Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: John Starks vs. Latrell Sprewell and the System? : How Does Subjectivity, Statis

Expand Messages
  • nickouli5
    Why are they overatted, from your subjective viewpoint?
    Message 1 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Why are they overatted, from your subjective viewpoint?
    • mrintp2000
      Well, like you showed in your other post their PER s weren t overly impressive. Spree s all time best PER was 19.22 in 96-97, his last year in GS. I m from the
      Message 2 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Well, like you showed in your other post their PER's weren't overly
        impressive. Spree's all time best PER was 19.22 in 96-97, his last
        year in GS. I'm from the Bay Area, he was actually my favorite
        player. But he ranked behind: MJ, Penny, Richmond, Drexler, and
        Miller at the 2. I think Spree sacrificed his own production playing
        the 3 in NY all those years when he is really a prototype 2. And by
        the time he got to NY he didn't have that freaky athleticism
        anymore. He really was a shutdown defender those first couple years
        in GS, too bad we don't have the PER's of opposing 2's to prove it.

        As for Starks, I never thought he was much of a player. He was
        feisty and I remember him being a decent passer. At his best he was
        maybe the 13th best 2 in the league, meaning at his best he was an
        average starter. He also missed a lot of games due to injury. If he
        didn't play for the Knicks nobody would even know his name, well we
        all would but you know what I mean.


        In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
        > Why are they overatted, from your subjective viewpoint?
      • nickouli5
        Well the thing with PER is guys like Marquis Daniels are in the Top 5. He defnetely was not a Top 5 SG this season. Maybe it points to his potential, but on
        Message 3 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Well the thing with PER is guys like Marquis Daniels are in the Top 5.

          He defnetely was not a Top 5 SG this season. Maybe it points to his
          potential, but on the other hand maybe he was just efficient in the
          Dallas HIGH Paced system. Maybe if he goes to the Detroit Pistons or
          Indiana Pacers he wouldn't even be a factor in a slow Paced offense.
          It wasn't like Marquis had blinding speed, was a great passer, great
          shooter etc... He seemed like a solid mid-range shooter who
          flourished in the open court game, and had above average
          athleticism. But Top 5 SG? I don't know if watching him in his
          rookie season you would get the impression he would be a Top 5 SG
          anytime in the near future.

          Regarding John Starks -- I think he could have been a pretty good
          player outside of NY if he went to a team that got in trasition a
          little bit more. He probably got more PUB due to being in NY, but I
          doubt scoring 19ppg 5apg and playing solid defense is just being an
          average starter when playing for a Top 5 team in the league. Oakley
          was solid, and so was Charlies Smith, and Mason in 1992-93, but
          Starks was the one who hit big shots down the stretch of games. He
          was the one who could take control of games with his tenacity. That
          won't show up in the stats, but there were more efficient guards, who
          underacheieved a lot more than Starks down the stretch of games. Is
          it fair to write off Starks who was a big part of their 60 win
          season? Ewing and Oakley alone weren't the ones getting them 60
          wins. Starks was a pretty big factor, efficient or not. I Say his
          best season he was a Top 8-11 SG.

          This is why I have somewhat of a problem with the PER, its too easy
          to dismiss the guys who DO RAISE THEIR GAME in the 4th quarter or
          play well against big teams like the Lakers. If I were to look at
          PER's I could also deduce Isiah Thomas was barely a Top 10 PG in any
          season -- but we all know in crunch time he could be the best PG in
          the game with Magic Johnson (better than the more efficient Mark
          Price or Kevin Johnson etc....).

          So what does that say about rating players? If we go by pure
          statisticals ratings such as PER its easy to dispell many players as
          ovveratted. Does that mean we also give credit to suprise players
          who are highly rated but for some reason still aren't given props,
          and they are simply random examples of those who create the "laugh
          test" in this type of rating schemes.

          Tony Parker didn't even graze the Top 20 PER and yet some are saying
          he is already a Top 10 PG or even Top 5! Why is that? There seems to
          be sort of a double standard and subjectivity, or at least most are't
          willing to say who they beleive are Top 10 calibur players of their
          positions.

          Do you mind if I ask you, based on all the rating schemes, stats,
          personal viewing of the playoffs, regular season games -- what would
          be your Top 10 SG List right now for the upcoming season? Without
          taking a look back at PER's or any other rating scheme.......

          Just curious.
        • mrintp2000
          ... He may turn out to be a very good player but I dont think Daniels was productive at all last year. Daniels is a good example of why I think the PER-diff
          Message 4 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            ---
            In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
            > Well the thing with PER is guys like Marquis Daniels are in the Top 5.
            >
            > He defnetely was not a Top 5 SG this season. Maybe it points to his
            > potential, but on the other hand maybe he was just efficient in the
            > Dallas HIGH Paced system.

            He may turn out to be a very good player but I dont' think Daniels was
            productive at all last year. Daniels is a good example of why I think
            the PER-diff is so much more valuable than the PER. He was actually
            -0.4 PER-diff at the 2 guard spot, he appears to be a bad defender. He
            also was at the bottom of the +/- rankings for his team.


