Player A or Player B

[RoboticDreams]

I'll reveal it since no one else seems interested.

Player A is James Harden and Player B is D-Wade

Oh, then player A.

 

[GMATCa]

Player A- 24 PPG, 5.6 APG, and 4.5 RPG on 44% shooting and on 16.6 shots per game with a PER of 20.79

Player B- 20 PPG, 5 APG, and 5 RPG on 54% shooting and on 14.5 shots per game with a PER of 22.62

Also take into consideration that Player B is a 2nd option while Player A is the top option.

Please don't look up the stats before giving your honest opinion

PER is junk science, a fallacious metric that misapplies team pace factors to individual performance, among other flaws.

... unless you believe that Amar'e Stoudemire was usually a more valuable player to the Suns than Steve Nash, or that Terrell Brandon was a better point guard in 1996 than Magic Johnson in 1986, or that Chris Paul is a perennially superior point guard to Magic Johnson, all claims made by PER.

Don't be brainwashed by John Hollinger and ESPN.

Placing PER aside, the guy shooting 54 percent from the field is probably more valuable, but I'd also want to see their True Shooting Percentages (the best gauge of scoring efficiency), and there's no accounting for their defensively value (PER won't help you there, either).

 

[Shanemansj13]

Player A- 24 PPG, 5.6 APG, and 4.5 RPG on 44% shooting and on 16.6 shots per game with a PER of 20.79

Player B- 20 PPG, 5 APG, and 5 RPG on 54% shooting and on 14.5 shots per game with a PER of 22.62

Also take into consideration that Player B is a 2nd option while Player A is the top option.

Please don't look up the stats before giving your honest opinion

Player B. I will always take a player that is more efficient AND shoots less.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Getting an extra 4 points a game while only taking 2 more shots? A push at REB and Assists? I don't really see a problem with Harden.

I still like DWade more but thats because of defense and the eyeball test.

My main thing was the shooting efficiency and Harden shoots 2 more shots a game.

 

[The Derski]

In the long run I would rather have Harden seeing as Wade is older and his knees are giving out. If I want to win a title right now I would go with Wade because he has been there and done that.

 

[GMATCa]

I'll reveal it since no one else seems interested.

Player A is James Harden and Player B is D-Wade

But you need to consider that playing with LeBron James allows Wade to inflate his shooting efficiency (no, Dwight Howard is not equivalent to James in that respect).

And you need to consider overall scoring efficiency. In terms of True Shooting Percentage, which accounts for three-pointers and free throws, Wade barely leads Harden at .589 to .586. Field goal percentage is still important because made baskets better enable a team to set up its defense, but the best way to set up a defense is by reaching the free throw line, an area where Harden is much better than Wade at this point (although Wade is still very good at it and he used to be phenomenal).

As for PER, again, it won't tell you much because it is a deeply flawed, fallacious metric.

 

[GMATCa]

My main thing was the shooting efficiency and Harden shoots 2 more shots a game.

Yes, but see my previous post. There's shooting efficiency and then there's scoring efficiency.

 

[GMATCa]

I would take Harden simply because there's no way of telling when and where Wade's knees might give way, even this season. By give way, I'm not referring to catastrophic injuries in the manner of Derrick Rose, but whether Wade will be in too much pain to play—or play effectively—in a given game. Remember, Wade is in the luxurious position of playing with LeBron James, which allows him to take games off more readily and to also be carried by a superstar teammate when his knees are problematic.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Yes, but see my previous post. There's shooting efficiency and then there's scoring efficiency.

Yah 4 points. And Harden shoots 2 shots more game. But Wade also has 10% higher FG Pct. That is a large margin. The 4 points isn't as big of a difference than the lower FG pct.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

And again, if we mention defense. This isn't even a discussion.

You could probably have me play defense for harden and there would be no difference.

 

[Clayton]

Yah 4 points. And Harden shoots 2 shots more game. But Wade also has 10% higher FG Pct. That is a large margin. The 4 points isn't as big of a difference than the lower FG pct.

Um..what? Taking 2 more shots a game and getting 4 points out of the deal is a push. You're looking at FG% and ignoring that Harden is getting to the line more and making more Free Throws which gets guys in foul trouble.

This is a silly comparison, though, because they are different kinds of players. If I tried to use DWade like Harden or vice versa in something like NBA2k, Id be in trouble.

As most other people have mentioned, Wade wins because of D.

Miami is currently 28th in Strength of Schedule and Houston is 11th, btw

 

[Hambombs]

Player A- 24 PPG, 5.6 APG, and 4.5 RPG on 44% shooting and on 16.6 shots per game with a PER of 20.79

Player B- 20 PPG, 5 APG, and 5 RPG on 54% shooting and on 14.5 shots per game with a PER of 22.62

Also take into consideration that Player B is a 2nd option while Player A is the top option.

Please don't look up the stats before giving your honest opinion

What's the win shares and +/- not a fan of per. Although if the 2 players are wade and harden then I take wade because you need to play both sides of the floor and defense is always overlooked

 

[GMATCa]

Yah 4 points. And Harden shoots 2 shots more game. But Wade also has 10% higher FG Pct. That is a large margin. The 4 points isn't as big of a difference than the lower FG pct.

Again, read my post; I'm talking about True Shooting Percentage, which represents scoring efficiency. You're talking about scoring volume and I'm not.

 

[GMATCa]

What's the win shares and +/- not a fan of per. Although if the 2 players are wade and harden then I take wade because you need to play both sides of the floor and defense is always overlooked

I don't think that Win Shares are reliable, either; for instance, by that metric, Amar'e Stoudemire was usually more valuable to the Suns than Steve Nash, even though Phoenix nearly reached the NBA Finals without Stoudemire in 2006. +/- is only especially worthwhile (although still imperfect) if in its "Adjusted" format, meaning infused with recent historical samples to create a broader data volume that reduces 'static.'

But you're right that PER provides shadows more than light and that most statistical measures do not adequately account for defense. The best may be "Adjusted +/-."

Adjusted Plus-Minus: An Idea Whose Time Has Come

Again, it's not perfect, but it is an improvement over the common 'advanced' metrics that most people uncritically cite without accounting for the quality and flaws of those metrics.

The best advanced metric that I've seen is True Shooting Percentage, probably because it just examines scoring efficiency and doesn't attempt the impossible, namely a conceptually sound gauge of comprehensive value.

 

[Flauge]

good thread. but i knew player B was wade.. and that biases me. because i love dwade.

 

[Clayton]

Player A- 24 PPG, 5.6 APG, and 4.5 RPG on 44% shooting and on 16.6 shots per game with a PER of 20.79

Player C - 27.4 PPG, 7.5 APG and 4.7 RPG on 49% shooting and on 18.9 shots with a PER of 29

Who is Player C?








D Wade when he was 24. Same age as Harden and back when he was a first option.