Re: Athlon Sports on scoring efficiency (or, the truth about Toine)

["Jim Meninno" <jam@london.com>]

----- Original Message ----- From: "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>

> So, we
> introduce Scoring Efficiency Index (SEI), which dissects PTS-per-FGA in a
> powerful new way-on a game by game basis, not over the season as a whole.
> It tells who is or is not productive with their shot attempts in the
highest
> percentage of their games, thus giving their teams the best chance to win
> those games.

I guess it shouldn't be too surprising that Antoine doesn't do well by this
measure.  I mean, he's got to be one of the least consistent 20+ ppg scorers
in the NBA and has some truly awful stat lines, shooting wise.  However,
nothing I'm about to say in any way suggests that Antoine is a more
efficient scorer than Paul Pierce.

Now, it's really a pity that Athlon Sports put so much effort into refining
PTS/FGA without addressing the real problem with the stat, which is that
fouls that result in two free throws are not counted as attempts.  They
didn't address it because they can't.  No one keeps track of how many times
a player is fouled and misses a shot, or goes to the line because the
defensive team is over the limit.  For guys like Iverson, Shaq and, yes,
Paul Pierce, this means that a great deal of their points come from
"attempts" that aren't counted by this statistic.

I also question the whole premise that consistency equals a better chance
for the team to win more games.  Maybe, maybe not.  But the way they define
consistency is completely arbitrary.  As I understand it, their rating is a
percentage of games that a player exceeds the league average PTS/FGA.  So,
if you miss it by .001, you might as well shoot 0-30.  I mean, that's just
an obviously worthless statistic, isn't it?

Is Shaq an effiecient scorer?  Of course.  Is Paul Pierce?  Yes.  Far more
efficient than Antoine Walker.  But this statistic is extremely flawed and
there's no point pretending it's not.

Jim