2009 LeBron now has the highest single season BPM of all time. It used to be 17 Westbrook with the old formula.
Printable View
2009 LeBron now has the highest single season BPM of all time. It used to be 17 Westbrook with the old formula.
We win AGAIN.
[QUOTE=Uncle Drew;13937629]We win AGAIN.[/QUOTE]
we don't though as it put Ordan above LeBron in career average
so this new BPM sucks
[QUOTE=Trollsmasher;13937632]we don't though as it put Ordan above LeBron in career average
so this new BPM sucks[/QUOTE]
And this is how Bran stans "watch" basketball.
Never was big on BPM. Its basically a box-score combined into one. RPM, RAPM and PIPM at least adjust for lineups, opponents etc.
PER isn't half bad either, if only measuring TOTAL efficiency.
BPM seems to make more sense than PER. At least the old one did. Gotta get used to the new one. PER thinks Enes Kanter and Hassan Whiteside are superstars.
Very strong stat.
Harden has led the league in BPM the last two years and is 2nd this year. :applause:
[QUOTE=superduper;13937635]And this is how Bran stans "watch" basketball.[/QUOTE]
Now imagine these pencil neck geeks trying to hoop.
lebron is only higher by .2 for the single season high in bpm
jordan has 4 of the top 10 single seasons and lebron has 3
stockton is now 8th all time and bird is 7th so there's two white guys in the top 10 now. lol
stockton is 3rd in career vorp now with the updated formula
pretty much every "advanced stat" i've seen has stockton as a goat level player
[QUOTE=superduper;13937635]And this is how Bran stans "watch" basketball.[/QUOTE]
This :lol
[QUOTE=post;13937656]lebron is only higher by .2 for the single season high in bpm
jordan has 4 of the top 10 single seasons and lebron has 3
stockton is now 8th all time and bird is 7th so there's two white guys in the top 10 now. lol
stockton is 3rd in career vorp now with the updated formula
pretty much every "advanced stat" i've seen has stockton as a goat level player[/QUOTE]
stockton and bird are in the top ten for career bpm not single season in case anyone was wondering what i meant
also it seems the newer advanced stats favor stockton better than the older ones like per and win shares per 48
meh
whatever
he was one of my favorite players as a kid and i don't even live in utah but i probably can't honestly say he's a top ten player of all time
[QUOTE=Manny98;13937657]This :lol[/QUOTE]
Wrong account
[QUOTE=RRR3;13937671]Wrong account[/QUOTE]
:lol :lol :lol
[QUOTE=post;13937670]stockton and bird are in the top ten for career bpm not single season in case anyone was wondering what i meant
also it seems the newer advanced stats favor stockton better than the older ones like per and win shares per 48
meh
whatever
he was one of my favorite players as a kid and i don't even live in utah but i probably can't honestly say he's a top ten player of all time[/QUOTE]
there's a stat called raptor and jaws that says stockton is the third best player since 1976
[url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/lebron-or-mj-raptor-picks-the-best-nba-players-of-the-past-40-years/[/url]
personally i think all these stats are a bit crazy but maybe i'm getting a little bit old. lol
There's been a lot of other changes to advanced metrics this year too
RPM was changed this year. Prior years it was pretty stable and the creator of it would engage with folks who were curious how/why certain players fell into certain places
The creator left ESPN (Was hired by the Mavs, can't remember which atm). Then all of a sudden they changed the formula to whatever we have now which is pretty wild (They admitted to changing it here, just there were more changes under the hood they didn't mention or they didn't foresee just how drastic the changes were)
[QUOTE]Because Engelmann joined the Dallas Mavericks as a senior analyst, RPM has moved in-house, with ESPN Analytics taking the lead in generating it for this and future seasons. In conjunction, we've bolstered the box-score prior with the inclusion of tracking data. The spirit of RPM remains largely the same in the new version, which you might call RPM 2.0.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/28309836/how-real-plus-minus-reveal-hidden-nba-stars[/url]
If you check out the other hoops forums they basically wrote the stat off due to the changes.
