Advanced Metrics might not be the be all end all, but they combine with traditional statistics to give us a better viewpoint of the game, of players helps teams. Still that stats aren't always an accurate way to measure a player's greatness. In basketball due to the lack of defensive statistics some important players don't do too well in terms of modern metrics. Players such as Bruce Bowen, Dennis Rodman, and Ron Artest/Metta World Peace/Whatever get hurt because they impacted defense in ways that do not show up in statistics. For Rodman at least he got a lot of defensive rebounds. I didn't want this to be about those types of players. Dave Hollinger who created the formula for Player Efficiency Rating (PER), admits that the formula isn't a fair way to judge certain defensive players who didn't put big stats. I wanted to concentrate on certain great who did put up some big numbers in terms of traditional statistics, but aren't really rewarded in terms of modern metrics. A recent ESPN article about how Isiah Thomas fared in terms of metrics inspired me to write this, but I had already thought about this for a while. So here goes
Allen Iverson
To certain people in my age group and a little younger, Allen Iverson should be getting compared to the likes of Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, and Lebron James. I lived in Philadelphia when he first came into the league, and the city went crazy right after he crossed over Michael Jordan. There was constant talk about it, and he was being compared to Jordan in his rookie season. Not long ago Lebron James said that Iverson was pound for pound the best player ever. His reputation among the people who were young during prime is so strong, but when you get past his high points per game average, his stats don't back it up. He averaged 26.7ppg, 3.7rpg, and 6.2apg, but he played over 41 minutes a game. His per game averages look pretty good compared to Kobe Bryant (25.1ppg, 5.3rpg, 4.7apg), but he played about 5 more minutes per game. When you adjust for minutes the edge clearly goes to Kobe.
Per 36 minute averages
Points Rebounds Assists
Allen Iverson 23.3 3.3 5.4
Kobe Bryant 24.9 5.2 4.7
Iverson was not efficient from the field. His career field goal percentage is 42.5. His true shooting percentage of 51.8%, which is right around average for his era. He got steals at a high rate, but got blocks at a low rate. His career PER is 20.9 is the regular season, and 21.2 in the post season, which is actually good, but not in the class of the best to ever play the game. When you look at win shares he does even worse. Iverson had 99.0 win shares in his career, which is significantly less than Chauncey Billups http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/9/10/6130879/chauncey-billups-retires-trades-pistons-celtics. His win shares per 48 minutes is .126, which is just barely above half of Michael Jordan, and David Robinson's averages. Win shares may not be the greatest way to judge a players, since it factors in a combination of how good a player's stats are, and how many wins his team gets. More team wins, means more wins for players to share. The problem is Iverson is so far below greats that he is compared to. In 2001 playoffs where Iverson "carried" the 76ers to the finals, he didn't lead his team in win shares. Dikembe Mutombo had 3.8 win shares in those playoffs, compared to 2.7 for Iverson. In terms of regular season win shares his 11.8 was comfortably ahead of the 2nd highest (6.5 by George Lynch), but that was largely because of the fact that Theo Ratliff was traded to Atlanta for Motombo, so neither spent close to a full year with the team. In his 34 games, and 875 mintues played for Philly that season Motombo got .201 win shares per 48 minutes, compared to Iverson's .190. That was his peak season in terms of win shares, and he only had 3 seasons in his career with more than 10. For comparsion Michael Jordan had 3 season with over 20 win shares. In the playoffs Iverson's staggering 29.7ppg (2nd all time behind Jordan's 33.4), belies the fact that his shooting averages were worse. His career 40.1 field goal percentage, and his 48.9 true shooting percentage are worse than his regular season percentages. While his career playoff PER is slightly higher than his regular season 20.9, his win shares per 48 minutes is only .109.
Isiah Thomas
When it comes to older basketball fans. The type that you see on ESPN talking about sports
Isiah Thomas' reputation is probably even greater than Allen Iverson's is with people in
my age group. Ask who is the greatest "little man" to ever play, and many will tell you
that it is Isiah Thomas. Unlike Iverson, Thomas won championships, 2 of them in the NBA.
