PER vs. Game Score vs. NBA Efficiency

[dflash3]

Kobe homers are scared of per.

LOL that was the first thing that entered my mind before I opened the thread and wouldn't you know the very first comment from a Laker fan confirmed it.

[mysticbb]

http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/11/17/ ... cy-rating/

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 played 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.

If that would be true, we should find a very strong correlation between shots per minute and PER. Why shots per minute? Because PER is a per minute stats. The correlation coefficient between PER and shots per minute for all players from last season is an incredible 0.4. LOL, sorry, but Berri really has no real idea what he is talking about. He undervalues scoring, because he completetly forgot before he made his regression analysis that there is something like a 24 sec clock. If nobody takes a shot within those 24 sec, it will end up being a turnover. And someone has to take that shot to give the team at least a chance to score in this possession. His analysis for the last season for example had as an result that Erick Dampier is more valuable to the Mavericks than Dirk Nowitzki. Let alone that Dampier not even played as many minutes, because he couldn't stay on the floor (yeah, there is something like foul trouble too!), Dampier had a negative +/- value in comparison to Nowitzki's positive value. Berri really has a low understanding of the game itself, that is something you can really read out of his articles.

[BrooklynBulls]

PREACH BROTHA

[hard49]

Berri's formula places to great an emphasis on rebounding while punishing players who have high amount of field goal attempts while discounting scoring.

It is a whacky formula...

[BallAboveAll]

Lmao @ the dumb response to more rings thing. Sure Horry isn't better than LBJ he was a role player on championship teams. You can't compare Horry to LeBron when it comes to winning. But you can compare Kobe and LeBron because they play similar roles as top dogs on contending teams.

I uderstand that rings don't make a player better then another. But stop with the dumb Horry>LBJ rebuttal statement.

As far as per and all that other stuff. I honestly don't keep track of it. Its cool that they came up with some of these stats. But the way some of these are used to praise players on here is a bit overboard at times.

[LebronsCavs]

All it takes is one idiot to turn this into a Kobe/Lebron debate.

Just STFU they're both good. Better than everyone else who plays the game today.

I'm sorry but Wade is definitely a better player than Kobe nowadays. He is a more effective scorer, better play maker, better attacker of the basket, better defender. better teammate. He even shot at a similar clip from mid range this year (Kobe's bread and butter). Lastly, Wade shot a higher % from 3 pt range post ASG. So basically there really isnt any reason why anyone should think Kobe is a better individual player.
The top 2 players in the league are Lebron and Wade. Sorry kobe fans.

[amb1ent]

i bet wade throws better sex parties than lebron and kobe combined, but i'm also positive that jordan's historical sex party record trumps anything wade could ever hope to accomplish.

[Kayjay]

This really shoulda been Wins Produced vs. PER vs. Adjusted Plus-Minus.

[shobe_81]

Could Someone point to me what's Larry Bird's best PER?

1. Kobe will never be great at PER!
2. Lebroniez are afraid of Championships, most of them would have you believe that Lebron had the Greatest Playoffs performance EVER Because the PER says so. Oh What's that "Lebron didn't win the championship?
3. Using Horry to say Championships are pointless is falling into retardation when you're actually saying that a TOP 10 Players championships don't matter like as if they weren't a HUGE reason for the rings.

AGIAN What's Larry Bird's best PER?

[Gutter92]

Kobe homers are scared of per.

[D-WestFan]

Could Someone point to me what's Larry Bird's best PER?

1. Kobe will never be great at PER!
2. Lebroniez are afraid of Championships, most of them would have you believe that Lebron had the Greatest Playoffs performance EVER Because the PER says so. Oh What's that "Lebron didn't win the championship?
3. Using Horry to say Championships are pointless is falling into retardation when you're actually saying that a TOP 10 Players championships don't matter like as if they weren't a HUGE reason for the rings.

AGIAN What's Larry Bird's best PER?

Larry Birds best PER is 26.5

[Paydro70]

Larry Birds best PER is 26.5

?
According to basketball-reference it's 27.8 in 87-88. Regardless, I have no idea what shobe_81 is trying to show... that's a superstar number.

Also, Kobe's not great at PER? He's been top 8 for the last decade, and his career PER is 15th all time.

As for the arguments regarding Berri and PER, I think the Dean Oliver quote from earlier in the thread has this pretty much on lock:

"Implying that all these high percentage, low usage shooters can ramp up their usage without penalty implies that the people running the NBA are not just a little wrong. It implies also that the fundamental nature of basketball is poorly understood. It implies that any sort of linear weights rating is wrong. . . . "

That really is what Berri is saying by not valuing usage in his calculations: that a player like Dampier could in theory be shooting more, and that a team like Nowitzki helps his team less because he does not shoot as high a percentage as Dampier does. It's so totally obvious and logical that you could not give Dampier the ball 20 times a game that it kind of boggles the mind to see Berri continue to insist otherwise.

[LebronsCavs]

Larry Birds best PER is 26.5

?
According to basketball-reference it's 27.8 in 87-88. Regardless, I have no idea what shobe_81 is trying to show... that's a superstar number.

Also, Kobe's not great at PER? He's been top 8 for the last decade, and his career PER is 15th all time.

As for the arguments regarding Berri and PER, I think the Dean Oliver quote from earlier in the thread has this pretty much on lock:

"Implying that all these high percentage, low usage shooters can ramp up their usage without penalty implies that the people running the NBA are not just a little wrong. It implies also that the fundamental nature of basketball is poorly understood. It implies that any sort of linear weights rating is wrong. . . . "

That really is what Berri is saying by not valuing usage in his calculations: that a player like Dampier could in theory be shooting more, and that a team like Nowitzki helps his team less because he does not shoot as high a percentage as Dampier does. It's so totally obvious and logical that you could not give Dampier the ball 20 times a game that it kind of boggles the mind to see Berri continue to insist otherwise.

He was trying to show that not all the all time greats have great PER's, but he failed miserably.

[Wade2k6]

All it takes is one idiot to turn this into a Kobe/Lebron debate.

Just STFU they're both good. Better than everyone else who plays the game today.

I'm sorry but Wade is definitely a better player than Kobe nowadays. He is a more effective scorer, better play maker, better attacker of the basket, better defender. better teammate. He even shot at a similar clip from mid range this year (Kobe's bread and butter). Lastly, Wade shot a higher % from 3 pt range post ASG. So basically there really isnt any reason why anyone should think Kobe is a better individual player.
The top 2 players in the league are Lebron and Wade. Sorry kobe fans.