SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-01-16 03:23 PM - Post#214590
In response to PhillyPantsAC
The odd thing is that MacDonald's usage, which was always low, is way down, too. He was 15 and 16% at FDU, and now he's at 10%.
Nobody on this team is enough of a possession hog to make up for that -- the whole thing is premised on having 4 guys who can shoot it from outside and Brodeur/Rothschild providing an inside presence.
Of course, in an advanced stats kind of way, maybe MacDonald is right to use fewer possessions if he's going to have a sub 100 ORAT.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-01-16 03:32 PM - Post#214595
In response to SomeGuy
thanks, big help
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-01-16 05:35 PM - Post#214612
In response to SomeGuy
I disagree that it ever pays to be less athletic. If some of our more one dimensional players were more athletic they'd be more of an asset when that dimension isn't working. If you can't play at the level we want to play you can't play at this level.
If Donahue scores it's because he puts up so many shots. Heck he was 4 for 11 against Villanova Tuesday. No idea what he was last year but does it really matter. He's 13 for 50 with a .260 FG% and 12 for 42 from 3 at a sizzling .286% clip. I don't get it.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-01-16 05:46 PM - Post#214613
In response to Buckeye Quake
not defending jackson, defending stats here, PP, but no one thinks Jackson is playing well. The argument is that last year's body of work should give him more than 5 games but it gets late pretty early.
Also, this may be my old age talking but I'm pretty comfortable with Steve's decisions here. He clearly is working towards giving Darnell more time as he's earned it. Same with Tyler.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
12-01-16 06:21 PM - Post#214614
In response to SomeGuy
Of course, in an advanced stats kind of way, maybe MacDonald is right to use fewer possessions if he's going to have a sub 100 ORAT.
Usage and ORAT are inversely related - if MacDonald's usage is low it means other players are absorbing more of the marginal attempts so his ORAT should be higher. If your usage and ORAT are both low then you shouldn't be playing.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-01-16 06:44 PM - Post#214618
In response to TheLine
Correct -- that's why it is odd that both his ORAT and usage are down this year.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-01-16 07:03 PM - Post#214620
In response to Buckeye Quake
Statistically, 4 for 11 from 3 is fine. If he does that all year, he'll be an effective player. It's the .286 overall that is the problem. As Jeff said, the point is that we have a body of work that says he's a 36% shooter from out there, which is fine.
To make Jeff's point another way, Jackson's ORAT for this year is higher than what Foreman put up either of his first two years. So the overall body of work says Donahue is the more efficient player. The five games we've seen this year obviously say Foreman is more efficient. We'll see which is right -- I'll optimistically predict that in the end Donahue is about where he was last year, and Foreman keeps rolling this year.
As far as athleticism goes, I disagree. A decent percentage of this game is hand eye coordination, and one part of that is how well you put the ball in the basket, particularly from 3. Yes, an athletic 36% shooter from 3 will always play over a guy like Donahue. But those guys don't grow on trees. You can beat an athletic team by out-shooting them if you know how to defend in a way that negates their athleticism. Against a Villanova, an athletic team that doesn't shoot it as well sometimes gets exposed more than a less athletic team that can shoot it. That's my theory anyway.
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-01-16 10:06 PM - Post#214625
In response to SomeGuy
One season does not a body of work make my friends. You're talking about one season on an abysmal team and five games into this season. Look I don't want to bury the kid. I truly hope he picks his game up substantially especially if he's going to continue to get the minutes he's been getting. But at some point doesn't production weigh in somewhere? Are we ever going to get better again if we contuniue to settle for average? Maybe it is age Jeff.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3584
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-01-16 10:23 PM - Post#214628
In response to Buckeye Quake
Remember we have had one home game
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-01-16 10:39 PM - Post#214630
In response to PennFan10
I guess it is age because I have no idea what that means.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3584
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-01-16 11:04 PM - Post#214633
In response to Buckeye Quake
Well shooting percentages are better at home so it stands to reason that Jacksons shooting percentage will continue to get better as we play more home games.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-01-16 11:19 PM - Post#214636
In response to Buckeye Quake
I think we're all agreed that he has to play better in order to keep playing starter minutes.
In regard to settling for average, I think we settle for that (for now) if that's the best we've got. Donahue may or may not fit on the type of team we hope to have in a couple of years, but in all honesty Hamilton likely doesn't either. What we've got is what we've got, and I'm now pretty optimistic about our playoff chances (even with Donahue, Wood, and MacDonald struggling, we've probably been the 3rd best team in the league thus far). We're not there yet, but this is probably the 2nd best team we've had since Ibby/Zoller/Danley graduated.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
12-02-16 03:02 PM - Post#214677
In response to Buckeye Quake
One season does not a body of work make my friends. You're talking about one season on an abysmal team and five games into this season. Look I don't want to bury the kid. I truly hope he picks his game up substantially especially if he's going to continue to get the minutes he's been getting. But at some point doesn't production weigh in somewhere? Are we ever going to get better again if we contuniue to settle for average? Maybe it is age Jeff.
