PDA

View Full Version : 4 year Prime who do you take?



L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 09:45 PM
4year peak averages - Bold indicates leader in each category.

Player 1
74gp 27.85ppg 6.65 rebounds 5.51 assists 1.6 steals .78 Blocks .439 FG% .354 3pt% 77.8 FT% .483eFG%
2.5 turnovers .537 TS%
0 Championships

Player 2
80gp 30.54ppg 5.65 rebounds 5.05 assists 1.63 steals .50 blocks .460 FG% .354 3pt% 85.2 FT%
.485 eFG%
3.0 turnovers .570 TS%
1 Championship 1 Finals MVP

Player 3
70gp 26.73ppg 5.1 rebounds 6.38 assists 1.95 steals 1.0 Blocks .484 FG% .301 3pt% .760 FT%
.504 eFG%
3.55 turnovers .566 TS%
1 Championship 1 Finals MVP


Discuss..

Saddletramp
05-07-2015, 09:46 PM
Let me guess........

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 09:48 PM
Let me guess........



There is no LeBron on here bud, try again..

goingfor28
05-07-2015, 09:49 PM
I'll take player 2

5ass
05-07-2015, 10:07 PM
I dont get this. Four year prime and you only posted stats for one season each?

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:09 PM
I dont get this. Four year prime and you only posted one season?



This is the average of their 4 best consecutive seasons, their " Prime Years".... So its a 4 year snapshot averaged out..

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:12 PM
I dont get this. Four year prime and you only posted stats for one season each?



Who you got?

ManningToTyree
05-07-2015, 10:12 PM
Player 2

5ass
05-07-2015, 10:13 PM
This is the average of their 4 best consecutive seasons, their " Prime Years"....

74, 80 and 70 gp. Did you just make a mistake there or am i missing something?

5ass
05-07-2015, 10:13 PM
Who you got?

you mind posting TS%, turnovers? How am i supposed to evaluate them defensively? based on steals and blocks?

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:22 PM
74, 80 and 70 gp. Did you just make a mistake there or am i missing something?

that is the average games played over the 4 seasons for each player.

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:24 PM
you mind posting TS%, turnovers? How am i supposed to evaluate them defensively? based on steals and blocks?


And sure I will post TS% and turnovers, I used eFG% but I will post TS%..

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:25 PM
Player 2

Can you vote on the poll as well?

Saddletramp
05-07-2015, 10:37 PM
What's their team records? Are they playing hero ball and playing by themselves or are they part of a team concept? Who's the coach/what's the system? Which conference did they go against? Stats don't always tell the whole story.

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:42 PM
What's their team records? Are they playing hero ball and playing by themselves or are they part of a team concept? Who's the coach/what's the system? Which conference did they go against? Stats don't always tell the whole story.

OMG, just answer the question, you can see that 2 of them won the championship, the other did not. The question is simple, these are the 4 year averages of these players prime, who would you take?

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:43 PM
you mind posting TS%, turnovers? How am i supposed to evaluate them defensively? based on steals and blocks?

OK, so the original post now has TS% and turnovers listed..

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 10:46 PM
What's their team records? Are they playing hero ball and playing by themselves or are they part of a team concept? Who's the coach/what's the system? Which conference did they go against? Stats don't always tell the whole story.

All of their teams made the playoffs, 2 of them had championship coaches, 1 plays in the West, the other 2 in the East.. And none of them are LeBron, so dont get all sensitive..

koreancabbage
05-07-2015, 10:47 PM
player 2.

More-Than-Most
05-07-2015, 11:08 PM
I went player 3 but did not see the 70 GP : (


Id go with player 2

Saddletramp
05-07-2015, 11:08 PM
I'm not getting sensitive. You are. Context and situations mean everything. If this is MJ/Kobe/Wade, I'd rather take MJ's years over the others no matter the numbers. How much help does each team have?

But basing on these numbers alone, Player 2.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-07-2015, 11:16 PM
Whichever one isn't Kobe, I'll take.

PowerHouse
05-07-2015, 11:31 PM
you mind posting TS%, turnovers? How am i supposed to evaluate them defensively? based on steals and blocks?

Is their a clear-cut metric that can accurately quantify defensive impact? Because DWS is just too flawed.

PowerHouse
05-07-2015, 11:35 PM
I think player 2 takes this fairly easily. I especially like the health, being the one who played in by far the most games.

