Per is an advanced formula based stat, but it's significantly influenced by volume and opportunity: Ayton averaged 10.4 more minutes and 6.7 more FGA and had a 19.4% usage rate compared to Clingan at 14.2% But, his PER was 17.7 while Clingan's was 17.4. That's a negligible difference and considering Ayton's big advantage in those volume components of the formula, I'd say PER in many ways favors Clingan
maybe, but Ayton has a defensive intensity deficit. I've seen him consistently loaf on defense. Clingan works his ass off; granted, sometimes confusedly still, Ayton is a drop-coverage C. He's not like Adebayo, Sengun, or Jarrett Allen
Context matters. Ayton sat out much of the 2nd half of the season when the team played well and won games which of course is reflected in the +/- stats. Was it because DA was sitting that they played well and won, or was it because Deni stopped trying to fit in and became the team's undisputed alpha/best player? I'm solidly in the later camp. For a vast majority of players in the league, their situation matters a great deal in how they statistically perform. From my observations, DeAndre & the team was vastly more effective when he was setting picks at top of the key & the primary P&R partner with Deni then when Deni was standing in the corner and Ayton was jacking up contested midrange jumpers as the clock wound down. Hopefully that answers your question STOMP
Disagree. Not when he's allowed to blitz the ballhander on the high PnR. I think he's about as good a legit big as there is doing that. Certainly the best we've had in a long time. He's feet are light years ahead of Clingan and I don't think that's something Clingan has the ability to make up.
Do you think Ayton is calling the sets and defining player roles? How many times will I have to say that I think Deni and Ayton were the best P&R combo on the team? I think it's most likely he was sat the 2nd half of the season after the trade deadline because the chance to improve his trade prospects had passed and management smartly moved on to prioritizing the development of the youngins STOMP
Exactly. His defensive strengths are not the same as Donovan's. While Ayton isn't the rim protector that DC is, he's much better on switches that happen on the high P&R which are the basis of the offense for most teams STOMP
Since Billups is staying, if he cannot be trusted to make good decisions, then Ayton should probably go.
I'm not sure what you're saying. The coach is responsible for the strategy & calls the set plays, how is it Ayton's fault that the new guy took part of the season to ascend to an alpha role on offense? I don't blame Chauncey for making Deni earn that status either, thats how it should be. STOMP
Given that PER is a normalized stat, the minutes and FGA/game differences are irrelevant. The usage rate difference is the significant item here, as the correlation between usage and PER is well-documented. Also worth noting, however that Ayton's eFG and TS% are also higher than Clingan's, which suggests that his higher usage may be justified. Still, as you imply, PER is primarily an offensive stat, whereas other advanced stats like WS, BPM, and VORP which reflect defensive impact definitely favor Clingan.
Agreed, and Clingan needs to hold onto the ball better. Tired of see him lose so many balks with his cinder block hands.
well, about the eFG% and TS%, there is not really a significant gap between them. eFG%: Ayton .573....Clingan .560 TS%: Ayton .583....Clingan .570 so he was 2.3% better at eFG and 1.6% better at TS%. That difference between the 2 categories explained by Clingan's much higher FT Rate, since eFG omits FT's from it's equation. to me, that's not a notable advantage for Ayton considering he's in his 7th and Clingan is a rookie. It's clear though that Ayton is a better shooter, but that's about the only thing he has on Clingan as for PER being normalized, how can you tell: PER = (1 / MP) * [ 3P + (2/3) * AST + (2 - factor * (team_AST / team_FG)) * FG + (FT * 0.5 * (1 + (1 - (team_AST / team_FG)) + (2/3) * (team_AST / team_FG))) - VOP * TOV - VOP * DRB% * (FGA - FG) - VOP * 0.44 * (0.44 + (0.56 * DRB%)) * (FTA - FT) + VOP * (1 - DRB%) * (TRB - ORB) + VOP * DRB% * ORB + VOP * STL + VOP * DRB% * BLK - PF * ((lg_FT / lg_PF) - 0.44 * (lg_FTA / lg_PF) * VOP)] Where: MP= Minutes played 3P= 3-point field goals made AST= Assists FG= Field goals made FT= Free throws made FGA= Field goals attempted TRB= Total rebounds ORB= Offensive rebounds TOV= Turnovers VOP= Value of possession (estimated average points per possession) DRB%= Defensive rebounding percentage STL= Steals BLK= Blocks PF= Personal fouls lg_FT,lg_PF, lg_FTA = League average free throws made, personal fouls, and free throw attempts, respectively team_AST,team_FG = Team assists and field goals made factor= A variable dependent on team assists and field goals I'm kidding. Try and explain al that, item by item. Wake me when you're done by the way, IIRC, I think Hollinger has even said that he thinks his PER formula(s) may undervalue offensive rebounds bottom line, as you mentioned, PER is basically a formula based gauge of offense skewed by usage. That Ayton has a 37% higher usage and only a 1.7% higher PER is pretty revealing
Well, it starts with 1/MP - which immediately tells you that all the values are per minute. Since FGA is a full-game stat - the 1/MP immediately neutralizes that. So, I think his assertion that these are not relevant to the calculation of PER are basically right. By starting with 1/MP you basically immediately know that all the stats used there are rate based, so the FGA (just like 3P, AST, FG, FT, TRB, ORB, TOV, STL, PF and BLK) is basically neutralized to be a FGAR (FG Attempt Rate per minute) which comes down to the usage... I am sorry if you were trying to be sarcastic, no green font etc...
yeah, I was being a little sarcastic but I am still wondering if the minute normalization eliminates skew all the way thru that formula.
That seems like it does - because you have (1 / MP) * [ .... ] In other words, if you were to write it in the traditional way, you would have the [ ... ] as the numerator (above the line) and MP as the denominator (below the line)
