Hogville Info
• 9,297,545 Posts
• 382,951 Topics
• 21,414 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Listen NOW:Game ON 103.3 
  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order  (Read 2373 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lando Calrissian

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 11,311
  • I seen one eat a rockin' chair, once.
    • Excelsior News
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #50 on: January 25, 2006, 04:07:48 pm »

Quote from: silvertip
How many points/game do Watson & Rondo average?

I have come to the conclusion that you have never seen Arkansas play this year, or that you've ONLY seen Arkansas play this year.

This is not about stats.  This is about game management, poise, control...

I realize that some will go to no end to trash Dontell, but I'm not one of those.

Dontell might be the coolest guy in the world, so don't take any criticism of him as a knock on his personal character.

He's not a very good point guard.  Period.

You've probably seen Rondo play as much as I have, and you are absolutely bonkers if you wouldn't take him over Jefferson.  Same goes with Watson.
Logged

Biggus Piggus

  • Escaped Journalist
  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 30,540
  • Hogville: The mosh pit of Razorbackland
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #51 on: January 25, 2006, 04:09:02 pm »

the math of your methodology is statistically incoherent.

The math is really quite simple & easily understood. Perhaps you were never good at division?

Sorry, BP, but if there's something that you really are confused about, then I will explain it without wise-cracks.

You forced me to do this.

You did a sequential ranking of the players on five categories, then you summed their sequential rankings.

This is complete mathematical hooey.  It's nutzo.  Ridiculous.

Several reasons.

First.  The distance between 1 and 2 is 50%.  The distance between 2 and 3 is 33%.  And so on.  The lower you go, the less the penalty for stepping down.  Problem is, it is more likely that, in a group of performers, the distance between their performance WIDENS as you get closer to the top.  Your approach is gibberish.

Second.  Sequential ranking says nothing about the true performance difference between each player.  Are they all clustered in a close knot, or is there an enormous difference somewhere?  I'm sure you, with sufficient time, can think of other ways why this is a problem.

Third.  Your points per shot seems to be a clever way to bury Jefferson's miserable shooting and scoring averages.  Total scoring production--scoring+points off assists--makes much more sense.  And floor percentage--made field goals + offensive boards / shots + turnovers--also.

Fourth.  Your method weights all five stats equally, while it's debatable they're all equally valuable, and it's highly questionable the points per shot is even useful.  Allowing a point guard to make up for low assists (though Rondo isn't playing point anymore) with rebounds is really what this does, and that's silly.

Fifth.  Steals are not a good proxy for any particular valuable quality in basketball.  Unfortunately, there's no other individual defensive statistic that would be usable at all, as guards don't block many shots, and we can find no stats on how many points a guy gives up on D.  Anyway, I don't like to glorify steals, because over the years I've seen certain players pursue steals to the detriment of the defensive scheme.

Forgetting all this, I've seen Watson, Rondo and Green make plays that won tough games, and I've seen Jefferson make plays that lost tough games.  Any system that rates Jefferson first is a joke.
Logged

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

snag

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #52 on: January 25, 2006, 04:27:41 pm »

Silvertip, you have not responded to my post. Would you be willing to add in FT% and change pts/shot to pts/game? I'd be interested to see the results
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #53 on: January 25, 2006, 04:38:02 pm »

Some stats.

Arkansas in wins vs. losses

2pt FG%
51.7% wins
47.6% losses

3pt FG%
36.0% wins
28.1% losses

FT%
70.4% wins
60.0% losses

Point distribution
Wins 56% 2ptFG 22% 3ptFG 22% FT
Losses 60% 2ptFG 25% 3ptFG 15% FT

Shots
Wins 45 2pt 17 3pt 26 FT
Losses 41 2pt 19 3pt 17 FT

I'm not sure what control we have over free throw attempts, but it sure made a difference forcing the issue at Auburn. To me the shooting percentages are most significant + they reflect how (not) well we run our offense against good opponents.

Thanks for the research, Biggus. I think those figures indicate that 27.4% of our shot attempts were 3-pointers in our wins(17 of 62)---while 31.7% of our shots were-3 pointers in our losses. Thus confirming my impression that we shoot more 3 pointers in our losses. Although, there is as you say a bias inherent in the fact that teams might shoot more 3s when behind.