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 11:44 PM
I'm not getting sensitive. You are. Context and situations mean everything. If this is MJ/Kobe/Wade, I'd rather take MJ's years over the others no matter the numbers. How much help does each team have?

But basing on these numbers alone, Player 2.

Thanks man, no MJ in this comparison, his numbers are out of this world, it wouldn't be fair to compare him to these 3.

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 11:45 PM
Whichever one isn't Kobe, I'll take.

What if there is no Kobe, which one would you vote for?

L8kers4life
05-07-2015, 11:47 PM
I went player 3 but did not see the 70 GP : (


Id go with player 2

I was strongly considering 3 as well but the games played and 3pt% and free throws led me to player 2.

Saddletramp
05-07-2015, 11:49 PM
I was strongly considering 3 as well but the games played and 3pt% and free throws led me to player 2.

That was my thinking as well.

Method28
05-07-2015, 11:53 PM
I was strongly considering 3 as well but the games played and 3pt% and free throws led me to player 2.
Those turnovers as well! I'd like to see usage rate as well. From What's provided I'd go with player 2.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 12:45 AM
^^^

I agree man, you have any other statistical measures you think I should throw in? I was gonna do win shares but it was just taking forever to do all the averages. I will add Usage in the morning.

IKnowHoops
05-08-2015, 04:01 AM
^^^

I agree man, you have any other statistical measures you think I should throw in? I was gonna do win shares but it was just taking forever to do all the averages. I will add Usage in the morning.

Throw in PER

I'd take number 2. And based on the stats, I'd say #2 has the highest PER.

IKnowHoops
05-08-2015, 04:03 AM
Im guessing this is

Tmac
Kobe
Wade

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 04:37 AM
Throw in PER

I'd take number 2. And based on the stats, I'd say #2 has the highest PER.

I have a hard time not voting for 3, defensively he is clearly better, games played is really the only knock and his assists are good.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 04:39 AM
lol @ insecure fans of a player. Trying to win people with raw stats lmfao!

Lmao, which stats should I throw on there kind sir?

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 04:43 AM
Lmao, which stats should I throw on there kind sir?

Don't feed the trolls. Lol I've seen dozens of similar threads posted with many different players, yet he chooses to spew his nonsense in this one. He's a bonafide troll man, don't even try. He only has like 10 words in his vocab and two of them are Kobe and kobephile, then he laughs alone at his own pathetic posts

More-Than-Most
05-08-2015, 04:58 AM
If it really is

1-Tmac
2-Kobe
3-Wade

Id go Tmac above both because of his line and the lack of help he had compared to the other 2 guys..... If this is just a Kobe/Wade argument please just stop... Its disrespectful to Kobe.

Raidaz4Life
05-08-2015, 05:07 AM
Pretty easily number 2 for me.

FraziersKnicks
05-08-2015, 07:37 AM
4 year peak I take Kobe
2 year peak I take Wade
1 year peak I take T-Mac

T-Mac had the best single season out of these guys (2002-03), Wade had the best 2 year peak (2008-10) and Kobe had the best 4 year peak (2005-09).

So to answer the poll, I take player 2.

This doesn't really solve anything though. If you value absolute peak play (even be it for just one season), T-Mac and Wade both are better. If you value more sustained production then Kobe is better. Simple.

mike_noodles
05-08-2015, 09:29 AM
I take player two.

JLynn943
05-08-2015, 10:51 AM
The only real problem with #3 is health, but I'm taking him anyway. I'm not too concerned about the 3pt% since you can put shooters around him and the other two players are nothing special at it either. Otherwise he seems superior.

Obviously context is key though, so this is all meaningless without knowing who they played with, what conference, etc.

HoopsDrive
05-08-2015, 10:56 AM
Player 2 seems to be slightly better, I like the raw defensive numbers player 3 puts up though. Just based on those numbers, I think I go with the consensus, player 2.

If I had to guess who these guys are, first thing I thought it's gotta be Tmac, Kobe, Wade respectively.

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 11:23 AM
4 year peak I take Kobe
2 year peak I take Wade
1 year peak I take T-Mac

T-Mac had the best single season out of these guys (2002-03), Wade had the best 2 year peak (2008-10) and Kobe had the best 4 year peak (2005-09).

So to answer the poll, I take player 2.

