this thread was in the context of minutes rather than possessions. Possession statistics are absolutely the least arbitrary.

ChiSox219

08-23-2010, 06:50 PM

All about context

For a rookie getting rotation time, say 20mpg, I think Per 36 can be a great way to project his numbers as a future starter. It's not 100% accurate but it's a quick and easy

Also, when comparing players, it's a good way to equalize minutes, especially for specific stats. So if you're comparing Lebron and Durant's ability to get to the Free Throw line and one has played 2-3 MPG more, they are typically going to have higher averages but might get to line at the same or even lesser rate.

Or look at Tim Duncan. The Spurs reduced his minutes to extend his effectiveness not just for this season but future seasons. His production was awesome but when looking at just his averages, his season doesn't seem nearly as good.

You could take it one step further and use Per 40 minute Pace Adjusted numbers to equalize minutes and pace.

For a rookie getting rotation time, say 20mpg, I think Per 36 can be a great way to project his numbers as a future starter. It's not 100% accurate but it's a quick and easy

Also, when comparing players, it's a good way to equalize minutes, especially for specific stats. So if you're comparing Lebron and Durant's ability to get to the Free Throw line and one has played 2-3 MPG more, they are typically going to have higher averages but might get to line at the same or even lesser rate.

Or look at Tim Duncan. The Spurs reduced his minutes to extend his effectiveness not just for this season but future seasons. His production was awesome but when looking at just his averages, his season doesn't seem nearly as good.

You could take it one step further and use Per 40 minute Pace Adjusted numbers to equalize minutes and pace.

Gators123

08-23-2010, 06:58 PM

Thanks everybody :)

Jays Claw

08-23-2010, 07:51 PM

Per 36 MPG statistics are often useful when projecting a player's value with starter minutes.

Example: DeMar DeRozan (2009-2010) [Per game] {21.6 MPG, 8.6 PPG, 0.7 APG & 2.9 RPG}

^ Those were his regular per game statistics last year. Now, if you'd like to know how he would fair as a full time starter, look into his per 36 MPG statistics.

Example: DeMar DeRozan (2009-2010) [Per 36 MPG] {36.0 MPG, 14.3 PPG, 1.1 APG & 4.8 RPG}

Now, I'm just letting you know that per 36 MPG aren't accurate, they're rather an educated estimate.

Example: DeMar DeRozan (2009-2010) [Per game] {21.6 MPG, 8.6 PPG, 0.7 APG & 2.9 RPG}

^ Those were his regular per game statistics last year. Now, if you'd like to know how he would fair as a full time starter, look into his per 36 MPG statistics.

Example: DeMar DeRozan (2009-2010) [Per 36 MPG] {36.0 MPG, 14.3 PPG, 1.1 APG & 4.8 RPG}

Now, I'm just letting you know that per 36 MPG aren't accurate, they're rather an educated estimate.

Chronz

08-23-2010, 08:42 PM

eh, they are a bit fishy honestly. Because it just depends on how said player is used. In spurts, or do they get continuity in their playing time. Most of the time, you wouldn't expect the 2nd 18 minutes to be as efficient as the first 18 minutes a player is in the game. So if you are comparing two players, and they are relatively close, they don't provide evidence of much.

They are a nice tool though, to see around what production you get out of a player with starters minutes.

And they are for sure better than per 48 stats

Your focusing on arbitrary definition, per minute stats are the same no matter the time. They are per minute rates for the sole purpose to put everyone on an equal playing field. Its the same idea as per possession metrics but in a more recognizable form.

this is what I mean. Its an iffy stat, unless you are comparing a guy like Love to David Lee for example. The comparisons have to have some sort of relation. It can't be a dude who plays 4 minutes a game.

There is no difference in any other stat, without ample sample size no data is concrete.

They are a nice tool though, to see around what production you get out of a player with starters minutes.

And they are for sure better than per 48 stats

Your focusing on arbitrary definition, per minute stats are the same no matter the time. They are per minute rates for the sole purpose to put everyone on an equal playing field. Its the same idea as per possession metrics but in a more recognizable form.

this is what I mean. Its an iffy stat, unless you are comparing a guy like Love to David Lee for example. The comparisons have to have some sort of relation. It can't be a dude who plays 4 minutes a game.

There is no difference in any other stat, without ample sample size no data is concrete.

Hawkeye15

08-23-2010, 09:02 PM

Your focusing on arbitrary definition, per minute stats are the same no matter the time. They are per minute rates for the sole purpose to put everyone on an equal playing field. Its the same idea as per possession metrics but in a more recognizable form.

There is no difference in any other stat, without ample sample size no data is concrete.

I understand per minute stats are the same no matter the minutes played. I only was referring to the fact that, trying to calculate a players per 36 minutes is a dangerous tool when they don't play enough minutes to start factoring in possible fatigue or wear and tear.

And I also said in a later post, that a small sample size in not applicable. A player who plays 25 mpg, sure, its a tool that can be respected. A player who plays 3 mpg, its useless

Do you agree that per minutes numbers shouldn't even be used, when the best way to measure is numbers per possession? Or do we look at both?

There is no difference in any other stat, without ample sample size no data is concrete.

I understand per minute stats are the same no matter the minutes played. I only was referring to the fact that, trying to calculate a players per 36 minutes is a dangerous tool when they don't play enough minutes to start factoring in possible fatigue or wear and tear.

And I also said in a later post, that a small sample size in not applicable. A player who plays 25 mpg, sure, its a tool that can be respected. A player who plays 3 mpg, its useless

Do you agree that per minutes numbers shouldn't even be used, when the best way to measure is numbers per possession? Or do we look at both?

Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.