PDA

View Full Version : Take those freshman stats with a grain of salt



MarcStarnes
01-05-2015, 05:02 PM
The article today by Barry Jacobs notes how impressive Okafor's freshman stats are, and he compares them to other amazing centers of the past (Duncan, Gminski, Sampson, Brand...). As a longtime fan of Jacobs (yet also a statistician) I have to add a brief comment on how to better interpret these comparisons.

In summary, today's "stud-big-guy-likely-one-and-done" players are in a different world than players of 15+ years ago. They are relied on more by their teams, because some of their best potential teammates are already in the NBA, and thus they the freshmen are asked by their coach to shoulder more of the scoring load.

Gminski would have scored more his freshman year if Spanarkel had gone pro. Heck, JJ Redick would not pass Dawkins in scoring Duke in scoring if Williams, Boozer and Dunleavy (and Deng) had not gone pro. Tyler Hansbrough would not be UNC's scoring leader, passing Phil Ford, if Mccants, May, Felton etc hadn't turned pro. And Okafor would be scoring less today if Parker, Hood, and Rivers were on the team. The list of hypotheticals could go on and on....

This doesn't wipe away the good info Barry Jacobs showed, but it is important to adjust for reasons why a record is broken, beyond a player's awesome talent/performance. In a world where great players go pro, and are replaced by great freshmen, it is not easy to compare today's great freshman to other freshman who played with studly upperclassman.

See also: 16 game NFL seasons (vs 14), 12 game college football seaons (vs 11), 3 point FGs introduced (see Redick vs Dawkins), baseball steriods.....

BTW, Jahlil, I love you big man!

BigWayne
01-05-2015, 07:10 PM
Another reason to adjust your level of attention when listening to broadcasts as these type of stats get mentioned. Of course, when the color guy is spouting a lot of these stats, it usually means Duke has a comfortable lead and he is filling time. :)

dukelifer
01-05-2015, 10:34 PM
The article today by Barry Jacobs notes how impressive Okafor's freshman stats are, and he compares them to other amazing centers of the past (Duncan, Gminski, Sampson, Brand...). As a longtime fan of Jacobs (yet also a statistician) I have to add a brief comment on how to better interpret these comparisons.

In summary, today's "stud-big-guy-likely-one-and-done" players are in a different world than players of 15+ years ago. They are relied on more by their teams, because some of their best potential teammates are already in the NBA, and thus they the freshmen are asked by their coach to shoulder more of the scoring load.

Gminski would have scored more his freshman year if Spanarkel had gone pro. Heck, JJ Redick would not pass Dawkins in scoring Duke in scoring if Williams, Boozer and Dunleavy (and Deng) had not gone pro. Tyler Hansbrough would not be UNC's scoring leader, passing Phil Ford, if Mccants, May, Felton etc hadn't turned pro. And Okafor would be scoring less today if Parker, Hood, and Rivers were on the team. The list of hypotheticals could go on and on....

This doesn't wipe away the good info Barry Jacobs showed, but it is important to adjust for reasons why a record is broken, beyond a player's awesome talent/performance. In a world where great players go pro, and are replaced by great freshmen, it is not easy to compare today's great freshman to other freshman who played with studly upperclassman.

See also: 16 game NFL seasons (vs 14), 12 game college football seaons (vs 11), 3 point FGs introduced (see Redick vs Dawkins), baseball steriods.....

BTW, Jahlil, I love you big man!

The best talent on other teams leave early as well. Jahlil has not really played against any elite bigs as most go to the NBA. I suspect he will have some challenges making all those moves against the top NBA guys. He is a talent but he is not a finished product.

Ichabod Drain
01-06-2015, 09:04 AM
The best talent on other teams leave early as well. Jahlil has not really played against any elite bigs as most go to the NBA. I suspect he will have some challenges making all those moves against the top NBA guys. He is a talent but he is not a finished product.

I agree it will be harder for Jahlil to make some of his moves in the NBA but I don't think it will hurt him that much. To me the best skill Okafor has isn't his footwork, post moves, or even his soft touch. It's his ability to read the defense and patiently make the decison of how to best handle the situation. He doesn't make many mistakes and takes very few bad shots. As long as he keeps that attribute of his game I think he'll be a great player from day one of his NBA career.

CajunDevil
01-06-2015, 09:33 AM
Jahlil is the most offensively skilled big man I've ever seen at this age - including Sampson, Olajuwon, Ewing, Shaq, and Duncan. As Ichabod pointed out, Jah's ability to patiently read a defense and consistently make the right play is something that usually takes several years in the NBA to develop. As legendary NBA GM Bob Bass told me 20+ years ago - "only a few players in this league (referring to NBA) KNOW how to play..." Jah knows how to play in the sense that Bass was referencing. It's not about his numbers it's about his feel, his understanding of the right pass, the type of pass, the speed and positioning of the pass, the spacing and what moves are available to him, etc. it's truly remarkable to see this development in a 19-year old.

Atldukie79
01-06-2015, 10:03 AM
Comparisons across eras always present challenges.

