2022-2023 Regular Season Game 17: Orlando Magic (5-11) at Indiana Pacers (8-6) - 7pm

[Bergmaniac]

I think the last play was the right call, we got a very good look for a gamewinner, Franz is almost automatic on these layups and he was hot late. Plus it increased the odds for an offensive rebound compared to an outside jumper, we almost got the board.

[j_n]

I think the last play was the right call, we got a very good look for a gamewinner, Franz is almost automatic on these layups and he was hot late. Plus it increased the odds for an offensive rebound compared to an outside jumper, we almost got the board.

What's even more impress about Franz is that his misses at the rim often lead to easy put backs.

In general I think it's something that's overlooked when judging efficency, not all misses are equal.

[drsd]

1. Per should not be used seriously, its a silly and flawed stat.

Great players have high PERs and rubbish players have low PERs. It is flawed only in that guys that have 5mpg playing every 8th game can have statically weird PERs. It also favours bigs over guards. But that can be position weighted (i.e. compare one SG's PER to another SG's PER). It also does not weight defense appropriately.

Here is Orlando's current PER ranking

Bol: 20.5
Banchero: 19.3
Carter: 17.6
F-Wagner: 16.6
Bamba: 16.1
Hampton: 15.9
Anthony: 14.1
Suggs: 12.7
Harris: 11.8
Okeke: 10.9
K-Harris: 9.2
Ross: 8.2
Schofield: 6.0
Houstan: 4.2


If one was going to make a subjective: who is the best Magician list, it would essentially look like the PER list, with some tweeks (notably Suggs). So: PER is not flawed, it is just not perfect.

PER also shows that Orlando has 6 players playing above the NBA average. Said another way, half of the team is in the top-200 of basketball capacity. That is a good thing.


..

[zaymon]

1. Per should not be used seriously, its a silly and flawed stat.

Great players have high PERs and rubbish players have low PERs. It is flawed only in that guys that have 5mpg playing every 8th game can have statically weird PERs. It also favours bigs over guards. But that can be position weighted (i.e. compare one SG's PER to another SG's PER). It also does not weight defense appropriately.

Here is Orlando's current PER ranking

Bol: 20.5
Banchero: 19.3
Carter: 17.6
F-Wagner: 16.6
Bamba: 16.1
Hampton: 15.9
Anthony: 14.1
Suggs: 12.7
Harris: 11.8
Okeke: 10.9
K-Harris: 9.2
Ross: 8.2
Schofield: 6.0
Houstan: 4.2


If one was going to make a subjective: who is the best Magician list, it would essentially look like the PER list, with some tweeks (notably Suggs). So: PER is not flawed, it is just not perfect.

PER also shows that Orlando has 6 players playing above the NBA average. Said another way, half of the team is in the top-200 of basketball capacity. That is a good thing.


..

PER undervalues unselfish playmakers and overvalues blocks and rebounds.
Wagner is clearly better than Bol and Carter on both sides. Hampton is not better than Suggs. Bamba is definetly not better than Suggs and nowhere near Wagner.
Per is overall a very dumb stat.

[Knightro]

Because a defensive rebound technically ends an offensive possession, there are some advanced stats that will tell you that a strong defensive rebounder is actually a strong defender and that's not always the case.

[jonbob17]

1. Per should not be used seriously, its a silly and flawed stat.

Great players have high PERs and rubbish players have low PERs. It is flawed only in that guys that have 5mpg playing every 8th game can have statically weird PERs. It also favours bigs over guards. But that can be position weighted (i.e. compare one SG's PER to another SG's PER). It also does not weight defense appropriately.

Here is Orlando's current PER ranking

Bol: 20.5
Banchero: 19.3
Carter: 17.6
F-Wagner: 16.6
Bamba: 16.1
Hampton: 15.9
Anthony: 14.1
Suggs: 12.7
Harris: 11.8
Okeke: 10.9
K-Harris: 9.2
Ross: 8.2
Schofield: 6.0
Houstan: 4.2


If one was going to make a subjective: who is the best Magician list, it would essentially look like the PER list, with some tweeks (notably Suggs). So: PER is not flawed, it is just not perfect.

PER also shows that Orlando has 6 players playing above the NBA average. Said another way, half of the team is in the top-200 of basketball capacity. That is a good thing.


..

PER undervalues unselfish playmakers and overvalues blocks and rebounds.
Wagner is clearly better than Bol and Carter on both sides. Hampton is not better than Suggs. Bamba is definetly not better than Suggs and nowhere near Wagner.
Per is overall a very dumb stat.

PER is probably not the best way to evaluate who is the best player, but there are some takeaways, and efficiency is one of the more important attributes in the modern nba.

I mean if Bol Bol can continue to have 67% TS we need to get him more looks, and if he can keep the efficiency on higher volume, figure out a way to get him even more involved.
Hampton has been very good this year, and better than Suggs in the minutes he is on the floor. Now I have little doubt that Suggs will ultimately be the better player, but it's hard to argue that Suggs has been better this year, probably on either end.
And that is the really frustrating thing with them not picking up Hampton, even if Hampton had continued to be a disaster on offense, he still had a pathway to minutes as a defender. I'd argue it is a pretty safe bet that Hampton will have a more productive career than Cole at this point, based on defense alone.

Ultimately the team that converts more opportunities wins, number of opportunities may be slightly impacted by turnovers, rebounds, et cetera, but basically you want the guys most likely to make a shot taking the shot.