Terrence Jones' PER is 17.11. That's higher than Chandler Parson's 15.33, and higher than Asik's 14.89. What's the deal?
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck... it must mean PER is utterly useless. PER is a compilation of the boxscore, which, is worthless.
Pat's PER was also high his rookie year. I don't really put tons of value on it as a statistic, but a high PER is certainly a positive.
PER is a flawed stat...it's highly correlated with shot attempts, so much so that if you were to shoot like 40% on 30 shots a game, you'd probably have the highest PER in the league.
PER is of some little value for players getting starter minutes. It is useless for evaluating 6 minutes per game players.
I remember looking at the league PER leaders last December. Greg Smith was in the top 5. The catch, of course, is that by default he was hidden from the list because he did not get enough minutes for his rating to be accurate.
Yes PER summarizes a boxscore, that's only meaningless if you want stats not represented in a boxscore.
because he's a lesser howard, and when he plays with regular howard they will create super howard! (and his PER will be off the charts)
But who looked better on the court their rookie year... Pat or TJ...? TJ did some impressive things with the little time he received. IMO, many stats have to be used with the eye test. Like the assist stat, did the person break down the defense and make a great pass or just walked past half court and passed it off and the guy made the shot. If you didn't see it you wouldn't know, you would just have the stat. But I'm just throwing something against the wall to see if it sticks. Maybe it doesn't matter. But I think Morey would laugh if he sees one of these post that are saying a stat is completely useless.
For such a strong guy, TJ doesn't set very good picks. Not as bad as Greg Smith, but still, he doesn't seem to slow down the defender at all.
there's gotta be some truth to this. heaven and earth. the macro and the micro. as above, so below and ****