Still, Spurs have 3 of the top 20 PER performers. To say all 3 flat out don't deserve to go is ridiculous in my opinion. They have the best record in the league and are all playing well.
If you had to choose 2 of the 3 you would choose Manu and Parker ...
Duncan as a center is not a bad choice the wEst is short on centers anyway ...but if they went by all-star type production ZBo or aldridge would get that spot ...
I almost feel bad for LA he has lost Roy, Oden, Camby and he keeps plugging away ...
I agree with this.
in terms of guards, I think that Williams, Westbrook, Manu, and Nash are more deserving than Parker.
Duncan I dont mind seeing get in at C to replace Yao or something, but Love and Griffin both are more deserving than him.
Absolutely not. He asked what, other than fan and coach voting is a qualifier.
That would be it.
Sure it's arguable with those other guards, but I think TP is right at their level. It's not his fault that his team is much more balanced. It is however important to note his team is winning at a ridiculous rate and he is one of the top 2 reasons why.
PER is garbage. Sure Kobe is having a great season in PER I believe better than the last two but are the Lakers or even Kobe playing better?
Ok garbage is overstating ...flawed is probably better ...
But glad Kobe is "up there" only so when I point out the flaws of PER people cant just say it's because it is not "kobe friendly" ...like I give a ? PER is like BCS ratings ...
West:
Blake Griffin
Dirk Nowitzki
Russell Westbrook
Lamar Odom
Kevin Love
Deron Williams
Manu Ginobili
*Pau Gasol
*Replaces Yao Ming
East:
Rajon Rondo
Chris Bosh
Kevin Garnett
Paul Pierce
Carlos Boozer
Raymond Felton
Joe Johnson
No, PER is not really like BCS and it is always pretty Kobe friendly. If you look at things in a bubble, yes, Kobe is playing pretty damn well (statistically) this season.
PER is just not a complete look. It intrinsically favors offense over defense, and rewards inefficient shooting...
Paul at# 1 and Love ahead of Dirk are laughable ...
Now dont get me wrong Paul is looking much better the past month ...but even BR had forsaken him earlier this season.
and Im not trying to hate on Paul last 3 games (i have seen) he has changed my mind I thought he was heading down the PG list ...but he has moved back up.
But any stat that says he has been the best (WC) player in the first half of THIS season is flawed ...
No way Odom gets the nod over Duncan, even if it's in LA.
Oh and Bynum OVER Odom, Melo and Scola THIS season ... LOL
Not really. Almost every statistic known to man has Paul playing at a really high level. However, when the standard is ridiculously high and a team struggles, it always skews perception.
Is Paul playing his best ball ever? No. But he is still one of the most elite players in the game.
It's not perfect, but it's a of a lot better than trying to "eyeball" rankings based on many factors that go into PER in a more refined and calculated way.
PER might be , but I'd argue it's better trying to judge players on some hodgepodge eye test that's inevitably going to vary from person to person.
I also think Westbrook is severely overrated... he's a guy that laid a few turds this season in 'big' games, and most notably, his offensive contribution diminish very rapidly if he can't get to the foul line.
PER rewards efficiency, how can it do that and reward inefficient shooting at the same time?
I was gonna post the same ...but since I dont value it I left it alone ... LOL
To quote Dave Berri, the author of The Wages of Wins:
"Hollinger argues that each two point field goal made is worth about 1.65 points. A three point field goal made is worth 2.65 points. A missed field goal, though, costs a team 0.72 points. Given these values, with a bit of math we can show that a player will break even on his two point field goal attempts if he hits on 30.4% of these shots. On three pointers the break-even point is 21.4%. If a player exceeds these thresholds, and virtually every NBA player does so with respect to two-point shots, the more he shoots the higher his value in PERs. So a player can be an inefficient scorer and simply inflate his value by taking a large number of shots."
So because PER has Paul at #1 and Love at #6 over Dirk (#8), it's absolutely useless to you? I don't know anybody who makes hard distinctions between ranks that are close to each other.
You make it sound like according to PER, Lebron is the worst player in the league and Keith Bogans is the best player in the league. It's not nearly as useless as you make it out to be. If anything, it's remarkable that of the top 10 players in PER, most would put at least 6 or 7 of them in their personal top 10 rankings.
BTW, I don't necessarily agree with Berri's "Wins Produced" method, but his take on that math is spot on.
Best list so far.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
