NBA Career PER Leaders - T-Mac #11, Higher Than Dream

Stats don't tell us everything, but you also have to consider that these stats are measuring their regular season. David Robinson was, arguably, a better regular season player than Hakeem. What set Hakeem apart was his ability to raise his level of play in the playoffs. And, indeed, Hakeem's playoff numbers are better than David's. Let's just compare their playoff numbers before the 98 playoffs:

Code:

[SIZE=2]            [B]G    mpg    pts/40  reb/40  ast/40  blk/40   stl/40   to/40   ts%   gs/40[/B]
Robinson    53   39.3    24.5    12.0    3.0     3.2      1.3      2.9   55.8%   [B]21.0[/B]
Olajuwon    131  40.8    26.7    11.4    3.3     3.4      1.7      3.0   57.5%   [B]22.3[/B][/SIZE]

That last column is a quick PER-like stat rating, and Hakeem is ahead of Robinson.

 

It is mostly an offensive stat, because NBA statistics capture offensive contributions much better than defensive contributions. Russell's PER is relatively low because he wasn't a good scorer, either in terms of productivity or efficiency. Perhaps his PER is also hurt by blocks not being counted, but even if it was that still wouldn't capture his overall presence on the defensive end.

What PER does is it summarizes all the individual numbers that are available into a single number. A lot of the time, that's enough to get a sense of how much a player is contributing. But for some players, like Bill Russell, the individual numbers don't come close to capturing a player's total value.

 

This list is virtually impossible to put faith in. Since the roles of each position have changed. For example, are 4 rebs from a pg the same as 4 assists from a center? Much less, are they the same value in the 60's and 70's? and 3 pointers didn't even exist until what the late 70's, early 80's? There's just no way to make the comparison between eras. Blocks weren't a stat when Wilt played... just something to think about.

Mike

 

Where did you get that data from?

 

Playoff stats are at basketball-reference.com.

 

haha...that's exactly what I was thinking about SF3. I think that b*stard was better than more than half the list. Other than Magic (I don't know REALLY old school bball)...I don't know of any 1 better than him. People seem to be so in love with Nash cuz of his play the last few years. I haven't seen him in the finals or slicing a dagger into my heart.

 

These Facts back up my opinion that we should give little creedence to this type of statistic. It, in no way, indicates to the future historian how great each player was both individually and to his team.
Also it is wrong to compare players from different time periods as the rules have changed so drastically over the years.
Also it can't indicate how the NBA and it's Refs allowed certain players to get away with--- such as Shaq and the fact that he travels on every play to the basket--- never gets called for it!! Jordan got away with murder by to-days standards!!
Look at Kevin Garnet leading the Leveno Stats-- how valuable is he? His team won't even make the playoffs!! Karl Malone and Stockton and Jerry Sloan dirty players and dirty coach. Stats don't indicate this!

 

Garnett isn't leading the lenovo stats (which are just +/- stats) for individual players. It's Duncan, then Nash, then Nowitzki -- in that order.

 

Sorry my error! Correction- Over the last few years he has at least been one of the leaders.

 

tmac is just the father, but kobe is the God.

 

Not really. Again, the "lenovo stat" is a +/- stat. It measures how good your team plays when you're on the floor. If Garnett had a great lenovo stat, but his Wolves still missed the playoffs, you definitely can't blame him for it. That would indicate his team played great when he was on the court, and just pitiful when he was off. Garnett is a great player, but even he hasn't been good enough to make his team play great with him on the court.

You're mistaking lenovo (which is strictly an on-court +/-) for the Roland Rating at 82games, which looks at the On/Off differential.

 

this PER favors active players because there are more stats these days.

 

Offense is 50% of the game. If defensive impact (steals, blocks, intimidations) were considered, both Russell & Hakeem would be higher. There may be a chance that Hakeem is the most potent player in history.

 

Not really, Hakeem is less potent than Wilt and Kareem, significantly less potent than Wilt.

 

Quick! Somebody grab me a bucket!!!


Hurl!!!!


(with all due respect, of course)