Jackie Butler is #6 Center - John Hollinger

[Dirk41MVP]

call it what you want, it's just a word. Some things just can't be described by other than what they are... you know, adjectives as well as nouns are used in everyday conversation and in english grammar. I don't get what's the biggie

[Mr. Body]

call it what you want, it's just a word. Some things just can't be described by other than what they are... you know, adjectives as well as nouns are used in everyday conversation and in english grammar. I don't get what's the biggie

Your mom likes to suck elephant . I know, because your dad called me about it. He's really impressed and wants to tell the world. He's considering a "Dirk41MVP's Mom's Gone Wild!" tape, so she doesn't have to pros ute herself anymore, but who wants to take away a hobby? I hear she's considering taking the doing-an-elephant thing on the road. More power to her, I say. Hopefully she can withstand the pain and disgrace, but hey, it's your dirty little family, and I can only imagine what kind of filthy pachyderms are in your family's legacy.

Only words.

[Dirk41MVP]

Your mom likes to suck elephant . I know, because your dad called me about it. He's really impressed and wants to tell the world. He's considering a "Dirk41MVP's Mom's Gone Wild!" tape, so she doesn't have to pros ute herself anymore, but who wants to take away a hobby? I hear she's considering taking the doing-an-elephant thing on the road. More power to her, I say. Hopefully she can withstand the pain and disgrace, but hey, it's your dirty little family, and I can only imagine what kind of filthy pachyderms are in your family's legacy.

Only words.

hahah that made me laugh, considering my name is a) not Dirk41MVP as any person with a slight bit of intelligence would know (come on you could at least change the name to make it more real) and b) MY words, or "slurs" w/e you want to call them, were not aimed at any member of this board, but to the sexual player.

I guess if you feel so much love for somebody you've never met and want to defend him in a forum against people you haven't even seen in your life, YOU must be the one sucking somebody else's , besides how did this thread change from nba's centers to elephant s ??, wonder what's on your mind... you're right though,

Only words

oh and I guess people around here have rules that don't seem to be rules..:

"Posts at SpursTalk.com message boards may contain adult language."
"FullSportPress.com content is exclusively for entertainment purposes only."

... got them officially from your site and haven't broken either one. You know, it would be useful to read your own forum and not have a fan from another team/forum tell you the rules/guidelines to abide by when visiting your own damn website... amazing

[Bruno]

Eh, I'd probably be motivated to do it if someone had a readily available source of the data (projected and actual PERs). I'm not inclined to google all over the place to get the numbers.

You can find PER on http://www.basketball-reference.com

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...20&postcount=1

Looking into the crystal ball, we shouldn't expect the top 10 to change much. Again, KG is on top:

In blue : PER: Projected 2005-06 Top 10
In red : real PER
Kevin Garnett, Minnesota 26.39 26.8
Tim Duncan, San Antonio 25.12 23.1
Shaquille O'Neal, Miami 24.24 24.4
LeBron James, Cleveland 24.09 28.1
Yao Ming, Houston 24.05 25.7
Tracy McGrady, Houston 24.03 22.0
Dirk Nowitzki, Dallas 23.52 28.1
Amare Stoudemire, Phoenix 23.51 17.8
Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers 22.46 28.0
Dwyane Wade, Miami 22.39 27.6

All in all he is quite wrong.

[Brutalis]

This guy has to be drunk 24-7.

[Obstructed_View]

oh and I guess people around here have rules that don't seem to be rules..:

"Posts at SpursTalk.com message boards may contain adult language."
"FullSportPress.com content is exclusively for entertainment purposes only."

... got them officially from your site and haven't broken either one. You know, it would be useful to read your own forum and not have a fan from another team/forum tell you the rules/guidelines to abide by when visiting your own damn website... amazing

Visitors to FullSportPress.com forum message boards are not permitted to post any material which:
• Threatens or abuses another user or FullSportPress.com ownership or management in any way.
• Violates the privacy or rights of another user.
• Contains defamatory remarks related to race, religion, etc.

Hey, stupid. If a moderator thinks that the "etc." refers to sexual orientation, and warns you, you need to pay attention. I'd prefer you don't, because I'd like to see your stupid no-basketball knowing troll ass banned from here. Knock it the off or you will be made to go away.

Idiot.

[Kori Ellis]

oh and I guess people around here have rules that don't seem to be rules..:

"Posts at SpursTalk.com message boards may contain adult language."
"FullSportPress.com content is exclusively for entertainment purposes only."

... got them officially from your site and haven't broken either one. You know, it would be useful to read your own forum and not have a fan from another team/forum tell you the rules/guidelines to abide by when visiting your own damn website... amazing

Basically the deal is that I asked you to stop with the sexual slurs twice. End of story.

If you want to continue this conversation, you can do it with me via private message. It's over in this thread.

(And I don't need another Spurs fan or other poster chiming in on this.)

Back to the topic.

Jackie Butler apparently is ranked number six because he's fat like Shawn Kemp

I don't care about these PER stats much because I can watch basketball and decide who I think is a better player. But as Hollinger explained himself in his chat, he's not saying that Gasol is better than Duncan or Paul is better than AI. He's just using his formula and ranking the results. I can find his rankings useful to some extent, just like every other rankings. But obviously it's not an end all to anything. GM's/coaching staffs look at his rankings (and others) so it has some value to some people that matter.

[Obstructed_View]

Sounds screwy to me. Somebody mentioned in the other thread that Amare is really high on this thing and Duncan is really low. I'd presume that Duncan's numbers from last year bring him down. Why don't Amare's? Wasn't this guy at one time claiming that this formula was the best way to rank players? It sure doesn't seem that way. It's kind of like VH1 making a list with idiotic crap at the top just to make people argue about it.

[GrandeDavid]

I just hope he's a fast learner.

[Rynospursfan]

Statistics also show that Butler would foul out before ever reaching 40 min. Last year he averaged 6.8 PF per 40.

[Mark in Austin]

PER works best when comparing players getting consistent minutes - who are in the rotation. Hollinger has a tendancy to say "it's not me, it's the numbers" when questioned, which I think is a cop-out. He's so in love with the statistical system he won't recognize the system's limitations.

A more relevant PER ranking would be to compare rotation players to each other. Using a scrub's points per minutes numbers to project what they would do over 48 minutes against real defense is just plain stupid. To then compare that player's PER to the PER of somebody who plays 35 minutes a night and expect that comparison to provide any more insight than a steaming pile of horse on a box score is lunacy.

[Obstructed_View]

At some point there really needs to be a "garbage time minutes" weighting here. It's fairly obvious that Bowen's numbers aren't earned the same way some of the guys ranked above him are, and it's obviously the same for Butler. Having some way to factor a player as a starter level player, a first sub level player or a scrub would probably even a lot of that out.

[ShoogarBear]

There is a way to do it, and that would be through some sort of adjusted plus/minus that factors in both the other four teammates on the court, and the five opponents.

It would essentially be calculated like a multidimensional "strength-of-schedule" plus/minus. Highly complicated, but it can probably be done and I'd be surprised if someone hasn't tried it.

This would take care of the garbage time issue indirectly. Assuming garbage time is played against lesser players, that time would be given less weight.

The nice thing about +/- is that it theoretically accounts for both offensive and defensive play, so guys like Bruce and Ben Wallace don't get short shrift.