            > Regarding John Starks -- I think he could have been a pretty good
            > player outside of NY if he went to a team that got in trasition a
            > little bit more. He probably got more PUB due to being in NY, but I
            > doubt scoring 19ppg 5apg and playing solid defense is just being an
            > average starter when playing for a Top 5 team in the league. Oakley
            > was solid, and so was Charlies Smith, and Mason in 1992-93, but
            > Starks was the one who hit big shots down the stretch of games. He
            > was the one who could take control of games with his tenacity. That
            > won't show up in the stats, but there were more efficient guards, who
            > underacheieved a lot more than Starks down the stretch of games. Is
            > it fair to write off Starks who was a big part of their 60 win
            > season? Ewing and Oakley alone weren't the ones getting them 60
            > wins. Starks was a pretty big factor, efficient or not. I Say his
            > best season he was a Top 8-11 SG.

            You may be right, but that still means at his best he wasn't an
            all-star. As far as him being clutch I'd like to see more stats to
            back that up.
            >
            > This is why I have somewhat of a problem with the PER, its too easy
            > to dismiss the guys who DO RAISE THEIR GAME in the 4th quarter or
            > play well against big teams like the Lakers. If I were to look at
            > PER's I could also deduce Isiah Thomas was barely a Top 10 PG in any
            > season -- but we all know in crunch time he could be the best PG in
            > the game with Magic Johnson (better than the more efficient Mark
            > Price or Kevin Johnson etc....).

            I doubt Isiah was not in the top five of PG's PER ranks during his
            best years. But honestly I don't know that he was a true superstar.
            >
            > So what does that say about rating players? If we go by pure
            > statisticals ratings such as PER its easy to dispell many players as
            > ovveratted. Does that mean we also give credit to suprise players
            > who are highly rated but for some reason still aren't given props,
            > and they are simply random examples of those who create the "laugh
            > test" in this type of rating schemes.
            >
            > Tony Parker didn't even graze the Top 20 PER and yet some are saying
            > he is already a Top 10 PG or even Top 5! Why is that? There seems to
            > be sort of a double standard and subjectivity, or at least most are't
            > willing to say who they beleive are Top 10 calibur players of their
            > positions.

            I've got Tony Parker rated as the tenth best PG in terms of PER-diff
            among guys who started at the point. Really I think that's about right
            based on his performance, he did step up in the playoffs but only to
            about the level that Billups and Cassell were at during the regular
            season.
            >
            > Do you mind if I ask you, based on all the rating schemes, stats,
            > personal viewing of the playoffs, regular season games -- what would
            > be your Top 10 SG List right now for the upcoming season? Without
            > taking a look back at PER's or any other rating scheme.......

            OK let me preface this by saying that Lebron James is a 3 and the Cavs
            are stupid if they play him at guard again. So I'm not going to
            include him. Here's my guess as to who will be the top ten SG's next
            season (in order)

            TMAC
            Kobe
            Ray Allen
            Pierce
            Carter
            Wade (he's not a PG!!!!!)
            Ginobili
            Redd
            Hamilton
            Iverson

            I also think Desmond Mason and Mickael Pietrus would crack the top ten
            if given starters minutes at the 2.

            How close is my list to yours?
          • Gabe Farkas
            seriously, i would think the opposite. if such a thing as intangibles can be measured, Spree gets points for it. ... __________________________________ Do
            Message 5 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              seriously, i would think the opposite. if such a thing
              as "intangibles" can be measured, Spree gets points
              for it.


              --- nickouli5 <NikoTMP@...> wrote:
              > Why are they overatted, from your subjective
              > viewpoint?
              >
              >





              __________________________________
              Do you Yahoo!?
              Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
              http://messenger.yahoo.com/
            • nickouli5
              He may turn out to be a very good player but I dont think Daniels was productive at all last year. Daniels is a good example of why I think the PER-diff is
              Message 6 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                "He may turn out to be a very good player but I dont' think
                Daniels
                was
                productive at all last year. Daniels is a good example of why I think
                the PER-diff is so much more valuable than the PER. He was actually
                -0.4 PER-diff at the 2 guard spot, he appears to be a bad defender. He
                also was at the bottom of the +/- rankings for his team."

                Just wondering, but do you have your own PER differential list or
                access to one? Or do you just go by memory and looking at the
                82games hundreds of profiles? Do you have access to a list where you
                can sort it, and see the top PER differentials amongst players in the
                league? Just curious, because if you do I would love to access it
                myself instead of going by memory or having to look at separate
                profiles of players at random times to see their PER differentials.

                Also the thing I want to ask about PER differentials is how accurate
                are they with guys like bench players or teams that have swingmen
                specialist defenders? For example Bruce Bowen usually guards the
                best perimeter player for SA, and pulls them to under their PER or
                scoring average – but of course even if he drastically lowers
                their
                efficiency, he still isn't scoring much. So does that mean Hedo
                Turkoglu and Manu Ginobili PER differentials are still solid? Is
                Bowen helping them a lot, or is it a WASH in this case, considering
                Bowen barely produces much on offense anyway? Does SA's +2.9 at
                the
                SG spot (their second Net Positive Gain PER after the C/PF position)
                have to do with the combination of Bowen's D and Ginobili's
                efficient
                offensive/defensive contributions? Who in this case keeps track if
                Bowen spent 39% of his time at SF and 27% at SG? Does someone keep
                track? What if Bowen guards the SF and Hedo guards the SG on a
                certain night? Does Hedo's differential still matchup against
                all
                the `3's who lineup against the Spurs during the season? That
                way at
                the end of the season, its all about PER production at the position
                not necessarily who the player was guarding most of the nights or not
                (not accounting if Hedo guarded the SG on some nights)?


