PDA

View Full Version : 2014 ACC Player of the Year



Dukehky
02-27-2014, 01:36 PM
While reading through the NC State/UNC game thread, I noticed some talk of Paige or Warren perhaps getting ACC Player of the Year. That got me to thinking, who do I think will win it?

I think that Fair and Ennis will split a lot of votes, removing either one from serious contention.

Erik Green proved last year that you can play on a terrible team and still win Player of the Year. How it wasn't Shane Larkin I will never fully understand (or Mason, but whatever, can't win em all).

Paige is averaging 17 and 4, which are pretty solid numbers, but not great considering the amount his team needs him to score.

I think Jabari is the front runner here. He is tops in the league in rebounding and second in scoring to Warren, and Jabari has tons of options around him. His defense is not great, and he turns the ball over too much, but he is easily the best player in the conference. Does that make him POY?

Will people not vote for him because he's a freshman with tons of hype? I don't think that will be the case, because he makes everyone money. When people see a story headline with the name Jabari Parker, they're going to read it.

I think the vote is probably between Warren and Jabari (mostly due to the fact that Ennis and Fair will really split some votes, and Rodney isn't really in contention right now, thought perhaps he should be), and I can't see the POY going to a low tier team for the second year in a row.

Obvious bias accepted, but I tried to be objective.

hurleyfor3
02-27-2014, 01:48 PM
I want to say this been discussed here recently, but we could have a repeat of 2002, when an ACC player won most of the national POY awards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._men%27s_college_basketball_national_p layer_of_the_year_awards) but did not win ACC POY. Or could only tie ACC POY, as in 2001. (For the 3067980479093864th time, seriously, Joe Forte?)

OldPhiKap
02-27-2014, 01:57 PM
Hard to believe that UVa might not have a single first-team player, but could (deservedly) win the regular season conference race (not Championship, I know).

Jabari and Hood may cause a split along the same lines suggested for Syracuse. Perhaps not as dramatically, but still.

Paige is not a bad bet, unfortunately.

JNort
02-27-2014, 02:28 PM
For me only three guys are in contention (Parker, Fair, Warren). I think Warren deserves it most IMO but Air and Parker are putting in the heat. Outside of those 3 only Paige can sneak in and make some noise but I doubt he will make the upset.

Duvall
02-27-2014, 02:29 PM
For me only three guys are in contention (Parker, Fair, Warren). I think Warren deserves it most IMO but Air and Parker are putting in the heat. Outside of those 3 only Paige can sneak in and make some noise but I doubt he will make the upset.

What's the argument for Fair?

Dukehky
02-27-2014, 02:51 PM
Hard to believe that UVa might not have a single first-team player, but could (deservedly) win the regular season conference race (not Championship, I know).

Jabari and Hood may cause a split along the same lines suggested for Syracuse. Perhaps not as dramatically, but still.

Paige is not a bad bet, unfortunately.

It just looks like Harris has way more help than anyone imagined that he would. Harris is a really good, solid player, but his PR came from the 36 points against Duke. His team is also more balanced offensively in terms of who can produce with Brogdon and the rest, so Harris doesn't have to be the primary scorer, and their pace of play is so slow that he doesn't have the chances others have to rack up numbers.

I just cannot believe that Paige will win this award, and I don't think Warren should because his team is no good. Is that his fault? No, but Erik Green shouldn't have won last year either. I'd be okay if Fair one, I guess, since it is probable that Cuse will finish higher in the standings than Duke and he was pre-season POY anyway. Writers may as well make themselves look good.

superdave
02-27-2014, 03:29 PM
Warren 23.3 pts (1st); 7.1 boards (7th); .523 FGs (1st); 1.7 steals (5th)
Parker 18.8 pts (2nd); 8.9 boards (1st); .479s FGs (3rd); 1.4 blocks (10th)
Paige 16.9 pts (5th); .431 FGs (10); 4.6 assists (4); .899 FT% (1)
Ennis 12 pts (N/A); 5.6 assists (1); 2.1 steals (1)

I did not include Fair because his stats looked more like Hood's or McAdoo's than like Parker's or Warren's.

Paige's numbers are not that exciting considering he is the #1 option. If you just want to pick the most outstanding #1 option, you'd pick Warren over Paige (6.4 more ppg). But Warren will suffer for playing on a .500 team and not being able to drag them to enough wins to make the tourney.

I think this comes down to Parker vs Ennis. Parker wins if Duke wins out and Fair takes a few votes away from Ennis. Ennis wins if Dukes loses to Carolina.

OldPhiKap
02-27-2014, 03:32 PM
I am doubting that Parker wins, simply because it is easy/lazy for a writer to give Parker the Freshman of the Year and then give Player of the Year to whoever the competing choice in your mind is. Parker is already getting an award, so share the wealth.

Not saying it's right. Saying it is a cop-out rationalization that some will use.

superdave
02-27-2014, 03:44 PM
I am doubting that Parker wins, simply because it is easy/lazy for a writer to give Parker the Freshman of the Year and then give Player of the Year to whoever the competing choice in your mind is. Parker is already getting an award, so share the wealth.

Not saying it's right. Saying it is a cop-out rationalization that some will use.

Under that reasoning, Ennis should not get strong consideration either. And I think they are the two biggest standouts in the conference this season.


Here's PER rankings for the guys under consideration -
Warren #1, Parker 3, Paige 14, Ennis 15, Fair 35. KJ McDaniel is #2. Anyone care to bump him up into the top group?

Wahoo2000
02-27-2014, 06:20 PM
How McDaniel doesn't get more love I really don't understand. That guys HAS to be the most underrated player in the league, and maybe the nation. He's in the top 10 in a TON of catagories, and leads Clemson in almost every major statistical category.

Given the precedent that was set last year (you don't need to be on a great team to win), I really don't see how he isn't in the top 2-3 guys to win. I could see Parker or maybe Warren ahead of him, but solely on play between the lines, and not PR/national pub, McDaniel HAS to be up there.

sagegrouse
02-27-2014, 08:58 PM
If it's numbers, it's probably TJ Warren. He is way ahead in scoring. OTOH Jabari is #2 in scoring and a clear #1 in rebounding.

If it's national hype, it's Jabari. He won 46 states out of 50 in an ESPN poll for most outstanding freshman (and two were "undecided"). I expect Jabari to be first-team A-A. I don't expect that of any of the other candidates

If it's value to a really good team, then it may be Paige or Ennis (or Parker). Here there is a difference between MVP and Most Outstanding Player. Paige has been phenomenal in the clutch.

I don't think the Erik Green example from last year means anything for this year's choice. Moreover, State is a respectable team compared to the disaster that was Virginia Tech in 2013.

And it depends on who's voting. The writers have traditionally been the only ones selecting All-ACC and MVP. Now the coaches are in the act. I expect they will have different choices (although if the writers' votes were limited only to the 15 or so most knowledgeable writers, they may more closely converge).

1999ballboy
02-28-2014, 12:48 AM
I believe it will be TJ Warren. His numbers have been consistently high this year, and what was a weak supporting cast at first is starting to come together around him into a much better team. The arguments for Parker are that he's the most impressive pure talent, and that his numbers dip a bit due to having guys like Hood and Sulaimon around him who at times are capable of matching his performance. While it doesn't mean that Warren is a better player than Parker, a case could be made that Warren's season has carried more weight for his program. I think that the same folks who voted for Erick Green will vote for Warren. And while I do love Jabari, I feel Warren is equally deserving.

Slackerb
02-28-2014, 03:15 PM
I think it should be Warren, but I'm baffled by the people that claim that so and so is easily the best player.

I think Warren should win it based on his offensive performance. None of the candidates are tremendous defenders, and no other players are on the same offensive level as Warren. He's a high volume scorer, but not a high volume shooter, and that's what makes him stand out.

When was the last ACC player that was a high volume scorer and scored with Warren's sheer efficiency? Warren should be shooting even more based on his offensive efficiency. When you watch him play, he's scoring seemingly effortlessly compared to others.

vick
02-28-2014, 03:48 PM
I think it should be Warren, but I'm baffled by the people that claim that so and so is easily the best player.

I think Warren should win it based on his offensive performance. None of the candidates are tremendous defenders, and no other players are on the same offensive level as Warren. He's a high volume scorer, but not a high volume shooter, and that's what makes him stand out.

When was the last ACC player that was a high volume scorer and scored with Warren's sheer efficiency? Warren should be shooting even more based on his offensive efficiency. When you watch him play, he's scoring seemingly effortlessly compared to others.

Last year? Green was very close to the same usage and much more efficient than Warren is. As offensive players, Warren hasn't touched Green's level, which is no knock on him at all, but a testament to how unbelievably good Green was last year.

JasonEvans
02-28-2014, 04:09 PM
As long as we are talking about it, color me shocked that the Nuggets could not find a spot on their roster for Erick Green. They are stashing him in Europe for at least a year. He's in the Italian league averaging about 11 ppg.

-Jason "with his size and skill, I would have thought Green could make it in the NBA... maybe someday" Evans

flyingdutchdevil
02-28-2014, 04:21 PM
It's about stats. I hate to say it, but it really is. Unfortunately, that means players like Ennis and Harris (12ppg, 11.5ppg) aren't going to be given that much consideration, despite being the most important players on the 2nd and 1st ranked teams in the ACC, respectively.

