Re: I was wrong about Jeff Green
posted at 3/23/2011 2:42 AM EDT
In Response to Re: I was wrong about Jeff Green
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: I was wrong about Jeff Green : Pete, To look at the most even playing field, I prefer the metric "player efficiency rating" (PER). It is not with out faults, but my opinion it is the best metric to review for fairly rating a player. W Chandler and T PRince are ranked as SF and are ranked #13 with a per of 15.27 M Williams is ranked as a SF and his rank is #27 at 13.20 per Gallo is a PF ranked #32 at 16.04 per Blatche is a PF ranked #38 at 15.43 per Jeff Green is ranked as a PF and is at #55 with a per of 13.10 Would Greens rank be better as a SF? Maybe. Can he defend the quicker 3's? Not sure. Is he worth $6M? From what I have seen, no.
Posted by rkarp[/QUOTE]
aren't these rating based mostly on what he did in OKC where it seems he was miscast? Already in Boston he is scoring substantially more on a per minute basis even though he is just starting to get integrated into the Celtic team offence and defense. WHat does his per look like if you just take the last 10 day or so? (a small but arguably most relevant sample) where he has averaaged more than a point per 2 minutes, one turnover per 40 min! fg% over 500 and 3's at .444. if the so called '"player efficiency rating" doesn't value those numbers highly there is something askew in the algorithm.
and by the way, I'm not real familiar with the usefulness of per in determinating a players value.... so I looked up the per for Paul pierce in 2007-8 celtics championship year. Paul's 19.9 per placed him as th 36th most valuable player in the NBA,,, Is that about where you would place him? hmmm
Thinking my memory was failing and he must have had a bad regular season ... I checked the post season per for pierce... I knew he was chosen as the finals MVP so you would think his per would be right up there... I guess my memory isn't so good Pierce's post season per 18.1
He was the 23rd most valuable player in the 2008 playoffs!!!! Damn maybe Danny can get some of his money back... Pierce obviously wasn't worth it.
And I could have sworn the celtics won that year but the lakers big 3, Kobe 4th highest per, Gasol 12 th highest per and Odem 16th highest PER were so much better than the celtic mvp that the Lakers must have won!
Then I came across this little tidbit about the PER formula for rating players
"Hollinger argues that each two point field goal made is worth about 1.65 points. A three point field goal made is worth 2.65 points. A missed field goal, though, costs a team 0.72 points. Given these values, with a bit of math we can show that a player will break even on his two point field goal attempts if he hits on 30.4% of these shots. On three pointers the break-even point is 21.4%. If a player exceeds these thresholds, and virtually every NBA player does so with respect to two-point shots, the more he shoots the higher his value in PERs. So a player can be an inefficient scorer and simply inflate his value by taking a large number of shots."
In other words this rating is just misnamed.. It shouldn't be the player efficiency rating .... it should be called the BCI Ball chucker index.
so find a better metric before you undervalue an obviously talented player like Green.