Is PER the single most telling statistic?

[Im Still Ballin]

I think it is. It usually coincides with the all time list and where players are ranked year in and year out.

Easily the best statistic we have.

[SouBeachTalents]

No, rangz

[T_L_P]

RAPM, PER, WS, WS/48, new +/- all need to be correlated.

PER is solely an offensive stat. That alone means it's not telling enough.

[STATUTORY]

I only count rings

[KyleKong]

I only count rings

Stop posting.

[I<3NBA]

I only count rings
So Russell>Horry>Kobe right?

[Droid101]

PER is solely an offensive stat. That alone means it's not telling enough.
No it isn't you ****shit.

It includes defensive rebounds, steals, blocks, etc.

So, therefore, as usual, you prove yourself you be a complete ****ing dipshit retard.

Carry on.

[Anaximandro1]

PER sums up the player' statistical accomplishments (per minute) adjusted for the team's pace.


Problems with PER (and advanced stats):

- declines with mpg

- is not a reliable measure of a player's defensive impact


And of course, PER:

- declines with age and milage

- declines in the late stages of the NBA playoffs

- depends on the team structure and varies across eras (Dirk's PER dwarfs Bird's, particularly in the playoffs)



That said, the combination of PER, WS/48, USG% and ORtg - DRtg works reasonably well. For example:

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vgRcipHQJI0/VGSrrDFXP2I/AAAAAAAADdE/_nEF0E5FwRQ/s1600/1.jpg

[tgan3]

No it isn't. I remembered last year when the kings where bad but they had individual players with very high PER. So it doesn't really mean anything.

[tgan3]

No it isn't you ****shit.

It includes defensive rebounds, steals, blocks, etc.

So, therefore, as usual, you prove yourself you be a complete ****ing dipshit retard.

Carry on.

But it doesn't count lots of other intangibles like how many shots a defender has cause a player to miss without blocking, how their positioning prevents a player from driving in and also taking charges etc...

[kurple]

why is everyone so obsessed with ranking everything and everyone?

[eklip]

PER represents the statistical output of a player per possession or per minute pretty well.

If you have two "per 100 possession" stat lines, the statline most people think is better is usually the one with the higher PER. I think PER does a good job putting all box score stats into one number.

If people want to rank players, PER is better than just looking at the pts/reb/ast and FG% like many people do but obviously stats don't tell the whole story, not even on offense (double teams, screens, floor spacing, off-ball movement, ...).

[Young X]

PER represents the statistical output of a player per possession or per minute pretty well.

If you have two "per 100 possession" stat lines, the statline most people think is better is usually the one with the higher PER. I think PER does a good job putting all box score stats into one number.

If people want to rank players, PER is better than just looking at the pts/reb/ast and FG% like many people do but obviously stats don't tell the whole story, not even on offense (double teams, screens, floor spacing, off-ball movement, ...).Exactly, it basically summarizes a player's statistical output per possession while they're on the floor and nothing else. People need to stop using it as a player ranking stat. It just so happens that the most productive players are usually the best players (but not all the time).

[ImKobe]

Nope.

[Pointguard]

Funny, Hollinger was running the stat by me everyday when he was creating it - I worked in the central library in manhattan at the time and it was the only place you could get the best boxscores. He was very thorough and more excited about this stat than any other he created. I told him then that it betrayed point guards and defensive players a bit and he said thinking/decision making isn't measurable in real life that much either. Deflections and denials aren't currently captured either.

It is the best stat for productive players and guys who fill up the stat sheet because it captures more stats than any other and has a measure for other factors of play as well. It is the most comprehensive, which is what he had in mind when he created it.

[STATUTORY]

Funny, Hollinger was running the stat by me everyday when he was creating it - I worked in the central library in manhattan at the time and it was the only place you could get the best boxscores. He was very thorough and more excited about this stat than any other he created. I told him then that it betrayed point guards and defensive players a bit and he said thinking/decision making isn't measurable in real life that much either. Deflections and denials aren't currently captured either.

It is the best stat for productive players and guys who fill up the stat sheet because it captures more stats than any other and has a measure for other factors of play as well. It is the most comprehensive, which is what he had in mind when he created it.

i bet now he wont even return your texts

tossed u aside like u mo williams

[Pointguard]

i bet now he wont even return your texts

tossed u aside like u mo williams
:lol Our conversations were like Dmavs' and mine are now.

[StephHamann]

According to PER Brandan Wright was the 13th best player last year.

Good stat :applause:

[wakencdukest]

Question for stat guys: Is there a correlation between PER and Winning? If you added up the PER score for every player on every team, would the teams with the highest collective PER scores be at the top of the standings?

[Nash]

admit it everyone, Hollinger is leaving our dreams.

[stalkerforlife]

Rings.

Finals appearances.

Wins.

Better than any stat, especially when combined with stats.

[SHAQisGOAT]

D-Wade has a higher peak PER than Kareem.

T-Mac's highest PER is better than any of Bird's.

Kobe's best PER is above Magic's best.

...

Definitely :rolleyes:

[Timmy D for MVP]

It is the single most telling stat.

I can tell that anyone who uses it so definitively is dumb.

[IncarceratedBob]

Hollinger is a borderline retard. How anyone takes any of this work seriously is beyond me. The PER formula is Jersey Number + Points scored / shoe size + assists per game.

[Smoke117]

It's the single WORST stat right now. It relies too much on a players scoring and their efficiency to get it's rating. It takes into account nothing defensively and very little as far as rebounds and assist.

[Psileas]

It's the single WORST stat right now. It relies too much on a players scoring and their efficiency to get it's rating. It takes into account nothing defensively and very little as far as rebounds and assist.

True. Take an elite (efficient) scorer who does nothing else, and his PER is still going to be pretty high. Take prime Dennis Rodman and his PER is only average.

[Smoke117]

True. Take an elite (efficient) scorer who does nothing else, and his PER is still going to be pretty high. Take prime Dennis Rodman and his PER is only average.

Jason Kidd has had a per over 20 only twice...EVER. :oldlol: He's one of the greatest players of all time. It's the worst statistic ever devised.

[Pointguard]

Hollinger is a borderline retard. How anyone takes any of this work seriously is beyond me. The PER formula is Jersey Number + Points scored / shoe size + assists per game.
Shoe size X's .44. Don't be lazy, write out the whole formula. Bob always trying to take the shortcut.

Yeah Psilas/Smoke117, a bright player that makes all the right decisions or flip a franchise ala Bird/Magic/Kidd won't get their just due with it.