What Stats or Advanced Stats Do You Find Useful

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

Definitely better than magic and Pippen. Who never averaged 27 ppg. Definitely ppg is the way to use to judge players. Youve convinced me.

me: ppg good metric
another poster: crap players never average 27 ppg
you: how bout purvis short?
me: purvis short not crap player
you: oh so purvis is better than magic and pippen?

who's the best player never to average more than 10 ppg?

[ambchang]

me: ppg good metric
another poster: crap players never average 27 ppg
you: how bout purvis short?
me: purvis short not crap player
you: oh so purvis is better than magic and pippen?

who's the best player never to average more than 10 ppg?

Read le.

[Ef-man]

All stats generally have some sort of weaknesses and advanced stats are no exception. In general, advanced stats such as WS, WS/48, RAPTOR, VORP are all affected by the quality of your teammates. If you have a system that you fit well in, then your advanced stats will shine. Case in point being Chauncey Billups, was he really the 4th best player in the NBA in 07-08 season, better than Lebron, Duncan? Was Manu really better than Duncan that year? I wouldn't say so but WS/48, VORP and BPM, when taken together as a whole, does point in the right direction.

BPM, aside from the quality of your teammates and how well you fit within the team, also depends on your sub and again how the team was built. Let's say Curry, the Warriors built their offence around his and Thompson's ungodly outside shooting, and when one of them sits, it is hard to get another player to duplicate that effect, which gives them a large BPM (OBPM in this case). if a team splurges on a strong starting lineup and got a crap bench, naturally your BPM is going to be huge as well as your replacement is crap, so these are factors that are outside of the player's control and doesn't say one player is better than the other.

There also is the sense of whether you ARE the system, and how easy it is to build that system around you? Players like Duncan, Jokic, Shaq, Lebron, Hakeem and Giannis are relatively easy to build around as the complementary pieces to help them win lots of game are comparatively easy to find, whereas guys like Dirk, the Admiral, and Barkley are tougher to build around because of the weaknesses you have to cover. I really haven't found a stat that measures this yet.

I find PER to be just like a weighted system for traditional stats and isn't overly insightful, especially when comparing across different seasons. Differences in pace and styles of different eras produce different results. I felt the low scoring 90s and early-mid 00s have generally deflated PERs, and today's league and those in the 60's have inflated PERs due to the pace and also the heliocentric style of play. You take a look at the best PER seasons ever, and of the top 20 seasons, 13 of them were either in the 60s or over the last 10 years, the other 7 were all Jordan and Lebron's who are widely known as the two best players ever. Whereas when you look at WS, WS/48, VORP and BPM stats, the best seasons tend to spread across multiple eras (still favouring recent era and those in the 60s, just not as prominently).

To answer the question, you just really have to look at them all, and I find that WS/48 and BPM compliments each other quite well, while RAPTOR and VORP have some level of overlap. You take 3 of these together and it tells the story pretty consistently, I would say. For example, last year, Jokic, Embiid were in the top 3 in WS/48, VORP and BPM, while Luka was top 3 in VORP and BPM (Luka was 11th in WS/48 because the Mavs sucked).

Agreed, ppg alone is a crap stat.

[TD 21]

Yes.

Only because Duncan was physically declining in '08 (hobbled from '09-'11). When healthy or as close as he could get in his latter years, he was still the best player on the team until '16.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

Read le.

who's the best player never to average more than 10 ppg?

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

Agreed, Any stat alone is a crap stat.

Agreed

[ambchang]

who's the best player never to average more than 10 ppg?

It shows you still don’t know what the point of stats are but to answer your question Probably Ben Wallace. But I’m sure you’d take purvis short over him.m
I’m also not so sure about what you are arguing. Ppg is a good stat. So let’s compare players who never averaged 10ppg to those who averaged 27ppg.

Like, let’s compare players who had 10 VORP to those who never had a VORP of 3.5.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

It shows you still don’t know what the point of stats are but to answer your question Probably Ben Wallace. But I’m sure you’d take purvis short over him.m
I’m also not so sure about what you are arguing. Ppg is a good stat. So let’s compare players who never averaged 10ppg to those who averaged 27ppg.

Like, let’s compare players who had 10 VORP to those who never had a VORP of 3.5.

kk do that I would like to see that. good idea!

[ambchang]

kk do that I would like to see that. good idea!

I believe the point of the exercise is for you to do it.

[Drom John]

me: ppg good metric
another poster: crap players never average 27 ppg
you: how bout purvis short?
me: purvis short not crap player
you: oh so purvis is better than magic and pippen?

who's the best player never to average more than 10 ppg?

B-R career VORP combined regular and post season, only two of the top 250 came close. Of course, both were Spurs.

