PDA

View Full Version : Pro's and Con's of PER



Hawkeye15
10-13-2010, 05:29 PM
I am creating this so a few users is the main forums can get the opinons of some of the more analytical posters here.
What flaws does PER have? What are the positives and negatives?

Thoughts?

arkanian215
10-13-2010, 07:09 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/4/7/0/4706604464b973bebda830a8dd22fca8.png
Where
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/6/1/a619d84292eca0a7d6e8f09921aa557a.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/d/1/fd17c8e20d91b21a28c4c65e6f14539c.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/a/c/eac31deb489bf1a986851b9217168f5d.png
Once uPER is calculated, it must be adjusted for team pace and normalized to the league to become PER:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/6/1/8611601f29df12d15edd0284bedfcadd.pngWiki

arkanian215
10-13-2010, 08:33 PM
I decided to look at the distributions of PER over the years.
Unfiltered 2009-10 PER
http://i53.tinypic.com/549czq.jpg
I found the first graph/table interesting because supposedly, league average PER is supposedly always 15.00. Maybe it's just the data I had since I grabbed it off B-R but not accounting for the hundreth place probably shouldn't result in a league average different by almost 2 pts.
Filtered by Games played >= half the season
http://i56.tinypic.com/2uxusl2.jpg
Filtered by "starter" (played more than half the season and 30 mpg)
http://i54.tinypic.com/zir5w8.jpg


-------------------------

The PERs of the players on the team w/ the best record in 09-10
http://i53.tinypic.com/iodq1v.jpg
The PERs of the players on the team w/ the worst record in 09-10
http://i54.tinypic.com/awvqr6.jpg
This here is Cavs vs Nets.


-------------------------

PER's of all players between 2000 and 2010
http://i54.tinypic.com/2n6yjjo.jpg
Filtered PER's of all players between 2000 and 2010 by "starter"
http://i52.tinypic.com/11j68fq.jpg
Filtered PER's of all players between 2000 and 2010 by "non-starter"
http://i55.tinypic.com/11u8cud.jpg
I thought the comparison would be interesting here between folks who got significant minutes per game and those who didn't. On average, mpg does reflect the inefficiency of players.
Same conditions except only including players who play 25 mpg or less
mean: 11.878 median: 11.8 std dev: 2.962
20 mpg or less
mean: 11.338 median: 11.4 std dev: 2.97
15 mpg or less
mean: 10.66 median: 10.7 std dev: 2.988
10 mpg or less
mean: 9.524 median: 9.65 std dev: 3.092

KnicksorBust
10-14-2010, 11:28 AM
PRO - PER is remarkably useful when tiering the effeciency and productivity of players. It accounts for a wide variety of information that includes offensive and defensive measures.

CON - There are numerous aspects of a game that cannot be measured statistically.
Offensively - the extra pass before an assist, outlet passing, screens, commanding double teams, etc.
Defensively - stops, deflections, strips, hand in the face defense vs. matador D, etc.

D-Will4Prez
10-15-2010, 04:53 PM
I'm not a stat junkie but one flaw of PER that I have noticed is that one player's PER can be skewed by how good/bad the rest of his team is doing. It's great for measuring defense and hustle though.

KnicksorBust
10-23-2010, 08:04 PM
PRO - PER is remarkably useful when tiering the effeciency and productivity of players. It accounts for a wide variety of information that includes offensive and defensive measures.

CON - There are numerous aspects of a game that cannot be measured statistically.
Offensively - the extra pass before an assist, outlet passing, screens, commanding double teams, etc.
Defensively - stops, deflections, strips, hand in the face defense vs. matador D, etc.

Great post.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-06-2010, 03:16 PM
Great post.

:laugh2:

kozelkid
12-25-2010, 04:56 AM
One thing I know about PER is that it weighs fga WAY too much. It's why certain chuckers might have a higher PER than a conservative player who doesn't take unnecessary shots. It's a big reason why AI had a very high PER, even if he wasn't an efficient scorer.