Paige, Warren, Fair, and Parker (17.5, 23.8, 16.5, 18.8) are all putting up great numbers. IMO, I think these are the four candidates. Breaking them down further:
-Paige: by far the most important and statistically relevant UNC player. He is leading a UNC team that is surprising a lot of folks
-Warren: insane numbers for a terrible team. Highly efficient scorer.
-Fair: Best statistical player for a 2nd ranked Orange.
-Parker: Best rebounder, incredible scorer for 3rd ranked Blue Devils.

I think Fair gets eliminated from that list fairly quickly. Paige may be next to go, simply because his point average isn't as high. Parker v Warren is an interesting debate. Parker is the better player, but Warren crushes Parker on points, is not a bad rebounder (7.0), and is, IMO, more important to the Wolf Pack than Parker to the Devils. That isn't anything against Parker, but rather how bad State is and how good Warren is.

I think, as of right now, it's Warren's trophy to lose.

CDu
02-28-2014, 04:22 PM
Based on ACC stats, here are the numbers for the various players who have been discussed (in order of PPG, for no particular reason):

Warren: 23.6 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 1.6 spg, 50.6 fg%
Paige: 16.8 ppg, 5.1 apg, 1.5 spg, 2.3 a/t, 42.7 fg%, 39.8 3pt%
Parker: 16.8 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 1.4 bpg, 43.3 fg%
Fair: 15.7 ppg, 6.7 rpg
Ennis: 12.3 ppg, 5.8 apg, 1.7 spg, 2.8 a/t

Honestly, I don't think Fair should even be 1st-team All-ACC. I think the other four guys are sure-fire first-team All-ACC guys.

If I had to pick, I'd either go with Warren for his fantastic scoring and scoring efficiency or Parker for his all-around game. If I had to say right now, I'd lean in favor of Warren. But a strong finish by Parker (perhaps closing the game some in PPG and FG%) could sway me back to Parker.

As of now, my first team would probably look like this: Warren, Parker, Paige, Ennis, McDaniels/Brogdon
Second team: Brogdon/McDaniels, Hanlan, Patterson, Fair, McAdoo
Third team: Zanna, Hood, Atkins, Sherman, Wells

BobBender
02-28-2014, 04:28 PM
The guy is the best pleyer on arguably the best team. And don't say it's all stats, he has scored in Double figures in every ACC games., stuffs the stat sheet, and is an outstanding defender. The North Carolina-Duke bias is over the top.
While reading through the NC State/UNC game thread, I noticed some talk of Paige or Warren perhaps getting ACC Player of the Year. That got me to thinking, who do I think will win it?

I think that Fair and Ennis will split a lot of votes, removing either one from serious contention.

Erik Green proved last year that you can play on a terrible team and still win Player of the Year. How it wasn't Shane Larkin I will never fully understand (or Mason, but whatever, can't win em all).

Paige is averaging 17 and 4, which are pretty solid numbers, but not great considering the amount his team needs him to score.

I think Jabari is the front runner here. He is tops in the league in rebounding and second in scoring to Warren, and Jabari has tons of options around him. His defense is not great, and he turns the ball over too much, but he is easily the best player in the conference. Does that make him POY?

Will people not vote for him because he's a freshman with tons of hype? I don't think that will be the case, because he makes everyone money. When people see a story headline with the name Jabari Parker, they're going to read it.

I think the vote is probably between Warren and Jabari (mostly due to the fact that Ennis and Fair will really split some votes, and Rodney isn't really in contention right now, thought perhaps he should be), and I can't see the POY going to a low tier team for the second year in a row.

Obvious bias accepted, but I tried to be objective.

Slackerb
02-28-2014, 04:30 PM
I was lazy and didn't specify "efficient". I meant scoring efficiency, and more based on watching players than stats. Stats are dangerous if you don't specifying what you're talking about and obviously can be stated to make a case, so I recognize that.

When you look at PER specifically, yes, last year's Green was much higher than Warren so far this year (31.6 vs. 30.27). But other factors like effective field goal percentage and field goal percentage are also important (and more visible to voters?) and don't include defensive statistics. Green's eFG% was 53.0% and Warren's is 55.1%. The pure shooting percentages are much worse for Green of course: 52.3% for Warren and 47.5% for Green.

Also, I think a player's career and legacy should factor somewhat in POY honors, and Warren will surely leave his mark in terms of scoring efficiency.

If Warren's career ended today rather than in a few weeks, he'd finish 4th in career FG% for the ACC at 56.0%, with the next wing player being Al Thornton at #11 with 52.8%. According to the stats I'm looking at, he'd be 4th in career ACC PER. Pretty impressive.

It's a close race, but in my view Warren is doing more with less than the others, and doing so incredibly efficiently on the offensive end of the court. Teams are doubling on him early and often in games, and he still piles up the points. He's had 7 30+ point games, and I think I read somewhere that no other player in the ACC has more than 1 30+ game. He hasn't scored less than 20 points since Jan 11 (his ONLY single point game). Etc., etc.


Last year? Green was very close to the same usage and much more efficient than Warren is. As offensive players, Warren hasn't touched Green's level, which is no knock on him at all, but a testament to how unbelievably good Green was last year.

CDu
02-28-2014, 04:32 PM
The guy is the best pleyer on arguably the best team. And don't say it's all stats, he has scored in Double figures in every ACC games., stuffs the stat sheet, and is an outstanding defender. The North Carolina-Duke bias is over the top.

I don't think this argument is a strong reason for being Player of the Year. For one thing, it was that kind of argument that (until recently) had CJ Fair and his okay-but-not-great stat line in serious conversation for Player of the Year. For another thing, UVa having the best record doesn't make them the best team given the unbalanced schedule.

You definitely need to be the best player on your own team. But being on the winningest team in the conference doesn't mean you need to be in the discussion for PoY.

I think Brogdon should absolutely be in the discussion for 1st Team All-ACC. I just don't think he should be PoY.

Wahoo2000
02-28-2014, 08:08 PM
I don't think this argument is a strong reason for being Player of the Year. For one thing, it was that kind of argument that (until recently) had CJ Fair and his okay-but-not-great stat line in serious conversation for Player of the Year. For another thing, UVa having the best record doesn't make them the best team given the unbalanced schedule.

You definitely need to be the best player on your own team. But being on the winningest team in the conference doesn't mean you need to be in the discussion for PoY.

I think Brogdon should absolutely be in the discussion for 1st Team All-ACC. I just don't think he should be PoY.

Heck, I'm a UVa fan, and I agree Brogdon shouldn't be in the mix for PoY.

I WILL say, that the unbalanced schedule thing is starting to wear on me. So we played only middle and lower tier squads for the teams we played twice. For argument's sake, lets say that you give us home dates with Pitt and Duke to replace two of those others (already played Pitt and Duke on the road). Is there ANYBODY that thinks we'd go any worse than 1-1 in those games? 15-1 or 14-2 (heck even if we dropped both and were 13-3), it all amounts to the same thing - beat Syracuse tomorrow to secure the 1 seed in the conference tourney. When you're talking the difference between the toughest and weakest conference schedule, you're talking about (most likely) a 1-2 game difference in the loss column MAX. If (and it is a BIG "if", I grant you) we beat 'Cuse tomorrow, we'll finish 2-3 games clear of everyone else anyway, rendering the "schedule" argument pretty pathetic IMO.

vick
02-28-2014, 08:29 PM
Heck, I'm a UVa fan, and I agree Brogdon shouldn't be in the mix for PoY.

I WILL say, that the unbalanced schedule thing is starting to wear on me. So we played only middle and lower tier squads for the teams we played twice. For argument's sake, lets say that you give us home dates with Pitt and Duke to replace two of those others (already played Pitt and Duke on the road). Is there ANYBODY that thinks we'd go any worse than 1-1 in those games? 15-1 or 14-2 (heck even if we dropped both and were 13-3), it all amounts to the same thing - beat Syracuse tomorrow to secure the 1 seed in the conference tourney. When you're talking the difference between the toughest and weakest conference schedule, you're talking about (most likely) a 1-2 game difference in the loss column MAX. If (and it is a BIG "if", I grant you) we beat 'Cuse tomorrow, we'll finish 2-3 games clear of everyone else anyway, rendering the "schedule" argument pretty pathetic IMO.

I think you're underselling UVa here. I was looking at scheduling discrepancies a few weeks ago, and I think the math works out* such that there's absolutely no way the scheduling difference is anywhere near two games in expected wins compared with a (presumably perfectly fair) double round robin, and frankly one game is a pretty big stretch. Using Pomeroy, UVa would be expected to win 14.0 wins against their schedule. In a true round robin, 21.5, which translates to 13.8 over an 18 game schedule. So basically, UVa was probably gifted something like 0.2 expected wins by the unbalanced schedule. Who cares.

* Maybe I'll start a thread about this this weekend since no Duke game, but the gist is, I think the evidence suggests the effect of unbalanced scheduling is hugely overblown.

(I'll spare the board another pro-Brogdon rant)

vick
03-01-2014, 11:46 PM
(I'll spare the board another pro-Brogdon rant)

No I won't. With the game today, Brogdon moves up to #8 nationally in Pomeroy's POY rankings--Jabari is #2, Patterson #7, and McDaniels #10, so the ACC is very well-represented. Of course, his stats are for the whole year rather than the ACC season specifically, so Patterson is probably higher than I think most people would say he is for the ACC race.

gofurman
03-02-2014, 02:59 AM
. How McDaniel doesn't get more love I really don't understand. That guys HAS to be the most underrated player in the league, and maybe the nation. He's in the top 10 in a TON of catagories, and leads Clemson in almost every major statistical category.
Given the precedent that was set last year (you don't need to be on a great team to win), I really don't see how he isn't in the top 2-3 guys to win. I could see Parker or maybe Warren ahead of him, but solely on play between the lines, and not PR/national pub, McDaniel HAS to be up there.

