Best PG in the game

[BigP50]

My vote would go to Rondo, Rose a close 2nd.

 

[FirstTimer]

My vote would go to Rondo, Rose a close 2nd.

Rondo's Per27 isn't very good though.

 

[WearShades]

A game is 48 minutes long. Per game90-95% of the time does the exact same thing.

You don't understand math, do you. The point of the Per36 is that it gives you rates you can compare. Comparing someone's per game to another's isn't necessarily a fair representation. If you score 30 points a game, and I score 25 a game, and that's all the information you know, you'd conclude that you are the better scorer. If I tell you that I'm only playing 30 minutes, and you're playing 40, you're scoring at a clip of only 27 points per 36 minutes where as I'm scoring at a clip of 30 points per 36 minutes. It then becomes clear who is the better scorer and it's not what the straight per game stat would give you. And not that it matters, since any comparable rates will do, but players don't play all 48 minutes so demanding that one recognize that there are 48 minutes in a game is even less relevant when looking at stats.

Per48 would make some semblance of sense seeing as games are 48 minutes long. Rarely longer. I'd rather see that a guy gives me per game than per "some completely arbitrary and useless time frame that no player every really plays that exact amount".

Per game makes so much more sense to go by that it's not even funny.

Per48 would give you no more information than per36, per 24, or perWhatever. It's about the rates. I have to question whether or not you understand what a rate is. And given that most star players play between 30 and 40 minutes a game, per 36 seems the most logical choice. Per games can often be misleading and not give an accurate indication of how effective a player is when comparing to other players. Per36 rectifies that.

You do realize that Per game doesn't make minutes a factor at all right? Hypothetically a game could last infinitely, yet per game only takes into account that game. It doesn't care about minutes played. What you scored in that game is what you scored. Whether you played for 1 minute, or 48, or 100. Per 36 is a form of bastardized statistical communism that treats all players, regardless of minutes played, as equals, when they aren't. It rewards player who either aren't good enough, aren't able to etc play enough to put up good per game stats. Per36 directly makes minutes a factor by equating all stats out on a per minutes basis. To some how says Per36 minutes makes minutes played no longer a factor is Special person because it does the exact fucking opposite. It becomes an even bigger factor for players that play more than 36 minutes per game because it actually makes their stats go down..meanwhile the Yinka Dare's of the world average 8pts and 10rpg.

Well we knew you weren't a math wiz, now we know political science isn't up your alley either.

The point you're not so eloquently trying to make is that a player who can only play a few minutes but performs well during that time will look very good up against a player who plays high volume minutes and doesn't play at the same high level for all of those minutes. This is where common sense comes in. If you're comparing a player who only plays well during a very small amount of minutes to a player who plays pretty well with high volume minutes, the per36 stat isn't a good comparison. However, when you're comparing two players who play a medium to high amount of minutes, it works to put those players on an even level so as to see which one is better optimizing their playing time. That's the point of the stat and it should be used accordingly. If someone's trying to use per36 to say that this year's Shannon Brown is a better player than this year's Luol Deng, their argument is as moronic as your's.

I understand math. What I am telling you is that this a pointless, worthless, and fucking Special person stat to use. it actually skews the value of the player rather than gives you the true indication of it.

It actually does the exact opposite. You're doing nothing to show that you have any hold on math, and that I have to school you on it in a sports message board is very, very sad.

 

[FirstTimer]

You don't understand math, do you.

You don't understand punctuation, do you?

The point of the Per36 is that it gives you rates you can compare.

Yeah..because Per game isn't a rate stat and isn't comparable...............

Comparing someone's per game to another's isn't necessarily a fair representation.

Yeah, I'd rather know how some player who plays less than another compares to a guy who is actually on the floor.

If you score 30 points a game, and I score 25 a game, and that's all the information you know, you'd conclude that you are the better scorer. If I tell you that I'm only playing 30 minutes, and you're playing 40

Then I'd taunt you for not being good enough to play more.

How's that bench feel scrub?

It then becomes clear who is the better scorer

No it doesn't. That's a compeltely myopic viewpoint. How many shots is it taking you to get those points? What's your FG%? How efficient are you? Those are the most important factors...and I don't need Per36 to tell me them.

Per48 would give you no more information than per36, per 24, or perWhatever. It's about the rates.