                Do you also consider the ON COURT and OFF COURT stats at 82games.com
                and net Points Per 100 Possessions for their respective teams? Which
                is more accurate, PER Differential or ON and OFF court Stats (Net
                Points Per 100 Possessions) in your opinion?

                "You may be right, but that still means at his best he wasn't an
                all-star. As far as him being clutch I'd like to see more stats to
                back that up." (Starks reference)

                I guess he had the rep of hitting big shots and being a solid crunch
                time player. But just because there are no stats on it doesn't
                mean
                that he wasn't a guy who played better in the crunch time of most
                games more of often than not (Game 7, 94 finals aside). He was a
                reason that they got that 2-0 lead on Chicago in 1993 and put some
                fear in their minds. He did have some big games against the Bulls
                over the years. I guess that's all intangible stuff, but I think
                he
                was better than a few players who had more `efficient'
                scoring stats.
                Again this is where subjectivity meets Efficiency and Overall Player
                Rating Statistics. Very tough to argue these types of things when
                those who have access to statistics and look at the big picture
                having watched different teams at different frequencies. The
                familiarity with intangibles of certain players varies, depending on
                how much the person watches. Then again some players simply get more
                chances to look better on TV, therefore are perceived as being better
                than those who have less talented teammates. Messy situation when
                debates come into play.


                "I doubt Isiah was not in the top five of PG's PER ranks during
                his
                best years. But honestly I don't know that he was a true
                superstar."

                That's the thing, those who watch the game all the time or were
                involved during the time probably perceived Isiah as a Top 5 player
                when the playoffs came around. A guy who raised his game several
                notches and when he was in the zone could hang with anyone, including
                the Jordan's, Magic, Bird's. Wasn't as good overall, but
                if he had
                the better supporting cast, he could beat Jordan's team pretty
                easily. I just find it interesting that his PER wasn't solid the
                years he won a title.

                "I've got Tony Parker rated as the tenth best PG in terms of
                PER-diff
                among guys who started at the point. Really I think that's about right
                based on his performance, he did step up in the playoffs but only to
                about the level that Billups and Cassell were at during the regular
                season."

                Do you also know PER's and differentials for the playoffs? Where
                do
                you access them from?

                What are your Top 10 PG's, you don't go by PER differentials
                alone do
                you? Or is that one of a few factors when you do your PG and SG
                rankings?


                **As far as your Top 10 list goes, mine actually has most of those
                guys in there in sort of a similar order.**

                But I have a few questions. Do you mostly base these on PER
                differentials, or is that only part of the equation? Do you add
                subjectivity, overall talent, and statistics relative to teams role
                and success?

                **Other questions on the Top 10 SG list**

                Why is Ivy so low? Why isn't Rip a little higher now with his
                playoff
                performance as most would probably bump him up? Also what makes you
                think Ginobili can be a Top 6-7 caliber SG? Would anyone else around
                here even agree? I know some people who just consider him a Starks
                or Bobby Jackson type of player, who brings `energy' but not
                much
                else. Is it his stats, PER, or what? I'm curious to see what
                others
                on this forum think of him relative to most SG's, along with how
                good
                they think Iverson, and Hamilton really are?

                Would it be inappropriate to start a Positional Top 10-15 Thread for
                each position?

                Sorry for all the questions, answer them when you can – same goes
                for
                anyone else on this forum!

                -Nikos
              • mrintp2000
                ... this later on... I made an excel spreadsheet with the PER diff s and minutes played for all the players with a positive PER diff and plus 10% of their
                Message 7 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- Playoffs are about to start but I'm looking forward to continuing
                  this later on... I made an excel spreadsheet with the PER diff's and
                  minutes played for all the players with a positive PER diff and plus
                  10% of their teams minutes. I took it from 82games.com. If you want,
                  I'll email it to you?