This doesn't really solve anything though. If you value absolute peak play (even be it for just one season), T-Mac and Wade both are better. If you value more sustained production then Kobe is better. Simple.[B]

Here's my problem with that. If Kobe is outperforming and the better player for the duration of the entire career out these 3 players, aside from what you would say 1 season or so because you might construe slightly better stats to mean being the better player. I just don't see how you can logically believe that. In my opinion having a mere 1 season with slightly better numbers doesn't equate to a better player to better peak, it simply is an anomaly with little wiggle room for error when judging. Especially when the numbers lack context and you're grasping hard to take fractions of percents and equate them to being superior to the player that clearly dominates the other two almost double the duration of their careers. It's like, you try hard to take the smallest amounts of numbers that 2 players are better than Kobe for 1 year, but ignore the other 17 years where Kobe was simply better than the others and say his peak wasn't as good. Haha I just don't understand that. We're talkin numbers without context, and even if some could consider them better than Kobe for one season, it's not black and white to say. Tmac and Kobe were simply better, or whatever you said. I feel like, people who have this mentality are Kobe haters and luckily tmac and wade both have a few different stats over the course of their careers that a slightly better than Kobe's and people grasp hard at that and try to convince others that their peaks were better than Kobe, when it's simply not true. It's not true for the entirety of their careers, and such a small sample size is nothing but an outlier. I don't know if I'm still being coherent because I'm typing on my phone, but please tell me if you kind of think what I'm saying makes sense to you. You said yourself a 4 year peak you would take Kobe, don't you think that qualifies him as the player with the better peak and just having 1 season "better" is more of a lucky/ over performed season kind of thing and not "simply the better player". It's kind of like when durant had his MVP season, it was statistically superior to anything lebron ever produced, but I doubt many around here will say durant had a better peak than lebron.

Ty22Mitchell
05-08-2015, 11:53 AM
I chose player two, but I want to know who the three players were and the identity of the one I picked.

JasonJohnHorn
05-08-2015, 11:57 AM
It's hard to call it based on the stats alone. I like player three.... the assist-to-turnover ratios aren't far apart, but he's a scorer and a willing passer, and his FG% is higher and he is only 3% of the other guys on 3pters. Also, he gets the most steals and blocks, but it is hard to evaluate defense alone on those stats. He could very easily be the worst defender of the three.

FraziersKnicks
05-08-2015, 12:04 PM
Here's my problem with that. If Kobe is outperforming and the better player for the duration of the entire career out these 3 players, aside from what you would say 1 season or so because you might construe slightly better stats to mean being the better player. I just don't see how you can logically believe that. In my opinion having a mere 1 season with slightly better numbers doesn't equate to a better player to better peak, it simply is an anomaly with little wiggle room for error when judging.

At their absolute best, both Wade and T-Mac played more productive, impactful, efficient basketball. I don't view an 82 game sample as an anomaly. If a career 17/3/3 guy had a one 30/6/6 season then yeah, fair enough. But Wade and T-Mac's best seasons weren't anomalies.


Especially when the numbers lack context and you're grasping hard to take fractions of percents and equate them to being superior to the player that clearly dominates the other two almost double the duration of their careers. It's like, you try hard to take the smallest amounts of numbers that 2 players are better than Kobe for 1 year, but ignore the other 17 years where Kobe was simply better than the others and say his peak wasn't as good.

I'm not ignoring the rest of their careers though. In terms of career I have always said Kobe > Wade > T-Mac. This is about their absolute peak. When looking at raw numbers and advanced numbers, they all agree with what I'm saying. Kobe's single best season was never as good as Wade's or McGrady's. I'm never gonna argue that Kobe doesn't have a much longer more productive career because I don't believe that. Understand what I'm saying.


Haha I just don't understand that. We're talkin numbers without context, and even if some could consider them better than Kobe for one season, it's not black and white to say. Tmac and Kobe were simply better, or whatever you said. I feel like, people who have this mentality are Kobe haters and luckily tmac and wade both have a few different stats over the course of their careers that a slightly better than Kobe's and people grasp hard at that and try to convince others that their peaks were better than Kobe, when it's simply not true.

What context do you want? So I'm a Kobe hater because I have a different opinion to you? Please convince me that Kobe has a better single season than T-Mac or Wade if it's simply not true.


It's not true for the entirety of their careers, and such a small sample size is nothing but an outlier. I don't know if I'm still being coherent because I'm typing on my phone, but please tell me if you kind of think what I'm saying makes sense to you. You said yourself a 4 year peak you would take Kobe, don't you think that qualifies him as the player with the better peak and just having 1 season "better" is more of a lucky/ over performed season kind of thing and not "simply the better player".

