You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Lestikow article on-Rotation
- Thread starter Hawkfnntn
- Start date
Look back over it, I started by posting several stats.....you are the one who always breaks it down to PER, and since I don't like the PER as it relies too much on the defensive component, I moved to Orate, which you seemed to like as well. Orating at least tells a more accurate picture, but as you know you also need to know usage rate, and I like to look at a couple other things as well.
I personally think the best picture painted is by using traditional stats. List the PPG, APG, RPG (if a F/C) and eFG%. Those to me paint a pretty good picture and may MPG to see if one guy is playing like 15 Minutes more per game.
I just quoted you saying Bohannon was better than certain players just because of his offensive rating and just because of his PER
What do they reference on the most reputable mock draft sites? Oh yeah, PER
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2017/
What do they reference on Selection Sunday? Oh yeah, RPI.
What do they reference on Selection Sunday? Oh yeah, RPI.
RPI isn't made up and it very much matters
Here is the PER of players we offered. The two Bohannon is ahead of are playing spot minutes because they're behind an upperclassmen starter
Gibbs: 16.1 PER
Moore: 15.9 PER
Pritchard: 13.7 PER
Vital: 13.6 PER
Carr: 13.1 PER
Jackson: 13.1 PER
Bohannon: 11.9 PER
Simpson: 11.0 PER
Green: 10.7 PER
Man Fran is good at spotting talent.
Man Fran is good at spotting talent.
Totally agree, if only he could land the PG he wanted
RPI isn't made up and it very much matters
It's probably twice as bad as the second worst metric. But you're right, unfortunately it very much matters.
Totally agree, if only he could land the PG he wanted
It's always going to be hard to get the best talent to iowa. You either have to be elite at landing it or elite at finding it. I think Fran is elite at finding it and somewhere between average and good at landing it.
It's always going to be hard to get the best talent to iowa. You either have to be elite at landing it or elite at finding it. I think Fran is elite at finding it and somewhere between average and good at landing it.
Not at the PG position, he's been bad at landing it there
Not at the PG position, he's been bad at landing it there
Because of random luck. Not because his sales pitch is worse at that one position. He's also not been able to land high ranked recruits at any position until he established the program. No he is landing them at a way higher clip.
Because of random luck. Not because his sales pitch is worse at that one position. He's also not been able to land high ranked recruits at any position until he established the program. No he is landing them at a way higher clip.
Disagree, I just don't think he's a good PG recruiter. Lots of coaches recruit better at certain positions than others
PER includes the Drate component to it. Hollinger who is the creator of the stat himself says it is sketchy at best. When you got the guy who created the stat saying that, you know damned well it is a shit stat. Plus if you look at the makeup of the stat itself, it sucks. Rewards rebounding, block shots and steals, and TEAM DEFENSE. Those don't paint a defensive picture. Staying in front of you and your man, lateral quickness, boxing out, positioning, that is defense......not some made up Drate that the creator of the stat said this about it:
Hollinger freely admits that two of the defensive statistics it incorporates—blocks and steals (which was not tracked as an official stat until 1973)—can produce a distorted picture of a player's value and that PER is not a reliable measure of a player's defensive acumen.
I like the Orate stat, and lots of the advanced offensive stats. I LOVE the baseball stats out there now, and they actually do a good job of defensive stats as well. Drate is absolute junk though, especially in the college game. PER uses Drate as a HUGE component to it, so I think it is junk.
That is true that it can't measure a defender who plays good position defense but doesn't rebound defensively, block shots, or create turnovers. But that doesn't mean it is a junk stat. It just means that there are things it doesn't measure. There is also a legitimate argument that if you aren't doing anything to produce defensive stats you really aren't having that much of an impact on the game.
However, look at all the best players in college basketball and tell me what their PER is? Now look at all the crap players and tell me what their PER is. Weird. It matches up pretty well. Look at the Iowa team. Oh that's weird. Jok has the highest PER and he is the best player on the team. Who would have thought that?
Well in fairness to me, maybe 3 other people beside you and me even know that PER exists.
People who follow basketball know. And coaches use these advanced stats in both the college and the NBA.
Oscar Robertson (last player to average a double double in the NBA for a season, and nearly did it a third season) has a 23 PER. Oscar was a great on-ball and help defender and was money when the game was on the line. Compare that to LeBron's PER of 29. Is LeBron that much better than Big O? I don't think so.
Yes, in fact he is.
No because there isn't enough data.I'm not sure how you can say PER is meaningful if players with lower PER are better than players with higher PER. Saying a player is better because they a higher PER is the height of stupidity, you need much more than that. As a matter of fact if I gave you PER or didn't give you PER, you could tell me who the better player is with traditional stats:
Player X
19 PPG
2.7 APG
13 RPG
47.5% 3pt%
58.7% eFG%
Player Y
14 PPG
2.8 APG
9.2 RPG
0.00% 3pt%
60% eFG%
It is meaningless without additional stats.
Who is the better player: 26.8 PER or 33.4 PER
This is just a stupid example. Doesn't mean that it is meaningless.
That is true that it can't measure a defender who plays good position defense but doesn't rebound defensively, block shots, or create turnovers. But that doesn't mean it is a junk stat. It just means that there are things it doesn't measure. There is also a legitimate argument that if you aren't doing anything to produce defensive stats you really aren't having that much of an impact on the game.
However, look at all the best players in college basketball and tell me what their PER is? Now look at all the crap players and tell me what their PER is. Weird. It matches up pretty well. Look at the Iowa team. Oh that's weird. Jok has the highest PER and he is the best player on the team. Who would have thought that?
It doesn't fit his narrative so he will say it's made up. Rinse and repeat
LeBron is a stud
I doubt they have all the relevant stats as well to measure the guys who played in the 50's 60's 70's
Just because Moss sucks and you don't want to admit it Dean, doesn't mean PER is a bad metric.
I said Moss was a clear miss at the beginning of the season and then he proved me wrong by looking real good for a stretch there but he's been pretty bad lately. He's just so inconsistent