This. He is the ONLY player in the entire country to lead his team in 4 categories of points..rebounds..blocks..and steals. How the same guy can lead a team in blocks rebounds and steals is unreal. Steals? And blocks? That's two difft types of players Only guy in entire country to do this. Insane. We saw it first hand. And he is second in assists on the team!

He better be first team all ACC. Team schmeam. The dude is awesome. Here's a good way to put it - I am very glad he doesn't play for UNC. They would be nearly unstoppable if he were helping Paige and McAdoo.

That's my soap box. Heard one of bilas or someone say he ought to be first or second all- America. I can see it

Slackerb
03-04-2014, 09:52 AM
This. He is the ONLY player in the entire country to lead his team in 4 categories of points..rebounds..blocks..and steals. How the same guy can lead a team in blocks rebounds and steals is unreal. Steals? And blocks? That's two difft types of players Only guy in entire country to do this. Insane. We saw it first hand. And he is second in assists on the team!

He better be first team all ACC. Team schmeam. The dude is awesome. Here's a good way to put it - I am very glad he doesn't play for UNC. They would be nearly unstoppable if he were helping Paige and McAdoo.

That's my soap box. Heard one of bilas or someone say he ought to be first or second all- America. I can see it

It really doesn't matter how much better you are than your teammates, that's basically a false comparison. For example, yes, he leads his team in steals, but that only puts him at 16th in the ACC, below all other candidates being discussed except Parker. Rebounds, he's 7th in the ACC. The only category I can find that leads in is blocks. I'm sorry, but you don't deserve to win ACC player of the year if the only thing you are top 5 in the conference in is blocked shots. He's an amazing player, a freak athlete, etc., but he's not an ACC player of the year.

Does anyone think that Warren sealed it up with last night's 41 point performance. If you missed it, you missed one of the best offensive displays in a very long time. He's scoring tons of points unselfishly and efficiently. The scary part is that he's getting better. Over the last five games he's averaging 29.6 PPG and shooting 56.4%.

If he continues this pace, I don't think it's a close race anymore.

JasonEvans
03-04-2014, 11:00 AM
If he continues this pace, I don't think it's a close race anymore.

Fixed it for you.

Warren's play of late has eliminated any tension in this race. If Parker goes off in a truly ridiculous way -- 30+ points, 15+ rebounds -- against UNC then maybe it raises some questions again, but I think this sucker is over and done with.

You know, it is a real tragedy that State could not put a better team around TJ. He is such a major talent and a huge force to be reckoned with, simply unstoppable at times and so efficient. If his teammates were even moderately competent, State could easily be a top 25 team nationally. What a waste... sigh.

-Jason "think of how different State's season would look right now if they had not gaacked up the Syracuse and UNC games -- they'd be 10-7 in the conference and 20-10 overall and would be in the NCAA tourney right now" Evans

FerryFor50
03-04-2014, 11:07 AM
Fixed it for you.

Warren's play of late has eliminated any tension in this race. If Parker goes off in a truly ridiculous way -- 30+ points, 15+ rebounds -- against UNC then maybe it raises some questions again, but I think this sucker is over and done with.

You know, it is a real tragedy that State could not put a better team around TJ. He is such a major talent and a huge force to be reckoned with, simply unstoppable at times and so efficient. If his teammates were even moderately competent, State could easily be a top 25 team nationally. What a waste... sigh.

-Jason "think of how different State's season would look right now if they had not gaacked up the Syracuse and UNC games -- they'd be 10-7 in the conference and 20-10 overall and would be in the NCAA tourney right now" Evans

The timing was bad for State. They got Warren at the tail end of CJ Leslie, Lorenzo Brown, Richard Howell, etc careers... Warren got caught smack dab in the middle of a rebuild from Lowe's recruit transition to Gottfried's.

vick
03-04-2014, 11:33 AM
Fixed it for you.

Warren's play of late has eliminated any tension in this race. If Parker goes off in a truly ridiculous way -- 30+ points, 15+ rebounds -- against UNC then maybe it raises some questions again, but I think this sucker is over and done with.

You know, it is a real tragedy that State could not put a better team around TJ. He is such a major talent and a huge force to be reckoned with, simply unstoppable at times and so efficient. If his teammates were even moderately competent, State could easily be a top 25 team nationally. What a waste... sigh.

-Jason "think of how different State's season would look right now if they had not gaacked up the Syracuse and UNC games -- they'd be 10-7 in the conference and 20-10 overall and would be in the NCAA tourney right now" Evans

I'm surprised you feel that way even if you think Warren indisputably deserves it. Some of the ACC historians can correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the only two winners to come from losing teams Len Bias and Erick Green? I'd be happy if you're right and voters recognize that even great players can't carry teams alone, but I'm not sure that's the case. I guess State can make that somewhat moot by beating BC, but 9-9 doesn't scream "excellence" either.

To me there are four players you can make solid cases for, in no special order: Warren, the best scorer; McDaniels, the most balanced (if you wonder how State would be without Warren, think about how bad Clemson would be without McDaniels--I'm not sure they'd average 50 points--and Clemson is better than State); Parker, who's played the best over the course of the whole season (which is not how I think the ACC award should work, but it's not completely unreasonable), and Brogdon, the most efficient of the bunch and on the best team. And hey look, those four have the highest PERs (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=2014&year_max=2014&conf_id=acc&school_id=&class_is_fr=Y&class_is_so=Y&class_is_jr=Y&class_is_sr=Y&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&games_type=C&qual=&c1stat=mp_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=25&c2stat=g&c2comp=gt&c2val=16&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=per), by far, in the ACC among players averaging 25 MPG (what I would consider full-time starter). Not the way I picked the four, but nice to see some stat support.

CDu
03-04-2014, 01:30 PM
I'm surprised you feel that way even if you think Warren indisputably deserves it. Some of the ACC historians can correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the only two winners to come from losing teams Len Bias and Erick Green? I'd be happy if you're right and voters recognize that even great players can't carry teams alone, but I'm not sure that's the case. I guess State can make that somewhat moot by beating BC, but 9-9 doesn't scream "excellence" either.

To me there are four players you can make solid cases for, in no special order: Warren, the best scorer; McDaniels, the most balanced (if you wonder how State would be without Warren, think about how bad Clemson would be without McDaniels--I'm not sure they'd average 50 points--and Clemson is better than State); Parker, who's played the best over the course of the whole season (which is not how I think the ACC award should work, but it's not completely unreasonable), and Brogdon, the most efficient of the bunch and on the best team. And hey look, those four have the highest PERs (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=2014&year_max=2014&conf_id=acc&school_id=&class_is_fr=Y&class_is_so=Y&class_is_jr=Y&class_is_sr=Y&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&games_type=C&qual=&c1stat=mp_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=25&c2stat=g&c2comp=gt&c2val=16&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=per), by far, in the ACC among players averaging 25 MPG (what I would consider full-time starter). Not the way I picked the four, but nice to see some stat support.

Of course, if you look at those PERs, it appears that this group of four is really a group of one (Warren, at 30.5) and a second group of 3 (McDaniels at 27.5, Brogdon at 26.1 and Parker at 26.0). The next best is, interestingly enough, Talib Zanna, at 22.8.

Of course, there are substantial limitations to PER. For example, it would appear to overrate forwards/centers (Miller from GT is 6th and the aforementioned Zanna in 5th; Paige and Ennis don't crack the top-15; only one true guard in the top-17). So that's probably not the fairest of metrics, either.

vick
03-04-2014, 01:52 PM
Of course, if you look at those PERs, it appears that this group of four is really a group of one (Warren, at 30.5) and a second group of 3 (McDaniels at 27.5, Brogdon at 26.1 and Parker at 26.0). The next best is, interestingly enough, Talib Zanna, at 22.8.

Of course, there are substantial limitations to PER. For example, it would appear to overrate forwards/centers (Miller from GT is 6th and the aforementioned Zanna in 5th; Paige and Ennis don't crack the top-15; only one true guard in the top-17). So that's probably not the fairest of metrics, either.

Yeah. The tilt toward big men in PER is well-known, though in some sense it doesn't trouble me--if a football metric said that quarterbacks are more valuable than right guards, is it a problem with the metric? No, it's just intrinsically the way the sport works. You could argue that basketball is just intrinsically biased toward forwards and centers. I dunno, maybe, maybe-not. But no question, guards, especially non-scoring point guards, don't generally get as high PERs as centers. The other major issue with PER is that it has no accounting for defense beyond rebounds, blocks, and steals, but clearly the fact that UVA, Clemson, and Duke are all much better defensive teams than State ought to have some impact on how you evaluate players. I'm with you on the limitations of PER, I just thought it was an interesting coincidence, not what was driving my thinking.

FerryFor50
03-04-2014, 02:19 PM
Yeah. The tilt toward big men in PER is well-known, though in some sense it doesn't trouble me--if a football metric said that quarterbacks are more valuable than right guards, is it a problem with the metric? No, it's just intrinsically the way the sport works. You could argue that basketball is just intrinsically biased toward forwards and centers. I dunno, maybe, maybe-not. But no question, guards, especially non-scoring point guards, don't generally get as high PERs as centers. The other major issue with PER is that it has no accounting for defense beyond rebounds, blocks, and steals, but clearly the fact that UVA, Clemson, and Duke are all much better defensive teams than State ought to have some impact on how you evaluate players. I'm with you on the limitations of PER, I just thought it was an interesting coincidence, not what was driving my thinking.

