PDA

View Full Version : How much value do you place on PER? (Look at top 5)



JerseyPalahniuk
12-23-2012, 06:53 PM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=41

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics

1. Lebron James
2. Kevin Durant
3. Carmelo Anthony
4. Chris Paul
5. Kobe Bryant
6. Duncan
7. Javale Mcgee
8. Brook Lopez
9. Nene
10. Greg Smith
11. Andray Blatche
12. Dwayne Wade
13. James Harden
14. Blake Griffin
15. Russel Westbrook

The top 5 seem fairly accurate based on this season's performance so far. If you agree then how far off are the assessments for the bolded players? Nets trolls please don't post - this is not a post hyping them up but to discuss PER.

Chronz
12-23-2012, 06:58 PM
Ask yourself what is PER overrating in any of those examples.

DoMeFavors
12-23-2012, 07:00 PM
Why did you bold Lopez and Blatche like they arent supposed to be there? what the hell....

Minimal
12-23-2012, 07:06 PM
PER is a great stat that shows how good the player is. Guys like McGee play great basketball unfortunately they don't play too much to be considered elite players, but they but up great stats for the time given.

chicagocubsfan
12-23-2012, 07:06 PM
Why did you bold Lopez and Blatche like they arent supposed to be there? what the hell....

Because they're scrubs?...

Minimal
12-23-2012, 07:09 PM
Because they're scrubs?...
I wish we had a scrub in Miami that puts up 22 pts 9 rebs and 3 blk in 36 minutes.

DoMeFavors
12-23-2012, 07:15 PM
Because they're scrubs?...

the PER dont lie look who they are above!

JerseyPalahniuk
12-23-2012, 07:16 PM
http://naption.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/7d75c__Andray-Blatche-cant-quite-put-his-finger-on-whats-wrong-with-the-Nets-defense.-Getty-Images.jpg

topdog
12-23-2012, 07:17 PM
PER needs to be put in the context of minutes. Krylylo Fesenko was one of the top players in PER last year but he only played about 5 minutes all season but made his shot and grabbed a rebound.

chicagocubsfan
12-23-2012, 07:22 PM
Lol jk. I think PER does a pretty good job.

Gators123
12-23-2012, 07:28 PM
the PER dont lie look who they are above!

So what are your thoughts about Hump and Wallace having below average PER's ? Williams PER isn't anything special either. ;)

DoMeFavors
12-23-2012, 07:33 PM
So what are your thoughts about Hump and Wallace having below average PER's ? Williams PER isn't anything special either. ;)

no thoughts about it we have 2 top 10 players in per

Green_Monster
12-23-2012, 07:42 PM
Obviously it has some serious flaws when the likes of McGee, Lopez, Blatche, Nene, and Smith are ahead of Wade, Harden, Griffin, and Westbrook.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-23-2012, 07:43 PM
the PER dont lie look who they are above!

lmao

JNoel
12-23-2012, 07:45 PM
No offense to the OP, but I swear I see one of these threads monthly...

JasonJohnHorn
12-23-2012, 07:50 PM
WTF is Greg Smith? lol

PER is interesting. I find the guys at the top usually should be at the top, but after that the rankings get kind of wacky.

The NBA PER rankings are a little different than what you got. They have: http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Efficiency.jsp?league=00&season=22012&conf=OVERALL&position=0&splitType=9&splitScope=GAME&qualified=N&yearsExp=-1&splitDD=

1. Durant
2. LBJ
3. David Lee
4. Kobe
5. Anderson-V
6. Tim Duncan
7. Harden
8. Melo
9. CP3
10. Rondo

PER is like every other stat, it has to be put in context. That, and I think there are different ways to do PER. The IBM award used to be award essentially to the guy who leaded the league in PER, though their equation was very different than the one for PER now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Award

Every stat can be helpful and every stat can be misleading when not put in context.

I mean, shouldn't it be obvious when a guy like Blatche is ahead of a guy like Anderson-V? Or Wade? Or Westbrook?


It's like PPS. Chandler ranks very high, but for obvious reasons, he is not superior to Jordan, even if he has a higher PPS.

Same with TS%, just because Chandler leads the league in TS% doesn't mean he is a better shooter than say Durant.