Related to that is the FT advantage in wins. 26 FT attempts in wins vs 17 FT attempts in losses. Resulting in 18 points at the line in wins vs 10 at the line in losses. An 8 point diff in FT points. 8 more points will win a lot more games.

As Heath just said, "We need to get the ball to our FT shooters." Townes, Thomas & Brewer should be our first 3 options. Modica can get it done driving to the basket, not shooting 3s.

I repeat, I think that's why DJ has shot less (maybe too much less). We need to play more inside-out & get to the FT line more. So SOMEONE amongst our guards needs to get more assists & fewer shots.

We need our "Vandy" box score & not our "Bama" box score.

Thanks again for the effort, BP.

Logged

highdefhog

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 149
  • My three Princesses
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #54 on: January 25, 2006, 04:45:26 pm »

I find any assertion that Jefferson is the number one point guard in the league to be laughable. I also "see" the games, as a matter of fact I will be there tonight. I do not think Dontelle is the problem on the team but he does not play the point guard position at a high level. His turnovers are low because he does not take any risks. No look passes, creativity, and passion  are not in his skill set. silvertip's stats may all be accurate but they are not a true measure of a point guards value. Points per shot can not be a measurable statistic if the player in question refuses to shoot. This logic follows sivertip's assertion that McCurdy's stats are not completely valid due to lack of playing time.

The point guard on any team must be a threat. That threat could be the ability to shoot, penetrate, or breakdown opponents by the dribble. Dontelle has not stepped up in any of these areas. It would be fine with me if he would take a few shots, even if he misses them. His lack of confidence ins his shooting ability stagnates our halfcourt offense which leads to hurried shots and three pointers at the end of the shot clock.

McCurdy appears to have potential and deserves more playing time to see if that potential can be realized. He is not the end all be all of point guards. Jefferson is not a bad point guard. Maybe their styles can complement each other and make the team better as a whole.

I'll "see" the game tonight.

We shouldn't bash Jefferson (good defense, few mistakes) but don't anoint him as all SEC. We can all "see" that is NOT the case.
Logged

Biggus Piggus

  • Escaped Journalist
  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 30,540
  • Hogville: The mosh pit of Razorbackland
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #55 on: January 25, 2006, 04:48:47 pm »

We shot like crap at the line in our losses, too, which lessened our attempts, because we missed some front ends of bonus situations.  One big diff between our Vandy and Bama boxes was Vandy preferred man and Bama was effective zoning us.  Vandy will foul, Bama plays very hands off with intense attention to foot position, like they get Tasered for reaching or hand-checking.

Our offensive stats look great when we force TOs and get transition chances.  Should be a part of our core strategy.  But it's not.
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #56 on: January 25, 2006, 05:15:45 pm »

Silvertip, you have not responded to my post. Would you be willing to add in FT% and change pts/shot to pts/game? I'd be interested to see the results

Snag, sorry I type slow & I can't keep up with the speed of this thread.

Since you are one who respects stats, I will turn off my wise-ass switch for this one post.(hope I remember to turn it back on)

FT% is already factored into the points per shot stat. POINTS SCORED at the FT line are included in the total points. POINTS scored at the line=FT% x # of FTs attempted. Thus, a player like Brewer who has a lower FG% as a resilt of getting hammered while slashing to the hole, makes up for the lower FG% by scoring a lot of points from the FT line.

The points/shot thus encompasses points scored by 2pt shots, points scored by 3pt shots and FTs made. It is the lasagna of scoring stats---everything's in there.

As far as points/game, I don't think that's a good way to compare players. It is easily skewed by playing time. PG Quantez might get 15 pts/game with 30 mins/game PT---while PG Sundiata might get 10pts/game on 20mins PT. The "points per game" stat would say Quantez is better at 15vs10. But actually they are tied at 15 pts per 30 minutes played. The points/shot stat ignores PT since it is "per SHOT' regardless of PT. It factors in your shot mixture & %s plus FTs. I am sure that it is the better stat for comparing players. I think of it as "scoring efficiency"---what you get for your shots. Right now, Hawgs have 1.27 points per shot on the year. I have no idea what is considered "good."