To be fair, TJ Warren isn't really a big. He's a combo wing...

CDu
03-04-2014, 03:08 PM
Yeah. The tilt toward big men in PER is well-known, though in some sense it doesn't trouble me--if a football metric said that quarterbacks are more valuable than right guards, is it a problem with the metric? No, it's just intrinsically the way the sport works. You could argue that basketball is just intrinsically biased toward forwards and centers. I dunno, maybe, maybe-not. But no question, guards, especially non-scoring point guards, don't generally get as high PERs as centers. The other major issue with PER is that it has no accounting for defense beyond rebounds, blocks, and steals, but clearly the fact that UVA, Clemson, and Duke are all much better defensive teams than State ought to have some impact on how you evaluate players. I'm with you on the limitations of PER, I just thought it was an interesting coincidence, not what was driving my thinking.

I think it is just a flaw in the metric. I actually think that good guard play (especially good point guard/playmaker play) is perhaps more important than good big man play. Yet here we see two guys (Zanna and Miller) in the top-6 of PER and two guys (Paige and Ennis) outside the top-15. I don't think anyone would suggest that Zanna and Miller are more productive/more valuable than Paige and Ennis.

PER is a useful tool for comparing comparable players. But I don't think it does a great job of normalizing across positions.

vick
03-04-2014, 03:12 PM
To be fair, TJ Warren isn't really a big. He's a combo wing...

Yeah, but Ferry, the anti-guard bias of PER makes Brogdon THAT MUCH MORE AWESOMER! ;)

In seriousness, I'd probably rank them Warren, Brogdon, McDaniels, Parker--a couple of weeks ago I thought Warren would slow down against the tougher defensive teams that were coming up on State's schedule, and instead he's accelerated. But given history, I would not call a player on a team that will finish at best .500 a lock.

The pro-Paige or Ennis case is a little more baffling to me, though I don't have a problem with consideration for first-team. How is it held against Brogdon that he hasn't had the opportunity to be as "clutch" (though he has certainly done it, see the game at Pitt) because his team actually wins convincingly? Yeah he didn't get a last-second block against Notre Dame--because UVa beat the crap out of Notre Dame! Crazy logic.

FerryFor50
03-04-2014, 03:25 PM
Yeah, but Ferry, the anti-guard bias of PER makes Brogdon THAT MUCH MORE AWESOMER! ;)

In seriousness, I'd probably rank them Warren, Brogdon, McDaniels, Parker--a couple of weeks ago I thought Warren would slow down against the tougher defensive teams that were coming up on State's schedule, and instead he's accelerated. But given history, I would not call a player on a team that will finish at best .500 a lock.

The pro-Paige or Ennis case is a little more baffling to me, though I don't have a problem with consideration for first-team. How is it held against Brogdon that he hasn't had the opportunity to be as "clutch" (though he has certainly done it, see the game at Pitt) because his team actually wins convincingly? Yeah he didn't get a last-second block against Notre Dame--because UVa beat the crap out of Notre Dame! Crazy logic.

PackMan has pointed this out several times, but TJ Warren has yet to win ACC Player of the Week honors this season. HOW???

This has gotta be the week he does it, right?

I'm fully on board with Brogden in the same conversation as Paige and Ennis. But I think Paige and Ennis are the better players. Not by much, though...

Duvall
03-04-2014, 03:31 PM
PackMan has pointed this out several times, but TJ Warren has yet to win ACC Player of the Week honors this season. HOW???

This has gotta be the week he does it, right?

How many times has NC State gotten through a week without a loss? Should happen this week.


I'm fully on board with Brogden in the same conversation as Paige and Ennis. But I think Paige and Ennis are the better players. Not by much, though...

Why? (http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=malcolm-brogdon&p1=tyler-ennis&p2=marcus-paige) Brogdon's defensive rebounding gives him a dimension the other two guards can't match. Throw in the beatdowns Ennis and Paige's team received from Virginia and Brogdon looks like the leader here.

vick
03-04-2014, 03:35 PM
PackMan has pointed this out several times, but TJ Warren has yet to win ACC Player of the Week honors this season. HOW???

This has gotta be the week he does it, right?

I feel like (and I don't have any statistical data to back this up, just my faulty memory) POTW awards generally go to players whose teams won both of their games in the week, which I don't think State has done in conference play except when they beat Maryland and Georgia Tech (and he didn't play in the Maryland game). I'm not saying I agree with that, and certainly I might be wrong about it anyway, but it would be my guess as an explanation.

CDu
03-04-2014, 03:36 PM
Yeah, but Ferry, the anti-guard bias of PER makes Brogdon THAT MUCH MORE AWESOMER! ;)

In seriousness, I'd probably rank them Warren, Brogdon, McDaniels, Parker--a couple of weeks ago I thought Warren would slow down against the tougher defensive teams that were coming up on State's schedule, and instead he's accelerated. But given history, I would not call a player on a team that will finish at best .500 a lock.

The pro-Paige or Ennis case is a little more baffling to me, though I don't have a problem with consideration for first-team. How is it held against Brogdon that he hasn't had the opportunity to be as "clutch" (though he has certainly done it, see the game at Pitt) because his team actually wins convincingly? Yeah he didn't get a last-second block against Notre Dame--because UVa beat the crap out of Notre Dame! Crazy logic.


PackMan has pointed this out several times, but TJ Warren has yet to win ACC Player of the Week honors this season. HOW???

This has gotta be the week he does it, right?

I'm fully on board with Brogden in the same conversation as Paige and Ennis. But I think Paige and Ennis are the better players. Not by much, though...

Yeah, I would say that Warren, Parker, and McDaniels should be first-team guys. After that, it's two of Brogdon, Paige, and Ennis, with the other being a close #6 and first guy on the second team.

The guys most likely to get left off of the first team by the actual voters are going to be Brogdon and McDaniels. Brogdon would absolutely have gotten left off by count-stat-minded voters had UVa not locked up 1st place. Had UVa finished second to Syracuse, I think we'd see both Ennis and Fair (who has no valid argument for 1st team) end up on the 1st team simply because voters are crazy.

vick
03-04-2014, 03:49 PM
Yeah, I would say that Warren, Parker, and McDaniels should be first-team guys. After that, it's two of Brogdon, Paige, and Ennis, with the other being a close #6 and first guy on the second team.

The guys most likely to get left off of the first team by the actual voters are going to be Brogdon and McDaniels. Brogdon would absolutely have gotten left off by count-stat-minded voters had UVa not locked up 1st place. Had UVa finished second to Syracuse, I think we'd see both Ennis and Fair (who has no valid argument for 1st team) end up on the 1st team simply because voters are crazy.

According to David Teel, of the 49 teams to win the regular season outright, only one--2011 UNC--failed to get a 1st team pick (and that UNC team had three on the 2nd team). Of course, a little different with 8 vs. 15 teams in the league.

nocilla
03-04-2014, 05:13 PM
Erick Green only won Player of the Week twice last year. Granted that is 2 more than Warren, but there is a pretty good chance Warren wins the next POTW award which would only leave him 1 behind Green. Green got exactly half of the 76 POTY votes. I expect Warren will get that many as well.

jhmoss1812
03-04-2014, 06:31 PM
Here are my ACC awards

Now that the season is winding down, I think it's time to hand out awards in the ACC

POY: Jabari Parker (Duke)
ROY: Tyler Ennis (Syracuse)
COY: Tony Bennett (UVA)
OPOY: T.J. Warren (NCSU)
DPOY: Akil Mitchell (UVA)
MVP: K.J. McDaniels (Clemson)

1st team:
Marcus Paige (UNC)
T.J. Warren (NCSU)
Jabari Parker (Duke)
K.J. McDaniels (Clemson)
C.J. Fair (Syracuse)

2nd team:
Malcom Brogdon (UVA)
Rodney Hood (Duke)
Tyler Ennis (Cuse)
Lamar Patterson (Pitt)
James Michael McAdoo (UNC)

3rd team:
Olivier Hanlan (BC)
Rion Brown (Miami)
Dez Wells (MD)
Joe Harris (UVA)
Ian Miller (FSU)

All-Defensive team
Aaron Thomas (FSU)
Tyler Ennis (Cuse)
K.J. McDaniels (Clemson)
Akil Mitchell (UVA)
Daniel Miller (GT)

cbarry
03-04-2014, 08:00 PM
I think Paige gets POY. He is an impressive PG. After watching the UNC- State game, I'm a believer. I just hope we can contain him on Saturday. UNC is mediocre without him, but a legitimate top 10 team with Paige. That says a lot about a player.

Duvall
03-04-2014, 08:02 PM
I think Paige gets POY. He is an impressive PG. After watching the UNC- State game, I'm a believer. I just hope we can contain him on Saturday. UNC is mediocre without him, but a legitimate top 10 team with Paige. That says a lot about a player.

Wait, when was UNC without Paige? They've had him all year, and haven't been a top 10 team, legitimate or otherwise.

FerryFor50
03-04-2014, 08:05 PM
I think Paige gets POY. He is an impressive PG. After watching the UNC- State game, I'm a believer. I just hope we can contain him on Saturday. UNC is mediocre without him, but a legitimate top 10 team with Paige. That says a lot about a player.

I don't think UNC is a top 10 team with Paige. But they definitely would not be as good without him.

But they wouldn't be NC State bad if they lost TJ Warren...