Every stat has to be put in context.

nickdymez
12-23-2012, 08:32 PM
Damn, Andy V. Is a top 5 player. :facepalm:

JesusNYY_Savior
12-23-2012, 08:38 PM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=41

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics

1. Lebron James
2. Kevin Durant
3. Carmelo Anthony
4. Chris Paul
5. Kobe Bryant
6. Duncan
7. Javale Mcgee
8. Brook Lopez
9. Nene
10. Greg Smith
11. Andray Blatche
12. Dwayne Wade
13. James Harden
14. Blake Griffin
15. Russel Westbrook

The top 5 seem fairly accurate based on this season's performance so far. If you agree then how far off are the assessments for the bolded players? Nets trolls please don't post - this is not a post hyping them up but to discuss PER.
Who the **** is Greg Smith, and why is "Duncan" the only player without his first name lol.

knicksfan42
12-23-2012, 08:41 PM
WTF is Greg Smith? lol

PER is interesting. I find the guys at the top usually should be at the top, but after that the rankings get kind of wacky.

The NBA PER rankings are a little different than what you got. They have: http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Efficiency.jsp?league=00&season=22012&conf=OVERALL&position=0&splitType=9&splitScope=GAME&qualified=N&yearsExp=-1&splitDD=

1. Durant
2. LBJ
3. David Lee
4. Kobe
5. Anderson-V
6. Tim Duncan
7. Harden
8. Melo
9. CP3
10. Rondo

PER is like every other stat, it has to be put in context. That, and I think there are different ways to do PER. The IBM award used to be award essentially to the guy who leaded the league in PER, though their equation was very different than the one for PER now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Award

Every stat can be helpful and every stat can be misleading when not put in context.

I mean, shouldn't it be obvious when a guy like Blatche is ahead of a guy like Anderson-V? Or Wade? Or Westbrook?


It's like PPS. Chandler ranks very high, but for obvious reasons, he is not superior to Jordan, even if he has a higher PPS.

Same with TS%, just because Chandler leads the league in TS% doesn't mean he is a better shooter than say Durant.

Every stat has to be put in context.


Not PER, NBA's website uses a stat they call efficiency.

b@llhog24
12-23-2012, 09:41 PM
It's a pretty good stat, if one knows how to apply it properly.

b@llhog24
12-23-2012, 09:42 PM
Damn, Andy V. Is a top 5 player. :facepalm:

This is the equivalent to saying:

Robery Horry>Kobe because 7>5.

:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

HouRealCoach
12-23-2012, 10:09 PM
In the end only the best players are there it is early t\now.. btw the all time list is pretty damn accurate

amos1er
12-23-2012, 10:17 PM
Damn, Andy V. Is a top 5 player. :facepalm:

Yup, PER is not an accurate stat at all. Here are the top 20 PER leaders of all time: lol according to this Wade is a better player than Magic, Kareem, and Kobe. That alone should tell you the worthlessness of this stat.

NBA/ABA
Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.29
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.62
7. Chris Paul 25.47
8. Bob Pettit* 25.35
9. Tim Duncan 24.76
10. Neil Johnston* 24.69
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63
12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
13. Magic Johnson* 24.11
14. Karl Malone* 23.90
15. Dirk Nowitzki 23.63
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Kobe Bryant 23.48
20. Kevin Garnett 23.25

amos1er
12-23-2012, 10:19 PM
In the end only the best players are there it is early t\now.. btw the all time list is pretty damn accurate

:laugh2:

justinnum1
12-23-2012, 10:20 PM
Yup, PER is not an accurate stat at all. Here are the top 20 PER leaders of all time: lol according to this Wade is a better player than Magic, Kareem, and Kobe. That alone should tell you the worthlessness of this stat.

NBA/ABA
Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.29
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.62
7. Chris Paul 25.47
8. Bob Pettit* 25.35
9. Tim Duncan 24.76
10. Neil Johnston* 24.69
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63
12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
13. Magic Johnson* 24.11
14. Karl Malone* 23.90
15. Dirk Nowitzki 23.63
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Kobe Bryant 23.48
20. Kevin Garnett 23.25

You're just mad kobe is so low :laugh2:

b@llhog24
12-23-2012, 10:23 PM
You're just mad kobe is so low :laugh2:

This.

amos1er
12-23-2012, 10:38 PM
You're just mad kobe is so low :laugh2:

Well, according to that list...

David Robinson > Magic

Barkley > Kareem

Wade > Duncan

Malone > Hakeem

Dirk > Bird

Lebron > Duncan

Barkley > Hakeem

Barkley > Magic

Wade > Bird


How many more inconsistencies do you want me to find? :facepalm:

2-ONE-5
12-23-2012, 10:45 PM
PER is just a suggestion of what a players production could be. i never really take it serious, i dont completely disregard it either

2-ONE-5
12-23-2012, 10:46 PM
Why did you bold Lopez and Blatche like they arent supposed to be there? what the hell....

you have to be kidding me? you cant honestly say that ANDRE BLATCHE was expected be a top PER player

waveycrockett
12-23-2012, 11:02 PM
you have to be kidding me? you cant honestly say that ANDRE BLATCHE was expected be a top PER player

wtf does EXPECTED have to do with it? When he has played he has been a very damn good. Deron Williams was expected to be a top-10 player this season. Obviously things change!