Fine. They are all useless. Per game is a rate stat as well dip shit.And a far more important one. I could give a shit what Omer Asik's Per36 is when he's playing practically 1/3 of that.

Per36 is a compeltely arbitrary useless fucking statistic.

I have to question whether or not you understand what a rate is.

I have to ask you if you are required to wear a helmet while posting.

Are you?

Because you should be.

And given that most star players play between 30 and 40 minutes a game, per 36

Actually then 35 would be since it's exactly in between them.

Per games can often be misleading and not give an accurate indication of how effective a player is when comparing to other players. Per36 rectifies that.

No it doesn't. Per 36 is nothing more than a per minute look at a random stat randomly multiplied by 36. It doesn't "rectify" anything. Per36 isn't a useful tool because no NBA player plays exactly 36 minutes and so to just randomly compare them at such a time frame makes no fucking sense. A game is always a constant 1. it doesn't get much more simple and effective than that. Acting as though Per36 tells you anything is a fucking crock. It's not some amazing mathematical formula. It's just one more way for stat ******s to try and over analyze something that doesn't need to be in the first place.

Well we knew you weren't a math wiz, now we know political science isn't up your alley either.

You aren't a spelling whiz either apparently...

The point you're not so eloquently trying to make is that a player who can only play a few minutes but performs well during that time will look very good up against a player who plays high volume minutes and doesn't play at the same high level for all of those minutes. This is where common sense comes in. If you're comparing a player who only plays well during a very small amount of minutes to a player who plays pretty well with high volume minutes, the per36 stat isn't a good comparison.

However, when you're comparing two players who play a medium to high amount of minutes, it works to put those players on an even level so as to see which one is better optimizing their playing time.

No it doesn't because it ignores the fact that players aren't fucking robots.

It ignores issues like fatigue, personnel on the floor, players roles on the team etc. Simply put if one player is forced to play high volume minutes due to his teams needs it's Special person to try and evaluate him against a medium volume timed player who isn't as inherently important to the teams success, thus why he isn't playing as much. That's where any Per36xx stat loses it. You want to bring up common sense? Try using some before posting.

What happens if that medium volume player has to play 5-10 more minutes. Are they still as efficient? Do they score as much? What if they are needed to be the first option on offense and face the other teams betetr defender and game plans designed to stop them rather than being the second option or not as highly respected a player?

Basketball is too much of a team game and has too many changes over the course of eras to have sabremetric-esque stats applied to it. We had this conversation ad nauseum in relation to a guy like Paul Pierce vs Clyde Drexler.

It actually does the exact opposite. You're doing nothing to show that you have any hold on math, and that I have to school you on it in a sports message board is very, very sad.

You haven't schooled shit. Go fap to a Bill James book and swallow a knife.

 

[WearShades]

Yeah..because Per game isn't a rate stat and isn't comparable...............

Unless the playing time happens to be equal, it isn't a rate stat.

Yeah, I'd rather know how some player who plays less than another compares to a guy who is actually on the floor.

Once again you're missing the point. If you want to make a strong comparison between players you'll want to see how they do in the same amount of time.

Then I'd taunt you for not being good enough to play more.

How's that bench feel scrub?

So this is what people do when they're wrong, know it, and are out of ideas...

No it doesn't. That's a compeltely myopic viewpoint. How many shots is it taking you to get those points? What's your FG%? How efficient are you? Those are the most important factors...and I don't need Per36 to tell me them.

Those other factors are important as well. However, they're no different between per game or per36, so you're really off point (again). What a player does with their minutes is important too, and it's easier to compare with per36 than per game.

Fine. They are all useless. Per game is a rate stat as well dip shit.And a far more important one. I could give a shit what Omer Asik's Per36 is when he's playing practically 1/3 of that.

Per36 is a compeltely arbitrary useless fucking statistic.

Per game is not a rate stat since players do not play the same amount per game. Comparing two different per game stats doesn't tell you how effective the players are with their minutes.

I have to ask you if you are required to wear a helmet while posting.

Are you?

Because you should be.

You should try harder next time you want to insult someone. The goal is to, you know, not sound like a prat.

Actually then 35 would be since it's exactly in between them.

So per36 is stupid because there's 48 minutes in a game but per35 is ok? Not that there would be anything wrong with a per35, but you're not consistent in your argument.