And Duke contained Paige the first time they played. Paige only scored 13. He had most of those in the 2nd half. It was Leslie McDonald and the 10 min scoring drought that killed us.

cbarry
03-04-2014, 08:15 PM
What I meant to say, is that Paige is head and shoulders above the rest of his mediocre teammates, and makes average players look pretty darn good. That says something about a PG, plus he is quite a scoring threat. I thought we contained Paige very well in the first game-- he is a different beast now, and I fear he will torch us. I still have a good feeling about the game. We should win without too much trouble.

Losing Paige would decimate UNC. Losing Parker would hurt us a lot, but we could still compete. (Losing Warren would also decimate NCSU, so I guess those 2 would be my finalists for POY).

I really like Parker's game, and will miss watching him in a Duke uniform next year, but I don't fault him at all for going pro after this year. And for those who think there is even a slight chance he will stay... I have some swampland in Arizona to sell you. I would love to see Hood stay, but he is probably gone also.



Wait, when was UNC without Paige? They've had him all year, and haven't been a top 10 team, legitimate or otherwise.

FerryFor50
03-04-2014, 08:23 PM
What I meant to say, is that Paige is head and shoulders above the rest of his mediocre teammates, and makes average players look pretty darn good. That says something about a PG, plus he is quite a scoring threat. I thought we contained Paige very well in the first game-- he is a different beast now, and I fear he will torch us. I still have a good feeling about the game. We should win without too much trouble.

Losing Paige would decimate UNC. Losing Parker would hurt us a lot, but we could still compete. (Losing Warren would also decimate NCSU, so I guess those 2 would be my finalists for POY).

I really like Parker's game, and will miss watching him in a Duke uniform next year, but I don't fault him at all for going pro after this year. And for those who think there is even a slight chance he will stay... I have some swampland in Arizona to sell you. I would love to see Hood stay, but he is probably gone also.

UNC has plenty of talent other than Paige.

Tokoto, McAdoo, McDonald, Meeks, Johnson... Any of those guys could start or play a lot of minutes for *any* ACC team, including Duke.

Paige has been their most consistent player, but he's not that far ahead of his teammates.

vick
03-04-2014, 08:39 PM
UNC has plenty of talent other than Paige.

Tokoto, McAdoo, McDonald, Meeks, Johnson... Any of those guys could start or play a lot of minutes for *any* ACC team, including Duke.

Paige has been their most consistent player, but he's not that far ahead of his teammates.

What's funny about McAdoo is that I can easily imagine him getting third team this year, instead of second like last year, despite the fact he's been a much better player this year than last.

FerryFor50
03-04-2014, 08:41 PM
What's funny about McAdoo is that I can easily imagine him getting third team this year, instead of second like last year, despite the fact he's been a much better player this year than last.

What's funnier about McAdoo is that he listened to Roy and didn't bolt after his freshman year.... Bwahahaha!

Newton_14
03-04-2014, 10:31 PM
It just looks like Harris has way more help than anyone imagined that he would. Harris is a really good, solid player, but his PR came from the 36 points against Duke. His team is also more balanced offensively in terms of who can produce with Brogdon and the rest, so Harris doesn't have to be the primary scorer, and their pace of play is so slow that he doesn't have the chances others have to rack up numbers.

I just cannot believe that Paige will win this award, and I don't think Warren should because his team is no good. Is that his fault? No, but Erik Green shouldn't have won last year either. I'd be okay if Fair one, I guess, since it is probable that Cuse will finish higher in the standings than Duke and he was pre-season POY anyway. Writers may as well make themselves look good.

Here's why my vote goes to Warren. He is in rarified air in a couple of categories and at least as of right now, State still has a chance to be a tourney team. They are no where near last year's Vatech team.

Warren is not only leading the league in scoring, he is leading the league in FG%. There are only two other players to ever accomplish that. One was Tim Duncan. Drawing a blank on the other at the moment. To accomplish that as a perimeter player is huge. In terms of number of 20 point an 30 point games at NC State he is now reaching numbers that only David Thompson and Rodney Monroe acheived. Plus he plays defense.

The 36 in the one point loss to the cheaters, and then the 41 point game in the win at Pitt last night seals it for me. Warren has earned it. No one on Duke, UVA. Cuse, deserves it more, and I have to give the nod to Warren over Paige due to consistency. Warren is just killing it.

vick
03-04-2014, 11:37 PM
With Syracuse faltering, Warren finally moved into the Pomeroy top 5, behind Parker, Brogdon, McDaniels, and Patterson. His system has a huge (IMO too large) team component--Green wasn't in his top 5 last year either.

By the way, for those who care, Parker is creeping up on McDermott...

Duvall
03-04-2014, 11:46 PM
What I meant to say, is that Paige is head and shoulders above the rest of his mediocre teammates, and makes average players look pretty darn good. That says something about a PG, plus he is quite a scoring threat. I thought we contained Paige very well in the first game-- he is a different beast now, and I fear he will torch us. I still have a good feeling about the game. We should win without too much trouble.

Losing Paige would decimate UNC. Losing Parker would hurt us a lot, but we could still compete. (Losing Warren would also decimate NCSU, so I guess those 2 would be my finalists for POY).

Okay, but if you put aside the completely unquantifiable "taking a player away" test, what's the argument for Paige over Malcolm Brogdon, let alone Parker? Unless you cherry pick his games as the media loves to do, the production just isn't superior.

PackMan97
03-05-2014, 08:22 AM
Warren is not only leading the league in scoring, he is leading the league in FG%. There are only two other players to ever accomplish that. One was Tim Duncan. Drawing a blank on the other at the moment.

I believe the name you are looking for is Wake Forest's, Josh Howard. First unanimous ACC POY vote since David Thompson.

CDu
03-05-2014, 09:39 AM
Okay, but if you put aside the completely unquantifiable "taking a player away" test, what's the argument for Paige over Malcolm Brogdon, let alone Parker? Unless you cherry pick his games as the media loves to do, the production just isn't superior.

Yeah, I can't understand why folks are pushing Paige. Yes, he had a fantastic start to the season. Yes, he's had one or two monster games to help his team win. But in conference, here are his numbers compared to another guy's numbers:

Paige: 15.8 ppg, 4.9 apg, 1.5 spg
Other guy: 13.8 ppg, 7.6 rpg

That other guy is McAdoo. People are saying that Paige is carrying this UNC team. But the stats just don't back that up. Yes, he has been the best player on that UNC team, but McAdoo is not far behind.

And it isn't just McAdoo. Brice Johnson is averaging 9 and 6 in about 20 mpg for them, and Leslie McDonald is averaging 10ppg. JP Tokoto is giving them 9 and 6 as well. Meeks is giving them 8 and 6 around 20 mpg too. They're getting about 31 points and 20 rebounds per game from three members of their five-man frontcourt rotation. And their other two wings are giving them about 20 ppg as well.

State is literally a one-man show with Warren. Paige has LOTS of help - it just hasn't come in the form of another star player. And in spite of that, Warren has been the MUCH more efficient and MUCH more consistent producer. Between those two, it seems like a no-brainer to go with Warren.

Slackerb
03-05-2014, 09:40 AM
Also, you can't judge Paige's POY worth based on the UNC/State game. I don't know if you watched many of his games, but he can be quite inconsistent. That was his career best game, an example of his potential, but not his current reality.

The difference is that on a weekly basis, Warren pretty much plays as well as he did in that game. You may not see it since many of his games aren't televised, but he's consistently great right now. Warren also draws the other teams best defense and attention, unlike others on this list. For example, in the UNC game, he scored 36 points on 13-25 shooting against Tokoto, UNC's best defender.

DBFAN
03-05-2014, 10:19 AM
I just can't get my head around this idea of Williams being COY and Paige being POY. This is what UNC does, they start off horrible in league play, then they finish up they way they were supposed to be to begin with and suddenly Williams has done some amazing Job, and Paige has led the way. Also extremely disappointed in front page article saying that Paige deserves it the most. Who makes that decision, do we actually think Duke would be the same team without Parker, or if State would have won more than 2 conference games without Warren. What I have seen of Piage is that when there is a decent but quick on ball defender he doesn't exactly blow up the stats, aka ND. I'm pretty sure if he had played the entire game against State and really wanted to Parker could have dropped 30 as well. But since we we beating them by 30, there wasn't really a need to push it, because everyone was scoring I am willing to wait until Sat to make a decision on whether or Not Paige is worthy of that honor. But if we beat UNC, we would be the only team to beat all 3 of the other top 4 teams in the league. That would be something worth considering. My thought is that the most consistent player over the year has to be CJ Fair, regardless of his teams slide, he has still continued to play well, dropping 28 last night. I don't know, not, trying to be rude or disagreeable but not of this talk about Paige happened until the State game. A game in which UNC barely survived against a team they beat handedly in Chapel hill. I just don't like taking a picture of one game and saying this is the player he is. Why not then take a pic of the ND game as well. He was almost non existent in that one, and almost coughed it up by missing his free throws.

Steven43
03-05-2014, 10:51 AM
I think Jabari is the front runner here. He is tops in the league in rebounding and second in scoring to Warren, and Jabari has tons of options around him. His defense is not great, and he turns the ball over too much, but he is easily the best player in the conference. Does that make him POY?

You say Jabari doesn't play great defense, but can't rebounding be considered a form of defense? He leads the league. Just a thought.

Matches
03-05-2014, 10:58 AM
Paige has been really good but he's not the POY and I doubt he would be in the conversation if he played for a different team. KJ McDaniels has IMO been better than Paige. Switch their jerseys and the conversation about the two of them would change significantly.