Alayla
12-24-2012, 03:58 AM
Obviously it has some serious flaws when the likes of McGee, Lopez, Blatche, Nene, and Smith are ahead of Wade, Harden, Griffin, and Westbrook.

Mcgee is a monster look at his per 36 minutes stats.
and lopez is very good not too shocking to see him up there.

Kashmir13579
12-24-2012, 03:59 AM
I prefer WS/48

Kashmir13579
12-24-2012, 03:59 AM
Mcgee is a monster look at his per 36 minutes stats.
and lopez is very good not too shocking to see him up there.

absolutely right.

Lakers + Giants
12-24-2012, 04:36 AM
You're just mad kobe is so low :laugh2:

So you agree that wade> Magic and Kareem :confused:

b@llhog24
12-24-2012, 04:37 AM
So you agree that wade> Magic and Kareem :confused:

You're better than that.

Lakers + Giants
12-24-2012, 04:51 AM
You're better than that.

Sorry. :(

Andrew32
12-24-2012, 05:16 AM
Did you account for MPG?

You can't use PER to say Player A > Player B if P-A plays 20mpg and P-B plays 38mpg

Andrew32
12-24-2012, 05:16 AM
So you agree that wade> Magic and Kareem :confused:

Magic is a PG and Kareem's PER over almost any number of years is superior to Wade's.
Career PER is a mostly useless stat if you're using that.

ModernDaySavage
12-24-2012, 05:40 AM
Wow I really can't believe how many people are getting *** hurt over Wade's career PER. It just shows how dumb some people can be. Did you not think about how Wade is still in his prime years? Of course his career PER is going to be a little higher, the retired greats have already went through their late age declines (which obviously lowers the career average). Once Wade plays through his 30's it will lower a bit. Just think about **** before hating blindy, it makes you look dumb.

Lakers + Giants
12-24-2012, 05:41 AM
Wow I really can't believe how many people are getting *** hurt over Wade's career PER. It just shows how dumb some people can be. Did you not think about how Wade is still in his prime years? Of course his career PER is going to be a little higher, the retired greats have already went through their late age declines (which obviously lowers the career average). Once Wade plays through his 30's it will lower a bit. Just think about **** before hating blindy, it makes you look dumb.

The irony. .

amos1er
12-24-2012, 05:49 AM
Sorry. :(

Why would you yield to him? WTF. He didn't even refute the argument, as usual he just made some snide comment and acted like he was above everything.

amos1er
12-24-2012, 05:50 AM
You're better than that.

This coming from a guy who had a Kobe is a Rapist signature. :rolleyes:

amos1er
12-24-2012, 05:54 AM
Wow I really can't believe how many people are getting *** hurt over Wade's career PER. It just shows how dumb some people can be. Did you not think about how Wade is still in his prime years? Of course his career PER is going to be a little higher, the retired greats have already went through their late age declines (which obviously lowers the career average). Once Wade plays through his 30's it will lower a bit. Just think about **** before hating blindy, it makes you look dumb.

Ughhh. Wade wasn't the only example...there were many more inconsistencies that I pointed out.

NBA/ABA
Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.29
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.62
7. Chris Paul 25.47
8. Bob Pettit* 25.35
9. Tim Duncan 24.76
10. Neil Johnston* 24.69
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63
12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
13. Magic Johnson* 24.11
14. Karl Malone* 23.90
15. Dirk Nowitzki 23.63
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Kobe Bryant 23.48
20. Kevin Garnett 23.25

Well, according to that list...

David Robinson > Magic

Barkley > Kareem

Wade > Duncan

Malone > Hakeem

Dirk > Bird

Lebron > Duncan

Barkley > Hakeem

Barkley > Magic

Wade > Bird


How many more inconsistencies do you want me to find? :facepalm:

tp13baby
12-24-2012, 06:05 AM
Obviously it has some serious flaws when the likes of McGee, Lopez, Blatche, Nene, and Smith are ahead of Wade, Harden, Griffin, and Westbrook.

I laugh at the Griffin statement. Not only does it help to play with the best point guard in the league.

amos1er
12-24-2012, 06:06 AM
Looks like 11 time coaching champion Phil Jackson (Greatest Coach of All-Time) doesn't place much value on PER.

