Go to the end to see Rox's top 3 scorers High shot total hurts Iverson's efficiency By Terry Brown NBA Insider Tuesday, December 2 Updated: December 2 2:46 PM ET ...... Most efficient scorers 1. Kobe Bryant, Los Angeles Lakers Stats: 1.465 (343 points on 234 shots) Wind him up and turn him loose while he strings together 40-point games like so many Christmas lights. Place him alongside three other Hall of Famers, add in rape charges, surgery rehab and sibling rivalry for effect, and he's still leads his team in scoring while doing so at almost 10 fewer points than he put up last year. But make no mistake about it. He remains the troubled prodigy trapped in a team sport, which should tell you just how talented he is by topping this list while completely out of his element. 2. Andrei Kirilenko, Utah Jazz Stats: 1.463 (278 points on 190 shots) This kid is in the top 10 in steals and blocks per game, No. 7 in free-throw percentage, No. 13 in field goal percentage and 17th in offensive rebounds. And we're supposed to believe in this mass of statistics that he's also being efficient about it? And here's the scary part. He's increased all of those numbers in every positive statistically category over each of his three seasons in the league and showing no signs of stretch marks, which makes us wonder how good he can possibly become. The more he scores, the better he shoots while nearly doubling his assist total from last year and adding two more boards a game. And have you seen him play defense on the only guy above him on this list? I know this piece is one dimensional in nature and I'm all over the board with this kid but have you noticed that he could play another 10 minutes a game and not look winded? Of course, there are more questions than answers at this point because, be honest, you still can't spell his last name without looking up. 3. Corey Maggette, Los Angeles Clippers Stats: 1.45 (262 points on 180 shots) Two words. Free throws. Two years ago, he shot a grand total of 251 on the season. In 13 games this season, he's already taken 112. This guy's on pace to shoot 705 of them from the small forward position. Heck, league MVP Tim Duncan took only 634 last year for comparison. He's getting a whopping 8.6 per game, which almost makes you completely forget that his shooting percentages from the field and long distance are actually lower than they were last season. Good for him that his free-throw percentage is at a career-high 84.8 percent. 4. Peja Stojakovic, Sacramento Kings Stats: 1.44 (372 points on 258 shots) There are maybe three or four people on the planet who can shoot the ball better than he can and that's being generous to the planet. He's never going to shoot a lot of free throws. He's never going to get a lot of offensive rebounds for chippy put backs. He's never going to be at the front of a fast break for an easy layup. The only way this guy gets on this list is to shoot lights out and 52 percent from the field, 42 percent from distance and 91 percent from the line certainly qualifies. But how long can be possibly keep it up? Well, after this year, his career numbers should be right around 47, 39 and 87 percent, respectively as well as respectfully. 5. Shaquille O'Neal, Los Angeles Lakers Stats: 1.41 (302 points on 214 shots) Let's be honest. This monster would rather be whistled for a charging foul than take another free throw in public, so his career mark of 57 percent shooting from the field (and league-leading 54 percent this season) shouldn't surprise you. He's going inside hard and leaving behind twice as many bodies than apologies. Besides, he shot a career best 62 percent from the line last season and everyone blamed him for not winning a fourth NBA title in a row. But for arguments sake, if the big guy had made every one of his free throws this season (rather than the 50 percent he's making now), his stat in this ranking would be an astronomical 1.73. Least efficient scorers 29. Antoine Walker, Dallas Mavericks Stats: 1.01 (287 points on 282 shots) Shame on you for thinking that four other all-star caliber players in the same line up would slow this guy down. Last year, he took 1554 shots and scored 1,570 points. The year before that, he took 1,689 shots and scored 1,794 points. And so on. You don't even need to ask his former boss Danny Ainge for the reason, either. HE SHOOTS TOO MANY THREES. Two years ago, he shot 34 percent from distance. Last year, he shot 32 percent. This year, he's shooting a miserable 28 percent. Take away all those triples and he's shooting a tidy 48.7 percent from the field as one of the premier forwards in the game. But you know and I know that will never happen and he remains the most inefficient scorer on any NBA floor. 28. Latrell Sprewell, Minnesota Timberwolves Stats: 1.03 (261 points on 251 shots) Shooting a career-low 38 percent from the field will do this to you, especially when you couple that number with 27 percent from long range, which is only hundredths of a decimal from also being a career low. The result is, well, a career-low scoring average to go along with this nifty little ranking for a guy who, on career numbers, registers a decent 1.18 points for every shot. 27. Kenyon Martin, New Jersey Nets Stats: 1.06 (205 points on 193 shots) Don't let the slight bump in numbers and puffed up rhetoric fool you. Kenyon Martin, at this point, is a star only in his own mind and here's some more proof. Supposedly, he's rough and tough and ready to blow your house down. Statistically, this power forward who takes more shots per game than anyone on his team gets to the free-throw line less (3.2 free throws per game) than 3-point shooting swingman Mike Miller of the Memphis Grizzlies (4 free throws per game) who is having his worst season of his career since, well, he beat Kenyon Martin out for Rookie of the Year honors in 2001. Rox players: Yao, 1.4 (292 points on 208 shots) SF, 1.2 (315 points on 262 shots) Cat, 1.27 (285 points on 225 shots)
Is it safe to assume that Yao is in the top 10? Shaq is at 1.41, Yao at 1.4 so I'm assuming Yao's right there.
I don't like PPS. It heavily favors those who shoot a lot of free throws. I agree that drawing fouls is important, but every 2 FTA should count as a shot for the calculation, AFAIAC. That would be much more representative of your expected value every time you throw it at the basket.
Do you realize only good players draw fouls to shoot FTs, star players draw more fouls and shoot more free throws, super stars draw the most fouls and shoot the most free throws? By the way, even you count 2 FTA as one shot which is not always true, your FT percentage is still way higher than your FG percentage, it is like you are shooting 70-80% on your shot, way better than your FG percentages.
That is hardly true. What about technical fouls? What about fouls at the end of a game. I don't like any stat where a marginal player in limited minutes has a chance to have impossible stats. If a guy only plays a couple minutes and is fouled on his only shot attempt, and then makes 1 of 2 FTs, his PPS is infinity. That, to me, is a seriously flawed stat. No stat is perfect, but at least if you add 1 fga for every 2 ftas it would be a lot more representative, even rewarding those who draw a lot of fouls due to the higher FT% that you noted, just not disproportionatly so to those whose games are not as conducive to drawing fouls, perhaps because they play more on the perimeter (eg Reggie Miller before he got old).
Adjusted FG% is a good stat too. Adjusted Field goal percentage is = (points - FTM)/(2*FGA) or [2*(FGM-3ptFGM)+3*3ptFGM]/FGA. It basically sees what a guy does from the floor. When you look at pps and ADJ FG% together you can see how well a player does at getting to line.
2 FTA + 1 opponent foul > 1 shot, a lot of times. If you can get the key opponent players into early foul trouble, you can change the game drammatically in your favor.
The problem with adding FT to shot attempts is that you have tech foul shots and basket-and-one situations. If a guy gets fouled on a miss, it doesn't count as an attempt, but if he's fouled on a made basket, it is an attempt. I have seen a statistical calculation that divides FGA by 1.4 to approximate the number of possessions it eats up. I'm assuming here that they did some research to come up with this number. So, I wouldn't mind adjusting the PPS by a factor of 1.4 of the FGA.