DBPM was also affected with Ben Wallace going from 1st to 5th.
I guess it's some sort of trend?
Regardless, PIPM seems to be the best regarded publicly available "catch-all" stat for most of this season. Unless they suddenly change that one up too
[QUOTE=RRR3;13937671]Wrong account[/QUOTE]
Shut up Tranny lover
After reading over the changes and their reasonings, and the new formula, I actually agree and think this will make BPM a better catch-all statistic. By extension it also boosts VORP
I especially like the adjustments to DBPM where it’s not largely determined by defensive rebounds anymore
[QUOTE=LostCause;13937687]There's been a lot of other changes to advanced metrics this year too
RPM was changed this year. Prior years it was pretty stable and the creator of it would engage with folks who were curious how/why certain players fell into certain places
The creator left ESPN (Was hired by the Mavs, can't remember which atm). Then all of a sudden they changed the formula to whatever we have now which is pretty wild (They admitted to changing it here, just there were more changes under the hood they didn't mention or they didn't foresee just how drastic the changes were)
[url]https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/28309836/how-real-plus-minus-reveal-hidden-nba-stars[/url]
If you check out the other hoops forums they basically wrote the stat off due to the changes.
DBPM was also affected with Ben Wallace going from 1st to 5th.
I guess it's some sort of trend?
Regardless, PIPM seems to be the best regarded publicly available "catch-all" stat for most of this season. Unless they suddenly change that one up too[/QUOTE]
bpm has anthony davis 5th, pipm has him 10th, and espn rpm has him 81st. lol
what is the average person to make out of all this nonsense
[QUOTE=post;13937718]bpm has anthony davis 5th, pipm has him 10th, and espn rpm has him 81st. lol
what is the average person to make out of all this nonsense[/QUOTE]
pipm has brook lopez 11th, bpm has him 51st, and espn rpm has him 147th
[QUOTE=LostCause;13937711]After reading over the changes and their reasonings, and the new formula, I actually agree and think this will make BPM a better catch-all statistic. By extension it also boosts VORP
I especially like the adjustments to DBPM where it’s not largely determined by defensive rebounds anymore[/QUOTE]
I've been telling you guys that for years - defensive rebs is why Bird had higher dbpm than pippen
So MJ is now #1 all-time in PER, BPM, and WS/48?
so everything proves MJ is goat - stats, modern era winning in 3-pointer basketball, clutch, mentality (mamba), and shooting (goat mid-range volume and efficiency)
:bowdown:
[QUOTE=3ball;13937728]So MJ is now #1 all-time in PER, BPM, and WS/48?
so everything proves MJ is goat - stats, modern era winning in 3-pointer basketball, clutch, mentality (mamba), and shooting (goat mid-range volume and efficiency)
:bowdown:[/QUOTE]
Cool, but LeBron has a higher peak BPM,PER and WS/48 than MJ :confusedshrug:
In the regular season at least, 91 MJs playoff run is GOAT
[QUOTE=3ball;13937728]So MJ is now #1 all-time in PER, BPM, and WS/48?
so everything proves MJ is goat - stats, modern era winning in 3-pointer basketball, clutch, mentality (mamba), and shooting (goat mid-range volume and efficiency)
:bowdown:[/QUOTE]
Not even close. He doesn't have the most rings (Russell) best stats (Wilt) or longevity/career totals (Kareem/LeBron)
LeBron also happens to be top 3 in basically every advanced stat (PER, WS, BPM, VORP), so hyping those up while claiming LeBron isn't even top 15 will leave you in a perpetual loop where you constantly contradict yourself :lol
[QUOTE=post;13937718]bpm has anthony davis 5th, pipm has him 10th, and espn rpm has him 81st. lol
what is the average person to make out of all this nonsense[/QUOTE]
From what I can see at least, the problem with RPM this season is that they’ve just been....lazy. They added tracking data to it and are trying to account for matchups, the problem is the data is just out of whack. For example they have players listed as positions they never played this season (Like Kohn Henson) and matching against players they never match up with
It’s embarrassingly bad and it wouldn’t surprise me if it looks wholly different next season because of the terrible results it has this season. At least BBref specifically tells you what the problem was, what the new formula includes, and what the changes fixed. I don’t think ESPN even knows what’s going on with RPM at this point after it’s creator left
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;13937732]Not even close. He doesn't have the most rings (Russell) best stats (Wilt) or longevity/career totals (Kareem/LeBron)
LeBron also happens to be top 3 in basically every advanced stat (PER, WS, BPM, VORP), so hyping those up while claiming LeBron isn't even top 15 will leave you in a perpetual loop where you constantly contradict yourself :lol[/QUOTE]
I'm tired of your shallow takes.. Don't bother respond to my posts if you're going to post some ignorant, skip bayless-level bullshit
First of all, I know it sounds good and most people will just think "100 points" and agree with you..............................
But explain how Wilt has better stats than MJ
MJ averaged [U]far[/U] more PPG in the playoffs (33.5 to 22.4), regular season (30.1 to 30.0), 3 more scoring titles, and #1 in PER, BPM and WS/48.
^^^ That destroys Wilt - a couple seasons of 40 and 50 ppg (harden-like bullshit taking advantage of era) doesn't beat MJ's vastly superior career of statistical excellence.. Notice how MJ leads all the "rate of production" stats, aka degree of domination stats like PPG, efficiency rating, WS/48 (contribution to winning), and BPM - no one is close to this and you simply have your head in the sand.. MJ also set the record for plus-minus in 1996 before Curry broke the mark in 16'
So MJ has the best stats and it's not close
Regarding winning - the lack of 3-point line/spacing in Russell's era made good team offense/ortgs impossible, thus allowing a 1-way defender like Russell to win the most.. But since the 3-point line was instituted, all 40 league MVP's have been dominant offensive players, which means Russell wouldn't be MVP-caliber in the modern era/3-pointer basketball.. Accordingly, MJ's 6 rings in the modern era is the goat winning standard - that's twice many "best player" rings as anyone in the modern era (maybe you could argue that Duncan has 4, but that's it)
So again, MJ has goat stats, winning and clutch.. and it's not close
[QUOTE=superduper;13937635]And this is how Bran stans "watch" basketball.[/QUOTE]
It's a more accurate way to experience the game. You plebs watch a buncha nigguhs jumping around in shorts, while we (The Faithful™) are able to glean every single minute detail of the game by looking at the Matrix code directly.
there are just fundamental flaws to this calculation
if you don't account for win, then there are no needs to set the league average of 0 since it's not a zero sum game.
the very basis of trying to set a league average of 0 neglects efficiency.
and for the argument of seasons and minutes balancing out, it actually shows the flaw of the max contract system, since how can the product be good if elite players are playing more minutes and less seasons. reminder, there is a thing called the regular season, and one called the playoff.
if black people were the rich people in America, how would it not make sense for them to bench their QB until they are more fully developed, in order to produce better results with better longevity.
and they soon will be, since it's the white folks collecting the mean checks while blacks collected rings. Aka-Lebron effect
and in this unbalanced pre-determined dynamic, rings speak.
[QUOTE=Manny98;13937657]This :lol[/QUOTE]
Thought you were on your rudeboi account:lol
[QUOTE=3ball;13937765]I'm tired of your shallow takes.. Don't bother respond to my posts if you're going to post some ignorant, skip bayless-level bullshit
First of all, I know it sounds good and most people will just think "100 points" and agree with you..............................
But explain how Wilt has better stats than MJ
MJ averaged [U]far[/U] more PPG in the playoffs (33.5 to 22.4), regular season (30.1 to 30.0), 3 more scoring titles, and #1 in PER, BPM and WS/48.