If you go to the 44 second mark of the video, Phil states that he believes more in product that he can see, feel, touch, and watch run up and down the court rather than in numbers and statistics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBZb_X5qjMg

How can you all argue against perhaps the greatest basketball mind in history?

amos1er
12-24-2012, 06:14 AM
Wow I really can't believe how many people are getting *** hurt over Wade's career PER. It just shows how dumb some people can be. Did you not think about how Wade is still in his prime years? Of course his career PER is going to be a little higher, the retired greats have already went through their late age declines (which obviously lowers the career average). Once Wade plays through his 30's it will lower a bit. Just think about **** before hating blindy, it makes you look dumb.

lol. So than by comparison you're saying that every player on that list played through their 30's? :rolleyes:

Magic played through his 30's??? News to me. :facepalm:

Oh and using personal insults and saying that just because someone doesn't agree with you that means their dumb is not the best way to be taken seriously. Irony at it's finest. Why don't you try calming down next time and try attacking the point I make rather than me personally. Honestly, it sounds like I touched a nerve or something. Perhaps there is some truth to what I am saying after all. ;)

Anji
12-24-2012, 06:41 AM
Ughhh. Wade wasn't the only example...there were many more inconsistencies that I pointed out.

NBA/ABA
Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.29
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.62
7. Chris Paul 25.47
8. Bob Pettit* 25.35
9. Tim Duncan 24.76
10. Neil Johnston* 24.69
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63
12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
13. Magic Johnson* 24.11
14. Karl Malone* 23.90
15. Dirk Nowitzki 23.63
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Kobe Bryant 23.48
20. Kevin Garnett 23.25

Well, according to that list...

David Robinson > Magic

Barkley > Kareem

Wade > Duncan

Malone > Hakeem

Dirk > Bird

Lebron > Duncan

Barkley > Hakeem

Barkley > Magic

Wade > Bird


How many more inconsistencies do you want me to find? :facepalm:
It just means those players have better pers. I think this is something the Saber Nerds can't wrap there heads around with these special stats they come up with.

There is more to basketball than how many bases you get and out many outs you use. Per, efficiency, ratings, ect, are just stats. No one stat tells you who the best player(s) is/were.

b@llhog24
12-24-2012, 06:48 AM
Sorry. :(

No biggie. :hi5:


This coming from a guy who had a Kobe is a Rapist signature. :rolleyes:

Point?

ILLUSIONIST^248
12-24-2012, 09:39 AM
Well, according to that list...

David Robinson > Magic

Barkley > Kareem

Wade > Duncan

Malone > Hakeem

Dirk > Bird

Lebron > Duncan

Barkley > Hakeem

Barkley > Magic

Wade > Bird


How many more inconsistencies do you want me to find? :facepalm:


Any list that has Lebron near the top is a good list to them.

JasonJohnHorn
12-24-2012, 10:17 AM
Not PER, NBA's website uses a stat they call efficiency.

You are aware that the "E" in PER stands for effciency, right?
PER = Player Efficiency Ranking.

knicksfan42
12-24-2012, 10:42 AM
You are aware that the "E" in PER stands for effciency, right?
PER = Player Efficiency Ranking.

I understand, but they have a different formula. That is the reason the numbers are different. They have a stat called win shares and another called EWS (estimated wins added).

ghettosean
12-24-2012, 10:48 AM
lol. So than by comparison you're saying that every player on that list played through their 30's? :rolleyes:

Magic played through his 30's??? News to me. :facepalm:

Oh and using personal insults and saying that just because someone doesn't agree with you that means their dumb is not the best way to be taken seriously. Irony at it's finest. Why don't you try calming down next time and try attacking the point I make rather than me personally. Honestly, it sounds like I touched a nerve or something. Perhaps there is some truth to what I am saying after all. ;)
Don't worry guy you proved your point... People arguing at this point are just being ignorant so they can tell people the star on there team is the greater than people like Kareem Abdul Jabar the leading scorer of all time in NBA history (those are solid stats not a formula like PER).

Chill guy you proved your point without a doubt let them open there presents on Christmas morning and tell there family the great tale of D-Wade the man who is 6 spots higher all time than the NBA's leading scorer ever, blocks ever and has won more championships than Wade :facepalm:



When Kareem Abdul-Jabbar left the game in 1989 at age 42, no NBA player had ever scored more points, blocked more shots, won more Most Valuable Player Awards, played in more All-Star Games or logged more seasons. His list of personal and team accomplishments is perhaps the most awesome in league history: Rookie of the Year, member of six NBA championship teams, six-time NBA MVP, two-time NBA Finals MVP, 19-time All-Star, two-time scoring champion, and a member of the NBA 35th and 50th Anniversary All-Time Teams. He also owned eight playoff records and seven All-Star records. No player achieved as much individual and team success as did Abdul-Jabbar.



Here's a quote for some of you Miami homers out there also :D Enjoy!