No it doesn't. Per 36 is nothing more than a per minute look at a random stat randomly multiplied by 36. It doesn't "rectify" anything. Per36 isn't a useful tool because no NBA player plays exactly 36 minutes and so to just randomly compare them at such a time frame makes no fucking sense. A game is always a constant 1. it doesn't get much more simple and effective than that. Acting as though Per36 tells you anything is a fucking crock. It's not some amazing mathematical formula. It's just one more way for stat ******s to try and over analyze something that doesn't need to be in the first place.

Per36 rectifies the issue of variances in minutes played, and as such it's a very useful tool. It's ok for you to admit you were wrong since, obviously, you have no idea what you're talking about if you think equalizing minutes is never a fair way to compare players. A game is not a constant for each player since they don't play the same amount. A player should not be held responsible for the time he's not on the court, which is exactly what you are arguing for. You can continue to repeat yourself, but you'd only be underscoring how imbecilic your argument is.

You aren't a spelling whiz either apparently...

100% true.

No it doesn't because it ignores the fact that players aren't fucking robots.

Lol, so now per36 is dehumanizing athletes...

So besides being irrefutably incorrect, you've now gone into self-satire. Excellent work.

It ignores issues like fatigue, personnel on the floor, players roles on the team etc. Simply put if one player is forced to play high volume minutes due to his teams needs it's Special person to try and evaluate him against a medium volume timed player who isn't as inherently important to the teams success, thus why he isn't playing as much. That's where any Per36xx stat loses it. You want to bring up common sense? Try using some before posting.

What happens if that medium volume player has to play 5-10 more minutes. Are they still as efficient? Do they score as much? What if they are needed to be the first option on offense and face the other teams betetr defender and game plans designed to stop them rather than being the second option or not as highly respected a player?

Basketball is too much of a team game and has too many changes over the course of eras to have sabremetric-esque stats applied to it. We had this conversation ad nauseum in relation to a guy like Paul Pierce vs Clyde Drexler.

I'm not saying per game is not useful at all, I'm just trying to get your brain to understand that there is a use for per36 as well.

You haven't schooled shit. Go fap to a Bill James book and swallow a knife.

Well clearly I haven't if you're still pushing this farce of an argument of yours. When you're ready to admit you're wrong I'll let you out of time out.

 

[FirstTimer]

Unless the playing time happens to be equal, it isn't a rate stat.

Anything "per" is a rate stat.

Posts per day is a rate stat.

Inches of snow per hour is a rate stat.

Inches or rain per hour is a rate stat.

All games are equal because they all count as one. Thus it's a rate stat.

Really?

Once again you're missing the point. If you want to make a strong comparison between players you'll want to see how they do in the same amount of time.

No I don't.

Not all players do and/or are capable of playing the same amount of time. So no, I don't want that comparison.

So this is what people do when they're wrong, know it, and are out of ideas...

No...I'm just telling you what I would do.

Those other factors are important as well.

They are the most important aspect. Especially dealing with scoring.

However, they're no different between per game or per36

Really ass clown?

No shit.

So that would prove my point of Per36 being a useless meaningless statistic.

How are you not grasping this?

What a player does with their minutes is important too, and it's easier to compare with per36 than per game.

Why not use Per1 then?
Why not use Per25?

Per 34?

Per 32?

Per 35?

Again, games aren't 36 minutes long. Not all players are capable of playing that length, and in a team sport like basketball to somehow try to make all minutes equal to "equate" out players doesn't hold any weight.

This stat is so arbitrary it used to be Per40.

Per game is not a rate stat since players do not play the same amount per game.

This shit again.

1. All games are a constant 1. Therefore per game is a rate stat as all players play the same amount of games at a time....1.

2. Your above statement makes Per36 even more useless. If all players don't play the same amount, and issues like fatigue, floor personnel, use within the offensive system etc would both effect they amount they play and what they are asked to do and capable of doing on the floor then Per36 is rendered even more meaningless as since a player usage and effectiveness on the floor could be directly correlated to how much they are able to play using Per36 to make any determination of how they would perform over that given time span isn't reliable.

Comparing two different per game stats doesn't tell you how effective the players are with their minutes.

And neither does Per36 because a player may not be effective playing 36 minutes as he would be playing his normal length. There's a reason guys like Kyle Korver don't play 36mpg.

So per36 is stupid because there's 48 minutes in a game but per35 is ok?

No.

