Harden, Paul & Capela are top 10 PER

[Mr. E]

There are many who value Player Efficiency Rating (PER); and there are some who think that it is an overrated system.

For those who see value in PER, they have to like what they are seeing from the Rockets in Week 17 of the season.

1. Harden 30.6
6. Paul 26.1
8. Capela 25.4


That damned fit strikes again!


https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/248954/NBA-PER-James-Harden-Creates-More-Separation-At-No-1

[moofs]

There's a rundown on how "shooting more" causes better PER in and of itself.
I'll dig it up later if I get a chance.

Iverson used to have really good PER scores back in the early 2000s.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html

They're all top 10 in WP48, too, though.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players?sort=per48_wins_produced&direction=desc&minimum=true
#2: Capella
#5: Paul
#7: Harden

Edit:
http://wagesofwins.com/2006/11/17/a-comment-on-the-player-efficiency-rating/

The same critique offered for NBA Efficiency also applies to Hollinger’s PERs, except the problem is even worse. 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 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.

But again, our model of wins suggests that inefficient shooting does not help a team win more games. Hence the conflict between PERs and Wins Produced. Hollinger has set his weights so that inefficient scorers still look pretty good. We argue that inefficient scoring reduces a team’s ability to win games, and therefore these players are not nearly as effective as people might believe.

[MaxRider]

There's a rundown on how "shooting more" causes better PER in and of itself.
I'll dig it up later if I get a chance.

Iverson used to have really good PER scores back in the early 2000s.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html

They're all top 10 in WP48, too, though.

imagine Iverson is playing in this era
especially when they are allowing the Iverson-rule now (palming the ball)

[moofs]

imagine Iverson is playing in this era
especially when they are allowing the Iverson-rule now (palming the ball)

Considering he was never that great of a shooter, I have no idea.

[MaxRider]

imagine Iverson is playing in this era
especially when they are allowing the Iverson-rule now (palming the ball)

Considering he was never that great of a shooter, I have no idea.

the way they are calling foul and he can palm the ball
nobody can guard him one on one
NBA added no palm ball rule just to slow him down

[TMU]

Capela is one mean Frenchman.

[MaxRider]

Capela is one mean Frenchman.

he's Swiss

[Mr. E]

He knows...


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[moofs]

imagine Iverson is playing in this era
especially when they are allowing the Iverson-rule now (palming the ball)

Considering he was never that great of a shooter, I have no idea.

the way they are calling foul and he can palm the ball
nobody can guard him one on one
NBA added no palm ball rule just to slow him down

He never had to play with that rule, either, and wasn't much different either before or after it.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players/544-allen-iverson?direction=desc&sort=per48_wins_produced
Arguably, he was better after it went into effect, but it was never really enforced.

Until shown otherwise, I'm going to claim that the 2001 finals was a result of Deke and a very solid core, not Iverson.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/teams/phi/2000?direction=desc&sort=per48_wins_produced

[K_chile22]

Considering he was never that great of a shooter, I have no idea.

the way they are calling foul and he can palm the ball
nobody can guard him one on one
NBA added no palm ball rule just to slow him down

He never had to play with that rule, either, and wasn't much different either before or after it.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players/544-allen-iverson?direction=desc&sort=per48_wins_produced
Arguably, he was better after it went into effect, but it was never really enforced.

Until shown otherwise, I'm going to claim that the 2001 finals was a result of Deke and a very solid core, not Iverson.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/teams/phi/2000?direction=desc&sort=per48_wins_produced

I'm on the "Iverson is very overrated" bandwagon, but that last part is a stretch even for me lol

[K_chile22]

CP3 and Harden are also 1 and 2 in RPM, though I'm not terribly fond of RPM myself

[moofs]

Until shown otherwise, I'm going to claim that the 2001 finals was a result of Deke and a very solid core, not Iverson.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/teams/phi/2000?direction=desc&sort=per48_wins_produced

I'm on the "Iverson is very overrated" bandwagon, but that last part is a stretch even for me lol

Ok, first I'm going to give you what I was going to write, then I'm going to give you my WTF moment I just had while digging through team data.

Basically, my train of thought goes, "Iverson couldn't shoot worth a crap, but was more than happy to do it, and it was indeed very impressive to watch (for as much crap as I talk about him, I really enjoyed watching him play). The reason that team worked was (basically the inverse of how the Rockets work) because they had one indefatigable scorer who wasn't actually very good at scoring, and who was fairly pesky on defense, and 4 very good rebounder/defenders who created extra shot attempts and possessions while reducing the other team's efficiency."
(the Rockets work by getting ridiculously high usage on 3 point shooting, super efficient 2 point shooting, spacing from a respectable lob-threat mobile center, decent defense, and passable rebounding)

I'll grant that the team doesn't work without *A* scorer, but Deke made that team tough, and the other defender/rebounders as a whole were the actual engine.

Take, say, a Dominique Wilkins, or DeMar DeRozan, Russell Westbrook, or Kyrie Irving (anachronistic, I know), or from the time, Ray Allen, Gary Payton, or Vince Carter on that team instead, and I suspect it'd have been a lot more potent. The only real question imo is whether they could have kept up with Iverson's usage rate.

After writing how the Rockets work, I was going through Sixers team stats and ...
Scored at average. Rebounded a bit better than average. Blocks and Steals about .3 difference total, for maybe about 2.6 extra possessions. Fouled about 10% less than opponents. Outscored opponents by 4.3ppg, which makes sense.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/teams/phi/2000

Ok, wtf. I have no idea.

[K_chile22]

Until shown otherwise, I'm going to claim that the 2001 finals was a result of Deke and a very solid core, not Iverson.
https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/teams/phi/2000?direction=desc&sort=per48_wins_produced

I'm on the "Iverson is very overrated" bandwagon, but that last part is a stretch even for me lol

Basically, my train of thought goes, "Iverson couldn't shoot worth a crap, but was more than happy to do it, and it was indeed very impressive to watch (for as much crap as I talk about him, I really enjoyed watching him play). The reason that team worked was (basically the inverse of how the Rockets work) because they had one indefatigable scorer who wasn't actually very good at scoring, and who was fairly pesky on defense, and 4 very good rebounder/defenders who created extra shot attempts and possessions while reducing the other team's efficiency."

I'll grant that the team doesn't work without *A* scorer, but Deke made that team tough, and the other defender/rebounders as a whole were the actual engine.

Take, say, a Dominique Wilkins, or DeMar DeRozan, Russell Westbrook, or Kyrie Irving (anachronistic, I know), or from the time, Ray Allen, Gary Payton, or Vince Carter on that team instead, and I suspect it'd have been a lot more potent. The only real question imo is whether they could have kept up with Iverson's usage rate.

There's a lot of value in extremely high usage and average volume though, and that season the league average TS% was .518, and his was exactly that on 34.4% usage, which I believe led the league. It wasn't a one man dragging them to the finals as some talk about it as, but he was their most important and valuable player

[moofs]

Edited above post.