PER................. good or bad........... pros and cons....

[BGrantFan]

HOF, you got so many stat sites from me over the years, you probably got that, too.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html

HCP, you want defense in a rating. PER includes blocks & steals, but does not integrate in a defensive rating, while the Roland Rating does. Both adjust for per minute and for possessions.

http://www.82games.com/0809/ROLRTG8.HTM

IMO, the Roland Rating is biased toward players on good teams in terms of assessing value. Too much emphasis on +/- at this stage, so in reality, it's more a value-to-team matrix than a head-to-head matrix. I like the Roland rating, because I value performance on-court in terms of winning, but I still believe PER is a more objective analysis.

 

[jlprk]

Study this and get back to me when you understand it. Then I'll have some intermediate things for you.

http://www.powerbasketball.com/theywin2.html

 

[Minstrel]

PER is a solid catch-all quick look at players. It's not sufficient to make conclusive determinations between players that are close to one another in ability, but it's quite a lot better, in my opinion, than looking at a PPG/RPG/APG line for getting an idea of where players stand.

 

[BGrantFan]

Study this and get back to me when you understand it. Then I'll have some intermediate things for you.

http://www.powerbasketball.com/theywin2.html

Was this directed at me? What is your point?

 

[jlprk]

Have you read it yet?