IMO it's gotta be Warren (best stats) or Jabari (really good stats on a contender). Apologies to Brogdon who I think is really excellent as well.

flyingdutchdevil
03-05-2014, 11:02 AM
You say Jabari doesn't play great defense, but can't rebounding be considered a form of defense? He leads the league. Just a thought.

In the whole scheme of things, yes, rebounding is an integral part of team defense. But, when most people talk of a player being a bad defender, I believe they mean man-on-man defending (or defending in a zone; whatever the coach uses).

Jabari is a great rebounder. He has Melo like rebounding skills. But his man-on-man D? It's not good. IMO, I think it's a combination of desire, energy protection (for offense), and not fully understanding defensive concepts.

Cameron
03-05-2014, 12:43 PM
In the whole scheme of things, yes, rebounding is an integral part of team defense. But, when most people talk of a player being a bad defender, I believe they mean man-on-man defending (or defending in a zone; whatever the coach uses).

Jabari is a great rebounder. He has Melo like rebounding skills. But his man-on-man D? It's not good. IMO, I think it's a combination of desire, energy protection (for offense), and not fully understanding defensive concepts.

While not yet great one on one, Jabari is actually quite good as a defender off the ball. For a natural small forward, he is an excellent help-side shot blocker (1.4 blocks per game, 9th best in the ACC) and plays the passing lanes uncommonly well for his size (1.1 steals per game, 8th best among ACC centers/forwards). The latter skill lends perfectly to Jabari's ability to command the court with the ball in his hands while in transition, as we have seen from him many times this season on fast-break opportunities.

Jabari's obviously a uniquely gifted and intelligent player who understands the game better than most kids his age. I think you nailed the reasons for why those traits don't always seem to translate defensively -- inconsistent desire, conservation of energy for offense (especially earlier in the season when Jabari was playing significant periods out of position and doing it all for us at the power forward/center spot) and untapped potential.

Wheat/"/"/"
03-05-2014, 12:45 PM
Midpoint of the ACC season I had Parker as POY. Now Paige has made a big push to get into the conversation along with Warren's steady play.

Less likely would be Ennis, Fair, Hood, McDaniels and Brogdon who are all having great seasons.

Before this last UNC/Duke game, I'd have to say my vote for POY would go to Warren. If we have an epic battle between Parker and Paige at Cameron like we saw between Paige and Warren, the winner of that battle could sneak in and take it away from Warren.

At this point in the season, I'll go with Warren. He's played great and been basically unguardable.

Wander
03-05-2014, 01:31 PM
People are saying that Paige is carrying this UNC team. But the stats just don't back that up. Yes, he has been the best player on that UNC team, but McAdoo is not far behind.


I think it's about value and fit. McAdoo has become a nice player, but UNC has other guys who can rebound and such. Can you imagine what UNC would look like if Paige went down to an injury? UNC is the 345th best free throw shooting team in the country... WITH Paige shooting 90%. There is one - one! - team out of 351 that shoots less threes than UNC, and that's with Paige being a really good three point shooter. UNC's third best shooter is either 8 of 31 or 3 of 11 on three point shots on the entire season. These numbers are laughable for anyone, but downright pathetic for a basketball powerhouse. I really do think how well UNC has been playing lately is largely a testament to Paige's value (though I'd probably still vote for Warren).

Cameron
03-05-2014, 02:25 PM
I just can't get my head around this idea of Williams being COY and Paige being POY. This is what UNC does, they start off horrible in league play, then they finish up they way they were supposed to be to begin with and suddenly Williams has done some amazing Job, and Paige has led the way.

Great, isn't it?

Turn the tables around on their ACC season -- 12-0 start, 1-4 finish -- and there are multiple threads on Inside Carolina today calling for Roy to step down. Pretty amusing.

All in all, the Tar Heels have done exactly what they were expected to do. People point to how "challenged" this team was early in ACC play and how Roy had to go to the chalkboard to devise some magical new formula to compensate for his rag-tag bunch of unknown McDonald's All-Americans. But UNC's early-season wins over Louisville, Michigan State and Kentucky tell a different story. They were no flukes. UNC had the talent to beat those teams and they did, and all of those victories came before the 0-3 start in ACC play.

Carolina has certainly hit its stride of late, and at just the right time. Let's not pretend, however, that it required some monumental coaching job in order to make it happen. The talent has been there all long. It just took the coaching staff an unusual amount of time to make it work.

A_boy_named_HOO
03-05-2014, 02:40 PM
TJ Warren. this is in no way to take away from Parker at Duke, Paige at UNC etc...this guy is a beast, and does not have the players around him that the others mentioned do. I think Parker and Hood take votes from each other, although Parkers double double line is awesone. I just think that Warren is clearly the most valuable player on a team that in most respects have played better than most predicted after all they lost. Eric Green like numbers on a team with a chance to go to the dance. I also am COMPLETELY sold on Mcdaniels at clemson, another great player that deserves some votes...scores and plays defense at a high level

What do you guys think? also, hope Warren, Parker, Hood, Paige and Mcdaniels all go pro, but that is for completely selfish reasons
WAHOOWA

JasonEvans
03-05-2014, 03:20 PM
I want to chime in with one thing that bugs me. This notion of, "look at how bad they would be if they did not have xxxxx." This year, xxxxx is Paige, McDaniel, and especially Warren. I get that each of them are hugely important to their team's success. I get that their teams would be pretty awful without them.

But isn't it sorta silly to judge a player based on how good his teammates would be without him? Just because Duke might happen to be fairly good even without Parker and Syracuse seems to have the personnel and scheme to allow it to succeed minus Ennis, does not make Ennis and Parker worse players or less deserving of Player of the Year, does it? In fact, one could argue that it is harder to stand out and be noticed on a team where there are teammates capable to stepping up and playing at a high level.

If Parker isn't "feeling it" one night, he knows Duke can often win without him putting up a big statistical night. If Hood, Dawkins, Rasheed, Cook or whoever is "on" for Duke, Parker need not take a bunch of shots to allow Duke to win. But, Warren is going to get the ball from State almost every time down the floor regardless of how "hot" his teammates may be. His stats are inflated as a result of his team constantly needing him to put up big stats. While you could call that an extra burden on him, you could also call it a massive stat-stuffing opportunity.

Here is a thought, if Warren were on Duke or Syracuse is there anyone who thinks he would get as many touches and average as many points as he does for State? No way!

I know my thoughts here run against conventional wisdom that it is easier to be successful when you have solid teammates to help out. To some extent I agree with that notion. I bet it is nice for Parker to know that the burden of winning each game does not fall completely on his shoulders. Still, I think there is another side to that coin, one that inflates the stats (and the reputation?) of great players surrounded by weak teammates. Again, I think the notion of selecting a player of the year based on how sucky his teammates are is a notion fraught with errors.

-Jason "all that said, Warren would get my POY vote if I had to vote right now" Evans

A_boy_named_HOO
03-05-2014, 04:03 PM
sorry for starting a 2nd thread of this, my bad

InSpades
03-05-2014, 04:37 PM
The amazing thing to me is that Parker isn't considered to be the #1 contender for ACC PotY (rightfully so you could argue) but he's generally considered a top 3 candidate for the Wooden Award. Even Jay Bilas (with his known anti-Duke bias :-P) has Parker as his 2nd best player in college basketball. If you try to come up w/ an All American 1st team you probably put Jabari on it (over Warren even). Strange how the conference rankings don't seem to jive with the national rankings as far as ACC players go.

Slackerb
03-05-2014, 04:59 PM
I want to chime in with one thing that bugs me. This notion of, "look at how bad they would be if they did not have xxxxx." This year, xxxxx is Paige, McDaniel, and especially Warren. I get that each of them are hugely important to their team's success. I get that their teams would be pretty awful without them.

But isn't it sorta silly to judge a player based on how good his teammates would be without him? Just because Duke might happen to be fairly good even without Parker and Syracuse seems to have the personnel and scheme to allow it to succeed minus Ennis, does not make Ennis and Parker worse players or less deserving of Player of the Year, does it? In fact, one could argue that it is harder to stand out and be noticed on a team where there are teammates capable to stepping up and playing at a high level.

If Parker isn't "feeling it" one night, he knows Duke can often win without him putting up a big statistical night. If Hood, Dawkins, Rasheed, Cook or whoever is "on" for Duke, Parker need not take a bunch of shots to allow Duke to win. But, Warren is going to get the ball from State almost every time down the floor regardless of how "hot" his teammates may be. His stats are inflated as a result of his team constantly needing him to put up big stats. While you could call that an extra burden on him, you could also call it a massive stat-stuffing opportunity.

Here is a thought, if Warren were on Duke or Syracuse is there anyone who thinks he would get as many touches and average as many points as he does for State? No way!

I know my thoughts here run against conventional wisdom that it is easier to be successful when you have solid teammates to help out. To some extent I agree with that notion. I bet it is nice for Parker to know that the burden of winning each game does not fall completely on his shoulders. Still, I think there is another side to that coin, one that inflates the stats (and the reputation?) of great players surrounded by weak teammates. Again, I think the notion of selecting a player of the year based on how sucky his teammates are is a notion fraught with errors.

-Jason "all that said, Warren would get my POY vote if I had to vote right now" Evans

Just to play Devil's advocate: Don't you think that there is an advantage to having better teammates? I can't overstate the importance of having a good PG to feed you the ball, or a good balanced offense that can spread the floor and give you space, other scoring threats on the team to distract the defense. Look at Warren last year. He had a much better cast around him, and shot a ridiculous 62.2%, including 52% from 3, as a freshman. Imagine if he had Lorenzo Brown (or Marcus Paige) feeding him the ball or Rodney Hood spacing out the floor and threatening the defense not to double him.