But when I look at a box score, I want to see a player with 17 points on 14 shots. Don't care that much about FG% or FT%. anytime it's less than one point/shot, I think, "Well, that sucks." (flipping the switch back on.)
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #57 on: January 25, 2006, 05:27:54 pm »

We shot like crap at the line in our losses, too, which lessened our attempts, because we missed some front ends of bonus situations. One big diff between our Vandy and Bama boxes was Vandy preferred man and Bama was effective zoning us. Vandy will foul, Bama plays very hands off with intense attention to foot position, like they get Tasered for reaching or hand-checking.

Our offensive stats look great when we force TOs and get transition chances. Should be a part of our core strategy. But it's not.

Yeah, Stan says in the pre-Miss press conference that we need to get the transition going.

One problem I've noticed is that we're either/or on forcing TOs vs RBing.
We can play pressure D like vs Mo St & get beat on the boards. Or we can RB better like last few games & TOs go down. No doubt a lot of that is Ronnie can pound the boards like the past few games, but TOs suffer because he's also our best steal man/deflector.

I wish Thomas & Townes could step up the RBing a notch. Hill would have to back off the shot-blocking to RB. Not sure that would work. Beats me.
Logged

thahawg

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 926
  • Go Hawgs!
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #58 on: January 25, 2006, 05:42:21 pm »

Dontell needs to go back to JC!!!!!!
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #59 on: January 25, 2006, 05:46:39 pm »

In all the discussion so far, I see little talk about DJs defense. You can't see that in the stats unless you know who he's guarding, how much zone vs man D is being played, etc. So, when the stats don't tell me why Olu plays as much as Pookie when Pookie has a slight stat advantage---then I listen to the coaches who say Olu was the better defender. Same thing they're saying about DJ vs McCurdy. And I "see" for myself that DJ is the better defender---as well as what the stats do say, that DJ is better at steals & blocks thn Sean & they are tied in RBing.

So, it is no mystery at all to me why DJ is the #1 PG. If they had equal experience, then I have no doubt Sean would be #1 because he still has a lot of up-side. And, if Sean comes in & takes more shots, then our big men get fewer shots & the team will get fewer FTs.
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #60 on: January 25, 2006, 05:56:45 pm »

Silvertip + = ManCrush

Some kind of Jewish humor there, HasidicHog? Not too bad when you think about it. How would like a job that takes where that thing goes all the time? WOOOOO PIGGG!!! and Jehovah be praised!!

Oy Vey!

Well, my reply was before I saw your wise-ass "man-love" remark. To be clear, I want to be Paula Abdul's toy.
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #61 on: January 25, 2006, 06:09:25 pm »

I find any assertion that Jefferson is the number one point guard in the league to be laughable. I also "see" the games, as a matter of fact I will be there tonight. I do not think Dontelle is the problem on the team but he does not play the point guard position at a high level. His turnovers are low because he does not take any risks. No look passes, creativity, and passion  are not in his skill set. silvertip's stats may all be accurate but they are not a true measure of a point guards value. Points per shot can not be a measurable statistic if the player in question refuses to shoot. This logic follows sivertip's assertion that McCurdy's stats are not completely valid due to lack of playing time.

The point guard on any team must be a threat. That threat could be the ability to shoot, penetrate, or breakdown opponents by the dribble. Dontelle has not stepped up in any of these areas. It would be fine with me if he would take a few shots, even if he misses them. His lack of confidence ins his shooting ability stagnates our halfcourt offense which leads to hurried shots and three pointers at the end of the shot clock.

McCurdy appears to have potential and deserves more playing time to see if that potential can be realized. He is not the end all be all of point guards. Jefferson is not a bad point guard. Maybe their styles can complement each other and make the team better as a whole.

I'll "see" the game tonight.

We shouldn't bash Jefferson (good defense, few mistakes) but don't anoint him as all SEC. We can all "see" that is NOT the case.

highdefhog, psst--a secret. I don't think DJ is the #1 SEC PG either. I do think he's in the top-6 somewhere. People want to point out this or that weakness in DJ's game. After micro-examining 18 games.

Well most of the SEC PGs have problems in their games. Few of them do as many things as well as DJ, but they have not had the benefit of "our" attention.