Miami Heat Coach Pat Riley, who coached Abdul-Jabbar for eight seasons in Los Angeles, once said in a toast recounted in Sports Illustrated, "Why judge anymore? When a man has broken records, won championships, endured tremendous criticism and responsibility, why judge? Let's toast him as the greatest player ever."



If Pat had to say that speech in this day and time he'd immediately change his tune to Jordan but I'm sure the point is made.

After seeing all these rankings this confirms it to me that PER is useless and looking further this MATHEMATICAL FORMULA was created by Hollinger an ESPN writer who tried to make a new all in one stat (I think he needs to work a little harder).

USELESS!!!

xnick5757
12-24-2012, 10:56 AM
You guys know that PER is readjusted every year so that 15 is the league average every single year, right?

So career PERs are completely useless because a 20 back then isn't a 20 now? Because of the re-scaling?

You guys wouldn't just be criticising a stat you know nothing about, would you?




Also, PER mainly measures offensive performance, so solely great defenders won't have high PERs .

nickdymez
12-24-2012, 11:28 AM
You guys know that PER is readjusted every year so that 15 is the league average every single year, right?

So career PERs are completely useless because a 20 back then isn't a 20 now? Because of the re-scaling?

You guys wouldn't just be criticising a stat you know nothing about, would you?




Also, PER mainly measures offensive performance, so solely great defenders won't have high PERs .

Im gonna make up stupid *** stat that changes every year.. lmfao. What a joke that some of you people have ruined your basketball watching lives living and dying by these advanced stats. :facepalm:

elledaddy
12-24-2012, 11:55 AM
OK OK all you "per" heads. I'll admit it, I was wrong. After shooting us Melo homers down time after time about his Per, I think it's time we Knick fans say that the "Per" thing is great. I mean I watch 15 games a week and I didn't know that Jimmer Fredette was better than Kyrie Irving and Rondo. Thanks " Per". And the Nets Fans BEEN telling me that Brooke Lopez was better than Dwight Howard but I'm mad that no Hornets fans told me that ROBIN LOPEZ was better too. I'm mad at y'all, I had no clue. I'm now a 100% "Perv"


PS...... I'm going to name my next child( god willing) Win Shares!!!!!!!!!

ModernDaySavage
12-24-2012, 12:25 PM
Ughhh. Wade wasn't the only example...there were many more inconsistencies that I pointed out.

NBA/ABA
Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.29
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.62
7. Chris Paul 25.47
8. Bob Pettit* 25.35
9. Tim Duncan 24.76
10. Neil Johnston* 24.69
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63
12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
13. Magic Johnson* 24.11
14. Karl Malone* 23.90
15. Dirk Nowitzki 23.63
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Kobe Bryant 23.48
20. Kevin Garnett 23.25

Well, according to that list...

David Robinson > Magic

Barkley > Kareem

Wade > Duncan

Malone > Hakeem

Dirk > Bird

Lebron > Duncan

Barkley > Hakeem

Barkley > Magic

Wade > Bird


How many more inconsistencies do you want me to find? :facepalm:

I mean really? Look at just a couple of the differences.... Barkley is a .05 rating higher than Kareem, Dirk is a .13 higher than Bird. Nobody is claiming it's an absolute say all end all stat, so to just say the rankings are set in stone with such minuscule differences is pretty dumb.... And stop nit picking, of course Magic didn't play through his entire thirties...How many others didn't as well?

ModernDaySavage
12-24-2012, 12:37 PM
lol. So than by comparison you're saying that every player on that list played through their 30's? :rolleyes:

Magic played through his 30's??? News to me. :facepalm:

Oh and using personal insults and saying that just because someone doesn't agree with you that means their dumb is not the best way to be taken seriously. Irony at it's finest. Why don't you try calming down next time and try attacking the point I make rather than me personally. Honestly, it sounds like I touched a nerve or something. Perhaps there is some truth to what I am saying after all. ;)

It has nothing to do with agreeing or not, and I really didn't attack anyone. Just saying it shows how dumb some people can be (potential) by looking past simple things like that. I honestly don't care about Wade or his PER I'm not a fan or anything. So sorry if you see one cuss word or hear someones intelligence being insulted that it translates directly into anger. It's more or less I'm mind boggled by some people who just take things for their argument and ignore the rest. Sorry if you felt directly insulted (guilty conscience?), but it was definitely made as a general statement and not towards anyone specific.

Now for the PER. Of course it has its flaws, that's why you cant just take numbers and treat them like concrete facts. Example being Barkley .05 rating above Kareem, of course I don't believe Barkley is better. Everything has to be put into to context with other stats, era, and all that good stuff.