Ultimately it sounds like most here agree that unless something drastic happens, it's entertaining to talk about, but Warren is the frontrunner.

brevity
03-05-2014, 05:25 PM
But isn't it sorta silly to judge a player based on how good his teammates would be without him? Just because Duke might happen to be fairly good even without Parker and Syracuse seems to have the personnel and scheme to allow it to succeed minus Ennis, does not make Ennis and Parker worse players or less deserving of Player of the Year, does it? In fact, one could argue that it is harder to stand out and be noticed on a team where there are teammates capable to stepping up and playing at a high level.

If Parker isn't "feeling it" one night, he knows Duke can often win without him putting up a big statistical night. If Hood, Dawkins, Rasheed, Cook or whoever is "on" for Duke, Parker need not take a bunch of shots to allow Duke to win. But, Warren is going to get the ball from State almost every time down the floor regardless of how "hot" his teammates may be. His stats are inflated as a result of his team constantly needing him to put up big stats. While you could call that an extra burden on him, you could also call it a massive stat-stuffing opportunity.

Agreed, and I would add that even if Jabari Parker has an off night, nobody has informed the opponent's defense. If Parker is on the floor and one of his teammates is having the better performance, part of the reason is that Parker is still receiving most of the opposing team's attention. I could see an argument that Parker is less essential if he fouled out a lot and Duke won anyway, but fortunately that isn't the case.

And count me among those who don't really understand how one can visualize a team going through a season if its best player is magically extracted. How the hell does that work? There are probably statistical approximations out there, but most people who are trying this method aren't using them. It must take the same amount of imagination as all those neutral court losses Wichita State has this season against hypothetical BCS-level opponents.

1999ballboy
03-05-2014, 05:29 PM
I want to chime in with one thing that bugs me. This notion of, "look at how bad they would be if they did not have xxxxx." This year, xxxxx is Paige, McDaniel, and especially Warren. I get that each of them are hugely important to their team's success. I get that their teams would be pretty awful without them.

But isn't it sorta silly to judge a player based on how good his teammates would be without him? Just because Duke might happen to be fairly good even without Parker and Syracuse seems to have the personnel and scheme to allow it to succeed minus Ennis, does not make Ennis and Parker worse players or less deserving of Player of the Year, does it? In fact, one could argue that it is harder to stand out and be noticed on a team where there are teammates capable to stepping up and playing at a high level.

If Parker isn't "feeling it" one night, he knows Duke can often win without him putting up a big statistical night. If Hood, Dawkins, Rasheed, Cook or whoever is "on" for Duke, Parker need not take a bunch of shots to allow Duke to win. But, Warren is going to get the ball from State almost every time down the floor regardless of how "hot" his teammates may be. His stats are inflated as a result of his team constantly needing him to put up big stats. While you could call that an extra burden on him, you could also call it a massive stat-stuffing opportunity.

Here is a thought, if Warren were on Duke or Syracuse is there anyone who thinks he would get as many touches and average as many points as he does for State? No way!

I know my thoughts here run against conventional wisdom that it is easier to be successful when you have solid teammates to help out. To some extent I agree with that notion. I bet it is nice for Parker to know that the burden of winning each game does not fall completely on his shoulders. Still, I think there is another side to that coin, one that inflates the stats (and the reputation?) of great players surrounded by weak teammates. Again, I think the notion of selecting a player of the year based on how sucky his teammates are is a notion fraught with errors.

-Jason "all that said, Warren would get my POY vote if I had to vote right now" Evans

While I agree with all of this, I think many people are just using this logic to predict who will be the actual POY. And that, I think, has some merit, since the voters have been known to use this logic as well. It's sort of like predicting Oscar winners (yay, topical tangents!). I wouldn't use it to select my own personal team.

sagegrouse
03-05-2014, 06:43 PM
The amazing thing to me is that Parker isn't considered to be the #1 contender for ACC PotY (rightfully so you could argue) but he's generally considered a top 3 candidate for the Wooden Award. Even Jay Bilas (with his known anti-Duke bias :-P) has Parker as his 2nd best player in college basketball. If you try to come up w/ an All American 1st team you probably put Jabari on it (over Warren even). Strange how the conference rankings don't seem to jive with the national rankings as far as ACC players go.

Well, it will be interesting to see if Jabari is First Team All-American and NOT ACC POY. I don't expect T.J. Warren to 1st Team A-A.

PackMan97
03-06-2014, 11:20 AM
I believe the name you are looking for is Wake Forest's, Josh Howard. First unanimous ACC POY vote since David Thompson.

I was wrong. It's Horace Grant is the other player besides Tim Duncan and TJ Warren to lead the ACC in FG% and Scoring.

vick
03-09-2014, 08:53 PM
My final picks:

1st team:

Brogdon
McDaniels
Paige
Parker (Rookie of the year)
Warren (Player of the year)

2nd team:

Brown (is there an award for most improved player? It would be him--anyone figure Miami would almost outscore its opponents in conference play this year?)
Ennis
Harris
Hood
Patterson

3rd team:

Fair
Hanlan
Miller
Mitchell (Defensive player of the year)
Wells

brevity
03-09-2014, 08:54 PM
It's a good year to be a procrastinating ACC voter.

One day after Jabari Parker had 30 points, TJ Warren scored a career-high 42 points as NC State beat (http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400502901) Boston College. He added 13 rebounds, 3 assists, 3 steals, and a block. (Olivier Hanlan had 29 points for BC.)

NC State finishes 7th in the ACC -- the upper half now -- with a 9-9 record.

CDu
03-09-2014, 09:10 PM
Two things: one tangential point a nd one on-topic point.

1. Somewhere upthread someone made a comment that Syracuse has the personnel to succeed without Ennis. I think that is fairly inaccurate. Syracuse has just two guards that play. One of them is purely a catch-and-shoot, off-ball guy. Without Ennis they have no PG at all. He is absolutely critical to their success.

2. I think Warren effectively slammed the door shut on any debate over PoY. 83 points and 18 rebounds in his last two games, and State finishes in the top half of the conference (eliminating the "bad team" argument.

CR9
03-09-2014, 09:51 PM
My final picks:

1st team:

Brogdon
McDaniels
Paige
Parker (Rookie of the year)
Warren (Player of the year)

2nd team:

Brown (is there an award for most improved player? It would be him--anyone figure Miami would almost outscore its opponents in conference play this year?)
Ennis
Harris
Hood
Patterson

3rd team:

Fair
Hanlan
Miller
Mitchell (Defensive player of the year)
Wells

Swap Fair and Harris and I'd go with these, though I think Grant could be in there somewhere.

Newton_14
03-09-2014, 10:13 PM
Agree that Warren slammed the door shut tonight. I think it will be well deserved. Like I said earlier, leading the lead in scoring and FG% from the wing position is an incredible feat.

My top 5
Warren
Jabari
Paige
Fair
KJ McDaniels

CDu
03-10-2014, 10:33 AM
My All-ACC teams:

1st Team:
Warren (Player of the Year)
Parker (Freshman of the Year)
Paige
Brogdon
McDaniels

2nd Team:
Ennis
Fair
Hood
Hanlan
Patterson

3rd Team:
Atkins
Brown
Wells
McAdoo
Miller (Defensive Player of the Year)

Freshman team:
Parker
Ennis
Perrantes
Wilson
Young

FerryFor50
03-10-2014, 11:09 AM
My final picks:

1st team:

Brogdon
McDaniels
Paige
Parker (Rookie of the year)
Warren (Player of the year)

2nd team:

Brown (is there an award for most improved player? It would be him--anyone figure Miami would almost outscore its opponents in conference play this year?)
Ennis
Harris
Hood
Patterson

3rd team:

Fair
Hanlan
Miller
Mitchell (Defensive player of the year)
Wells

About time you came around ;)

My list looks like yours, except I would swap Harris with Fair and Hanlan with Brown.

My all freshman team:

Jabari Parker
Tyler Ennis
London Perrantes
Manu Lecomte
Michael Young

vick
03-10-2014, 11:22 AM
My list looks like yours, except I would swap Harris with Fair and Hanlan with Brown.


That's very reasonable, I had Harris and Brown at the bottom of who I thought should be second team. It's possible regarding Fair I fell into the Derek Jeter trap, where you think he's overrated by some people for so long (remember when people were touting Fair as a POY candidate?) that you wind up underrating him. I certainly think your list is more likely to be the one the media comes up with.

CDu
03-10-2014, 11:36 AM
That's very reasonable, I had Harris and Brown at the bottom of who I thought should be second team. It's possible regarding Fair I fell into the Derek Jeter trap, where you think he's overrated by some people for so long (remember when people were touting Fair as a POY candidate?) that you wind up underrating him. I certainly think your list is more likely to be the one the media comes up with.

I actually don't think Harris has put up an All-ACC season. Here are his ACC numbers:
11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg, 39.9 fg%, 42.1 3pt%.

Even if you exclude the game he basically missed due to injury, his numbers are only:
12.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 2.6 apg, 39.9 fg%, 42.1 3pt%.

Yes, UVa plays at a very deliberate pace. Yes, they were the best team in the ACC this year, and it is weird to not have multiple All-ACC players from the best team. Yes, Harris was a 1st team All-ACC player last year. But his season this season just doesn't quite cut it for me.