I repeat, PG is not our biggest problem. The rest of our senior class is most of the rest of our problems. There are only so many possessions per game. If we could get more assists and FTs from our other guards, then maybe DJ could go back to shooting like earlier in the year. One problem with trying to get more assists from one of our other guards is that he's just as likely to turn it over.
Logged

Biggus Piggus

  • Escaped Journalist
  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 30,540
  • Hogville: The mosh pit of Razorbackland
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #62 on: January 25, 2006, 06:16:10 pm »

Problem with the points per shot stat on Jefferson:

For the season, he has taken 38 free throws and just 61 field goal attempts.

83 points, 99 shots by your method.  Probably doesn't mean anything if you count FT attempts (worth one point, misses reboundable only part of time) same as FG attempts (worth two or three).

Looking at field goals only, it's 58 points on 61 shots.

Jefferson: 0.95 point per shot, 61 shots (SEC only, 0.4 point per shot)
Green: 1.08 point per shot, 154 shots (SEC only, 1.1)
Steele: 0.95 point per shot, 160 shots (SEC only, 0.9)

He's taking a little more than one-third the shots FOR THE WHOLE SEASON INCLUDING THE CRIP GAMES and still is no more efficient than they are.  That is not good, with severely limited shot selection.  In SEC, he's been awful.

Also, minutes per free throw point:

Jefferson: 20.0 (46 in SEC play)
Green: 6.6 (5.4 in SEC play) WOW!
Steele: 14.0 (<12 in SEC play)

And point responsibility (scoring plus assists x team avg points per fg)

Jefferson: 17.5 (<14 in SEC)
Green: 25.4 (32 in SEC) ANOTHER WOW!
Steele: 19.6 (20.5 in SEC)

I don't have time to look at other assist leaders such as Rondo (13 ppg), Quantez Robertson, Darrel Mitchell (17 ppg) and CJ Watson (16 ppg).  I'll guess Mitchell's point production is about 27, Watson about 26, and Rondo about 23.

I think I've about kilt dis cockroach.
Logged

silvertip

  • Guest
Re: Jefferson, Watson, and Rondo are the top 3 SEC PGs--in that order
« Reply #63 on: January 25, 2006, 06:20:48 pm »

Interesting stats, but they do seem to be slanted by a pre-conceived conclusion. You don't seem totally objective. For instance, why do you want to measure pts/shot rather than pts/game? That would change his status quite a bit. Good grief. Dontell went two games without taking a shot! And how about adding FT% as a stat?.......

Jefferson seems like a great kid. And he's doing a pretty good job. He is not our problem, but the truth is - he is not the solution either.

First off, I explained the point/shot stat & the FT% & the pts/game stat in respone to your 2nd post asking about them. I am just now getting to this post.

I think you need to understand what you are talking about before you say that someone is "slanting stats to reach a pre-conceived solution." Fact is, once you do know what you're questioning, you SHOULD realize that points per shot already includes FT%. And you would realize that using "points/game" has serious problems as well. I use points/shot because i think IT IS THE BEST STAT TO MEASURE OFFENSIVE EFFICIENCY. And furthermore, there is a wide range of diff in how much a PG scores depending on what the coach thinks the team needs. Right now, it is obvious that the team NEEDS less shooting from the guards.

In fact, I would say points/game is less accurate ar evaluating PGs than any other player on the team. No, DJ is not the "solution." I don't think the "solution" is on the team. McCurdy is a poorer scorer than the other 13 PGs evaluated & right now is likely to give up more points than he scores.

Seems to me that I explained points/shot in the original post. Before you accuse someone of "slanting the stats" to "reach a preconceived conclusion"---next time take a few minutes to understand what you're talking about. Before you cracked-wise in this post, it had been explained once. After you read this reply, you've had 3 explanations.

So, you think using YOUR stats would "change his status consderably." And what makes you think that? You want to change my system? Fine. While you're at it, find some way to factor in blocked shots---at which Dontell kicks ass among SEC PGs. Go ahead & do it your way. I would be curious about the results. But if you throw out points/shot, then you will have to account for 2pt FG%, 3pt FG%, FT%, and your avg points/game. You're going to replace my one stat with four of your own. Have fun. I've been hoping someone would present THEIR system.
I'll wait here.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2006, 06:55:36 pm by silvertip »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas