Reading through a few threads, apparently PER has become a big factor when people decide on who's a better player (or perhaps it's just the unintelligent guys doing this). I see PER stats being thrown out more than ever before; certainly, through two months of the season, I've seen the PER rating tossed out more times than ALL of last season.
PER, for one, was created by John Hollinger, therefore, it's usually completely idiotic to begin with. There are variations, but most of them are the same thing, just with a few adjustments.. and most people use the Hollinger one anyway. It basically just spits out a number on how effective a player is in 2 plays (or one minute, since it's a 'per minute' stat). Meaning, players like Bruce Bowen, who before this year was known as a defensive specialist and moderate three point threat, but doesn't get many blocks, steals or 3 pointers would be ranked amongst the lowest in the league (Source). Obviously, even this season, there's a lot of problems wrong with using the rating to determine who the better player is. For example, just looking of the Top 50 list, I see:
Devin Harris (#3) is more important to his team than Dwight Howard, Carlos Boozer, Brandon Roy, Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant and Yao Ming (In consecutive order based on PER).
Zydrunas Illgauskas is on par with Amare Stoudemire, and is better than Shaquille O'Neal, Vince Carter, Pau Gasol and Kevin Garnett, whilst still being a top 16 player in the league. *hmm*
Rajon Rondo is more important to his team than Chauncey Billups, who many believe has kick-started the Nuggets and is one of the more important players to his team in the league.
The most impressive rookie, Mareesee Speights (can't say I'm surprised ) is more important than Joe Johnson, and almost on a level with Manu Ginobili, Danny Granger and Chauncey Billups.
The list could go on and on.
So does anybody actually have a valid argument as to why PER is such an important stat that it is used in basically every single thread to bring up some kind of point?
F__K HOLLINGER and his PER BULLSHT. it's geek analysis by nerds who never played the game. if you ever picked teams, you ain't gonna use PER to see which guys to pick. the PER overrates some so-mediocre players and disregards so many essential players. it's mostly stupid spreadsheet math that has no place in the real world. this PER BULLSHT has to die.
F__K HOLLINGER and his PER BULLSHT. it's geek analysis by nerds who never played the game. if you ever picked teams, you ain't gonna use PER to see which guys to pick. the PER overrates some so mediocre players and disregards so many essential players. this PER BULLSHT has to die.
It's a single number that manages to tell you nothing about a player's capabilities, a bunch of math that results in something actually inferior to just reading a statline. Only useful to players of fantasy basketball. To reprint my issues with PER:
Once uPER is calculated, it must be adjusted for team pace and normalized to the league to become PER:
And now to rant: I hate this statistic. It is the only "stat" that tells you absolutely nothing, and yet some posters brag on it like it's the most important thing possible. I would bet that most of the people talking about per don't know the equations used to create it, nor do they get the relevance of numbers like "0.44." It's random addition, subtraction, divison, and multiplication...well, not truly "random"; it's based on what John Hollinger values. The system doesn't really value defense at all and doesn't really tell you what a player is truly good at. A high per generally means a guy can score, and beyond that, you can only guess. Why this stat is better than just looking up a guy's actual numbers, I have no idea, but a lot of posters here just love it.