PER has to be a per minute or per 48 minute (there is no difference) stat, so you can compare two players who play a different number of minutes. The whole idea of the number is to be able to compare players, even of different (pace) eras. I suspect the difference in PER values on 82games.com and Hollinger's numbers are a matter of process. Hollinger may be looking at summary team stats, while 82games.com crawls game play-by-play logs. I would think the former are more accurate, but the latter provides the ability to figure out things like top five-man floor units. However, there may be rounding error in the minutes played in the summary stats, since a guy can play 24:15 and maybe they only add 24 to the total minutes played. I did send 82games.com an email asking about the PER difference. They've responded to me in the past. I'll post what they send me.
Wow, what a thread with stats galore which the more I look at them only confirm how little they really help in Blake's evaluation. Our eyes and common sense evaluation work much better. Yes he is having a very bad year and it's exacerbated by all the injuries and that the starting lineup now only has two offensive threats - Roy and LMA, Blake/Webs/Pryz are simply wildly inconsistent or almost non existant as scoring threats. Blake simply should not start in a lineup with only 2 legitimate scoring threats and our coaches should have realized and reacted to this much quicker. Put those endless stats to bed!
Hopefully these kinds of stats are shown to the Blazer coaches and to KP. I sure hope these stats are turning points to KP ignorant mind for trading Blake for a PF or center.
The team has much more advanced data available than what we can get at 82games.com and Hollinger's PER. As for trading Blake for a power forward or center, who did you have in mind? I suppose we could probably get one of the Collins brothers, or maybe even Aaron Gray, but if you are talking about getting an actual serviceable player then you can straight up forget it. Not only do teams almost never trade big for small, they especially don't do it for a small having the worst year of his career, even if he's an expiring contract.
Yep, other teams also have access to stats that show Steve Blake is incredibly unproductive. Even if they didn't, why the hell would anyone trade a big man for a pulse for a PG who has a PER of 8.9 and is shooting 0.364 for the field (his one supposed strength)? Seriously, as Nik said, Blake's greatest trade value is as an expiring contract - and he's even not paid enough to fetch anything of much value in return. BNM
