San Francisco Player Ratings

SF (2).PNG

Emery sure broke out of his shooting slump! I think we should play every game at San Francisco!

Nick Emery played a very Jimmeresque game. Good for him, it was fun to watch.

I like that we had 7 guys with double digit ratings.

I have to question the numbers. If Fischer's game wasn't even decent then something is wrong. He had a great game. 22 pts, 1 TO, 1 PF, shot .500 from the floor and .800 from the stripe. If that doesn't even rate a decent on the scale then the formula is flawed.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

imuakahuku wrote:
I have to question the numbers. If Fischer's game wasn't even decent then something is wrong. He had a great game. 22 pts, 1 TO, 1 PF, shot .500 from the floor and .800 from the stripe. If that doesn't even rate a decent on the scale then the formula is flawed.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

it's because he didn't contribute much else than points. No assists. No steals. No blocks. Few rebounds. The formula encompasses total effort and contributions to a win. If a player/team doesn't rebound, make assists, get steals or block shots they've played a very one dimensional game.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

SpiffCoug wrote:

I have to question the numbers. If Fischer's game wasn't even decent then something is wrong. He had a great game. 22 pts, 1 TO, 1 PF, shot .500 from the floor and .800 from the stripe. If that doesn't even rate a decent on the scale then the formula is flawed.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

it's because he didn't contribute much else than points. No assists. No steals. No blocks. Few rebounds. The formula encompasses total effort and contributions to a win. If a player/team doesn't rebound, make assists, get steals or block shots they've played a very one dimensional game.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Why is his score, and other's, higher than Davis? Just curios how the formula is weighted. It just seems to me that 22 pts with high make % would be heavier weighted.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

imuakahuku wrote:
Why is his score, and other's, higher than Davis? Just curios how the formula is weighted. It just seems to me that 22 pts with high make % would be heavier weighted.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I don't know how it's weighted, but I'm assuming rebounds, steals and assists are all multiplied by something. Whatever that number is, for assists, Fischer's PER was multiplied by 0 because he had 0 assists. Davis' had the assist multiplier multiplied by 1 because he had an assist. Fischer had the rebound multiplier multiplied by 1 because he had just 1 rebound. Davis had that same multiplier multiplied by 6 because he had 6 rebounds. Davis had 2 blocks, Fischer 0.



PER, in basketball, is about how much you contributed to your team's victory. Other than points, Fischer contributed very little. He did have a very good shooting game, but the rest of his game was lacking.



I don't think byufan4ever posted the Pacific game PERs, but I bet Fischer had a strong PER in that game - even though BYU lost. Because in that game, even though he didn't shoot nearly as well (3 of 14 vs Pac opposed to 6 of 12 vs USF), Fischer had 1 rebound and two assists and two steals.



To have a good PER, you have to do more than just score.

I posted the Pacific ratings here:



http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=19451&start=10#p223542



Yes, Fisher did have a better rating vs Pacific. I know the BYU announcers are in love with Fisher because he's leading our team in scoring, but there's so much more to basketball than scoring. This isn't football where you can focus on just one aspect of the game. You're on the court for offense and defense. Defense is a bit hard to quantify since it's quite possible to play lock down defense without getting a steal or block.



Here is my formula:



PER = Pts - (FGA-FGM) - (FTA-FTM) + (Reb * 0.75) + (Ast * 2) + (Blk * 1.5) + (Stl * 2) - (TO * 2)



Sure, it's not perfect. And I've changed it over the years as I've been using it. It started out as a very simple formula (no weights) that my JV coach used to measure our on court efficiency and I've adapted it by adding in weights which were partly influenced by a college basketball simulation game that I used to play called Drive The Lane (since I couldn't "see" the players play I needed someway to judge the players' performance).



But you can see that it really helps to have a positive Ast+Stl to TO ratio. Some people say if you dominate the boards you win. I say if you share the rock and play great D it's hard to lose.

Why are assists weighed more heavily than blocks? Blocks are much more rare than assists, and a better indicator of "effort". So someone with 10 blocks gets 15 points versus someone with 10 assists gets 20 points? I honestly think that would be the other way around. Blocks at 2, or 2.25 even, assists at 1.5 or 1.75.

Brayden Green wrote:
Why are assists weighed more heavily than blocks? Blocks are much more rare than assists, and a better indicator of "effort". So someone with 10 blocks gets 15 points versus someone with 10 assists gets 20 points? I honestly think that would be the other way around. Blocks at 2, or 2.25 even, assists at 1.5 or 1.75.

Only problem I have with blocks is that they don't usually result in a turnover, just an in bounds for the other team.

BYULV wrote:

Why are assists weighed more heavily than blocks? Blocks are much more rare than assists, and a better indicator of "effort". So someone with 10 blocks gets 15 points versus someone with 10 assists gets 20 points? I honestly think that would be the other way around. Blocks at 2, or 2.25 even, assists at 1.5 or 1.75.

Only problem I have with blocks is that they don't usually result in a turnover, just an in bounds for the other team.

Sure, I agree with that. But, there is a lot of non-stat effect in the game of someone that can block. Rudy Gobert can alter an entire offensive strategy, and that is very valuable to a team when you take away the inside game.

Like BYULV said blocked shots often don't result in TOs thus why they are less valuable than steals. And I like I said there are many things that are hard to quantify by stats alone. Take a sharp shooter who stands at the 3 point line and draws his man close to him afraid to play help defense. That helps a teammate get a one-on-one to the basket. Doesn't show up in the stat sheet and doesn't get any points in my calculation. You're not going to find one formula that makes everyone happy. t's not perfect, but I like it and I go through the effort to track it and post it so you're stuck with it! :)

And that is the best reason. I would love to see one for the woman's game.