                  In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                  > "He may turn out to be a very good player but I dont' think
                  > Daniels
                  > was
                  > productive at all last year. Daniels is a good example of why I think
                  > the PER-diff is so much more valuable than the PER. He was actually
                  > -0.4 PER-diff at the 2 guard spot, he appears to be a bad defender. He
                  > also was at the bottom of the +/- rankings for his team."
                  >
                  > Just wondering, but do you have your own PER differential list or
                  > access to one? Or do you just go by memory and looking at the
                  > 82games hundreds of profiles? Do you have access to a list where you
                  > can sort it, and see the top PER differentials amongst players in the
                  > league? Just curious, because if you do I would love to access it
                  > myself instead of going by memory or having to look at separate
                  > profiles of players at random times to see their PER differentials.
                  >
                  > Also the thing I want to ask about PER differentials is how accurate
                  > are they with guys like bench players or teams that have swingmen
                  > specialist defenders? For example Bruce Bowen usually guards the
                  > best perimeter player for SA, and pulls them to under their PER or
                  > scoring average – but of course even if he drastically lowers
                  > their
                  > efficiency, he still isn't scoring much. So does that mean Hedo
                  > Turkoglu and Manu Ginobili PER differentials are still solid? Is
                  > Bowen helping them a lot, or is it a WASH in this case, considering
                  > Bowen barely produces much on offense anyway? Does SA's +2.9 at
                  > the
                  > SG spot (their second Net Positive Gain PER after the C/PF position)
                  > have to do with the combination of Bowen's D and Ginobili's
                  > efficient
                  > offensive/defensive contributions? Who in this case keeps track if
                  > Bowen spent 39% of his time at SF and 27% at SG? Does someone keep
                  > track? What if Bowen guards the SF and Hedo guards the SG on a
                  > certain night? Does Hedo's differential still matchup against
                  > all
                  > the `3's who lineup against the Spurs during the season? That
                  > way at
                  > the end of the season, its all about PER production at the position
                  > not necessarily who the player was guarding most of the nights or not
                  > (not accounting if Hedo guarded the SG on some nights)?
                  >
                  >
                  > Do you also consider the ON COURT and OFF COURT stats at 82games.com
                  > and net Points Per 100 Possessions for their respective teams? Which
                  > is more accurate, PER Differential or ON and OFF court Stats (Net
                  > Points Per 100 Possessions) in your opinion?
                  >
                  > "You may be right, but that still means at his best he wasn't an
                  > all-star. As far as him being clutch I'd like to see more stats to
                  > back that up." (Starks reference)
                  >
                  > I guess he had the rep of hitting big shots and being a solid crunch
                  > time player. But just because there are no stats on it doesn't
                  > mean
                  > that he wasn't a guy who played better in the crunch time of most
                  > games more of often than not (Game 7, 94 finals aside). He was a
                  > reason that they got that 2-0 lead on Chicago in 1993 and put some
                  > fear in their minds. He did have some big games against the Bulls
                  > over the years. I guess that's all intangible stuff, but I think
                  > he
                  > was better than a few players who had more `efficient'
                  > scoring stats.
                  > Again this is where subjectivity meets Efficiency and Overall Player
                  > Rating Statistics. Very tough to argue these types of things when
                  > those who have access to statistics and look at the big picture
                  > having watched different teams at different frequencies. The
                  > familiarity with intangibles of certain players varies, depending on
                  > how much the person watches. Then again some players simply get more
                  > chances to look better on TV, therefore are perceived as being better
                  > than those who have less talented teammates. Messy situation when
                  > debates come into play.
                  >
                  >
                  > "I doubt Isiah was not in the top five of PG's PER ranks during
                  > his
                  > best years. But honestly I don't know that he was a true
                  > superstar."
                  >
                  > That's the thing, those who watch the game all the time or were
                  > involved during the time probably perceived Isiah as a Top 5 player
                  > when the playoffs came around. A guy who raised his game several
                  > notches and when he was in the zone could hang with anyone, including
                  > the Jordan's, Magic, Bird's. Wasn't as good overall, but
                  > if he had
                  > the better supporting cast, he could beat Jordan's team pretty
                  > easily. I just find it interesting that his PER wasn't solid the
                  > years he won a title.
                  >
                  > "I've got Tony Parker rated as the tenth best PG in terms of
                  > PER-diff
                  > among guys who started at the point. Really I think that's about right
                  > based on his performance, he did step up in the playoffs but only to
                  > about the level that Billups and Cassell were at during the regular
                  > season."
                  >
                  > Do you also know PER's and differentials for the playoffs? Where
                  > do
                  > you access them from?
                  >
                  > What are your Top 10 PG's, you don't go by PER differentials
                  > alone do
                  > you? Or is that one of a few factors when you do your PG and SG
                  > rankings?
                  >
                  >
                  > **As far as your Top 10 list goes, mine actually has most of those
                  > guys in there in sort of a similar order.**
                  >
                  > But I have a few questions. Do you mostly base these on PER
                  > differentials, or is that only part of the equation? Do you add
                  > subjectivity, overall talent, and statistics relative to teams role
                  > and success?
                  >
                  > **Other questions on the Top 10 SG list**
                  >
                  > Why is Ivy so low? Why isn't Rip a little higher now with his
                  > playoff
                  > performance as most would probably bump him up? Also what makes you
                  > think Ginobili can be a Top 6-7 caliber SG? Would anyone else around
                  > here even agree? I know some people who just consider him a Starks
                  > or Bobby Jackson type of player, who brings `energy' but not
                  > much
                  > else. Is it his stats, PER, or what? I'm curious to see what
                  > others
                  > on this forum think of him relative to most SG's, along with how
                  > good
                  > they think Iverson, and Hamilton really are?
                  >
                  > Would it be inappropriate to start a Positional Top 10-15 Thread for
                  > each position?
                  >
                  > Sorry for all the questions, answer them when you can – same goes
                  > for
                  > anyone else on this forum!
                  >
                  > -Nikos
                • nickouli5
                  Yes please email it to me! How large is the file? Will you continue this convo. at a later time though :) ?
                  Message 8 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yes please email it to me! How large is the file?

                    Will you continue this convo. at a later time though :) ?
                  • mrintp2000
                    ... The file is tiny, what s your email address? The playoff PER s are on 82games.com as well
                    Message 9 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                      > Yes please email it to me! How large is the file?
                      >
                      > Will you continue this convo. at a later time though :) ?

                      The file is tiny, what's your email address?

                      The playoff PER's are on 82games.com as well
                    • nickouli5
                      Email adress is Nikotmp@go.com
                      Message 10 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Email adress is Nikotmp@...
                      • nickouli5
                        ... Nikotmp @ go.com in case you cant read it. Also where are the TOTAL PER s in the playoffs? Do you have that stat as well?
                        Message 11 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...>
                          wrote:
                          > Email adress is Nikotmp@g...

                          Nikotmp @ go.com in case you cant read it.

