How is it "The best"? (I think you meant to say "best." I'll give you the benefit of the doubt) BTW who's whining about it?
Dont plead ignorance on Kingspeed assumptions...you know he is looking for the most skewed PER's so he can make moronic arguments. That is FAAAAAR differnent comparing the PER of the SAME PLAYER in consecutive years on the same team...A 5 point jump in PER by the same player on the same team you can easily say "that player has improved"....if you want to argue by how much then that is a different story
You looked at the PER and rendered the opinion that they were sweeping generalizations. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. Do you have stats?
There are 3 "problems" with PER. 1) Some people overgeneralize the numbers. It is a valuable tool - not the only tool. In particular, it is much better at measuring offense than defense. 2) It is PT neutral, which means a player can have a high PER and still not be super valuable to their team. 3) Any evaluation that gives credit to unpopular players (eg Zach) will be disparaged. Conversely, a system that points out that a popular player (eg Roy or Blake) is regresssing will also provoke hostility.
Your points 1 and 3 have a lot more to do with each other than Zach's popularity. Zach is a fantastic offensive player, have been for a long time - and PER captures it fantastically well. What PER does not catch is how sucky his defense mostly is - which really helps you evaluate him in the grand scheme of things. Nic Batum, last year, was a below average starter offensively, as his PER showed, but his stellar defense made up for his lack of efficiency on the offensive side, making him a worthwhile starter for a team lacking in defense but not lacking in offense. Luckily for us, this year he has improved to be almost all-star level offensively, at least in efficiency while retaining his fantastic defensive abilities.
Right! So what's the point of flopping PER out every time there's an argument re a player if all it's doing is actually just reformatting the old numbers and spitting out what is essentially the same info? I actually don't have a problem with it. I just think it's another stat like the rest of them that can be looked at and then judged. My problem with PER is the the way people throw it around as if it's something you couldn't possibly argue against. There's no room for human opinion anymore.
I have no generic point. I try to use PER when discussing players only where it makes sense. I am sure that sometimes I am not right, but that's how I try to use it. Well, of course. It's a tool. But, it makes no sense to ignore this tool if some tools use and abuse it. it's not the tool's fault, it's the user (well, tool) that misuses it... Are we really taking Eric's posts as anything other than unfounded entertainment masked by unbridled enthusiasm? There is always room for human opinion. It is just that opinions backed by (properly used) data are usually more valuable.
Just to be clear I wasn't talking about "YOU" specifically. I think you have the right idea regarding the "tool"
guys i'm pretty sure that kingspeed was being sarcastic no one thinks nazr mohammad is better than deron williams
I am pretty sure that I have no fucking clue, anymore, when he is sarcastic and when not. He is an enigma at this point, or, more likely, a random post generator.
Troll + Bait + Youz Guyz = This Thread Some of you must really enjoy arguing about PER for the thousandthest time.
