It has been a month since I asked the PBA to give me its formula in computing for statistical points. It just bewilders me why the chief statistician of the PBA refuses to divulge the formula to determine player ranking in the MVP race.
There are several methods or formulae to rank players according to the statistical points that they compile. There is the very complicated player efficiency rating or PER. Formulated by John Hollinger of ESPN, it is the formula that enjoys great patronage in NBA. It is so highly respected that salaries of NBA players are sometimes determined by PER. A high PER indicates a productive player on the court. A player with a PER of 32 is a runaway MVP candidate. Net plus - minus rating, on the other hand, measures a player's total effect on the team. It is less complicated than PER but likewise uses points, rebounds, assists, blocks, fouls and errors of a player. There is also SportsRatings' MVP rating which takes into consideration a player's team winning percentage. Aside from using all of a player's statistics, MVP rating gives due importance to a player's ability to make his team win. Hence a good player that takes his team far in the tournament will have a higher MVP rating.
Despite the availabilty of internationally - accepted methods and formulae like the ones mentioned above, the PBA finds it necessary to formulate its own statistical point system. Does the PBA find all these methods and formulae unacceptable ? Perhaps it is time the PBA reveals its formula so that it can make a tremendous contribution to basketball in general.
No comments:
Post a Comment