                          Also where are the TOTAL PER's in the playoffs? Do you have that stat
                          as well?
                        • mrintp2000
                          You ve got mail. PER Lakers playoff http://www.82games.com/034PLAL5.HTM Pistons http://www.82games.com/034PDET5.HTM
                          Message 12 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            You've got mail.
                            PER Lakers playoff
                            http://www.82games.com/034PLAL5.HTM

                            Pistons
                            http://www.82games.com/034PDET5.HTM


                            In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                            > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...>
                            > wrote:
                            > > Email adress is Nikotmp@g...
                            >
                            > Nikotmp @ go.com in case you cant read it.
                            >
                            > Also where are the TOTAL PER's in the playoffs? Do you have that stat
                            > as well?
                          • nickouli5
                            Oh by total I meant each players TOTAL, but I see its not on 82games.com. No biggie I guess. Thanks!
                            Message 13 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Oh by total I meant each players TOTAL, but I see its not on
                              82games.com. No biggie I guess.
                              Thanks!
                            • mrintp2000
                              ... Also the thing I want to ask about PER differentials is how accurate ... The PER-diff is calculated by the production of both lineups on the floor. So in
                              Message 14 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                                >
                                Also the thing I want to ask about PER differentials is how accurate
                                > are they with guys like bench players or teams that have swingmen
                                > specialist defenders? For example Bruce Bowen usually guards the
                                > best perimeter player for SA, and pulls them to under their PER or
                                > scoring average – but of course even if he drastically lowers
                                > their
                                > efficiency, he still isn't scoring much. So does that mean Hedo
                                > Turkoglu and Manu Ginobili PER differentials are still solid? Is
                                > Bowen helping them a lot, or is it a WASH in this case, considering
                                > Bowen barely produces much on offense anyway? Does SA's +2.9 at
                                > the
                                > SG spot (their second Net Positive Gain PER after the C/PF position)
                                > have to do with the combination of Bowen's D and Ginobili's
                                > efficient
                                > offensive/defensive contributions? Who in this case keeps track if
                                > Bowen spent 39% of his time at SF and 27% at SG? Does someone keep
                                > track? What if Bowen guards the SF and Hedo guards the SG on a
                                > certain night? Does Hedo's differential still matchup against
                                > all
                                > the `3's who lineup against the Spurs during the season? That
                                > way at
                                > the end of the season, its all about PER production at the position
                                > not necessarily who the player was guarding most of the nights or not
                                > (not accounting if Hedo guarded the SG on some nights)?

                                The PER-diff is calculated by the production of both lineups on the
                                floor. So in the following lineup Nesterovic, Duncan, Turkoglu, Bowen,
                                Parker-Duncan's stats would be calculated at PF. With Nesterovic out
                                and Horry in, Duncan's stats would be calculated at C.

                                You're point about cross guarding is one of the reasons so many
                                posters on here don't value the PER-diff. We had a poll and there was
                                not a concesus, but the average came out to be that 70% of the time a
                                2 can be assumed to be guarding a 2, and so on. IMO, it's more like
                                90% but I don't think very many people here agree with me.

                                At any rate that doesn't mean the PER-diff is less valuable, it's just
                                less precise. To be safe we can add in maybe a 25% margin so that a
                                guy with a PER-diff of 6 could be considered in the same category as a
                                guy with a 4.5, but a guy with a 7.5 clearly had a significantly
                                better year. But I have no math background, there might be a better
                                way to view the margin of error. I use the PER-diff to group guys, it
                                takes a little subjective analysis too:)

                                >
                                >
                                > Do you also consider the ON COURT and OFF COURT stats at 82games.com
                                > and net Points Per 100 Possessions for their respective teams? Which
                                > is more accurate, PER Differential or ON and OFF court Stats (Net
                                > Points Per 100 Possessions) in your opinion?

                                I like to keep it simple, I just use PER-diff and plus/minus, the rest
                                is subjective.
                                >
                                >
                                > Again this is where subjectivity meets Efficiency and Overall Player
                                > Rating Statistics. Very tough to argue these types of things when
                                > those who have access to statistics and look at the big picture
                                > having watched different teams at different frequencies. The
                                > familiarity with intangibles of certain players varies, depending on
                                > how much the person watches. Then again some players simply get more
                                > chances to look better on TV, therefore are perceived as being better
                                > than those who have less talented teammates. Messy situation when
                                > debates come into play.

                                Agreed
                                >
                                >
                                > "I doubt Isiah was not in the top five of PG's PER ranks during
                                > his
                                > best years. But honestly I don't know that he was a true
                                > superstar."
                                >
                                > That's the thing, those who watch the game all the time or were
                                > involved during the time probably perceived Isiah as a Top 5 player
                                > when the playoffs came around. A guy who raised his game several
                                > notches and when he was in the zone could hang with anyone, including
                                > the Jordan's, Magic, Bird's. Wasn't as good overall, but
                                > if he had
                                > the better supporting cast, he could beat Jordan's team pretty
                                > easily. I just find it interesting that his PER wasn't solid the
                                > years he won a title.

                                Again, I'd like to see statistical confirmation that Isiah really
                                raised his game. I remember a couple great games of course. I believe
                                in John HOllingers book he showed that JOrdan didn't play better in
                                the playoff, maybe everyone else played worse?
                                >
                                > "I've got Tony Parker rated as the tenth best PG in terms of
                                > PER-diff
                                > among guys who started at the point. Really I think that's about right
                                > based on his performance, he did step up in the playoffs but only to
                                > about the level that Billups and Cassell were at during the regular
                                > season."
                                >

                                >
                                > What are your Top 10 PG's, you don't go by PER differentials
                                > alone do
                                > you? Or is that one of a few factors when you do your PG and SG
                                > rankings?