No I believe Kobe had a more sustained peak, hence me taking him for 4 years but choosing the others for 1 or 2. As I have previously mentioned, an 82 game sample size is hardly a "lucky" season. Especially if that player has career numbers like Wade and T-Mac do. Their peak was just higher but much shorter than Kobe's. The fact Kobe sustained such a long peak is why I have him (among other reasons) above Wade and McGrady all time.


It's kind of like when durant had his MVP season, it was statistically superior to anything lebron ever produced, but I doubt many around here will say durant had a better peak than lebron.

Was it superior? Can you back that claim up? Because I don't see anything KD did that rivals LeBron's seasons of 2008-09 and 2012-13. I would like to hear your argument though.

RLundi
05-08-2015, 12:21 PM
Clearly, player 2. But you already knew that. Why did you feel the need to create this thread to praise Kobe?

Chronz
05-08-2015, 12:40 PM
Think I would take player 2, 80 GP on average is pretty sick. Most efficient it seems and most prolific. Not seeing how its much of a debate . Aside from watching them play, only playoff averages and apbr metrics could sway this.

JLynn943
05-08-2015, 12:57 PM
Think I would take player 2, 80 GP on average is pretty sick. Most efficient it seems and most prolific. Not seeing how its much of a debate . Aside from watching them play, only playoff averages and apbr metrics could sway this.

The efficiency difference between players 2 and 3 is insignificant imo. For TS%, .570 vs .566 is nothing, then eFG% favors player 3. Then the extra 1.3 extra assists per game likely makes up much of that scoring difference. 80 GP is fantastic though and is really the only reason I'd go with him over player 3. The raw defensive metrics favor player 3, but those could be misleading.

lol, please
05-08-2015, 01:02 PM
Player 2.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 01:13 PM
4 year peak I take Kobe
2 year peak I take Wade
1 year peak I take T-Mac

T-Mac had the best single season out of these guys (2002-03), Wade had the best 2 year peak (2008-10) and Kobe had the best 4 year peak (2005-09).

So to answer the poll, I take player 2.

This doesn't really solve anything though. If you value absolute peak play (even be it for just one season), T-Mac and Wade both are better. If you value more sustained production then Kobe is better. Simple.


For the most part I believe you are correct, the only thing is, I would take Wade for the 1 year peak as well as the 2 year peak. When looking at Wade's best year 30.2 PER and McGrady's best year 30.3 PER, I would still take Wade because his defensive numbers crush McGrady's , I believe Wade had a 4.4 DWS while McGrady had a 2.7 DWS. But like many have stated, absolute peak ( best 1 or 2 years), I take Wade, anything over 2 years I take Kobe, for his sustained consistency.

And for the record, you guys are all correct, TMAC is player 1, Kobe Player 2 and Wade player 3....

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 01:16 PM
Think I would take player 2, 80 GP on average is pretty sick. Most efficient it seems and most prolific. Not seeing how its much of a debate . Aside from watching them play, only playoff averages and apbr metrics could sway this.



It's very close with player 2 ( Kobe) and player 3 ( Wade), Wades defensive numbers and assists are so good I'm still in a bit of a struggle figuring out who I would select if I had a gun to my head.

WaDe03
05-08-2015, 01:25 PM
Now that we know the players do you care to post the years, or have you already and I just missed it?

WaDe03
05-08-2015, 01:28 PM
It's very close with player 2 ( Kobe) and player 3 ( Wade), Wades defensive numbers and assists are so good I'm still in a bit of a struggle figuring out who I would select if I had a gun to my head.

Wades defense was great in his prime. Definitely should've had more 1st team all defense selections like he should also have an MVP but that's another discussion.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 01:50 PM
Wades defense was great in his prime. Definitely should've had more 1st team all defense selections like he should also have an MVP but that's another discussion.


McGrady 01-05
Kobe 04-08
Wade 08-11

The hard thing was the fact that Wade has never put together 4 healthy years in a row, it would always be like 67 games, 77 games, 76 games then 51 games, he never has a stretch where he is healthy 4 years in a row except for early on in his career and during those times his stats were not as favorable. Kobe's durability really stood out as did Wades incredible defensive numbers.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 02:05 PM
It's very close with player 2 ( Kobe) and player 3 ( Wade), Wades defensive numbers and assists are so good I'm still in a bit of a struggle figuring out who I would select if I had a gun to my head.