ModernDaySavage
12-24-2012, 12:50 PM
Don't worry guy you proved your point... People arguing at this point are just being ignorant so they can tell people the star on there team is the greater than people like Kareem Abdul Jabar the leading scorer of all time in NBA history (those are solid stats not a formula like PER).

Chill guy you proved your point without a doubt let them open there presents on Christmas morning and tell there family the great tale of D-Wade the man who is 6 spots higher all time than the NBA's leading scorer ever, blocks ever and has won more championships than Wade :facepalm:



Here's a quote for some of you Miami homers out there also :D Enjoy!



If Pat had to say that speech in this day and time he'd immediately change his tune to Jordan but I'm sure the point is made.

After seeing all these rankings this confirms it to me that PER is useless and looking further this MATHEMATICAL FORMULA was created by Hollinger an ESPN writer who tried to make a new all in one stat (I think he needs to work a little harder).

USELESS!!!

Hey guy. Have you thought about the part where Wade is thirty and in his prime, and Kareem played until he is 42? It boggles my mind how this gets overlooked. Of course Wade's career PER is going to be higher. I will guarantee that if Wade played until 42, Kareem's PER would blow his out. So stop putting all this weight on counting stats like rings, career points, and total blocks (at the time he retired). Of course when a guy played twenty years compared to nine or ten years it's going to make the other dude look like a child in comparison. Hopefully you can understand this sir.

Federal Reserve
12-24-2012, 01:02 PM
This PER list also accurately displays (indirectly) just how much of an inefficient chucker Kobe Bryant really is.

ghettosean
12-24-2012, 01:38 PM
Hey guy. Have you thought about the part where Wade is thirty and in his prime, and Kareem played until he is 42? It boggles my mind how this gets overlooked. Of course Wade's career PER is going to be higher. I will guarantee that if Wade played until 42, Kareem's PER would blow his out. So stop putting all this weight on counting stats like rings, career points, and total blocks (at the time he retired). Of course when a guy played twenty years compared to nine or ten years it's going to make the other dude look like a child in comparison. Hopefully you can understand this sir.

Sorry did you mean NBA all time records as in the best in history of the game of basketball is that what you meant :facepalm:

You only prove the point that PER is a useless stat if Wade retired today he would be more effecient than Kareem in his career.




Problems With PER

PER largely measures offensive performance. Hollinger freely admits that two of the defensive statistics it incorporates -- blocks and steals -- can produce a distorted picture of a player's value and that PER is not a reliable measure of a player's defensive acumen. For example, Bruce Bowen, widely regarded as one of the best defenders in the NBA (at least through the 2006-07 season), has routinely posted single-digit PERs.
"Bear in mind that this rating is not the final, once-and-for-all answer for a player's accomplishments during the season. This is especially true for players such as Bruce Bowen and Trenton Hassell who are defensive specialists but don't get many blocks or steals."

In addition, some have argued that PER gives undue weight to a player's contribution in limited minutes, or against a team's second unit, and it undervalues players who have enough diversity in their game to play starter's minutes.

Lastly, PER rewards inefficient shooting. To quote Dave Berri, the author of The Wages of Wins:

"Hollinger argues that each two point field goal made is worth about 1.65 points. A three point field goal made is worth 2.65 points. A missed field goal, though, costs a team 0.72 points. Given these values, with a bit of math we can show that a player will break even on his two point field goal attempts if he hits on 30.4% of these shots. On three pointers the break-even point is 21.4%. If a player exceeds these thresholds, and virtually every NBA player does so with respect to two-point shots, the more he shoots the higher his value in PERs. So a player can be an inefficient scorer and simply inflate his value by taking a large number of shots."

Problems with PER Projections

The projections are built by looking at comparable players at the same age and how their stats changed in the following season. For players in most age brackets, this is extremely reliable, but there have been so few players to turn pro out of high school in the past two decades that there is a very small sample to work with. While some players who have come out of high school have shown a lot of promise in their future years, many have floundered and never quite reached their full potential.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_efficiency_rating

Are you embarassed enough yet young one... LOL. Seriously the creator of PER admits that it's not accurate to many degrees. What makes you know more than him?!? Seriously tell me I can't wait to here your D-Wade fantasies some more...

Stop this you are not making yourself look any better.

JerseyPalahniuk
12-24-2012, 03:29 PM
Im gonna make up stupid *** stat that changes every year.. lmfao. What a joke that some of you people have ruined your basketball watching lives living and dying by these advanced stats. :facepalm:


Chill dude. It doesn't just "change every year." It adjusts for each year for the different rules and style of game incorporated. If a certain year favored more up tempo pace and less defense that caused most players PPG to rise (and other stats), PER would adjust by making sure that the average player is always 15.0 PER. I think you misread that comment

Chronz
12-24-2012, 04:08 PM
Looks like 11 time coaching champion Phil Jackson (Greatest Coach of All-Time) doesn't place much value on PER.

