Reply With Quote
First off, Brown is a way better defender than Farmar. Not even close. Second, Brown will play his role. Farmar might be a better individual player, but Shannon Brown is by far a way better fit in the triangle.
I am not disagreeing with that. But it will be because of at ude and playing a role more than likely. If it just came down to PG ability and overall talent, I think Famar would win. But also, maybe Shannon Brown makes another leap next year in his abilities and that changes.
First off, Brown is a way better defender than Farmar. Not even close. Second, Brown will play his role. Farmar might be a better individual player, but Shannon Brown is by far a way better fit in the triangle.
Ya, I read that. I mean it is hard for me to dog the guy for wanting the starting job. I would be worried if a guy did not care. There is a fine line between being a cancer and being a fierce compe or.
Especially when Fish was very average this year. I don't think those comments were too bad. Some were, but then he says he just wants to push Fish as well. I do not know how he is in the locker room or how he works on his game.
The PER's don't say so. But that is not the entire picture.
I don't care about PER, the point guard's job in the triangle isn't to stuff the stat sheet.
PER is not about stuffing the stat sheet. It is about being efficient in system.
PER takes into account positive accomplishments, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls. The formula adds positive stats and subtracts negative ones through a statistical point value system. The rating for each player is then adjusted to a per-minute basis so that, for example, subs utes can be compared with starters in playing time debates. It is also adjusted for the team's pace. In the end, one number sums up the players' statistical accomplishments for that season.
I know it's an individual stat, and not a team stat. And if it's not about stuffing the stat sheet, what is it about?
In the end, one number sums up the players' statistical accomplishments
Is it called Player statistical rating or Player Efficiency Rating?
Quit intentionally acting stupid.
Thats funny coming from you. You are a fool if you think PER rewards chucking shots and being crappy. It is about being efficient. Not about padding stats. Do stats play a role? Yes. But there is a difference in stats playing a role and padding stats.
The highest scorers in the league do not have the highest PER. By your logic, since Brown makes the Lakers defense better in PPG against, he pads his defensive stats.
You just like to argue for the sake of it. You are wrong about Rubio/PER and many other things and you lack the simple understanding of concepts often. It is mind blowing.
This is coming from someone who interjects in countless amounts of Nash arguments he's got no reason to be involved with.
But you're right, PER isn't a stat. I'm sure that's why John Hollinger created it, he's known for not using stats.
Why would I have no reason? Because it does not say Suns fan under my name? You have no reason to be on SpursTalk then. Or in a Lakers thread. Or a Rubio thread.
It is STATISTICAL BASED, not based on PADDING STATS. Are you this dense? So, the leading scorers, who pad their stats, have the highest PER's?
PER leaders:
1) Lebron James, 31.76
2) Dwayne Wade, 30.46
PPG leaders:
1) Dwayne Wade, 30.2
2) Lebron James, 28.4
I never said it was based on padding stats. I said "stuffing the stat sheet". Players who "stuff the stat sheet", as in get a lot of all around stats, have the highest PER.
Of last years top 10 players in PPG, 6 of those 10 were also top 10 in PER. I'd say scoring points definitely has a strong connection to PER.
So then don't tell me I "argue for the of it" when you do the same.
Ok, semantics game. That is not exactly what I meant, but kind of. Yes, the "highest scorers" last year did have the highest PER. In that regards I was wrong. But I was going off of the efficient argument, not "padding stats". Just so happens those two are extremely efficient, but then after that list, guys who are efficient across the board are next. Generally high scorers are efficient, but if you did not mean "padding stats", but "stat stuffing" ok. Chuckers is who I thought you were referring to, and I thought that is what you meant with Farmar.
But please now explain how Brown is a better fit for the triangle. Please explain the triangle offense and why you would make that statement.
But please explain to me how
It does, but that is not what I meant exactly. I meant chuckers are not rewarded. But, yes, high scorers often are efficient, but not in every case. And PER does not reward one dimensional chuckers was what I was getting at.
You already explained it. One player knows his role, the other doesn't.
No. You start random ass arguments. I was in here talking about Farmar. You come in and start arguing about PER and get every thing off track. I followed suit like an idiot because I feel, like others that I have to correct the hate you spew without knowing the details. Then you rely on trying to twist and contort words so you can
You argue about Rubio, when you do not even know about his buyout.
You argue about Nash all of the time, to the point people make fun of you.
Farmar had very good success in 08. He knew his role. His best year was better than Browns. Lets see how it shakes out.
double post.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
