HUH? Do you not understand standardization? Average PER is always 15 no matter the pace. Therefore 15 is always the average, it doesn't change from year to year.

The point about Magic isn't that he was on his deathbed, it's that at the time, AIDS was considered a death sentence, and keeping himself in basketball shape probably wasn't at the top of his mind since he thought he'd never play again. Michael Jordan OTOH, was in very good physical condition as he was still playing professional sports all through his hiatus, AND he had 21 NBA games under his belt before the Orlando series started which is much better preparation than playing a few exhibitions with the Olympic team where you play 20 MPG.

This is video from NBA not FIBA ball with a real zone.

yeah, he chose to retire because of the world's ignorance (which included him) about the disease. everyone thought HIV was transmittable just by touching someone. no one knew that catching HIV from someone playing sports is like getting hit by lighting. so he retired because he thought he had to.

BTW, there's no way in hell the 2012 team would waste LeBron guarding old man Magic Johnson. LeBron would be on Michael at all times. If they were really that worried about the size differential at the point, they could just start Westbrook over CP3 and still have a solid edge at that position while only giving up a few inches, but I really don't think it would be that much of an issue since they'd be playing a lot of zone which would keep Magic from being able to post up efficiently since no one in the starting lineup for the Dream Team could shoot the 3. Honestly, I think probably starting CP3 with a zone, and then having Westbrook come in off the bench if they bring in Mullin to stretch the floor would make more sense.

SE is nothing if not predictable in it's hate of all things lakers

magic crushes a real zone. sees over it, dissects it.

its the same reason you can't trap magic, because of his height. while a trapped chris paul has to scramble and just get the ball to the nearest guy, magic sees over the trap and can find the open man on the other side of the court. magic would crush a zone just like he did in college.

and its not like guys don't catch the ball on the post in a zone all the time. magic would still catch it down there and pick the zone apart form there or the perimeter.

and since when did 2012 team play a zone? they are an athletic, man-to-man team. them even going to a zone would be like conceding defeat.

also, a zone benefits the dream team way more. not just because they had magic, but because they had shot blocking 7-footers that could camp in the lane. also, doesn't a zone ruin your argument of having a quick pg?

BTW, I'm definitely not a Laker hater throughout all-time or anything like that. I'm just very high on Kareem and Shaq and very low on Magic on Kobe.

Dream Team can't play a zone because the 2012 team has 4 starters that shoot the 3 better than any of the DT starters.

so the zone nullifies the quickness advantage the 2012 team has at the point a far as penetration, benefits magic's height/vision combination, and benefits the dream team because they have shot-blocking 7-footers in the lane that can set up a tent.

oh, and barkley, malone, ewing, robinson love a zone because it benefits rebounders and bangers.

Zone benefits shooters WAY WAY more than it benefits anything else. 2012 shooters >>>>> 1992 shooters. This isn't rocket science.

But if you play at a faster pace for 48 minutes won't that bring your per possession stats down since you will be more tired? (The answer to that is yes obviously -- is it accounted for in the statistic though?)

Faster pace = riskier possessions = more turnovers
Also, lower FG%/3PT%/FT% due to being tired. Assists are harder to make since you have less time to see the offense develop and defense respond and find an open man. Points per possession would go down since turnovers go up, worse shot selection by necessity (less time to create a good shot), plus less energy due to the faster pace, etc.

Then you have the standardization across the league which will bring PER down again for faster paced eras.

if the dream team played a zone, the paint would be shut down.

so the 2012 team would be forced into way more jumpshots than the dream team. i like those odds.

Faster pace normally leads to easier looks. You get a lot more fast breaks. Fast breaks are much better possessions than half court possessions. You are really bringing up some weird, irrelevant points.

this just isn't true - the zone is one of the main reasons mj's ppg went from around 18-20ppg at north carolina to 30ppg in the league - the paint was freed up.

any coach or basketball mind would prefer to score more points inside than outside. that isn't rocket science.

I'm saying when you standardize it to 15 in faster paced eras you are bringing the raw unstandardized PER down relative to a slower era. The unstandardized PER changes year to year. But then you already adjusted for pace in adjusted PER. Again, I'm not convinced this is a fair way to account for differences in pace across eras.

Nah, this isn't necessarily true at all. Playing at a faster pace will often benefit the offense more than the defense since it's more tiring to pursue then just to make a move, and the percentages can go up due to all the easy buckets in transition. Ultimately though, it's a moot point since if leaguewide shooting did go down due to the pace, it would be accounted for in the yearly PER adjustments, and Magic's PER would go up to reflect the difference.

It's more to do with teams in pros score more points (higher talent level), have a longer game(48 vs 40 in college-and players play more minutes), and at UNC they share possessions pretty well, longer shot clock (24 vs 35). I'm not even sure of all the rules in college at the time.

what about 8 more minutes and a shot clock

So you're agreeing with me now? That slashers who can't shoot from outside are totally shut down by a zone, therefore he'd have a hard time against the 2012 team under FIBA rules.

if stats were as significant as this forum makes them out to be, then cp3 would be considered equal with lebron. and we all know that isn't the case. and it isn't the case with magic either.

stats don't explain why david robinson, who had some of the best stats ever, got crushed by hakeem. why some guys play worse in the playoffs. why the highest ppg in college doesn't translate to the nba. why lebron's glossy PER was shut down against dallas.

and why a guy that can legitimately play 4 positions, especially in today's era of point forwards and stretch 4's, would crush shrimpy chris paul.

What's the best way? There is little reason to be discussing unstandardized PER. The whole point of per is to adjust to the mean. You only adjust for pace once.

Fast breaks don't always go through the point guard. It's more likely the offense goes through the point guard on normal possessions b/c that's what an offense utilizing a PG is designed to do. The advantage for stats for fast breaks would be in bulk per game statistics, we are now talking about per possession. If you don't understand that Magic would be more tired with a faster pace and this would cause his per possession stats to hurt I don't know what to do with you.

We understand that PER doesn't account for D and position scarcity very well. I'm glad you can point out exceptions. PER doesn't work make sense in every situation but it accounts for most the offensive side of the ball and allows you to adjust for competition--something that is impossible with Bulk stats. Then you bring up matchups which of course PER isn't going to account for very well. And then transition from college to pros which again is pretty irrelevant b/c it isn't the same game entirely. In college, certain aspects of play can be exploited easier than they can in the pros. In college you can more easily use your size to dominate. In the pros this is harder. In college there is a shorter 3 point line, a more allowed zone, and a million other small differences.

I don't know. I'm not the one claiming there is a single number that can thoroughly encompass all offensive productivity adjusted for all paces and all eras. Why don't you tell me what the best way is?

Also,
Average league unadjusted PER will go up in a faster pace era. Think about what that does to the adjusted PER for players above the average.