                                Here's my prediction for next season
                                Marbury
                                Davis
                                Kidd
                                Billups
                                Parker
                                Miller
                                Bibby
                                Nash
                                Cassell
                                Arroyo
                                >
                                >
                                > **As far as your Top 10 list goes, mine actually has most of those
                                > guys in there in sort of a similar order.**
                                >
                                > But I have a few questions. Do you mostly base these on PER
                                > differentials, or is that only part of the equation? Do you add
                                > subjectivity, overall talent, and statistics relative to teams role
                                > and success?

                                Absolutely
                                >
                                > **Other questions on the Top 10 SG list**
                                >
                                > Why is Ivy so low? Why isn't Rip a little higher now with his
                                > playoff
                                > performance as most would probably bump him up? Also what makes you
                                > think Ginobili can be a Top 6-7 caliber SG? Would anyone else around
                                > here even agree? I know some people who just consider him a Starks
                                > or Bobby Jackson type of player, who brings `energy' but not
                                > much
                                > else. Is it his stats, PER, or what? I'm curious to see what
                                > others
                                > on this forum think of him relative to most SG's, along with how
                                > good
                                > they think Iverson, and Hamilton really are?
                                >
                                I think you're right, maybe Rip should be bumped up based on his
                                playoff performance.

                                Shawn
                              • mrintp2000
                                Message 15 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- Oh, that's there too, just go to each player and click on by position.

                                  In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                                  > Oh by total I meant each players TOTAL, but I see its not on
                                  > 82games.com. No biggie I guess.
                                  > Thanks!
                                • nickouli5
                                  Did you already bump Rip up before? Personally I don t think he deserves a HUGE bump unless he stays playing well againast LA. Reggie Miller and Kittles is
                                  Message 16 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Did you already bump Rip up before?

                                    Personally I don't think he deserves a HUGE bump unless he stays
                                    playing well againast LA. Reggie Miller and Kittles is different
                                    than the Lakers team and Kobe Bryant. Props if he can stay at the
                                    same level in the NBA finals.....I dont think he will though (and im
                                    not saying this based on the first half, I sort of expected this to
                                    some extent) Actually I figure Billups will be the main scorer....I
                                    could be wrong though.

                                    So where would you place Rip if he plays OK against LA? Still leave
                                    him at the lower tier of the Top 10?

                                    Also what is your take on Ginobili? Is he underratted by most? Im
                                    willing to bet not many others would put him in the Top 10-15 in SG's
                                    on this forum or in general. As I said most consider him an energy
                                    guy who can do a lot of things on the floor -- but not much else no?
                                  • mrintp2000
                                    ... but he s top 10 for sure. Ginobili absolutely has an all around game, look at his production vs. opposing 2 guards this season, he has no weaknesses. He
                                    Message 17 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      ---Yeah Rip doesn't quite have the all-around game like the best guys
                                      but he's top 10 for sure. Ginobili absolutely has an all around game,
                                      look at his production vs. opposing 2 guards this season, he has no
                                      weaknesses. He gets more assists, rebounds, trips to the line, and
                                      shoots a higher percentage...
                                      http://www.82games.com/03SAS8C.HTM


                                      And yet he only played 55% of his teams minutes in the playoffs,
                                      Popovitch should be fired,tarred and feathered, disbarred, for that
                                      alone. Maybe if Ginobili plays 90% of the minutes the Spurs are in
                                      finals right now? If I were a GM I'd be scratching a nice big check
                                      for Ginobili this offseason.


                                      In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                                      > Did you already bump Rip up before?
                                      >
                                      > Personally I don't think he deserves a HUGE bump unless he stays
                                      > playing well againast LA. Reggie Miller and Kittles is different
                                      > than the Lakers team and Kobe Bryant. Props if he can stay at the
                                      > same level in the NBA finals.....I dont think he will though (and im
                                      > not saying this based on the first half, I sort of expected this to
                                      > some extent) Actually I figure Billups will be the main scorer....I
                                      > could be wrong though.
                                      >
                                      > So where would you place Rip if he plays OK against LA? Still leave
                                      > him at the lower tier of the Top 10?
                                      >
                                      > Also what is your take on Ginobili? Is he underratted by most? Im
                                      > willing to bet not many others would put him in the Top 10-15 in SG's
                                      > on this forum or in general. As I said most consider him an energy
                                      > guy who can do a lot of things on the floor -- but not much else no?
                                    • nickouli5
                                      I agree that Manu is a good player, and underused. However most feel hes just a solid bench man after his semi-demotion to the bench favoring Hedo Turkoglu.
                                      Message 18 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I agree that Manu is a good player, and underused. However most feel
                                        hes just a solid bench man after his semi-demotion to the bench
                                        favoring Hedo Turkoglu. Heck I bet most on this forum probably say
                                        hes somewhere between 14-20 in the SG rankings despite his solid
                                        efficiency overall (PER).

                                        The sad thing is Hedo didn't even earn the starters positon, he was
                                        playing horrible off the bench and Pop coddled him and gave him the
                                        role hoping he would do better as a starter. The idea was to make
                                        Manu the energizer off the bench like last season. But in the end it
                                        bit them in the but anyway (Hedo struggled in the playoffs, and Manu
                                        actually did well in 29mpg vs the Lakers).