If you go to the 44 second mark of the video, Phil states that he believes more in product that he can see, feel, touch, and watch run up and down the court rather than in numbers and statistics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBZb_X5qjMg

How can you all argue against perhaps the greatest basketball mind in history?

The way I did when you tried this last time. By going by what the Spurs do, and combining EVERYTHING

SLY WILLIAMS
12-24-2012, 06:38 PM
PER is a great stat that shows how good the player is. Guys like McGee play great basketball unfortunately they don't play too much to be considered elite players, but they but up great stats for the time given.

McGee and his PER are a good example of why stats are useful but can not be used while ignoring a persons own eyes. The guy makes some great plays and some really questionable plays. If his play was really at the level his PER implies he would be starting and playing 35-40 minutes a night. Hopefully one day his game will mature to this level.

JEDean89
12-24-2012, 07:10 PM
PER is only valuable if the player is playing full minutes

Cromedome
12-24-2012, 08:45 PM
I sure as hell am not sitting around talking about PER and advanced stats, at a bar, while watching the game.

How sad would that be?

b@llhog24
12-24-2012, 09:17 PM
This PER list also accurately displays (indirectly) just how much of an inefficient chucker Kobe Bryant really is.

Not it doesn't.


McGee and his PER are a good example of why stats are useful but can not be used while ignoring a persons own eyes. The guy makes some great plays and some really questionable plays. If his play was really at the level his PER implies he would be starting and playing 35-40 minutes a night. Hopefully one day his game will mature to this level.

Not to be a jerk or anything right, but honestly who does that? (look solely at stats). Most advanced stat users on this board tend to watch a ton of games anyways. We learned about advanced metrics because of our LOVE for the game not to take away from it. Carmelo was my fav player before and after I learnt about APBR metrics. Also if you look at the effect McGee has on his teammates stats when he's on the floor then you can see that he has a negative impact on his teammates.

ModernDaySavage
12-25-2012, 03:51 AM
Sorry did you mean NBA all time records as in the best in history of the game of basketball is that what you meant :facepalm:

You only prove the point that PER is a useless stat if Wade retired today he would be more effecient than Kareem in his career.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_efficiency_rating

Are you embarassed enough yet young one... LOL. Seriously the creator of PER admits that it's not accurate to many degrees. What makes you know more than him?!? Seriously tell me I can't wait to here your D-Wade fantasies some more...

Stop this you are not making yourself look any better.

You truly define ignorance. I'm not defending PER as a stat, or D Wade as a player. You sound so arrogant when you talk, yet it is you just spewing pure ignorance making yourself look dumb.

Andrew32
12-25-2012, 04:04 AM
Do people not understand that using Career PER is the wrong way to use the stat?

If you wanna compare a players best 5 years to another players best 5 years using PER or comparing Peak to Peak or even best 10 years is 100x more reasonable then using Career PER.

Wade for example is not better then Kareem going by PER like some are ignorantly implying when trying to discredit the stat.


#5.
Kareem : Post Season - PER

Peak : 32.4
Top 5 : 28.4
Top 7 : 26.5
Top 10 : 26.5

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

#9.
Wade : Post Season - PER

Peak : 29.4
Top 5 : 26.64
Top 7 : 25

PER is a fantastic stat at times and it has many uses.
Obviously its not perfect and people can misuse it.

ModernDaySavage
12-25-2012, 04:24 AM
Do people not understand that using Career PER is the wrong way to use the stat?

If you wanna compare a players best 5 years to another players best 5 years using PER or comparing Peak to Peak or even best 10 years is 100x more reasonable then using Career PER.

Wade for example is not better then Kareem going by PER like some are ignorantly implying when trying to discredit the stat.



PER is a fantastic stat at times and it has many uses.
Obviously its not perfect and people can misuse it.

According to some of these guys, career PER is the absolute end all say all stat for career rankings. They just look past all reasonable arguments, and say as little as a .05 difference is concrete evidence that the player is better.

Andrew32
12-25-2012, 04:34 AM
According to some of these guys, career PER is the absolute end all say all stat for career rankings.

Those people don't understand the stat or say it purposely to try and discredit it.

Cracka2HI!
12-25-2012, 04:36 AM
Do people not understand that using Career PER is the wrong way to use the stat?

If you wanna compare a players best 5 years to another players best 5 years using PER or comparing Peak to Peak or even best 10 years is 100x more reasonable then using Career PER.

Wade for example is not better then Kareem going by PER like some are ignorantly implying when trying to discredit the stat.



