Great Statistical and Scouting Analysis of Austin Rivers

[loran16]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...-austin-rivers

It's by Sebastian Pruitti of Basketball Prospectus fame, so it's really good stuff.

[roywhite]

Thanks, but 4 games into a freshman season is way too early for an overall analysis, IMO, especially on a statistical basis.

I'd call them preliminary observations.

[slower]

Thanks, but 4 games into a freshman season is way too early for an overall analysis, IMO, especially on a statistical basis.

I'd call them preliminary observations.

Well, I don't think that these are any observations that many of us haven't already made. But I think Austin will be fine. Much better than fine, actually.

And, as with anything you read in Grantland concerning Duke, just remember that Grantland is Simmons' baby. Simmons will take any and every shot at Duke that he can. And even stuff written by Shane Ryan, their in-house "Duke guy", will always tend to have negative things in it. That's just the way it is over there. And, of course, anything written by UNC homers like Jay Kang will take as many shots at Duke as possible.

[jamesfrommaiden]

Are you serious? What does the young man have to do to impress this guy? I think Austin is doing a very good job so far. Yes there is plenty of room for improvement, but he doesn't have to be the alpha and omega for this team. Fortunately for Austin he is surrounded by a cast that includes veteran and young talented players as well. I think you also have to consider the immense pressure placed on him as the number one overall recruit and going to Duke. A gaurd which means he has a long line of some of the greatest college players ever at the position to follow. I have seen a confident, self assured, cocky if you like, with that great Duke swagger. He knows how good he is. He doesn't need, or have to prove to anyone that he is the real deal. He can get to the rim at will. If he doesn't get a basket, he gets fouled, or both. We will see more of the latter in time as he gets stronger to finish around the rim. I leave you with this. UNC fans and people of their ilk like to ask the question "who is going to gaurd Harrison Barnes?". I am asking those people who is going to check Austin Barnes? GO DUKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[juise]

Regarding the question of the analysis being silly because we're four games into the season, the author agrees:

Is this to say that Rivers is a bust and a terrible player? No. To make any sweeping generalizations about a player after four games would be silly.

[CDu]

Regarding the question of the analysis being silly because we're four games into the season, the author agrees:

He does not call his analysis silly. He says making declarations about Rivers as a player would be silly. Those are very different statements. One can analyze without making sweeping declarations.

[juise]

He does not call his analysis silly. He says making declarations about Rivers as a player would be silly. Those are very different statements. One can analyze without making sweeping declarations.

You're right. That was poorly worded by me. I guess I was more referring more to the "final analysis" phrasing from earlier in the thread.

Overall, I agree that (1) the sample size is too low and that (2) it doesn't take PPP stats to say demonstrate that Austin has some room for growth in decision making. (Likewise, we don't need a larger sample size to demonstrate that Mason needs work on free throw consistency.) However, I think that it is useful to take a snapshot of Austin's season at this point, noting his current PPP, and compare the number to his efficiency in February. I think the comparison will be favorable, even with increased competition.

[tele]

"Great Statistical and Scouting Analysis of Austin Rivers", so which one is silly at this point of the season? If an observtion is accurate you can find a statistic to support it 100% of the time, if an observation is inaccurate, it usually takes more analysis to find one. And no, I haven't read the article.

[CDu]

"Great Statistical and Scouting Analysis of Austin Rivers", so which one is silly at this point of the season? If an observtion is accurate you can find a statistic to support it 100% of the time, if an observation is inaccurate, it usually takes more analysis to find one. And no, I haven't read the article.

Why not just read the article before posting?

[basket1544]

Well done. I like the fact that the author includes some of his high school work to the story also. I agree that Austin has a terrific first step and will become a great basketball player as soon as he learns how to pass to his open teammates. I think it is awesome that teams respect him so much this early as to double team him.
He'll learn; he's got the greatest teacher in the game.

[FellowTraveler]

To my eye, in his first several games (exhibition and real) Rivers demonstrated a fantastic first step, but his lack of elite athleticism frequently allowed the defense to recover by the time he shot, leading to a lot of drives that began with him making a great move to create separation and ended with a contested shot anyway. In the last two games, he’s had a few great drives where he’s successfully built on the initial separation, including a very nice drive tonight in which he incorporated a jump-stop and a couple of quick changes of direction. His first step is a huge asset. When he develops the ability to capitalize on it by maintaining separation to get clean shots -- and by finding teammates left open by a shifting defense -- he’ll be a truly elite offensive player.

[DukieTiger]

To my eye, in his first several games (exhibition and real) Rivers demonstrated a fantastic first step, but his lack of elite athleticism frequently allowed the defense to recover by the time he shot, leading to a lot of drives that began with him making a great move to create separation and ended with a contested shot anyway. In the last two games, he’s had a few great drives where he’s successfully built on the initial separation, including a very nice drive tonight in which he incorporated a jump-stop and a couple of quick changes of direction. His first step is a huge asset. When he develops the ability to capitalize on it by maintaining separation to get clean shots -- and by finding teammates left open by a shifting defense -- he’ll be a truly elite offensive player.

Lack of elite athleticism?

I think it more likely that the separation closes simply because he is not used to the closing speed of opposing defenses at this level. Either that, or the separation closes because a help defender comes into the picture- and no matter how athletic you are, it's hard to avoid help defenders at all times.

That said, I agree with your point about his need to learn how to capitalize on the separation he is able to create. I think defenders can close on him or catch up to him because he tends to hold the ball too long before making a decision. Thus, he drives into the teeth of the defense or gets stripped or takes contested shots. He definitely needs (and will!) to learn to capitalize on his quickness by making decisions quickly as well. When his decision-making catches up to his first step, he will pull up for a jumper and still have that space, he will find the open man when the space is still available, or he will get to the basket when there is room for that as well. It's his mental quickness, not physical quickness, that is lacking at this point.