I'm not a huge believer in Wade being as good as his steals/blocks suggest. Depends on how you look at it I guess. Like when Kobe(+Tmac for that matter) entered the playoffs, they wouldn't pace themselves and went full bore defensively. They prolly dont amass the same blocks+steals but thats partly because they were their teams primary defender. When Kobe could roam (like he would on Rondo) he was on a Pippen level of roaming/helping. He wouldn't play like that all RS for various reasons but he had it in him.

Tmac was capable of defending PG's like Baron/Chauncey, traditional SG like Rip, scorers like Stackhouse and Glen Robinson and even clamped down on 7footers like Dirk. Tmac was also tasked with manning his teams zone defense as the defacto Center. Wade didn't have that defensive ability, what he did have was great defender around him to allow him to maximize his strengths. At his peak Tmac had the superior WS/PER rates and it would have been by a greater disparity had the Magic not been so trash defensively. Great defenders tend to bring out the best defense in stars. His first year with Houston is the season where he put forth the most effort defensively but he could have done that had he gotten the right teammates in Orlando.

One thing about Wade, because he never learned to pace himself or because he never advanced his skillset, he often got injured during pivotal moments. He left so much on the table, the series vs Detroit is the most glaring. Hes lucky he had Bron for his final 2 chips when he was very sporadic.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 02:29 PM
I'm not a huge believer in Wade being as good as his steals/blocks suggest. Depends on how you look at it I guess. Like when Kobe(+Tmac for that matter) entered the playoffs, they wouldn't pace themselves and went full bore defensively. They prolly dont amass the same blocks+steals but thats partly because they were their teams primary defender. When Kobe could roam (like he would on Rondo) he was on a Pippen level of roaming/helping. He wouldn't play like that all RS for various reasons but he had it in him.

Tmac was capable of defending PG's like Baron/Chauncey, traditional SG like Rip, scorers like Stackhouse and Glen Robinson and even clamped down on 7footers like Dirk. Tmac was also tasked with manning his teams zone defense as the defacto Center. Wade didn't have that defensive ability, what he did have was great defender around him to allow him to maximize his strengths. At his peak Tmac had the superior WS/PER rates and it would have been by a greater disparity had the Magic not been so trash defensively. Great defenders tend to bring out the best defense in stars. His first year with Houston is the season where he put forth the most effort defensively but he could have done that had he gotten the right teammates in Orlando.

One thing about Wade, because he never learned to pace himself or because he never advanced his skillset, he often got injured during pivotal moments. He left so much on the table, the series vs Detroit is the most glaring. Hes lucky he had Bron for his final 2 chips when he was very sporadic.


Greast post, One thing I didnt consider was defensive versatilty and TMAC definitly has that, also your point that his teams in Orlando were so bad it hurt his defensive statistics. If his team was better defensively his numbers would have been better defenively and therefore his PER could have gone even higher, which would be scary.

And to your point about Wade, it's kind of crazy how good his numbers were before Lebron and even his first year with Lebron were, but after 10-11 those injuries really started piling up. Had Wade been trully healthy they definitly could have 3 peated at least, but his injuries probably really hindered the Heats ability to dominate even more. I will say this, he was a damn good side kick to LeBron, his WS and PER LeBrons first year were incredible, and even after he was banged up, his numbers were still pretty incredible, its only the injuries that deterred the Heats progress.

Minimal
05-08-2015, 02:37 PM
Player 3 without question. He is efficient and is a great defender.

nastynice
05-08-2015, 03:18 PM
I go player 2. seems the best offensive threat and versatility given the fg %. Also, strong, don't like the turnover to assist ratio, but the other numbers rank him tops for me personally

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 03:33 PM
Player 3 without question. He is efficient and is a great defender.

Player 2 has higher TS% plus 10 more games played on average, but to your point, his defense is steller. I have debated between the 2, but the Games played was the deciding factor for me, player 3 played a half season less than player 2. 40 games less over 4 year period.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:39 PM
For future reference, you can save time by simply valuing o-rtg over TS% and Turnovers because it incorporates them both(among other stats but those 2 are most important). Its the best barometer we have for per possession efficiency thats readily available.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 03:59 PM
For future reference, you can save time by simply valuing o-rtg over TS% and Turnovers because it incorporates them both(among other stats but those 2 are most important). Its the best barometer we have for per possession efficiency thats readily available.

