View Single Post
Old 11-27-2012, 12:45 PM   #84
EricaLubarsky
Inactive.
 
EricaLubarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 41,985
EricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Five-ofan View Post
You do realize that collison is already significantly better than any version of jjb right? That's just hyperbole, I hope
I was not being hyperbolic at all and ANY version? I'd beg to differ.

Collison 12-13 vs. JJB 10-11

45.6/49.0% eFG%
33.3/38.9% clutch eFG%
43.6%/43.9% FG
33.3%/34.9% 3pt FG

88.2%/84.7% FT
8.6/9.2 AP48
3.5/3.9 TOp48
2.6/2.3 A/TO ratio
3.2/4.6 Rp48
7.0/9.7 pass rating
6.6/9.9 rebound rating
16.8/20.0 "hands" rating (a measure of bad passes, TOs, etc)
14.4/15.1 PER rating (player overall rating)
-1.6/3.9 net PER (player production minus opposing player's PER)


Collison only leads in three (3) statistical categories important for PGs. Three. Just look at all the stats that go JJB's way. I believe that the simple stats, when corrected for minutes played and advanced stats bear my point out quite well. I think you either undervalue JJB or overvalue Collison, because comparing JJB and Collison seems to be a solid move. Across multiple years, JJB and Collison are mirror images of each other with JJB taking the lead in many key categories.

Last edited by EricaLubarsky; 11-27-2012 at 12:59 PM.
EricaLubarsky is online now   Reply With Quote