PDA

View Full Version : Usage rates and PER, 2007-2012



DenButsu
05-26-2012, 02:25 AM
There was a debate in the Nuggets forum about whether Manu was a "superstar" player and I did this chart up to show that he should at least be in the conversation. Thought as long as I'd already done it, may as well post it here, too. Most of you will recognize that it's inspired by recently done work at Paroxysm. The cutoffs (21.5+ PER, 21+ usg%) are somewhat arbitrary, and mainly set where they're at just to unclutter the chart of too many dots.

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

This is a chart of all (qualified by minutes and games) NBA players from 2007-2012 who in a single season ended up with a PER of 21.5 or higher and a usage rate of 21% or higher. The importance of the usage rate is that it indicates what percentage of his team's possessions a player is using while he's on the court. The axis along the bottom indicates PER, the axis along the left indicates usage rate. In the past 5 seasons, 35 players passed this threshold, some more than once, for a total of 85 times. The only players to be there all 5 seasons were CP3, Dwight, Dirk, Wade, Kobe, LBJ, Manu and Duncan.

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/denbutsu/2007-2012NBAusageratesandPER.jpg



Here's the raw data:


PER USG%
LBJ 31.7 33.8
LBJ 31.1 33.5
LBJ 30.7 32
DW 30.4 36.2
CP 30 27.5
LBJ 29.1 33.5
CP 28.3 25.7
DW 28 34.9
AS 27.6 28.2
LBJ 27.3 31.5
CP 27 24.3
DW 26.3 31.3
KD 26.2 31.3
KD 26.2 32
DH 26 27.2
DW 25.6 31.6
DH 25.4 26.1
KL 25.4 28.8
KG 25.3 25.5
CB 25 28.7
TD 24.7 26
DN 24.6 28.8
KB 24.4 32.2
TD 24.4 28.5
TD 24.4 28.2
MG 24.3 28.7
KL 24.3 22.9
KB 24.2 31.4
DH 24.2 26.1
MG 24.1 22.7
DH 24 23.9
BR 24 27.4
KB 23.9 35.1
CB 23.8 27.7
CP 23.7 21.1
CP 23.7 22.2
ChB 23.6 23
KD 23.6 30.6
RW 23.6 31.6
DR 23.5 32.2
BG 23.4 26.6
DN 23.4 28.2
TP 23.4 31.7
PG 23.3 21.8
AJ 23.1 28.9
DN 23.1 30.3
DR 23 30.5
AB 22.9 23.8
PG 22.9 21.4
MG 22.9 27.2
DH 22.9 24.2
DN 22.9 28.8
RW 22.9 32.7
AJ 22.8 25.7
LMA 22.7 27
AJ 22.7 27.5
YM 22.7 26.2
AS 22.7 30.9
ZR 22.6 25
AS 22.6 27.3
TD 22.5 26.2
MG 22.5 25.8
YM 22.5 27.1
SO 22.3 24.2
CA 22.2 33.4
DL 22.2 23.8
CB 22.1 26.9
GM 22 23.6
TP 22 27.7
ClsB 21.9 26.6
KB 21.9 35.7
KB 21.9 32.3
TD 21.9 22.9
BG 21.9 27.3
DG 21.8 29.6
PM 21.8 23.2
CA 21.7 32
DMC 21.7 29.7
MG 21.7 26
DN 21.7 29.2
PG 21.6 22.1
DH 21.6 28.4
SN 21.6 22.9
LMA 21.5 25.7
DW 21.5 33.1

KnicksorBust
05-31-2012, 09:07 PM
He's not a "superstar." He's one of the greatest sidekicks of all-time though. Along the lines of a McHale/Pippen. Unless you had a 70s Knicks/2000s Pistons type balance, you won't win with Manu as your #1.

Chronz
06-01-2012, 06:58 PM
If Melo is considered a superstar then Manu is without a doubt a superstar

DenButsu
06-01-2012, 09:31 PM
Yeah, I'm really not into the whole arbitrary "star"/"superstar" terminology, since it's so vague. The main thing I wanted to demonstrate was that the posters I was talking to were pretty clearly underrating Manu.

KnicksorBust
06-01-2012, 10:34 PM
If Melo is considered a superstar then Manu is without a doubt a superstar

:laugh:

JordansBulls
06-18-2012, 08:08 AM
If Melo is considered a superstar then Manu is without a doubt a superstar

How so?

DenButsu
06-18-2012, 12:20 PM
How so?

"Efficiency" and "results" are the first two words that pop into my head, being too tired and about-to-go-to-bed right now to dig into statistical comparisons.

That said, look again at the chart I posted. It's the intersection of only two metrics, but a really valid one imo.

Chronz
06-18-2012, 11:50 PM
How so?

Better player

Kashmir13579
06-26-2012, 03:07 PM
If Melo is considered a superstar then Manu is without a doubt a superstar

You don't actually think 'Melo is a superstar?

Chronz
06-27-2012, 05:38 AM
Sure why not?

Pablonovi
05-20-2014, 05:32 PM
Hey DenButsu,
I've only run across this diagram & linked chart just now. Wow. Thanx so much for working it up AND posting it.

Some questions/suggestions:
1) By 2007-2012 do you mean 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 = 5 years. (Usually I'd take 2007-2012 to mean the SIX seasons ending in those years; here I think you mean only the 5 full seasons).

2) Anyway to attach the year to each data?

3) In the linked diagram, one can see 3+ LBJ data points towards the very top and very right. Is this "better" than being to the very top and very left?

4) Does such a chart/diagram exist for All-Years?

5) Any correlations with other such things as:
a) All-NBA 1st, 2nd, 3rd Teams (which, imo, is THE best SINGLE indicator of yearly Reg. Season Greatness);
b) MVP voting (and beyond just the MVP winner);
c) Any other "key" indices?

P.S. About "bumping" this thread. It isn't my intention to bump it. But I don't know how else to both:
respond to such a quality thread (especially, but not restricted to the OP) and NOT bump it.

There was a debate in the Nuggets forum about whether Manu was a "superstar" player and I did this chart up to show that he should at least be in the conversation. Thought as long as I'd already done it, may as well post it here, too. Most of you will recognize that it's inspired by recently done work at Paroxysm. The cutoffs (21.5+ PER, 21+ usg%) are somewhat arbitrary, and mainly set where they're at just to unclutter the chart of too many dots.

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

This is a chart of all (qualified by minutes and games) NBA players from 2007-2012 who in a single season ended up with a PER of 21.5 or higher and a usage rate of 21% or higher. The importance of the usage rate is that it indicates what percentage of his team's possessions a player is using while he's on the court. The axis along the bottom indicates PER, the axis along the left indicates usage rate. In the past 5 seasons, 35 players passed this threshold, some more than once, for a total of 85 times. The only players to be there all 5 seasons were CP3, Dwight, Dirk, Wade, Kobe, LBJ, Manu and Duncan.

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/denbutsu/2007-2012NBAusageratesandPER.jpg



Here's the raw data:


PER USG%
LBJ 31.7 33.8
LBJ 31.1 33.5
LBJ 30.7 32
DW 30.4 36.2
CP 30 27.5
LBJ 29.1 33.5
CP 28.3 25.7
DW 28 34.9
AS 27.6 28.2
LBJ 27.3 31.5
CP 27 24.3
DW 26.3 31.3
KD 26.2 31.3
KD 26.2 32
DH 26 27.2
DW 25.6 31.6
DH 25.4 26.1
KL 25.4 28.8
KG 25.3 25.5
CB 25 28.7
TD 24.7 26
DN 24.6 28.8
KB 24.4 32.2
TD 24.4 28.5
TD 24.4 28.2
MG 24.3 28.7
KL 24.3 22.9
KB 24.2 31.4
DH 24.2 26.1
MG 24.1 22.7
DH 24 23.9
BR 24 27.4
KB 23.9 35.1
CB 23.8 27.7
CP 23.7 21.1
CP 23.7 22.2
ChB 23.6 23
KD 23.6 30.6
RW 23.6 31.6
DR 23.5 32.2
BG 23.4 26.6
DN 23.4 28.2
TP 23.4 31.7
PG 23.3 21.8
AJ 23.1 28.9
DN 23.1 30.3
DR 23 30.5
AB 22.9 23.8
PG 22.9 21.4
MG 22.9 27.2
DH 22.9 24.2
DN 22.9 28.8
RW 22.9 32.7
AJ 22.8 25.7
LMA 22.7 27
AJ 22.7 27.5
YM 22.7 26.2
AS 22.7 30.9
ZR 22.6 25
AS 22.6 27.3
TD 22.5 26.2
MG 22.5 25.8
YM 22.5 27.1
SO 22.3 24.2
CA 22.2 33.4
DL 22.2 23.8
CB 22.1 26.9
GM 22 23.6
TP 22 27.7
ClsB 21.9 26.6
KB 21.9 35.7
KB 21.9 32.3
TD 21.9 22.9
BG 21.9 27.3
DG 21.8 29.6
PM 21.8 23.2
CA 21.7 32
DMC 21.7 29.7
MG 21.7 26
DN 21.7 29.2
PG 21.6 22.1
DH 21.6 28.4
SN 21.6 22.9
LMA 21.5 25.7
DW 21.5 33.1

DenButsu
05-21-2014, 12:12 PM
Hey Pablo, I can't answer all your questions right now, but in short: I did that chart up myself on Excel (or actually LibreOffice, but that's irrelevant). I actually don't remember how I did it. I suck at making charts from spreadsheets, and I'm always jealous when I see the more beautifully done graphics from people who actually know what they're doing. So I'll just tell you this: If you have the data, the will power and the same utter lack of computer skills as me, you can make these things yourself. It takes some time, though. Whether it's worthwhile or not all hinges on how you value your time. This is an edit. I phrased something poorly before. But basically, if finding out what that chart looks like is worth the pain in the *** factor in making it, then go for it and create it yourself. If not, then you're not worried about it enough to worry about it anyhow. But there are so many great resources out there now that the data is easy enough to come by.

Pablonovi
05-21-2014, 12:59 PM
Hey Pablo, I can't answer all your questions right now, but in short: I did that chart up myself on Excel (or actually LibreOffice, but that's irrelevant). I actually don't remember how I did it. I suck at making charts from spreadsheets, and I'm always jealous when I see the more beautifully done graphics from people who actually know what they're doing. So I'll just tell you this: If you have the data, the will power and the same utter lack of computer skills as me, you can make these things yourself. It takes some time, though. Whether it's worthwhile or not all hinges on how you value your time. This is an edit. I phrased something poorly before. But basically, if finding out what that chart looks like is worth the pain in the *** factor in making it, then go for it and create it yourself. If not, then you're not worried about it enough to worry about it anyhow. But there are so many great resources out there now that the data is easy enough to come by.

Hey DenButsu,
Thanx for the timely and kindly response. I await, when you DO have the time, any further explanations.

I do "lots" of Excel charts. (I'm "into" charting things (NBA Greats, Rock-Music Greats, English-Language Word-Tendencies....) How efficient I am at it is another question. On the one hand, I came late-in-life to computers and Excel-type thingies. Otoh, I seem to have been born loving numbers and being logical; and continue to love to "play with them". So, maybe, the second, somewhat, makes up for the first. (I'm also pretty tenacious - so, regardless of the time/effort, once having started, I tend to "muscle" the thing until it seems to me it's as useful as I can get it.