Can't we say the exact same thing about Darnell except he had the benefit of two seasons, not one? If we followed this logic Darnell never would've had a chance this year.
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-02-16 05:45 PM - Post#214689
In response to Quakers03
Yeah except you left out the part about him getting better each year. Did Darnell steal your girlfriend or are you just a contrarian?
|
Okoro Dude
Senior
Posts: 309
Loc: Glen Mills, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
|
12-02-16 06:00 PM - Post#214690
In response to Buckeye Quake
We might need Darnell to play meaningful minutes on this team if no one else steps up who can play point - but Donahue is the higher upside player in the rotation as he has shown that on his best days, he can take over a game and be a prolific outside shooter. Darnell has never shown that, even on his best day. For two years, he has been at the bottom of D1 statistically. I will be thrilled to acknowledge he has improved if his good play does longer - even in the unlikely event that he steals my wife.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
12-02-16 06:13 PM - Post#214691
In response to Okoro Dude
Except this team needs someone who can play point and not turn it over 5 times a game.
Coach gave Foreman an opportunity, Foreman is running with it. There are consequences based on how you perform, good or not.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-02-16 06:58 PM - Post#214693
In response to Okoro Dude
While I agree with you to a degree about upside, Foreman really only had one year at the bottom of D1. Last year was more what I would call below average efficiency (and pretty similar in terms ORAT to where Wood, Donahue, and MacDonald all are right now). The jump from last year looks pretty similar to the jump from 1st year to 2nd, which is a good fact for PP's argument that this year's numbers are progression and not a small sample size mirage.
The other good thing about rewarding Foreman is that at least from afar he seems like a leader, a worker, and just the type of kid you ought to reward. I don't want to demoralize Wood, who is the one starting guard who really was playing with confidence. So not meant as a knock on anybody else's effort (particularly when I don't know what goes on in practice, etc.) or anything like that -- I'm sure everybody is working their butts off. But good for Darnell.
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-02-16 08:22 PM - Post#214695
In response to Okoro Dude
It's not his job to "take over a game" It's his job to facilitate and run the offense. Which he's done quite nicely. And we do need him to do that because he's the only person on the team right now who can. I think the only acknowledgement Darnell is looking for is from his coaches and from what I understand they have. Whether you choose to admit the obvious is inconsequential.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-02-16 08:50 PM - Post#214697
In response to Buckeye Quake
It's definitely still early, so expect this could change, but it seems for sure that current locked starters that really are unquestioned are:
1) Brodeur - Center
2) Howard - Forward
The other guys who have started are:
Wood - Point Guard
Foreman - Point Guard
Donahue - Shooting Guard
MacDonald - Forward
Clearly Wood was struggling turning it over and while he does have good court vision, he really is a SG. Foreman to date has clearly earned time (deservingly). The guys that currently I'd like to see start are:
1) Brodeur - Center
2) Howard - Forward
3) Foreman - Point Guard
4) Wood - Shooting Guard
5a) Hamilton - Forward (if we play small)
5b) Rothschild - Forward (if we play big)
First off the bench would be Donahue at SG for instant offense and MacDonald for "glue guy" at Forward.
Wood - in my mind, I'd rather he starts because I think he does bring more than 3 point shooting (hasn't done it much, but has had a few nice drives, great FT shooter, bigger on def, and better rebounder).
Donahue - can bring instant offense of the bench and fire the guys up.
MacDonald - definitely see a high basketball IQ and very steady, but honestly a little disappointing to date. That one handed shotput shot is not pretty, he is not attacking anything on offense, and even though he is almost non-existent on offense, he is turning it over more than he should. Let him be a calming influence off the bench when needed.
For me, I'd like to see what Hamilton can do with more time. He is clearly earning more playtime and I think he brings something different on offense and defense. Hell, it's not like we're losing a dead-eye shooter if he is replacing MacDonald in lineup.
Rothschild we have to be careful with since we are so thin upfront, but do like a bigger look sometimes. With the right matchup I think it could be worth the risk to have him start with Brodeur.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
Nova
12-03-16 02:00 PM - Post#214720
In response to Buckeye Quake
Yeah except you left out the part about him getting better each year. Did Darnell steal your girlfriend or are you just a contrarian?
Couldn't I say the same thing to you about Jackson since he's really only had a few down games? I guess I still have some bad memories of an out of control Foreman not showing the best basketball IQ on the court the last 2 years. To your point, kids improve as they grow, but it seems to me that you're basically writing Jackson Donahue off, a kid who as a freshman destroyed the advanced stats of Sophomore Foreman, just for starting this year slowly. I just think that's a bit shortsighted and you're being as unfair to Donahue as you feel others are to Darnell.
Foreman has most certainly earned the time to this point and should get the start again today, but I just think at the end of the day the offensive side of Wood/Donahue will be greater than the positives we see from Darnell running the point. That said, if Darnell continues to score well he'll be the unquestioned starter the rest of the way. We need to find points from each position, especially if Macdonald is on the floor not getting involved in the offense.
|