Thanks I was going to add o-rtg but wasn't quite sure what it entailed.

DWNTWNLakeShow
05-08-2015, 04:00 PM
Player 2

5ass
05-08-2015, 04:00 PM
Based on the stats u posted id take player 3, but after mentioning the players ill take tmac.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 04:08 PM
Thanks I was going to add o-rtg but wasn't quite sure what it entailed.

The name confuses alot of people. If PER and ORTG were to switch names, it might be more aptly described, as PER is mostly offensively influenced and doesn't really value efficiency so much as usage, whereas ORTG isn't really a rating in the sense most people understand, but it is PURELY efficiency related.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 04:15 PM
The name confuses alot of people. If PER and ORTG were to switch names, it might be more aptly described, as PER is mostly offensively influenced and doesn't really value efficiency so much as usage, whereas ORTG isn't really a rating in the sense most people understand, but it is PURELY efficiency related.



Here is O-rtg and d-rtg 4 year average

Player 1 (McGrady) O-rtg - 112 D-rtg 105

Player 2 (Kobe) O-rtg 114 D-rtg 108

Player 3 (Wade) O-rtg 111 D-rtg 105


What does D-rtg entail Chronz? is this a good measure of Defense?

Chronz
05-08-2015, 04:30 PM
I wouldn't worry too much about D-RTG, just know it influences DWS, its why its sometimes best to separate the O&D WS numbers. Its a rudimentary rating system for defense but its no different than people looking at reb+stls+blks in conjunction with his teams defensive standing.

Its usually pretty spot on with bigmen anchors, but its more of a step 1 thing. Also you have to keep in mind that these efficiency markers aren't era adjusted. In some eras a 101 rating could be better than a 99.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 04:34 PM
I wouldn't worry too much about D-RTG, just know it influences DWS, its why its sometimes best to separate the O&D WS numbers. Its a rudimentary rating system for defense but its no different than people looking at reb+stls+blks in conjunction with his teams defensive standing.

Its usually pretty spot on with bigmen anchors, but its more of a step 1 thing. Also you have to keep in mind that these efficiency markers aren't era adjusted. In some eras a 101 rating could be better than a 99.

Yeah, you can definitly see that the D-rtg is flawed, Wades blocks and steals were much better than McGrady and Wade, but his D-rtg was the lowest.

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 04:36 PM
I wouldn't worry too much about D-RTG, just know it influences DWS, its why its sometimes best to separate the O&D WS numbers. Its a rudimentary rating system for defense but its no different than people looking at reb+stls+blks in conjunction with his teams defensive standing.

Its usually pretty spot on with bigmen anchors, but its more of a step 1 thing. Also you have to keep in mind that these efficiency markers aren't era adjusted. In some eras a 101 rating could be better than a 99.

If you had to take your favorite 3-5 stats/ stat formulas to try to paint the most clear picture of a player's overall abilities, worth, awesomeness, which would they be?

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 06:05 PM
If you had to take your favorite 3-5 stats/ stat formulas to try to paint the most clear picture of a player's overall abilities, worth, awesomeness, which would they be?

Thats a great question, I would like to know that answer as well.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 06:16 PM
Yeah, you can definitly see that the D-rtg is flawed, Wades blocks and steals were much better than McGrady and Wade, but his D-rtg was the lowest.

That is interesting. Gonna have to look at the team success and era translations when I get a chance. But yeah, defense is a tricky ***** to gauge.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 06:19 PM
If you had to take your favorite 3-5 stats/ stat formulas to try to paint the most clear picture of a player's overall abilities, worth, awesomeness, which would they be?

Usage%, O-RTG and rebound rates. That tells me everything I really need to know statistically. After that, you can look at PER/WS/WP to get a sense for how influential those numbers were given their era.

Forgot to mention, this is focusing on statistical impact and not play style. Obviously 2 guys could be equally efficient but one could be doing it on the strength of interior play, the other off perimeter domination. That stuff still matters, but you're asking me for top-3 stats.

flea
05-08-2015, 06:27 PM
Yeah, you can definitly see that the D-rtg is flawed, Wades blocks and steals were much better than McGrady and Wade, but his D-rtg was the lowest.

D rating is almost useless for wings, IMO. If it really likes a wing it's probably because they collect a lot of defensive boards/blocks/steals OR play on a really good defense (for example, Iverson looked like a top wing defender when he was on Mutumbo defenses).