I was just pointing out your own complete lapse in logic for saying 36 is a decent # to use. You said players play between 30 and 40 minutes per game so Per36 would be the "logical" choice....which doesn't make since. Logically you'd want to split that number equally.

It had nothing to do with me saying Per 35 is the way I want to go. It had everything to do with me pointing out you're legally Special person.

Per36 rectifies the issue of variances in minutes played

No it doesn't because again:

Per36 is rendered even more meaningless as since a player usage and effectiveness on the floor could be directly correlated to how much they are able to play

It ignores that if a guy playing 24 minutes a game was forced to play 36 minutes per game he may not be able to put up the same rate statistics per minute.

Lol, so now per36 is dehumanizing athletes..

..............................

I'm not saying per game is not useful at all, I'm just trying to get your brain to understand that there is a use for per36 as well.

I like how your "response" to the main point of contention of why Per36 is useless is this limp dicked sentence.

You essentially just said "Everything you just said above that makes Per36 useless is correct as to effectivness of players over a certain time period and how they may not be as effective or good if they were forced to play more as well as taking other factors into account. I can not refute this...but Per36 is still useful."

Are you even trying anymore?

Well clearly I haven't if you're still pushing this farce of an argument of yours. When you're ready to admit you're wrong I'll let you out of time out.

I could always just tell Lefty that his Special person cousin registered here?

You never did answer my question about you being required to wear a helmet while posting.

 

[Rush]

lol @ FirstTimer. The multi-quote king.

 

[WearShades]

First Timer apparently wishes not only to be wrong, but flagrantly wrong. You hold so firmly to the wrong ideas that we can't even make fun of you; you're doing it for us. Thanks for the the signature fodder. I'm sure I'll use some of the particularly hilarious ones in the near future.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

FT is argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative. He never looks to find common ground, or to be constructive.

 

[ChicTownBoyJohn]

1. Rondo
2. Rose
3.Williams
4.Paul
5.Wall

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

It honestly makes me ill to see people putting Rondo in front of Paul, Williams, and Rose. He honestly shouldn't even be in front of Russell Westbrook...

 

[houheffna]

It honestly makes me ill to see people putting Rondo in front of Paul, Williams, and Rose. He honestly shouldn't even be in front of Russell Westbrook...

The problem with your statement is Westbrook IS on the same level as any other point guard in the league. Have you seen that guy play this year? He is unbelievable. He is actually outplaying Durant...he has been sick this year.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

kyrie irving

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

The problem with your statement is Westbrook IS on the same level as any other point guard in the league. Have you seen that guy play this year? He is unbelievable. He is actually outplaying Durant...he has been sick this year.

http://www.chicitysports.com/forum/chicago-bulls-forum/9037-deserving-nba-all-stars.html

Notice that I have Westbrook ahead of Durant in the list of most deserving All-Stars in the West.

 

[X]

In No Order:
Rose
Williams
Nash
Paul
Westbrook
Evans
...

Then probably Rondo.

Basically, any above average guard that doesn't play with four hall of famers. Rondo doesn't make anyone better...Ray Allen didn't become a better shooter when he joined up w/ Rondo. KG didn't become a better finisher or talk better shit when he signed on w/ the Celtics. And Paul Pierce hasn't become a better scorer since Rondo. Rondo is told to go out and not turn the ball over...then find one of 4 finishers to pass to. He is overrated...and if any of you would honestly take Rondo over Williams, Paul or Rose, I will laugh in your general direction...several times over....on thursday night football in front of everybody.

 

[Shakes]

Rondo is just one of those guys who was under rated for a while and everyone picked up on him at once (the Bill Simmons hype train no doubt helped) and now he's over rated.

 

[FirstTimer]

FT is argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative. He never looks to find common ground, or to be constructive.

You just told me yesterday how great of a feel I have for being an NBA GM.

You're bipolar.

:slap:

:smoke:

:date:

First Timer apparently wishes not only to be wrong, but flagrantly wrong. You hold so firmly to the wrong ideas that we can't even make fun of you; you're doing it for us. Thanks for the the signature fodder. I'm sure I'll use some of the particularly hilarious ones in the near future.

I accept your apology.

:date:

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

You just told me yesterday how great of a feel I have for being an NBA GM.

I'm sure most of them are assholes, too.

 

[FirstTimer]

I'm sure most of them are assholes, too.

And millionaires.

 

[Rush]

Solid point.