Kobe Wade Roy JJ Are definitely better, so 5-7ish with Stephen Jackson and Vince Carter when he is playing well
Out of that list, I would rank kevin martin 4, behind kobe, dwade and roy. Joe Johnson is old and I dont see him having that many good years in the future. Also, someone will give him a max contract which he is not deserving of. Manu Ginobili should not be ranked higher than martin. Ginobili is also old and constantly injured. If he was any good, then why are the Spurs not resigning him? He was great in his prime, but not anymore. Maggette is a loser and his production has never led to winning. Isnt he more of a small forward? Jamal Crawford....serously? He's having a great year, but he's not someone that you can build around. Crawford's game is suited for scoring off the bench. Monta Ellis is kinda overrated. You guys think Brooks is bad, just wait till you see Ellis. The guy makes bad decisions, high turnover, and does not make his team better. Often times, he would just dribble the ball while everyone else just stands and watch.
That's a stupid stat to use because freethrows result in a change of possession but don't count as a "shot attempt."
Your statement would only make sense if free throws didn't count for points. Since hitting two free throws is just as good as hitting a two-point shot, that's an idiotic thing to say. Getting fouled is the most efficient way to score, and Martin is very, very good at drawing fouls, and very, very good at shooting free throws.
Wrong. This is very easy to refute. Who was more efficient? Player A: 5-10 from the field, 2-18 from the free throw line, 12 points Player B: 6-13 from the field, 0-0 from the free throw line, 12 points By your formula, Player A's efficiency is 1.2 points per shot, while Player B's efficiency is 0.92. So Player A was more efficient. But that completely ignores all the missed the free throws, as if a missed free throw doesn't hurt your team. In fact, assuming none of the misses were offensive rebounded, Player A's scoring attempts consumed more possessions -- 19 compared to 13. So, Player B has to be considered more efficient.
Yes, but it's a nonsensical argument when you're talking about an 85% free throw shooter. Think of it this way: Every time Martin gets to the line, that's worth 1.7 points. Over the long run, you can put that in the bank. You also have to factor in that there are instances where he tries to draw the foul and doesn't get the call, resulting in a missed shot attempt (which by this formula brings down the efficiency rating). It's not a perfect way to judge efficiency, but it's a lot better than FG% or TS% or even eFG%. And it's simple enough that anybody can instantly understand it.
The formula is demonstrably flawed even for players that shoot perfectly from the free throw line. Consider: Player A: 0-1 from field, 12-12 from free throw line, 12 points Player B: 6-6 from field, 0-0 from free throw line, 12 points According to your formula, Player A scores 12 points per shot while Player B scores merely 2 points for shot. Oh, so Player A is 6 times as efficient? Hardly. Player B scored his 12 points by consuming only 6 possessions, while Player A scores his 12 points consuming 7 possessions. The reason your formula is flawed is because it treats free throw makes as free points, but that would only be true if your team retained possession after the free throw attempts.
1. Kobe 2. Wade 3. Roy 4. Johnson 5. Healthy Manu 6. Iggy 7. Martin 8. Butler 9. Mayo 10. Gimpy Manu or Jackson, take your pick
Certainly in the top 10. But 5-7ish like most people are putting him looks a little high to me. Wade, Kobe, Roy and Johnson in that order is heads and shoulders above everyone else. Vince, Rip, Iggy, Manu, Mayo, Ellis and JRich are there and about. There is also the likes of Redd, Allen, Gordan. Who are having a bad or injury hit season.
Putting Martin in the same category as Kobe may be the most absurd thing I have ever read on this forum. Wonder where Martin will finish in this years MVP voting???? Thanks for the laugh.
This. This is exactly a spot-on analysis of the flaw inherent in scoring efficiency. It's a metric, but it's not a perfect one. Bravo! (Not being sarcastic.) Also, someone like Kobe may have a lower shooting percentage because he's forced to create more of his own shots and is able to pick up more of the slack when his team needs. For example, let's say you have a guy, Player A, who can only make shots when he's wide-open. When wide-open, he shoots 100%. So he may go 4-4 every game and score 10 points (we'll say he made two from behind the arc), but he's utterly useless in clutch situations if he's not wide open. Whereas his teammate, Player B, isn't perfect when he's wide-open, but he's able to force some difficult shots and make them. He may go 8-16 from the field for 18 points (we'll give him a couple of treys, as well), but he was able to create and make some difficult shots when his team needed it. He could have settled for 4-6 shooting on gimme baskets if he were aiming for the Scoring Efficiency Title, but his team needed more, so he took another 10 shots and made nearly half of them. That's the guy who wins who championships. I realize these are extreme ends of the spectrum, but they're used to illustrate a point. All players will lie somewhere in the middle. Kobe is more like Player B than A, however, and the one I'd prefer on my team. (Of course, you could utilize Player A as a role player, but let's not confuse him with MJ or Kobe. Those guys are killers.)
If we are including the likes of Redd and Allen and ignoring injuries. Then, T-Mac should be rated than Johnson and Roy.
