mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-28-19 11:57 AM - Post#282974
In response to james
The reason that data is relevant:
1) It demonstrates that Harvard's offense usually wasn't balanced on any given night pre-Aiken's return.
2) It demonstrates that the player that went high usage on those nights was usually not that good at it.
I have started putting together the PBPs to derive off court, on court for different lineups, and I've got about half the games Bryce played in loaded. It's not pretty offensively when he's off the floor.
At the same time, I don't want to make it seem like Noah's development is credited to Aiken. While the pressure to create declined once Aiken came back, which would raise his efficiency regardless, I agree that Noah also was learning more of what he couldn't do at this level. Noah had a lot of double-whammy turnovers early in the year due to driving into trouble. He'd either yield a live-ball TO, which is the worst type of TO, or a charge-TO, which can put you into foul trouble really quickly.
It remains to be seen, though, if he can handle true PG duties at this level. I was one of the earliest folks on these boards calling him a PG, while he kept being listed as a SF or even PF, because his abilities as a facilitator at Ashbury and NMH were always undervalued. The flaws in his on-ball game are well-documented here... if he can fix those and bring the TOs down, I'm on board. Until then, Bryce is the only safe, ball-dominant, high-usage creator on this roster.
|
