Rockets Leaders in PER: Alperen Sengun - 21.98 Cam Whitmore - 18.46 Tari Eason - 17.16 FVV- 16.07 Amen - 15.66 Jalen - 13.48 JSJ - 13.24 Jalen has been problematic but Jabari being so low (Chet and Wemby are both above 20) is a cause for concern.
not really when Jabari's TS% is 57%. that tells you he's still efficient Jalen has both a shitty PER and TS%
PER is not a good metric for comparing these two players. On offense, PER correlates with usage. While it penalizes players who are inefficient, players who are efficient but don't shoot a lot will also have low PER scores. On defense, it only measures counting player-specific counting stats like blocks and steals. It does not take into account team +/-. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_efficiency_rating Jalen is overrated by PER. Almost all players with high usage have high PER. You have to be especially inefficient to have a PER this low. Jabari is underrated by PER. His solid shooting is outweighed by his low usage, and his team defense contributions aren't considered at all.
I'm astonished PER has taken hold as well as it has given that it completely ignores any defensive value that doesn't result in a block or steal. It's an offensive stat, which I'm fine with in that context, but it's absurd that so many people use it as the true value of a player when it's so obviously flawed when valuing literally half of the sport.
For comparison, Robert Horry has a career PER of 13.4. PJ Tucker has a career PER of 9.9. Lou Williams has a career PER of 18.0.
KPJ was not a very good basketball player when it came to contributing to winning. KPJ was a loser on and off the court. He was inconsistent defensively, he was poor in practice, a poor leader, not terribly efficient and failed to do little things at the end of games that win games. The guy was basically Ricky Davis.
To add on, even more robust all-in-one stats like RAPTOR and LEBRON have inherent flaws, and those use way more "sophisticated" methods for output than PER. Not to discount those kinds of stats. They do add to discussion, help identify trends, and of course provide a foil to the eye test. But if you're just pointing to them in a vacuum and saying "This is the better player/defender/scorer/etc.." It's lazy analysis.
I presume the 3 seasons he played with the Rockets were cumulatively the worst winning % in the franchise’s history?
