Why are basketball stats always counted as average per game and not cumulative?
In: Other
In sports there are 2 kinds of stats. Counting stats that accumulate constantly (like points scored this year), and Rate stats (like points per minute) that try and normalize the production of the players into smaller chunks to try and account for the fact that some players simply play more than other players which obviously skews the counting stats.
If one player plays 95% of every game and has 200 total points accumulated, and another player only plays 5% of every game but has accumulated 50 points, then who’s the better player? Who should we pay to keep on the team? Who should we play more?
Well, its stupid to say “the player with 200 points” just because he has more points accumulated. Clearly the 50 point player has done more with the time he has been allotted, and will likely score even more points than the other player if given a chance to play that much.
The Rate stats try and give you the best idea of who is making the best use of the time they are afforded, not just who has the most opportunities.
There are a handful of cumulative records in basketball – one of the most famous records is Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s all-time points lead at over 38,000.
But as far as stats go, averages per game (or per season) are much more useful than cumulative, because cumulative totals don’t really tell you the whole story. Imagine an unbelievable rookie player who scores 3,000 points in his first season. Now imagine a player who scores 500 points per season for 6 seasons. Both of these players have a cumulative 3,000 points, but one of them is performing much better than the other.
Same reason that shooting percentage is an important statistic – a player who shoots 100 times for three-pointers and makes 10 of them has scored 30 points, while a player who shoots 20 and makes 10 has also scored 30 points, but he’s done it much more effectively – using less time on the clock, and giving the opposing team way fewer opportunities to turnover and respond. I’d rather have the guy with a 50% 3-point average (which is unreal, but handy for this example) than the guy with a 10% average.
Latest Answers