RealGM

Interested in hearing which players people would prefer on their team.

It's based purely on box score stats and both players play similar minutes but they are scaled to 36 mins here.
This is box score only so offense leaning, can't take into account defense other steals+blocks but they are similar there.
These are 2 real players that play a similar position. I will reveal them later.


Player A: 26pts on 55.8% TS, 21fga, 5.2fta, 6.4reb, 3.8ast, 1.6stl, 0.7blk, 2.8to

Player B: 22.6pts on 78.4% TS, 11fga, 8 fta, 4.5reb, 3.9ast, 2.1stl, 0blk, 3.5to

Who would you prefer?

Bonus questions:
Who is more likely to be an all-star?
Which position do these 2 play?

Offense-only I think you'd have to take player B based on a massive efficiency advantage (even with the higher turnovers). Though the difference could be mitigated if player A is on a much worse offensive team making it much harder to score efficiently.

giberish wrote:Offense-only I think you'd have to take player B based on a massive efficiency advantage (even with the higher turnovers). Though the difference could be mitigated if player A is on a much worse offensive team making it much harder to score efficiently.

Yeah certainly player A is taking more shots trying to push an offense. They do have fewer TOs though and they bring down more rebounds. So they generate or maintain more possessions.

Looks like very small sample size data, how many of the shots are assisted, and what's their place in hierarchy (1st/2nd options).
22.6 on ~80% TS% is an amazing feat, you take that any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Over what period of time are these averages? Because 78.4% TS would be unprecedented (over a season).

Who would you prefer? B
Who is more likely to be an all-star? A, but B also not unlikely
Which position do these 2 play? No idea. Especially player B. Player B sounds like a unicorn. Player A could be a Kobe-like player.

-Luke- wrote:Over what period of time are these averages? Because 78.4% TS would be unprecedented (over a season).

Who would you prefer? B
Who is more likely to be an all-star? A, but B also not unlikely
Which position do these 2 play? No idea. Especially player B. Player B sounds like a unicorn. Player A could be a Kobe-like player.

Mavrelous wrote:Looks like very small sample size data, how many of the shots are assisted, and what's their place in hierarchy (1st/2nd options).
22.6 on ~80% TS% is an amazing feat, you take that any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Yeah it's a small sample.
Player A is first option
Players B is second option

Who would you prefer? Player B, no doubt. 78% True shooting is insane.

Bonus questions:
Who is more likely to be an all-star? Player B
Which position do these 2 play? Player A is Joel Embiid, Player B is Anthony Davis?

That Trueshooting is crazy. Could be Larry Bird

JJ_PR wrote:Who would you prefer? Player B, no doubt. 78% True shooting is insane.

Bonus questions:
Who is more likely to be an all-star? Player B
Which position do these 2 play? Player A is Joel Embiid, Player B is Anthony Davis?

Nah not those guys, not enough rebounds

-Luke- wrote:Over what period of time are these averages? Because 78.4% TS would be unprecedented (over a season).

Who would you prefer? B
Who is more likely to be an all-star? A, but B also not unlikely
Which position do these 2 play? No idea. Especially player B. Player B sounds like a unicorn. Player A could be a Kobe-like player.

Basically why I picked player A. Screams small sample size which isn't sustainable.

Player B good shooting and scoring on way less shots, still puts up relatively the same rebounds, assists, steals

Thought player B was Austin reaves vs denver in the playoffs... 21 PPG 4 rpg 5 apg 74% TS

close....hmmmm

God Squad wrote:

-Luke- wrote:Over what period of time are these averages? Because 78.4% TS would be unprecedented (over a season).

Who would you prefer? B
Who is more likely to be an all-star? A, but B also not unlikely
Which position do these 2 play? No idea. Especially player B. Player B sounds like a unicorn. Player A could be a Kobe-like player.

Basically why I picked player A. Screams small sample size which isn't sustainable.

Good point. The first player I looked up was Caleb Martin in the Boston series last season, but the stats don't match. But could be one playoffs series. Could also be someone like Seth Curry if he ever had a crazy playoff series where everything was falling.

zimpy27 wrote:Interested in hearing which players people would prefer on their team.

It's based purely on box score stats and both players play similar minutes but they are scaled to 36 mins here.
This is box score only so offense leaning, can't take into account defense other steals+blocks but they are similar there.
These are 2 real players that play a similar position. I will reveal them later.


Player A: 26pts on 55.8% TS, 21fga, 5.2fta, 6.4reb, 3.8ast, 1.6stl, 0.7blk, 2.8to

Player B: 22.6pts on 78.4% TS, 11fga, 8 fta, 4.5reb, 3.9ast, 2.1stl, 0blk, 3.5to

Who would you prefer?

Bonus questions:
Who is more likely to be an all-star?
Which position do these 2 play?

To answer who I would prefer on my team or is more likely to be an all-star, I would want to see sustained averages, not a small sample size. For instance, if I see 78.4 TS% I would have to discount it without any other context, because that's not a sustainable number I could expect as the norm for any player.

I'm guessing these are wings because the assists are low for a point guard and the rebounds and blocks are low for a big.

I would take player B but also depends on what I am paying each of them and what players I have around them.

zimpy27 wrote:Interested in hearing which players people would prefer on their team.

It's based purely on box score stats and both players play similar minutes but they are scaled to 36 mins here.
This is box score only so offense leaning, can't take into account defense other steals+blocks but they are similar there.
These are 2 real players that play a similar position. I will reveal them later.


Player A: 26pts on 55.8% TS, 21fga, 5.2fta, 6.4reb, 3.8ast, 1.6stl, 0.7blk, 2.8to

Player B: 22.6pts on 78.4% TS, 11fga, 8 fta, 4.5reb, 3.9ast, 2.1stl, 0blk, 3.5to

Who would you prefer?

Bonus questions:
Who is more likely to be an all-star?
Which position do these 2 play?

Can't make a decision based on per 36 to be honest and can't make a decision without position. What if player B was a centre? Would I want him at all?

Player B looks like a big, Player A looks like SF or possibly a SG.

One thing is for sure, saying player B because "efficency" ain't right, because on 21 attempts per 36 he may shoot even worse that .558. Depends.

Per 100, how many minutes a game do they play? What's different about their teams? Where/how do they do this? This is just meaningless data without context.

Is it Lebron & Austin Reaves from the Nuggets series?

Player A is Michael Jordan, Player B has to be Larry Bird. It seems like Player A is a superstar, & OP wants to make a case that Player B is better.

Data clues point to B
Context clues point to A

Whole thing points to metrics and boxscore watching as an ineffective way to accurately evaluate players