                                        I think Pop made a slight mistake. Hedo has always been fragile
                                        mentally -- it would have been better to let him play well off the
                                        bench and let him earn his confidence back -- maybe that would have
                                        been better.

                                        I can't quite figure out if Manu is a more efficient starter -- or if
                                        he really is best fit as a 30 minute guy. But maybe thats just Pop
                                        deeming him to that role.

                                        I think Manu's lack of pure shooting is why Pop gave Hedo a chance --
                                        cause Manu is more suited towards up-tempo game and more of a motion
                                        type of offense. Manu still finished games, but Pop trying him at the
                                        PG spot and demoting him couldn't have done much for his confidence.

                                        I wonder what Manu's PER was early in the season, maybe it wasn't as
                                        high -- but he was doing everything well exept shooting a good % (he
                                        got to the free throw line a lot to make up for it though). The
                                        offensive help he had also wasn't there with Duncan and Tp injured
                                        and Rasho/Hedo not really playing good basketball either. Also the
                                        Spurs tend to always improve their offense anyway as the season
                                        progresses.

                                        Anyone know if Manu was high on the SG Per chart early in the year?

                                        Either way Manu is tough to figure out. He does have an all around
                                        game, but will Pop use him effectively? Will he become a starter?
                                        Will the Spurs use his overall game, or do they just want a shooter
                                        such as Brent Barry to come in and let Manu go?

                                        I am not sure about this one. But I do think Manu is a better player
                                        than the general perception of him. I think he could do pretty well
                                        in a Denver Nuggets type up-tempo game. But do the Spurs want to
                                        keep him? Does he fit their offense?
                                      • mrintp2000
                                        ... anybody with any playing style. I don t know what you mean by pure shooter but Ginobili shot an effective .428 on jumpers, that s decent for a 2.
                                        Message 19 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          ---I think he's a stud and he could/should start for just about
                                          anybody with any playing style. I don't know what you mean by "pure
                                          shooter" but Ginobili shot an effective .428 on jumpers, that's decent
                                          for a 2. Popovitch just doesnt realize what he has.

                                          In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                                          > I agree that Manu is a good player, and underused. However most feel
                                          > hes just a solid bench man after his semi-demotion to the bench
                                          > favoring Hedo Turkoglu. Heck I bet most on this forum probably say
                                          > hes somewhere between 14-20 in the SG rankings despite his solid
                                          > efficiency overall (PER).
                                          >
                                          > The sad thing is Hedo didn't even earn the starters positon, he was
                                          > playing horrible off the bench and Pop coddled him and gave him the
                                          > role hoping he would do better as a starter. The idea was to make
                                          > Manu the energizer off the bench like last season. But in the end it
                                          > bit them in the but anyway (Hedo struggled in the playoffs, and Manu
                                          > actually did well in 29mpg vs the Lakers).
                                          >
                                          > I think Pop made a slight mistake. Hedo has always been fragile
                                          > mentally -- it would have been better to let him play well off the
                                          > bench and let him earn his confidence back -- maybe that would have
                                          > been better.
                                          >
                                          > I can't quite figure out if Manu is a more efficient starter -- or if
                                          > he really is best fit as a 30 minute guy. But maybe thats just Pop
                                          > deeming him to that role.
                                          >
                                          > I think Manu's lack of pure shooting is why Pop gave Hedo a chance --
                                          > cause Manu is more suited towards up-tempo game and more of a motion
                                          > type of offense. Manu still finished games, but Pop trying him at the
                                          > PG spot and demoting him couldn't have done much for his confidence.
                                          >
                                          > I wonder what Manu's PER was early in the season, maybe it wasn't as
                                          > high -- but he was doing everything well exept shooting a good % (he
                                          > got to the free throw line a lot to make up for it though). The
                                          > offensive help he had also wasn't there with Duncan and Tp injured
                                          > and Rasho/Hedo not really playing good basketball either. Also the
                                          > Spurs tend to always improve their offense anyway as the season
                                          > progresses.
                                          >
                                          > Anyone know if Manu was high on the SG Per chart early in the year?
                                          >
                                          > Either way Manu is tough to figure out. He does have an all around
                                          > game, but will Pop use him effectively? Will he become a starter?
                                          > Will the Spurs use his overall game, or do they just want a shooter
                                          > such as Brent Barry to come in and let Manu go?
                                          >
                                          > I am not sure about this one. But I do think Manu is a better player
                                          > than the general perception of him. I think he could do pretty well
                                          > in a Denver Nuggets type up-tempo game. But do the Spurs want to
                                          > keep him? Does he fit their offense?
                                        • nickouli5
                                          What I mean is Manu is a streak shooter. He tends to jump sideways sometimes on his jumpshot instead of straight up (as Hollinger mentioned in his book). But
                                          Message 20 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            What I mean is Manu is a streak shooter.

                                            He tends to jump sideways sometimes on his jumpshot instead of
                                            straight up (as Hollinger mentioned in his book). But I agree with
                                            his accessment completely.

                                            He did shoot poorly in Game 6 vs LA, but in Games 1-5 he hit the
                                            three very well. Hes not as good as an open shooter as Hedo was
                                            during the regular season -- but Hedo eventually choked in the
                                            playoffs. Manu did solid all around against LA, again.

                                            Bottom line, Manus game isn't about the jump shot. Hes primarily a
                                            SLASHER, creator for himself and others. He is very good at that.
                                            One of the best slashing/passing 2s in the league.

                                            Only thing keeping him from being VERY GOOD, is his jump shot.

