clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

How good were last seasons' the top players, really?

I always feel bad about showing stats in some of my posts, and drawing conclusions about them. It's not 'right' to do just that, without explaining if a value is 'good' or not. A frame of reference is necessary - how else would someone know if the top scoring option on their favorite team is getting to the line as much as other first options are without looking at the data? We fans wouldn't. Free throw attempts are one thing, at least most of us know what that is. It is entirely another thing when you see me listing categories for unknown ideas like "Shooting Worth" or "Shooting Frequency". My humble attempt to illuminate us on this subject has been, according to me, not good enough. So here is a list of five of the "TOP PLAYERS" at each position and a list of their stats. This isn't much of an analysis, and the data is from last season -- but I think this is a handy thing to see. We can evaluate our players by the best at their respective position this way. (E.g. Last season Pau Gasol had a shooting worth of 1.41, this season Paul Millsap has a current worth of 1.31.) It's lunch time, so don't expect much "analysis" . . .

Click on to see the charts. Any and all comments / suggestions are welcome.


Everything Else:

I do not think that the data suffers by reducing the significant digits after the decimal point . . . I guess at a sports blog we don't need to see junk like that. At least I didn't start off showing GO Rating in scientific notation ... e.g. 1.25392 x 10^2


  • If you can't see the data in the current window, you can see the tables here: sshooting, everything else.
  • Here's a link to a very recent post that charts out the data for the Utah Jazz, if you are interested.
  • The data is from, which may or may not be my homepage
  • Thai food for lunch?