Add in a college national championships, and rivalries with the likes of Jordan, Bird, and
Magic, and you have one of the all time greats. Add in some mesmerizing ball handling,
and an infectious smile, and it's understandable why he is so popular. Thomas averaged
19.2 points, 3.6 rebounds, and 9.3 assists per game in 36.3 minutes per game. Adjusting
per minutes those are right there with Iverson's numbers. There are some problems beyond
that, though. For one, Thomas played in an era of faster paced basketball. This was
especially true in the early 80s. For a lot of the decade the Pistons were a run, and gun
team. They didn't become the slow down grind it out Bad Boys until late in the decade.
Looking at his per 100 possession statistics and doing some math, it seems that the
average pace he played at was about 99 possessions per 48 minutes. Michael Jordan who
played his first 9 seasons when Thomas was playing, had a little less than 94 possessions
per 48, probably around 93.5 for his career. Magic Johnson and Larry Bird would have
played at a similar pace as Isiah. That is factored into PER. He also shot 45.4% from
the field in an era where that was a good deal below average. He had a true shooting
percetange of 51.6%, in an era where that percentage was usually around 53-54%. So while
he scored at a decent rate, his efficiency in doing so was below average. His 9.3
assists per game are great, but he also turned the ball over 3.7 times per game. His
assists to turnover ratio was still a good 2.5/1, but a turnover hurts you more than a
missed shot in terms of PER, because it ends a possessions, where a missed shot could be
rebounded by the offense. Thomas' career regular season PER is just 18.1, not a lot
higher than the average 15.0. His win shares per 48 minutes is .109, and he only had 80.7
career win shares in the regular. To Thomas's credit, he did better in the postseason.
His win shares per 48 minutes is .146 in the postseason, which still comes up well short
of Chris Paul, and John Stockton. His career postseason PER in only 19.8.
Pete Maravich
'Pistol' Pete isn't as highly rated among the all time great as Allen Iverson, and Isiah
Thomas, but I still think that he is similar. Like both of them he was a flashy ball
handler, whose spectacular plays would cover up the weaknesses in his game. Those who
are fans of Maravich are very praising of his ability as a basketball player, but the
advanced metrics do him very few favors. Before I get to that let's get into Maravich's
college career. He average a ridiculous 44.2 points per game in his college career, but
also took an insane 38.1 field goal attempts per game, making 43.8% of them, playing in
a conference that was still largely racially segregated. In his NBA career Maravich's
points, rebounds, and assists averages still look good. Playing 37.0 minutes per game,
his ppg-rpg-apg line is 24.2-4.2-5.4. One of the negatives about him is that he shot
only 44.1% from the field in an era of high field goal percentages. His true shooting
percentage was 50.0%. That was below average in the era he played in. In fact it
would've been below average any season after he played also. So like Iverson and Thomas,
he got a good number of points, but wasn't efficient. The league started counting steals,
and blocks in the 1973-74 season, and during the 7 seasons of his career that those stats
were counted he averaged 1.3 steals, and 0.3 blocks. His steals average is worse than
Thomas, and Iverson, and even though he was 6'5" he didn't get that many blocks. His
numbers also become less impressive when you consider the fast paces that teams in
the league, and most specifically his teams, played at during his career. His career PER
was 18.4, and he topped out at 20.5 in the 1975-76 season. He didn't play on good teams
for most of his career but even considering that his .092 wins shares per 48 minutes,
isn't that impressive, who you consider his reputation. Pete didn't play much in the
playoffs. He only playe din 26 playoff games in his career. His playoff PER was 17.4,
and he had .065 wins shares per 48 minutes in the playoffs. He made the postseason in
his first three seasons with Atlanta, and in his last season with Boston when he was very
close to 33 years old.
