But to base an MVP argument on PER is, well… ah heck, who cares, people base arguments on scoring averages, so it really does not matter.

I guess it was just the attitude Hollinger had regarding his PER that irked me and rubbed off the wrong way.

As for PER, I’ve been reading and following Hollinger and how he arrives at his numbers for years. But understand how I see them and all the new per-minute, rebound rate and other stats: They are tools in the toolbox. No one stat has all the answers, and even Hollinger will tell you that. Here’s how I use it: If I was writing tomorrow’s Clippers preview and I saw, say, Quintin Ross had a PER of 20, borderline All-Star level, I’d do a double take. Then I’d look at other stats and things (like watch a Clips game) to find out why — is his shooting suddenly brilliant, is he dishing out a bunch more assists, rebounds, whatever? Like I said, I think PER is as good a snapshot stat as exists right now, but it is just that. The details are where the interesting stuff is.

It’s all about how you use the tools.

As for PER, he says it’s pace adjusted, and per minute… but what does that actually mean? And do you agree, or buy into the weights he assigned to each stat? can you actually say, off the top of your head, how much one stat is worth compared to another?

if you can’t, you’re not really using PER, but instead parroting something Hollinger claims. and therein lies another problem with PER – it’s probably too complicated to say what is worth how much, making people accept Hollinger’s opinion without thinking.

Also, PER will benefit certain players more than others, especially due to the emphasis on rebounds. a 3pt shooter, for example, will never win out as he probably won’t get ANY offensive boards out of his own shots, nor will he ever be in a position to fight for rebounds. That’s part of the system, not part of his flaw.

And as Hollinger points out, PER does not measure defense in any way, nor does it adjust for the style of offense the team runs. Nothing accounts for the fact that some players will just have more opportunities to make an impact with the ball, so i honestly don’t think how he can say that PER is a handy reference that can rank players.

Look, I have no problem with LBJ being presented as an MVP candidate. What I have problem with is that there is absolutely no consistency from the guys that vote on the MVP. How do you entrust such an honor, that is almost an automatic HOF bid, to people who will change their minds every season?

LBJ sure got numbers, but when did Kobe NOT have the numbers? as far as i remember, other than his rookie years off the bench, he has always produced numbers worthy to be included in the MVP talks, but was always dismissed as being cocky or selfish or both.

If they presented a case for CP3 (i’m sounding like a broken record here), at least that shows some consistecy, even though it’d probably mean that a PG standout will win over everyone else. That’s also why i didn’t have a problem with Nash winning it two years in a row – the standards didn’t change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Efficiency_Rating

That thing is a beast of a math equation.

I simply think he trusts his own statistics further than they warrant. It’s natural for him to do that, since he created them. But that doesn’t make his reliance on them entirely rational.

Um, the only way you know Hollinger’s opinion on something is if you actively seek it out. You have to go to ESPN and read his stuff (or in the least read what people are saying about him). There are plenty of NBA writers I don’t think much of, so I don’t read them. It’s not that hard, with Hollinger or any of them.

Look, I want Kobe to be MVP and thinks he deserves it. But if you don’t think you can make a valid case for LeBron or Chris Paul this year as well you are kidding yourselves. And, honestly, I’m fast growing weary of both arguing that point and the whole “who should be MVP” thing in general. I still don’t see what the big deal is — if Kobe doesn’t win it is not a personal offense to any of us.

And by the way, the formula for PER can be found in Hollinger’s old Basketball Forecast books (a print version of what ESPN now pays him for in the player profiles and the like). He tweaks it, but at places such as APBR he talks about it some. Guys like Mike at Knickerblogger and Justin at basketball-reference know it and use it on their sites.

Two years ago, Kobe led a young and not-so-talented team to 45 wins and averaged 35, 5, 4. In the process, he was called selfish, a bad teammate, incapable of making those around him better. (Kobe finished 3rd or 4th in the MVP votes that year!) This year Lebron is doing basically the same thing and averaging 30, 8, 7 and being called a great player, “head and shoulders” above the rest and the MVP.

This year, Kobe is putting up great numbers 28, 6,5 and playing great defense. His team is #1 in the west and his teammates are playing great. However, the media still won’t credit Kobe with “making teammates better.” Somehow, when its Kobe players get better despite him and when its Lebron or Nash players get better because of them. Personally, I hate the “making other better” argument because its almost impossible to measure but the media seems to love it.

Long story short, its really the inconsistency of the media and voting thats the issue. Why is the media voting for the MVP anyway? Shouldn’t the players and coaches be doing the voting? Aren’t they the best judge?

By the way, Lebron’s numbers are not that unique. Kobe did average 30, 7, 6 (and played defense) in 02-03 when Duncan won the MVP.

I’ve scoured ESPN.com for what the exact formular was for PER, and wasn’t really successful finding it. And that’s one of the biggest problems i have with PER. As with any other stat it is flawed, but it also has its merits… provided people actually understood exactly what was worth how much!

I don’t know, i was here when he first came up with per, and cited all the reasons for weighing them as such, but i sure don’t remember them. Is 2 pts worth as much as a rebound? a steal? how is possessions factored and how much weight does it carry?

I’m not even going into his reasonings, i’m having trouble remembering the weights he used! Can you guess a players PER by looking at his box score? If you can’t, what other information do you need and how do you find it?

Ah, why bother. I’ll just leave it at this:
IF he is willing to hyperlink his original PER explanation every time he/ESPN mentions PER, I have no problem with him using PER.

I find it amusing people say “Hollinger isn’t objective” or that he has something out for Kobe, as if Lakers fans are the model of objectivity on this issue. First off, there is no standard definition of MVP off which we can judge what is “objective” and that’s not even getting into the myth of objectivity in choosing who is a better basketball player among the most elite few players in the world who are asked to do different things in their systems.

I love that this year Lakers fans are saying “the Lakers are winning big and the Cavs wouldn’t make the playoffs in the West” when for the last two years the argument was “records don’t matter, look at who the best player is.”

Finally, PER is not perfect but it is useful. I use it in some situations because it is a good snapshot of what a player is doing on offense. To say it “doesn’t count the assist before the assist” is silly because nobody tracks that stat. It doesn’t count defense outside of blocks and steals because there are no tracking of that open to the public (you need a private firm like Synergy Sports).

Hollinger has an opinion and gets paid to write it. He does a hell of a lot better backing it up than most national writers. You have a different opinion. Because it is different does not make you smart or him stupid.