For bigs it's tricky - they will generally rate good defenders highly but the way they do it obscures some things. For instance, because defensive rebounds are credited as a "stop" for a player, someone like Andre Drummond has a better rating this year than Al Horford. Al Horford was a better defender than Drummond when he was 20, and he's an anchor in his prime. The difference being that Drummond is a top rebounder while Horford is merely average for his position. Horford also anchors what's really a matchup zone because he has such good mobility - but he doesn't have the length or athleticism of other anchors (like Jordan and Duncan) so he doesn't register blocks. Because of Horford's responsibilities in the defensive scheme he is often out of rebound position (they double in the post and sometimes trap on pick and rolls).

The ratings drastically underrate elite wings like Battier and Tony Allen who don't generate turnovers. The reason Kawhi scored so highly is that he's the rare wing who creates turnovers, rebounds, and plays on a great defense. Tim Duncan has been making mediocre players look good for years, and I actually think D rating underrates his impact even though IIRC he is the best defender by career D rating.

Teufelshunde4
05-08-2015, 06:31 PM
4year peak averages - Bold indicates leader in each category.

Player 1
74gp 27.85ppg 6.65 rebounds 5.51 assists 1.6 steals .78 Blocks .439 FG% .354 3pt% 77.8 FT% .483eFG%
2.5 turnovers .537 TS%
0 Championships

Player 2
80gp 30.54ppg 5.65 rebounds 5.05 assists 1.63 steals .50 blocks .460 FG% .354 3pt% 85.2 FT%
.485 eFG%
3.0 turnovers .570 TS%
1 Championship 1 Finals MVP

Player 3
70gp 26.73ppg 5.1 rebounds 6.38 assists 1.95 steals 1.0 Blocks .484 FG% .301 3pt% .760 FT%
.504 eFG%
3.55 turnovers .566 TS%
1 Championship 1 Finals MVP


Discuss..


I don't think you can pick a player solely based on stats. Thr composition of the rest of the roster is far to important to just cherry pick based on stats. Plus you give no ages. A player can be dominate statically and not win in the playoffs. IMO in nba no player is a superstar until they can raise the level of their game in postseason.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 07:03 PM
I don't think you can pick a player solely based on stats. Thr composition of the rest of the roster is far to important to just cherry pick based on stats. Plus you give no ages. A player can be dominate statically and not win in the playoffs. IMO in nba no player is a superstar until they can raise the level of their game in postseason.

Player 1 (Tmac) was 23-27 years old for these stats playing with Orlando and 1 year with Houston.
Player 2 ( Kobe) was 25-29 and its 3 years without Shaq and 1 year with Pau
Player 3 ( Wade) was 26-30 and it includes the year he won his ring with Shaq and 1 year with LeBron..

The question is about these 3 players 4 year prime, who would you take just looking at the numbers, I have posted more numbers along the way to help give more data.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 07:37 PM
It is pretty close overall but just on the stats I think I would go player 2.

Knowing that it's Kobe vs wade vs tmac I would still take Kobe over the others as the biggest question I had was defense of the 3 which stats don't tell. The other two have had individual years better but Kobe has been far more healthy and consistently dominant than them.

L8kers4life
05-08-2015, 07:54 PM
It is pretty close overall but just on the stats I think I would go player 2.

Knowing that it's Kobe vs wade vs tmac I would still take Kobe over the others as the biggest question I had was defense of the 3 which stats don't tell. The other two have had individual years better but Kobe has been far more healthy and consistently dominant than them.

Yeah looking at these numbers, TMAC and Wade both had 1-2 year runs that can only rival LeBrons crazy numbers, defensively is where I really want to see the comparison, I tried adding D-rtg but that doesnt seem to paint an accurate picture of their Defense.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 08:38 PM
Yeah looking at these numbers, TMAC and Wade both had 1-2 year runs that can only rival LeBrons crazy numbers, defensively is where I really want to see the comparison, I tried adding D-rtg but that doesnt seem to paint an accurate picture of their Defense.

I really don't put much stock into drtg honestly, especially for perimeter players. I'm sure there are some decent defensive stats but it's mostly eye test for me.

They all have their strengths on defense so I wouldn't give any a huge edge there. Tmac versatility, wade as a help defender, and Kobe as a free safety or pressuring guards.

Ya tmac and wade each had a couple of crazy years. Once you get past a couple seasons stretch I think Kobe probably is the right choice.