^^^ That destroys Wilt - a couple seasons of 40 and 50 ppg (harden-like bullshit taking advantage of era) doesn't beat MJ's vastly superior career of statistical excellence.. Notice how MJ leads all the "rate of production" stats, aka degree of domination stats like PPG, efficiency rating, WS/48 (contribution to winning), and BPM - no one is close to this and you simply have your head in the sand.. MJ also set the record for plus-minus in 1996 before Curry broke the mark in 16'
So MJ has the best stats and it's not close
Regarding winning - the lack of 3-point line/spacing in Russell's era made good team offense/ortgs impossible, thus allowing a 1-way defender like Russell to win the most.. But since the 3-point line was instituted, all 40 league MVP's have been dominant offensive players, which means Russell wouldn't be MVP-caliber in the modern era/3-pointer basketball.. Accordingly, MJ's 6 rings in the modern era is the goat winning standard - that's twice many "best player" rings as anyone in the modern era (maybe you could argue that Duncan has 4, but that's it)
So again, MJ has goat stats, winning and clutch.. and it's not close[/QUOTE]
doesn't make sense to talk about bpm when there are no bpm stats for wilt
isn't wilt's per lower than it would be because there were no block and steal stats included and it doesn't even try to measure them for wilt?
my understanding is win shares per 48 tries to measure blocks and steals for wilt but i don't know if that makes sense for guys there are no block and steal stats for. seems at best it would be a rough approximation
similar with plus minus. are there actually plus minus stats for wilt? i've never seen them
wilt has the higher single season in both per and win shares per 48 compared to jordan
i don't think counting rings matters that much. if you put wilt on the celtics he might win just as much as russell, or if not as much then at least 6 like jordan
doesn't traditional wisdom say if you have a dominant big guy (wilt) and a dominant guard (jordan) you take the dominant big guy?
my dad saw wilt play live when he was younger and he told me wilt sometimes didn't try as hard as he could but if he was in the right head space or got mad he would take over the game against anybody. people on the internet have said similar things. so maybe jordan had more passion for the game and was trying 100% all the time. that's not a knock on jordan but it may explain some of wilt's statistical shortcomings compared to jordan. wilt also took far fewer shots per game in the second half of his career and never played with a player of pippen's caliber until he went to the lakers and wilt wasn't even trying to score on the lakers
[QUOTE=3ball;13937765]I'm tired of your shallow takes.. Don't bother respond to my posts if you're going to post some ignorant, skip bayless-level bullshit
First of all, I know it sounds good and most people will just think "100 points" and agree with you..............................
But explain how Wilt has better stats than MJ
MJ averaged [U]far[/U] more PPG in the playoffs (33.5 to 22.4), regular season (30.1 to 30.0), 3 more scoring titles, and #1 in PER, BPM and WS/48.
^^^ That destroys Wilt - a couple seasons of 40 and 50 ppg (harden-like bullshit taking advantage of era) doesn't beat MJ's vastly superior career of statistical excellence.. Notice how MJ leads all the "rate of production" stats, aka degree of domination stats like PPG, efficiency rating, WS/48 (contribution to winning), and BPM - no one is close to this and you simply have your head in the sand.. MJ also set the record for plus-minus in 1996 before Curry broke the mark in 16'
So MJ has the best stats and it's not close
Regarding winning - the lack of 3-point line/spacing in Russell's era made good team offense/ortgs impossible, thus allowing a 1-way defender like Russell to win the most.. But since the 3-point line was instituted, all 40 league MVP's have been dominant offensive players, which means Russell wouldn't be MVP-caliber in the modern era/3-pointer basketball.. Accordingly, MJ's 6 rings in the modern era is the goat winning standard - that's twice many "best player" rings as anyone in the modern era (maybe you could argue that Duncan has 4, but that's it)
So again, MJ has goat stats, winning and clutch.. and it's not close[/QUOTE]
Pts 6911
Game winners 10
Elim game ppg 34.9
Steals 421
1st, 1st, 1st, 1st
LeBron wins again