Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 4 of 4 « First<1234
Username Post: Stefanini        (Topic#19971)
Chet Forte 
PhD Student
Posts: 1771

Reg: 03-02-08
04-24-17 12:42 PM - Post#228888    
    In response to Dr. V

Thanks Dr. V. Very interesting. While I admit that I am not objective, Smith is also an exceptional ball handler.


 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4580

Loc: Jersey City, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Stefanini
04-24-17 01:05 PM - Post#228889    
    In response to Chet Forte

Counting stats don't really tell you all that much. What matters more is efficiency and usage.

For the season, Bryce had the sixth-highest efficiency nationally amongst frosh with 28% usage or higher (nationally only about 130 players total used 28% or more of possessions). For the season, his shot rate was up over 29%, which is a similarly high rate to his usage. His eFG% was just over 50% for the year though his TS% was up over 56% because of his strong free-throw shooting.

Mike was a little behind in all of those metrics, but still played quite well for the year, especially for a freshman. His usage and shot rate were 24 and 26%, respectively, which indicates a central role in the offense - not quite carrying it, but certainly a big-time contributor. His eFG% and TS% were 46 and 51, respectively, which you'd like to see rise a bit next year.

What's more is that Mike was only a KP MVP in 2 games last season, whereas Bryce was in 5. That indicates more of an ability to take over a game - essentially a "where's the ceiling" metric, versus more of those season-long averages above.

Finally, looking at Win Shares, Bryce was fifth amongst frosh with 2.5, whereas Mike was eighth with 2.0.

Mike had a freshman season that would have won ROY easily back in the 2000s and even in some of the 2010 years. But he might not have even made an All-Rookie First Team last year (Brodeur, Oni, Aiken would have been locks, from there, it'd be Mike, Towns, Bruner, Lewis, Bassey) - that's how crazy last year's class was. IF this league can just stay healthy and not lose any stars in the annual Sept-Nov bloodbath, this should be a Top 10 league next year.

 
Dr. V 
PhD Student
Posts: 1341

Reg: 11-21-04
04-24-17 03:09 PM - Post#228893    
    In response to mrjames

Maybe I'm too much of a dinosaur to fully understand and appreciate what you're trying to say, but something doesn't add up. Head to head, Smith's and Aiken's stats were roughly even, though Smith's assists and steals were higher (those don't count in the new BB math anymore?).

For the year, Aiken's scoring average was a little higher, 14.5 to 13.6, but in League, Smith's was higher, 14.7 to 13.4. You say those don't count for much? OK. But how do shooting percentages not matter? Smith's for the season were FG % 401, 3-pt % 382 and FT % 821. Aiken's were FG % 392, 3-pt % 345 and FT % 876. How does that trianslate into Aiken having had a better season? (And that's what we're measuring, right? Not future ceiling height or whatever.)

Perhaps most importantly, at least to this dinosaur, Smith's assist to TO ratio was 95/48; Aiken's was 71/63. How in the world does that get washed out in the new stats? And lastly, Smith had 29 steals to Aiken's 21.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4580

Loc: Jersey City, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
04-24-17 03:26 PM - Post#228894    
    In response to Dr. V

FG% is a misleading stat. Because Aiken took a much higher percentage of his shots as threes than Smith did, you'd expect his FG% to be lower. Once you adjust for the 3-point shot (eFG%), Aiken's eFG is ~4 pp higher.

Assist-to-turnover tells some of a story, but really misses the bigger point - namely that the two aren't related stats. What we care about more are the independent rates: What percent of the team's baskets that you didn't score while you were on the floor did you have an assist on and what percent of your used possessions were used by you turning the ball over.

Since Aiken used a higher percentage of possessions, you'd expect him to have more turnovers. Aiken's TO Rate was 18.8 percent, which is pretty good for a ball-dominant freshman (better than Siyani's was). Smith's was SUPERB at just under 14%. If he keeps that up, that's extremely valuable.

Their assist rates were pretty much equal: 22.1% for Aiken, 22.8% for Smith.

Their steal rates were essentially equivalent, due to the difference in numbers of oppt poss faced based on different playing time.

Rates are extremely important, as is adjusting for the three-point shot. When you do that, Smith's only real advantage over Aiken was his extreme stinginess with turnovers, while Aiken got the better of shooting and usage. That's why Aiken's efficiency for the year was slightly better than Smith's even at a higher usage rate.

 
Stuart Suss 
Masters Student
Posts: 827

Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
04-24-17 03:48 PM - Post#228895    
    In response to mrjames

This debate is why, for reasons of clarity and transparency, I prefer to use the individual efficiency statistics.

Of the 60 players who were on the court for 140 or more minutes during the 14 regular season league games, Bryce Aiken ranked 52 and Mike Smith ranked 53 in Adj WS. The main difference is shooting efficiency. Mike Smith was a high volume shooter who made only one-third of his two point shots, 47 for 141. Mike's good assist and turnover numbers could only partially make up for that negative.

If you sort the spreadsheet to rank players by WS/40, to see who performed best on a "per 40 minute" basis, the underrated player on the Columbia roster was Lukas Meisner who ranked 4th in the entire league.

(Please note that since the column headings are on Row 1, the number 1 ranked player appears on Row 2, the number 2 ranked player on Row 3, etc . . .)


 
 Page 4 of 4 « First<1234
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

2571 Views




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.07 seconds.   Total Queries: 17   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 06:50 PM
Top