I agree with FerryFor50 that Fair and Hanlan should be 2nd team. I would be okay with Harris being in the discussion with McAdoo and Miller (and a few other guys) for the last spots on the 3rd team. But I just don't see his performance this year as being among the top ten players in the ACC.

vick
03-10-2014, 11:48 AM
I actually don't think Harris has put up an All-ACC season. Here are his ACC numbers:
11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg, 39.9 fg%, 42.1 3pt%.

Even if you exclude the game he basically missed due to injury, his numbers are only:
12.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 2.6 apg, 39.9 fg%, 42.1 3pt%.

Yes, UVa plays at a very deliberate pace. Yes, they were the best team in the ACC this year, and it is weird to not have multiple All-ACC players from the best team. Yes, Harris was a 1st team All-ACC player last year. But his season this season just doesn't quite cut it for me.

I agree with FerryFor50 that Fair and Hanlan should be 2nd team. I would be okay with Harris being in the discussion with McAdoo and Miller (and a few other guys) for the last spots on the 3rd team. But I just don't see his performance this year as being among the top ten players in the ACC.

The pro-Harris case vs. Hanlan, IMO, rests on the fact that Virginia was a much, much better defensive team than Boston College, and I think in no small part due to Harris (as well as Mitchell and Brogdon). Shouldn't defense matter? UVa was every bit as defensively dominant as we were on offense (and better offensively than we were on defense)--shouldn't that show up in the all-ACC teams?

FerryFor50
03-10-2014, 11:59 AM
The pro-Harris case vs. Hanlan, IMO, rests on the fact that Virginia was a much, much better defensive team than Boston College, and I think in no small part due to Harris (as well as Mitchell and Brogdon). Shouldn't defense matter? UVa was every bit as defensively dominant as we were on offense (and better offensively than we were on defense)--shouldn't that show up in the all-ACC teams?

Yea, but was UVA's defense a result of Joe Harris? Or more a result of Akil Mitchell, the pack line and other factors?

Harris is a serviceable defender, but I wouldn't tout his defense as All-ACC. His dRTG is 93.7:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/joe-harris--1.html

CJ Fair comes in with a 98.7 dRTG:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/cj-fair-1.html

Jabari Parker, not known for his defense, is at 97:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/jabari-parker-1.html

Mitchell has a dRTG of 88:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/akil-mitchell-1.html

Coming into this season, I thought Harris would dominate. But his overall production has dropped since last season. His minutes, points per game, shooting, rebounding... even his FT % is down. He regressed. He's the anti-McDermott.

CDu
03-10-2014, 12:03 PM
The pro-Harris case vs. Hanlan, IMO, rests on the fact that Virginia was a much, much better defensive team than Boston College, and I think in no small part due to Harris (as well as Mitchell and Brogdon). Shouldn't defense matter? UVa was every bit as defensively dominant as we were on offense (and better offensively than we were on defense)--shouldn't that show up in the all-ACC teams?

The problem is that there is no strong evidence to suggest that (a) BC was a bad defensive team due to Hanlan or (b) UVa was a good defensive team because of Harris.

I'd suggest that BC was bad defensively because they had no interior presence whatsoever. I think their guards Hanlan and Rahon) were actually capable defenders, but the other three spots on the floor were complete liabilities defensively. Is it fair to penalize Hanlan because his team stunk at defense? What if it is really Anderson, Jackson, Odio, and whatever scrubs are getting PT at SF through C that are causing BC to stink defensively?

As for UVa, I have seen a bunch of their games and I haven't come away thinking Harris was a really good (or bad) defender. I think what makes UVa good defensively is (a) they are TENACIOUS on the defensive boards, (b) they are really good defenders in the paint, and (c) Bennett runs a fantastic scheme. Should Harris be given credit for the fact that his team is good at defense? What if it is really Brogdon, Anderson, Tobey, Mitchell, Atkins, and Gill that are the driving forces of that great defense, and Harris is just okay?

I'm all for giving defense its due credit on the All-ACC teams. That's why I suggested that Miller make it, as I think he's the best defensive C in the conference. But it just seems like putting Harris on the All-ACC team is really just taking the next-best offensive player on UVa and giving him credit for his team's defense.

vick
03-10-2014, 12:33 PM
The problem is that there is no strong evidence to suggest that (a) BC was a bad defensive team due to Hanlan or (b) UVa was a good defensive team because of Harris.

I'd suggest that BC was bad defensively because they had no interior presence whatsoever. I think their guards Hanlan and Rahon) were actually capable defenders, but the other three spots on the floor were complete liabilities defensively. Is it fair to penalize Hanlan because his team stunk at defense? What if it is really Anderson, Jackson, Odio, and whatever scrubs are getting PT at SF through C that are causing BC to stink defensively?

As for UVa, I have seen a bunch of their games and I haven't come away thinking Harris was a really good (or bad) defender. I think what makes UVa good defensively is (a) they are TENACIOUS on the defensive boards, (b) they are really good defenders in the paint, and (c) Bennett runs a fantastic scheme. Should Harris be given credit for the fact that his team is good at defense? What if it is really Brogdon, Anderson, Tobey, Mitchell, Atkins, and Gill that are the driving forces of that great defense, and Harris is just okay?

I'm all for giving defense its due credit on the All-ACC teams. That's why I suggested that Miller make it, as I think he's the best defensive C in the conference. But it just seems like putting Harris on the All-ACC team is really just taking the next-best offensive player on UVa and giving him credit for his team's defense.

That's fine, except I don't think Hanlan has looked particularly capable defensively in the games I've watched, at least by all-ACC standards. But then shouldn't Mitchell be higher than third team? You didn't even have him on any of the teams, if I am looking at this correctly. Put differently, can you imagine a team winning the conference by two games and having a single spot on the all-ACC team (as you would have it) if they did it in a style like Duke this season, with exceptional offense? I don't think it would ever happen. So why should it happen with if the team does it with exceptional defense?

Here are the teams to win the conference outright since expansion in 2005:

UNC 2005 - May (1), Felton (1), J. Williams (3), McCants (3)
Duke 2006 - Redick (1), Williams (1),
UNC 2008 - Hansbrough (1), Ellington (2)
UNC 2009 - Hansbrough (1), Lawson (1), Green (3)
UNC 2011 - Zeller (2), Henson (2), Barnes (2), Marshall (3)
UNC 2012 - Zeller (1), Henson (1), Barnes (1), Marshall (2)
Miami 2013 - Larkin (1), Kadji (2)

All of them had at least two players in the top 10. I can accept reasonable disagreement with Harris (is the gap between #10 and #16 so large?). What I don't buy is that a team can win the conference rather easily, and somehow do it with only one of the top 15 players.

CDu
03-10-2014, 12:48 PM
What I don't buy is that a team can win the conference rather easily, and somehow do it with only one of the top 15 players.

See, I see no reason why this couldn't be the case, especially in a 15-team conference. Let's say the team had a top-5 player and then players 16-22. Wouldn't you think that that team would have a shot at the top seed? That team would have only the one representative on the all-conference team.

With UVa, the reason I didn't include Mitchell is because I think it is the system and the balance of talent (they are very good from 1-8 in their rotation) rather than the individual players that make their defense so good. I would put Mitchell on the All-defensive team for sure. But I don't think his individual defense is enough to offset his rather pedestrian offense.

vick
03-10-2014, 01:02 PM
See, I see no reason why this couldn't be the case, especially in a 15-team conference. Let's say the team had a top-5 player and then players 16-22. Wouldn't you think that that team would have a shot at the top seed? That team would have only the one representative on the all-conference team.

With UVa, the reason I didn't include Mitchell is because I think it is the system and the balance of talent (they are very good from 1-8 in their rotation) rather than the individual players that make their defense so good. I would put Mitchell on the All-defensive team for sure. But I don't think his individual defense is enough to offset his rather pedestrian offense.

Yeah, in theory, I agree that team would be really good. FWIW, I look at a variety of metrics that try to explain efficiency margin--Basketball-Reference's win shares (calculated both the way they do it for college and for the pros), a statistical plus-minus method (http://godismyjudgeok.com/DStats/aspm-and-vorp/), and so forth, and generally but not always they put Harris and Mitchell in the top-15. PER, which doesn't try to account for defense aside from steals, blocks, and rebounds, doesn't (the others adjust the levels of players up based on team defense that isn't accounted for in those stats--like the dRTG Ferry referenced). But it's for sure an inexact process, and individual stats can probably only explain half, at most, of a player's defensive value. For example, Fair in particular tends to look pretty bad on these sorts of things (not top 15), but I think he's a pretty valuable defender in their zone.

CDu
03-10-2014, 01:05 PM
Yeah, in theory, I agree that team would be really good. FWIW, I look at a variety of metrics that try to explain efficiency margin--Basketball-Reference's win shares (calculated both the way they do it for college and for the pros), a statistical plus-minus method (http://godismyjudgeok.com/DStats/aspm-and-vorp/), and so forth, and generally but not always they put Harris and Mitchell in the top-15. PER, which doesn't try to account for defense aside from steals, blocks, and rebounds, doesn't (the others adjust the levels of players up based on team defense that isn't accounted for in those stats--like the dRTG Ferry referenced). But it's for sure an inexact process, and individual stats can probably only explain half, at most, of a player's defensive value. For example, Fair in particular tends to look pretty bad on these sorts of things (not top 15), but I think he's a pretty valuable defender in their zone.

Totally agree on the bolded part. I also agree with one of your earlier comments about the difference in player #10 vs player #16 (I might even extend that all the way to player #20 or so) is fairly small this year.