Player Efficiency Rating

[youngman42]

Interestingly - and as expected from his play - Zion is dominating the NCAA this year with his PER (Player Efficiency Rating) that measures the efficiency of a player - positive contributions & negative plays - on a per minute basis.

Zion is at 42.55. Second is Brandon Clarke, at 37.73, which is a large spread given the rest of the top 100 players in PER are all over 25 and fairly tightly bunched.

However, Zion is the only Duke player in the top 100.

As great at times as RJ Barrett has been, his PER is at 24 (from Basketball Reference) - not even cracking the top 100.

This is one area that I think Duke can and needs to improve upon the rest of the way - especially Barrett and Reddish. They need to play with greater efficiency. You expect some of this to be lower in freshmen because they are going to make a number of mistakes that would be uncharacteristic in a veteran. Moving forward, if Duke wants to win a title, this is a concern. Even if we don't shoot threes great, we can cut down on chucking up bad or forced shots, or shots too early in half-court offense in close games, or throw ill-advised passes. Tolerating mistakes with young players is important, but they need to grow from that. And fast in this instance!

 

[Quavarius]

I mean we’ve won 30 games with only one player being in the Top 100 Efficiency. Sure, it would be nice to have more, but with the schedule we’ve faced, Zion’s monsterous efficiency numbers are just enough. That’s why we looked like a Top 15 team without him instead of a Top 3 team.

I get what you’re saying. I even said that if this team was a great 3 point shooting team, our average margin of victory would have to be damn near 30 points. Yet, we’re still blowing teams out because of the other things we can do on the other end of the court.

If we can get through this tournament healthy, I like our chances against anyone.

At this point, we are who we are. Improvements from everyone (not named Zion) would be appreciated, but it’s hard to see major improvements through a possible 6 game tournament.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

PER assumes all teams are equal, so the “top 100” means nothing. I’m sure RJ would be substantially more efficient if he played for a mid-major. Most of those players are also non shooters. Big men tend to boast higher shooting percentages. Volume scorers also look terrible in metrics (Kobe for example)

 

[IPSYCHOSIS]

PER assumes all teams are equal, so the “top 100” means nothing. I’m sure RJ would be substantially more efficient if he played for a mid-major. Most of those players are also non shooters. Big men tend to boast higher shooting percentages. Volume scorers also look terrible in metrics (Kobe for example)

Baker would be more efficient at a mid-major.

 

[IPSYCHOSIS]

RJ plays with ....yea his efficiency should be much better, but it is what it is. Hes a great player, but like I said a month ago he ain’t going #2 in the draft. He has some things to improve on. To be a “volume scorer” for one ya gotta shoot better.

 

[dukesince91]

RJ plays with ....yea his efficiency should be much better, but it is what it is. Hes a great player, but like I said a month ago he ain’t going #2 in the draft. He has some things to improve on. To be a “volume scorer” for one ya gotta shoot better.

I would take him #2.

 

[Shatterthesky22]

Well anything over 15 is a positive PER, and over 20 is where you find most stars in the NBA, so considering how RJ goes through slumps mid game sometimes and isn't the most efficient scorer out there, him having a PER of 24 is impressive. It shows just how many other things like rebound and facilitate, he does for our team.

 

[IPSYCHOSIS]

I would take him #2.

Cool

 

[ioliva]

Rj May be inefficient based on those ratings but he produces great results. His shot has been off a bit lately but he’s still playing great.

Reddish is the one that needs to be more efficient. He has the power to shoot us out of games honestly. He’s got to focus on taking quality shots. He started out 0-6 last game. The next 3 shots he took were really good ones and he sunk them, finishing 3-9.

 

[df64]

Reddish also has to do a better job avoiding charges and finishing at the rim. Granted, I think he gets screwed more than anyone in recent memory on the block/charge call, but there is no reason for a guy with his size and skill set to be such a horrible finisher at the rim. Several times, it has been at least partly due to trying to be too fancy with one handed Dr. J like moves.

 

[youngman42]

Reddish also needs to improve. But the argument about Barrett that he "produces" is just not recognizing the inefficiency in that production. He can look awesome at times but then takes too many poor shots.

And, Duke did not have a super hard schedule. A superficial look, makes it seem hers doing great (talent wise, he's top 2-3 in all of CBB), but the reality is he's had a number of bad games and you can't afford those against really good teams. It's one thing to have a bad game against a Syracuse, or Wake, it's another thing to do that against a quality sweet 16, elite 8, or FF team, which is where it matters and needs to be cleaned up.

Couple of classic illustrations:

He had 23 against Gonzaga. A superficial view that says, "Hey, he had 23!" ignores that it took him 25 shots (9 of 25, 1-4 from 3) 36% & 25%, which is almost always a losing proposition for a team.

Again, 23 points against 'Cuse in the first game, but on 8 for 30 shooting, and 4 of 17 from 3! 23 points is bad if it's with those numbers.

Or the 26 points against UNC but on 10 of 27 shooting.

His overall shooting % covers up much of his significant inefficiency because he'd have great shooting games against lesser schools like Hartford & Stetson.

He can be spectacular. It's just when he forces tough sots it hurts the team. And, in the NCAA all you need is one of those really inefficient games.

If there were 7 game series, Duke would beat anyone - no doubt. But, all it takes is one game with several boneheaded plays and it could be over.