#110 Dennis Rodman, career 7.3 PPG, but 11.6 PPG for only season above 10 PPG.

#179 Robert Horry, career 7.0 PPG, but three seasons above, topping out at 12.0 PPG.

[Extra Stout]

Jordan Poole averaged 20.4 ppg last year.

Manu Ginóbili’s highest average was 19.5.

I think we all understand that Jordan Poole is a better player than Manu Ginóbili was and the advanced stats that explain why Ginóbili was a first-ballot Hall of Famer are just something nerds made up.

[ambchang]

Jordan Poole averaged 20.4 ppg last year.

Manu Ginóbili’s highest average was 19.5.

I think we all understand that Jordan Poole is a better player than Manu Ginóbili was and the advanced stats that explain why Ginóbili was a first-ballot Hall of Famer are just something nerds made up.

But ginobili averaged 10ppg at least one season!!!!

[spurraider21]

Did anybody claim that ppg directly makes someone better than the other or just that its usually a fairly reliable shorthand to see who is a good/impactful player or who isn’t

[ambchang]

Did anybody claim that ppg directly makes someone better than the other or just that its usually a fairly reliable shorthand to see who is a good/impactful player or who isn’t

Well. Neither is true. I mean, was Michael adams impactful? Was Dana barros impactful? Was Dennis rodman impactful in Detroit? Was Ben Wallace impactful?

[spurraider21]

Well. Neither is true. I mean, was Michael adams impactful? Was Dana barros impactful? Was Dennis rodman impactful in Detroit? Was Ben Wallace impactful?

“Fairly reliable shorthand”

[Extra Stout]

> 27 ppg: good
< 10 ppg: either a role player or they suck
Between 10 and 27 ppg: who knows

fairly reliable

[Ef-man]

K.C. Jones with sub-par ppg: career ppg 7.4; playoff ppg 6.4.

John Stockton with just above sub-par ppg: career ppg 13.1; playoff ppg 13.4.

Bill Russel with just above sub-par ppg: career ppg 15.1; playoff ppg 16.2.

They must have sucked.

[Gagnrath]

Did anybody claim that ppg directly makes someone better than the other or just that its usually a fairly reliable shorthand to see who is a good/impactful player or who isn’t

Bowen was a pretty impactfully player despite never averaging 10 ppg for a season just ask Wally Szerbiack about his impact.

[ambchang]

“Fairly reliable shorthand”

What stat isn’t?

[spurraider21]

What stat isn’t?

ppg more than others imo

if i wanted to get a sense of the top 10 players in the league i could probably look at the top 25 scorers and find 9/10 of them or so. Don’t think you can do that with another raw stat

[stnick2261]

Plus-Minus is easily the most impactful stat. It shows that no matter how much you score/don't score, when you are on the court you're winning.

[Extra Stout]

ppg more than others imo

if i wanted to get a sense of the top 10 players in the league i could probably look at the top 25 scorers and find 9/10 of them or so. Don’t think you can do that with another raw stat

If you wanted to get a sense of the top 10 players in the league, you could look at BPM or VORP or WS/48 and there would be 10 players who are in the top 15 of each one. It takes maybe 2 more minutes than looking at the top scorers, and you get a lot more certainty on who the top 10 actually are.

[spurraider21]

If you wanted to get a sense of the top 10 players in the league, you could look at BPM or VORP or WS/48 and there would be 10 players who are in the top 15 of each one. It takes maybe 2 more minutes than looking at the top scorers, and you get a lot more certainty on who the top 10 actually are.

I never said ppg was the best metric in the world. If you read my OP you’d know that.

one poster said ppg is a solid metric and I’m just pointing out he’s not wrong if you want a quick shorthand glance at top players

[Ef-man]

I never said ppg was the best metric in the world. If you read my OP you’d know that.

one poster said ppg is a solid metric and I’m just pointing out he’s not wrong if you want a quick shorthand glance at top players

Only time I have looked at ppg is to see who are the NBA scoring leaders.

Amazing that as many non-champs were recent scoring leaders, Harden, Westbrick, Iverson, and Carmelo Anthony. Could be that they were main beneficiaries of garbage time teams that sucked?

Otherwise, it is all about team Ws and Ls in conference.

[spurraider21]

Only time I have looked at ppg is to see who are the NBA scoring leaders.

Amazing that as many non-champs were recent scoring leaders, Harden, Westbrick, Iverson, and Carmelo Anthony. Could be that they were main beneficiaries of garbage time teams that sucked?

Otherwise, it is all about team Ws and Ls in conference.

from basic box score type stats, its probably the best one.

not that one should be evaluating players just off basic box score stats

hence this thread i made

iverson is a weird inclusion though. led a weak roster to the finals. his advanced stats compare favorably with tony parker