PER projections: 8-bynum 10-kobe 15-pau 109-LO 117-ron

Post #1 » by **dockingsched** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 12:50 am

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/rankings

Hollinger is out with his PER projections, the title has the overall ranking that his numbers tell him each of those lakers will end up at.

among sg's, kobe is 2nd to wade

among sf's, artest is 17th. ariza is 14th

among pf's, lamar is 28th. pau would be 3rd behind dirk and bosh but pau is missing from the pf and center lists.

among centers, bynum is 3rd behind d12 and aljeff. pau is

TonyMontana · Post #2 » by **TonyMontana** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 1:00 am

dcash4 wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/rankings

Hollinger is out with his PER projections, the title has the overall ranking that his numbers tell him each of those lakers will end up at.

among sg's, kobe is 2nd to wade

among sf's, artest is 17th. ariza is 14th

among pf's, lamar is 28th. pau would be 3rd behind dirk and bosh but pau is missing from the pf and center lists.

among centers, bynum is 3rd behind d12 and aljeff. pau is

So you posted this for us to tell you that Hollingers got his head up his arse??? But you already knew that Brah. :lol:

Or wait wait I got it.............. Whats wrong with that, HE IS RIGHT??? :lol:

Specially with Pau and Artest.

Oh and Kobe..2009-10 Projected PER: 22.65
League Average Comparison: +7.65
2008-09 PER: 24.46

2009-10 outlook: First, the bad news: Declines in free throw rate are a fairly ominous canary in the coal mine, and Bryant is 31 with a lot of mileage on his body

Pshhhhhhhhh he's even lucky to be tied with Wade.

Post #3 » by **dockingsched** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 1:04 am

TonyMontana · Post #4 » by **TonyMontana** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 1:08 am

I was being sarcastic Dc...... Hollinger is a tool and I never ever understand his projections and his rankings and I could careless about anything he has to say when it comes to the Lakers. Thats all :wink:

but I thought you knew that already..

Post #5 » by **Slava** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 1:50 am

Understandable but not by Hollinger's explanantion. Obviously Kobe is going to be limited to ideally no more than 34 MPG. This assuming Sasha pulls his head out his behind and Shannon/Artest pitch in with good SG minutes. The per 40 scoring & rebounding are going to decline but I expect the assists and TS % to improve with an even more selective scoring load.

I don't understand the declining FT % part. He shot badly when his pinkie flared up a bit on a couple of games but overall he's been reliable and his career averages stay around the mid 80s.

Pau is infact on that list, he's 15th overall with 22.96 PER.

I expect Bynum to not be that high if he gets more than 32 minutes like he's used to.

ROballer · Post #6 » by **ROballer** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 4:17 am

j-far wrote:
I don't understand the declining FT % part

he shot fewer FT last year than the years before

JustBlaze · Post #7 » by **JustBlaze** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 11:51 am

I'd be happy if Bynum was 8th in the league in PER...I don't really see it happening though

supaflash · Post #8 » by **supaflash** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 3:45 pm

The 3 Lakers and the 3 Spurs in that list wave their ring adorned hands at the top five in that list...

Superstars on crappy teams = PER champs

Guys like Kobe, KG, TD can put up monster numbers on their own if they chose, but each has taken the road of reducing their own loads and helping and allowing teammates to increase theirs. Wins and Rings baby...

PER is pretty good for fantasy basketball... kinda like the fantasy world Hollinger lives in...

ROballer · Post #9 » by **ROballer** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 4:06 pm

supaflash wrote:The 3 Lakers and the 3 Spurs in that list wave their ring adorned hands at the top five in that list...

Superstars on crappy teams = PER champs

Guys like Kobe, KG, TD can put up monster numbers on their own if they chose, but each has taken the road of reducing their own loads and helping and allowing teammates to increase theirs. Wins and Rings baby...

PER is pretty good for fantasy basketball... kinda like the fantasy world Hollinger lives in...

+1

Totally agreed ..I could care less if kobe or other lakers is 1st in PER or 50th...It's all about the bling baby :lol:

,let others(you know who 8-)

)battle for PER's title each year but when it comes to THE REAL TITLE,they fail every year

same for MVP's ,let lebron have it,that title is cursed i'm telling you :lol:

,6 straight years and counting in which the MVP has not won the ring at the end of the season
in the last 20 years only Duncan,Shaq and MJ(4 times ) did it

Sedale Threatt · Post #10 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 6:56 pm

supaflash wrote:The 3 Lakers and the 3 Spurs in that list wave their ring adorned hands at the top five in that list...

Superstars on crappy teams = PER champs

Guys like Kobe, KG, TD can put up monster numbers on their own if they chose, but each has taken the road of reducing their own loads and helping and allowing teammates to increase theirs. Wins and Rings baby...

PER is pretty good for fantasy basketball... kinda like the fantasy world Hollinger lives in...

Jordan won the PER title in each of his first three championship seasons. So did Shaq in 00, 01 and 02. And Larry Bird in 86. And Moses Malone in 83. And so on and so on...

///

Personally, I never understand why people get so bent out of shape by Hollinger's stuff.

Indeed, he seems to get more vitrol than any other writer, which is ironic considering he's the one of the few who tries to come up with concrete findings through the use of formulas rather than totally subjective opinion.

It's not perfect, to be sure, but it's like anything else -- take it with a large grain of salt.

CowsMoo · Post #11 » by **CowsMoo** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 8:15 pm

Insider crap pisses me off though.

supaflash · Post #12 » by **supaflash** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 9:04 pm

I'm actually a bit of a stat whore myself, but also being a fan and a player I understand there is so much more to the game that cannot be quantified by stats.

The thing that irks me is just his attitude towards his precious PER formula and about so many of his followers. They take it in way too high esteem like it is the end all be all of a player's talent and value. He bases too much on it. I understand its his baby, but because of the power of ESPN I think he has a much inflated sense of the actual value of his stat.

Some of the things he uses to create PER just annoy me as well, like setting an arbitrary league average. His use of pace also irritates me highly because it overvalues slower paces, not really taking into account actual possessions used. It's near complete disregard for defense is also troublesome.

My point is the formula is far from perfect, has a large degree of personal arbitrary bias, and shouldn't be treated as highly as it is. Interesting stat for sure, but like you said, taken with a high grain of salt, not as some scientific mathematical fact.

Sedale Threatt · Post #13 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 10:38 pm

Those are all valid criticisms. No formula, nor any numbers-based analysis, is ever going to be perfect.

I just think he's generally good at what he does, and I get a huge kick out of how many people accuse him of being unfair or biased in relation to his rankings when all he's doing is plugging in numbers.

Granted, the measures he uses to create his formula have an element of bias, but the approach he's trying to take -- basically basketball's equivalent to the Moneyball craze in baseball -- is about as fair as you can get.

So I take it for what it is and don't treat it as gospel. Rather, his work is just another flawed but useful tool to help me gain more insight into my favorite sport.