[CDu]

Thanks, but 4 games into a freshman season is way too early for an overall analysis, IMO, especially on a statistical basis.

I'd call them preliminary observations.

It's still an analysis. It's just not a final analysis. And it doesn't proclaim to be a final analysis. It's just an analysis of what he has been at the moment and what he needs to improve to be truly dominant. And I think it's a pretty fair assessment of what he has done so far.

[loran16]

Thanks, but 4 games into a freshman season is way too early for an overall analysis, IMO, especially on a statistical basis.

I'd call them preliminary observations.

I love how you basically ignored the article in this comment. It's more like you just read the title and felt necessary to attack it without reading it. Bad form really. The article doesn't make any overall assessment of Rivers as a failure (or success) you know.

@Kedsy, while I dislike some of the CBB stuff at Grantland, they've shown a record in other sports (Baseball, Football) of getting statistical-analysis guys to write pieces. I suspect this wouldn't have been written if the NBA was still going on (this writer is normally on the NBA side of Prospectus), but I don't think the piece was published simply because it was about a Duke player underperforming thus far.

[COYS]

This is a great, detailed article that demonstrates with stats and examples what many on the board have also noticed. Rivers needs to learn when to take the ball all the way to the rim and when to kick it out or pull up for a jump shot rather than a leaning, spinning layup through traffic. Rivers has not been a ball hog as many have feared. He's a willing passer. He's just not a willing passer on his drives, which is the biggest reason he hasn't been an efficient passer. I would also add to the article that his three point shooting has yet to get going, either. Making a whole bunch of three pointers is THE quickest cure to offensive inefficiency. Since he's streaky from three, I'd imagine that his three point percentage will never be particularly awe-inspiring, but hitting anywhere from 35-37% will help open up the floor for him.

Anyway, I know I'll be watching to see if/how much Austin's decision-making on drives improves. If he starts producing more positive plays than negative ones (assist, free throw attempt, or made pull up jumper) when he can't get all the way to the rim for a score, it will DRAMATICALLY improve the teams overall offensive efficiency, which is already solid (8th in the country according to KenPom, even though this season's stats are not yet completely isolated to the current season yet).

[roywhite]

I love how you basically ignored the article in this comment. It's more like you just read the title and felt necessary to attack it without reading it. Bad form really. The article doesn't make any overall assessment of Rivers as a failure (or success) you know.

@Kedsy, while I dislike some of the CBB stuff at Grantland, they've shown a record in other sports (Baseball, Football) of getting statistical-analysis guys to write pieces. I suspect this wouldn't have been written if the NBA was still going on (this writer is normally on the NBA side of Prospectus), but I don't think the piece was published simply because it was about a Duke player underperforming thus far.

I read the analysis and made my comment.
Your response seems hostile.

[Biscuit King]

So, to summarize: Rivers has no difficulty beating the first man off the dribble, but he needs to improve his decision-making when help defense comes.

For a freshman who has played 4 games at the D-I level, this does not seem to be advanced analysis. It is certainly correct. It's just not very insightful. The efficiency stats are also to be taken with a grain of salt in such a small sample size.

[CDu]

I read the analysis and made my comment.
Your response seems hostile.

In fairness, your comment did sort of sound like you hadn't read the article. Because the author in fact uses words like "yet" and "to make any sweeping generalizations about a player after four games would be silly."

It's an analysis of what Rivers has done so far (and I think a fairly accurate one), not a final judgment on him as a player.

[Des Esseintes]

In fairness, your comment did sort of sound like you hadn't read the article. Because the author in fact uses words like "yet" and "to make any sweeping generalizations about a player after four games would be silly."

It's an analysis of what Rivers has done so far (and I think a fairly accurate one), not a final judgment on him as a player.

I don't mean to put words in roy's mouth, but the argument could be made that statistical analysis after four games--even with the caveat that it is not a "final judgment"--is illegitimate based on sample size issues. I remember a spirited discussion from a few days back between you and Kedsy (and others) about whether plus-minus tells us anything meaningful. You came down on the side that it probably does not, at least in college, because there are simply is not enough information. That was over the course of an entire season. The present Rivers sample size is so miniscule as to be nonexistent right now. It's an honest question: how are the situations different? This, I think, is the issue. It isn't that the Pruiti is leaping to final conclusions. Of course he isn't. But isn't it a leap to make even provisional conclusions based on statistics when the sample size is so pathetic?

Perhaps some people on the board recall what kenpom's rankings used to look like early in the season before he adopted preseason weighting last year. It took a very long time for the results to tell us anything, and for quite a while many of the results were actively misleading. It would have been insane to say, "Well, the data to this point says Old Dominion is the best team in the country. This is by no means final, but I think we can ..." No. The correct thing at the time would have been to say that the data was not yet telling us anything upon which we could rely, full stop. Eventually, more data accrued, the rankings stabilized, and the stats became an immensely powerful tool. That point was well past the fourth game of the season.

[Grey Devil]

I truly appreciate the time and effort that Sebastian Pruiti put into his analysis of Austin's "tendencies."

My only reaction is that Coach K and staff (along with their own high tech video equipment) have probably already gone over this with Austin, maybe even multiple times, before this insightful article was even posted.

It will just take some time before Austin incorporates the suggested skill set into his repertoire of moves. It is, after all, a big step up for him (to be playing at this level). But I have no doubt that he will catch on and eventually be using his newly learned skill to help the team win more games. The more interesting question to me is how soon will we be seeing him "get it" in games?

For me the fun of being a Duke fan is not in all the victories, altough I certainly enjoy each and every one, but in watching Coach K and staff help each player maximize their abilities and blend them all into one "fist."

Go Duke!

Grey Devil