PER is a fantastic stat at times and it has many uses.
Obviously its not perfect and people can misuse it.
Hahaha, served em there!!

b@llhog24
12-25-2012, 05:04 AM
Great post Andrew.

Also PER and "efficiency" are NOT the same thing.

Money_23
12-25-2012, 12:06 PM
I take it a little more seriously than win shares.

Swashcuff
12-25-2012, 06:21 PM
The majority people who dislike PER are those who have no clue what it represents. Because Player X has a higher PER than player Y does not make him a better player it means he has a higher player efficiency rating. Simple as that. Now read up on what it is and see how many examples you can get of players who have good PERs and players who have not so good PERs. Does PPG tell you who is a better player? How about RPG? So why on earth do you guys think PER should?

Swashcuff
12-25-2012, 06:23 PM
According to some of these guys, career PER is the absolute end all say all stat for career rankings. They just look past all reasonable arguments, and say as little as a .05 difference is concrete evidence that the player is better.

I argue more than most posters here on the NBA Forum and in my time here on the NBA Forum I have NEVER seen someone say this. Could you please find us an example where someone says PER is an end all stat. The only persons who say that are the ones who hate it (eg Nicky, Amoser etc). Guys who actually know what PER is and what it represents have never said that around here.

Sactown
12-25-2012, 06:28 PM
Also per is also based off of league average, so comparing people from different eras is going to have some variance. Also comparing WAde to someone who has finished their career is foolish, considering most of Wades career has been spent in his prime lol

Swashcuff
12-25-2012, 06:31 PM
Ughhh. Wade wasn't the only example...there were many more inconsistencies that I pointed out.

NBA/ABA
Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.29
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.62
7. Chris Paul 25.47
8. Bob Pettit* 25.35
9. Tim Duncan 24.76
10. Neil Johnston* 24.69
11. Charles Barkley* 24.63
12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
13. Magic Johnson* 24.11
14. Karl Malone* 23.90
15. Dirk Nowitzki 23.63
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Kobe Bryant 23.48
20. Kevin Garnett 23.25

Well, according to that list...

David Robinson has a higher PER than Magic

Barkley has a higher PER than Kareem

Wade has a higher PER than Duncan

Malone has a higher PER than Hakeem

Dirk has a higher PER than Bird

Lebron has a higher PER than Duncan

Barkley has a higher PER than Hakeem

Barkley has a higher PER than Magic

Wade has a higher PER than Bird


How many more inconsistencies do you want me to find? :facepalm:

Just thought I'd fix that for ya.

Anyone with a working brain can understand that not because a player has a better PER he's better than another its basically that player doing more on the floor statistically per minute that he's given than another player. More so in terms of offense than defensively.

JUST BECAUSE ONE PLAYER HAS A BETTER PER THAN ANOTHER DOES NOT MAKE HIM A BETTER PLAYER IT MEANS HE HAS A HIGHER PER PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

Swashcuff
12-25-2012, 06:51 PM
Using career PER to say that one player is better than another is like me saying Allen Iverson is a better scorer than Kobe Bryant because he has a higher career scoring average. According to some idiots around here (the usual suspects sadly) I would be right, since they seem to believe that that's how stats works.

I use stats in damn near every player evaluation I make and the same goes for %100 of the open minded rational posters on this forum what we don't do however is use them wrongly for purposes in which they weren't intended for without the use of context. If I did I'd be running around saying A.I. should have been on the All D team on more occasions than Kobe since he averaged more steals than damn near anyone else who played at the G position during his time.

Stats aren't the end all us "nerds" or "stat guys" like some idiots like to call us always say this time and time again but apparently they are to dumb, dense or slow to see this.

Chronz
12-25-2012, 07:08 PM
According to some of these guys, career PER is the absolute end all say all stat for career rankings. They just look past all reasonable arguments, and say as little as a .05 difference is concrete evidence that the player is better.

Ive seen more people say what you just described than actual people who abuse it as the end all. Just saying, I would like to see these posters.

astrosmaniac
12-25-2012, 07:41 PM
I argue more than most posters here on the NBA Forum and in my time here on the NBA Forum I have NEVER seen someone say this. Could you please find us an example where someone says PER is an end all stat. The only persons who say that are the ones who hate it (eg Nicky, Amoser etc). Guys who actually know what PER is and what it represents have never said that around here.
I believe he was referencing guys like amose who make that claim as a way to try and discredit it. Basically I think he's agreeing with you

Greedy22
12-25-2012, 09:18 PM
wtf does EXPECTED have to do with it? When he has played he has been a very damn good. Deron Williams was expected to be a top-10 player this season. Obviously things change!

In what world?