                                            But who knows, with more touches and a bigger role in the offense he
                                            can have a more consistent jumper and scoring outputs. Sometimes he
                                            is prone to shoot 1-7, 2-9 at times (even though he does get to the
                                            line to make up for his poor shooting games).

                                            I like his overall game, and I think hes a good player. But if I
                                            were to only see him a few times a year, I probably think he was just
                                            a solid player based on him being benched and all.

                                            But who knows? Maybe Manu can be more effective as a starter, with
                                            more shots. I think he can.

                                            Anyone else think he is a super-sub or is meant to be a starter in
                                            this league?
                                          • nickouli5
                                            Forgot to mention this, but what did you mean when you said shot effective .428 on jumpers? Where did you get that stat? I see the eFG on 82games for playoffs
                                            Message 21 of 27 , Jun 6, 2004
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Forgot to mention this, but what did you mean when you said shot
                                              effective .428 on jumpers? Where did you get that stat?

                                              I see the eFG on 82games for playoffs and reg season and didnt see
                                              that number for jumpers?

                                              Also how can inside shots have a eFG? how can they be adjusted when
                                              its impossible to take an INSIDE THREE POINT SHOT (the whole point of
                                              eFG or adjusted FG%)?
                                            • mrintp2000
                                              ... http://www.82games.com/03SAS8A.HTM ... when ... of ... They don t need to be adjusted.
                                              Message 22 of 27 , Jun 7, 2004
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...>
                                                wrote:
                                                > Forgot to mention this, but what did you mean when you said shot
                                                > effective .428 on jumpers? Where did you get that stat?
                                                >
                                                > I see the eFG on 82games for playoffs and reg season and didnt see
                                                > that number for jumpers?
                                                >
                                                http://www.82games.com/03SAS8A.HTM

                                                > Also how can inside shots have a eFG? how can they be adjusted
                                                when
                                                > its impossible to take an INSIDE THREE POINT SHOT (the whole point
                                                of
                                                > eFG or adjusted FG%)?

                                                They don't need to be adjusted.
                                              • methman05
                                                About Isiah Thomas, if you re curious, I ve looked at his statistics throughout his career using the MagicMetric formula (http://www.magicmetric.com) and
                                                Message 23 of 27 , Jun 7, 2004
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  About Isiah Thomas, if you're curious, I've looked at his statistics
                                                  throughout his career using the MagicMetric formula
                                                  (http://www.magicmetric.com) and adjusted for gamepace. It's not as
                                                  accurate as the PER, but it's a lot easier for me to calculate.
                                                  At any rate, Isiah's PER's were probably low the years he won titles
                                                  with Detroit because he was past his prime at that point. His best
                                                  offensive years came in the mid 80's; by 1989, his offensive game
                                                  had declined a bit.
                                                  While the magicmetric numbers for his regular seasons do not lend
                                                  much credence to the conception of him being a great player, his
                                                  playoffs numbers do. Isiah showed an ability to consistently
                                                  outperform his regular season offensive contributions during the
                                                  playoffs, and considering that most players decline from regular
                                                  season to playoffs, his performances are especially impressive.

                                                  --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...>
                                                  wrote:
                                                  >> "I doubt Isiah was not in the top five of PG's PER ranks during
                                                  >> his
                                                  >> best years. But honestly I don't know that he was a true
                                                  >> superstar."
                                                  >
                                                  > That's the thing, those who watch the game all the time or were
                                                  > involved during the time probably perceived Isiah as a Top 5
                                                  player
                                                  > when the playoffs came around. A guy who raised his game several
                                                  > notches and when he was in the zone could hang with anyone,
                                                  including
                                                  > the Jordan's, Magic, Bird's. Wasn't as good overall, but
                                                  > if he had
                                                  > the better supporting cast, he could beat Jordan's team pretty
                                                  > easily. I just find it interesting that his PER wasn't solid the
                                                  > years he won a title.
                                                  >
                                                • nickouli5
                                                  Another note about EFFICIENT bench players. 20.06 Williamson, Cor was 4th in SF in 2001-2002 -- does that mean based on his PER he would be a great starter?
                                                  Message 24 of 27 , Jun 7, 2004
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Another note about EFFICIENT bench players.

                                                    20.06 Williamson, Cor was 4th in SF in 2001-2002 -- does that mean
                                                    based on his PER he would be a great starter?

                                                    Does this sort of apply with Manu? Maybe hes not a TRUE starter? Is
                                                    there a way to distinguish a true starter playing on the bench, and
                                                    an OVERACHEIEVING energy bench player?
                                                  • mrintp2000
                                                    ... to his performance. I am skeptical of great numbers in limited minutes. ... Is ... and
                                                    Message 25 of 27 , Jun 8, 2004
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      --- Manu played a lot of minutes, so much so that I have no doubt as
                                                      to his performance. I am skeptical of great numbers in limited
                                                      minutes.

                                                      In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "nickouli5" <NikoTMP@g...> wrote:
                                                      > Another note about EFFICIENT bench players.
                                                      >
                                                      > 20.06 Williamson, Cor was 4th in SF in 2001-2002 -- does that mean
                                                      > based on his PER he would be a great starter?
                                                      >
                                                      > Does this sort of apply with Manu? Maybe hes not a TRUE starter?
                                                      Is
                                                      > there a way to distinguish a true starter playing on the bench,
                                                      and
                                                      > an OVERACHEIEVING energy bench player?
                                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.