Cracking the Code: NBA ADJeff – Enhancing Player Assessment

We’ve dedicated our efforts to refining our statistical analysis, and we’ve identified a metric that we believe effectively encapsulates player value. This metric is essentially a fusion of Player Efficiency Rating (PER) and Defensive Rating. PER remains a reliable statistic; for instance, when describing a player as having a 25 PER, those familiar with advanced stats would immediately grasp the statistical significance. Likewise, characterizing a player as an 11 PER players would convey specific statistical information most would understand the level of that palyer. We’ve addressed the primary criticism of PER by integrating a stronger defensive component. Our choice of Defensive Rating, a well-respected metric, helps fortify the statistical model. The balance we’ve struck between these two metrics appears to be appropriate.

Applying our new NBA ADJeff to the past five seasons reveals significant changes. It demonstrates how players with lower defensive ratings, such as Luka or Damian Lillard, are notably impacted in the rankings. Conversely, players like Anthony Davis experience an elevation in their ranking due to the augmented importance of Defensive Rating.

Some Historical Examples

Of course we must remember the offenses of the last couple of years have never been as strong. They keep breaking records so that would need to be adjusted to an average to look back historically. Still this seems to check out when you run it through some all-time greats best seasons where Defensive Rating was available.

Michael Jordan

LeBron James

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

NBA ADJeff

NBA ADJeff rankings as well as raw stats will be available throughout the season at the link below. These are the current standings as of today 6% of the season in.

College

At the collegiate level, our player ratings are primarily founded on efficiency adjusted by strength of schedule (SOS). While our current methodology proves effective at identifying the best players in the nation, incorporating a defensive rating could fortify the statistical analysis. Here, we present several examples from the previous season. In our initial assessment, Dickenson was on par with Dante in basic ADJeff and surpassed Broome. However, considering the lower defensive rating from the prior year, he would fall behind in the New ADJeff. Jahmir Young and Kolek were graded as the most efficient guards when adjusted for SOS. Integrating the defensive component propels Young ahead and elevates Taylor some as well.

*Adjusted by SOS as well.

Players who operate around the basket, or specifically post players, often hold higher rankings in these assessments in college. The truth remains that they represent crucial elements in college basketball today. They are regarded as the most dominant players because they are. Many among them are older, not particularly sought after by the NBA due to their ground-bound style, yet they excel in college securing high-efficiency shots around the rim. Additionally, they form a pivotal part of the majority of defensive strategies anchoring most defenses. In essence, without bigs achieving 20 PERs, maintaining a 60% true shooting rate, and boasting Defensive ratings in the 90s, teams begin at a disadvantage.

Guards undeniably possess the potential to make a significant impact; however, they must bring substantial value, a challenge many perimeter players in college often grapple with. For instance, Jimmer Fredette serves as an exemplar, ranking among the all-time greatest in PER (Player Efficiency Rating) seasons. Notably, Steph Curry and Damian Lillard also achieved a remarkable 35 PER seasons. Nevertheless, in the NBA, numerous guards excel in these statistics, with Michael Jordan leading the ranks. It’s entirely possible for guards to rank if they actually have the stats.

In collegiate play, guards typically do not exhibit the same level of per-possession statistics, mainly because their skill sets are more repeatable we theorize. Moreover, there exists a scarcity of highly talented big individuals worldwide. Their value significantly increases if they excel in multiple essential skills at the college level with such an expansive need with 362 teams.

Perhaps the challenge for college guards arises from the different dynamics, potentially influenced by factors such as the shorter three-point line and less space as well. However, in theory, they should also be more capable of making additional successful three-point shots. It’s something to consider but we have no problem with the rankings valuing bigs because in college they clearly are the most valuable players currently on both sides of the ball.