Just as the original post in this thread points out the fact that freshmen studs of the past 15 years or so are relied upon more heavily because their talented brethren are in the NBA rather than teammates, and thus skew comparisons, I must also point out another skew in perception that is not often mentioned.

We love to talk about all time lists (JJ scoring record at Duke) but we rarely acknowledge the discrepancy in number of games played across eras. The studs from the 60's Heyman, Mullins, Marin, Verga and other played 3 seasons of 25 +/- games. Their career stats can never match the totals of the 4 year players with 35+ games per year.

Now with the "one and done's", I have to wonder whether the career scoring stats at Duke may start to gather dust as the 4 year studs' numbers are out of reach.

kAzE
01-06-2015, 11:31 AM
Eh, I'm not buying it, at least not for Okafor. He'd have been a starter from day one regardless of what era he played in. Johnny Dawkins played in the 80s and started as a freshman. Some guys are just good. Okafor would have started at center even if the college versions of Elton Brand, Shane Battier, and Mason Plumlee were on this team.

Mmm . . . could you imagine trying to score on a lineup with Okafor, Brand, and Battier on the floor?

jv001
01-06-2015, 12:35 PM
Eh, I'm not buying it, at least not for Okafor. He'd have been a starter from day one regardless of what era he played in. Johnny Dawkins played in the 80s and started as a freshman. Some guys are just good. Okafor would have started at center even if the college versions of Elton Brand, Shane Battier, and Mason Plumlee were on this team.

Mmm . . . could you imagine trying to score on a lineup with Okafor, Brand, and Battier on the floor?

Yeh, or Okafor, Laettner and Grant Hill. Jah would have started on any Duke team. A better question would which player would rather have for 4 years, Christian or Jah? I'd say the teams would have a good shot at winning multiple NCAA championships whoever you choose. GoDuke!

MarcStarnes
01-06-2015, 02:40 PM
Yeh, or Okafor, Laettner and Grant Hill. Jah would have started on any Duke team. A better question would which player would rather have for 4 years, Christian or Jah? I'd say the teams would have a good shot at winning multiple NCAA championships whoever you choose. GoDuke!

Yes, Jahlil would start on any Duke team. The issue isn't starting vs not starting.

The issue I mentioned is that if upperclass studs had remained in college, then the freshmen would be accomplishing less.

If Jabari, Rodney, and Austin returned to this team, then they would start along with Jahlil, and would display their growth and experience; and with all the offense that Jabari, Rodney, and Austin would provide in 2014-15, then Jahlil's number of (hypothetical) shot attempts per game in 2014-15 would be less than it has really been this year, and thus his PPG would be less.

This is nothing negative about Jahlil. He is amazing!! But his contributions would be less if the other guys hadn't turned pro.

Durant would have scored less on the 2010 USA team if Lebron, Kobe, Carmelo, etc had played on that team. Nothing negative on Durant. He was a dream in 2010. But having stud teammates means that you shoot less.

Marc

InSpades
01-06-2015, 02:54 PM
Yes, Jahlil would start on any Duke team. The issue isn't starting vs not starting.

The issue I mentioned is that if upperclass studs had remained in college, then the freshmen would be accomplishing less.

If Jabari, Rodney, and Austin returned to this team, then they would start along with Jahlil, and would display their growth and experience; and with all the offense that Jabari, Rodney, and Austin would provide in 2014-15, then Jahlil's number of (hypothetical) shot attempts per game in 2014-15 would be less than it has really been this year, and thus his PPG would be less.

This is nothing negative about Jahlil. He is amazing!! But his contributions would be less if the other guys hadn't turned pro.

Durant would have scored less on the 2010 USA team if Lebron, Kobe, Carmelo, etc had played on that team. Nothing negative on Durant. He was a dream in 2010. But having stud teammates means that you shoot less.

Marc

I buy the "he's playing against worse competition" argument, that one is hard to debate. Though it would impact so few games... how many teams on our schedule are actually impacted by players leaving early? Even Wisconsin doesn't seem impacted that much...

I think the "he'd have to defer to upperclassmen" argument is thin. Everything would be different if guys were staying 4 years. Extend that argument to Calipari teams and you get arguments like how would Derrick Rose play w/ John Wall? (they probably wouldn't). How would Kentucky's big men feel playing behind Cousins and Noel? They also wouldn't. These are things that just wouldn't happen... Kentucky couldn't recruit 5+ studs every year if they were all staying 4 years. Just like Duke wouldn't get all of the same players... would Winslow come to Duke knowing he'd play behind Jabari and Rodney? Would we have Quinn and Tyus if Kyrie was still around? The teams would be entirely different. Maybe we don't even get Okafor. They hypothetical world where Kyrie, Jabari and Okafor all play on the same team would be very very different.

mpj96
01-06-2015, 03:34 PM
Also worth noting -- Jah has only played in one conference game so far and that against BC. Our preseason schedule wasn't all cupcakes, but was still a bit easier than our ACC regular season schedule.

BobBender
01-06-2015, 06:09 PM
Comparisons across eras always present challenges.

Just as the original post in this thread points out the fact that freshmen studs of the past 15 years or so are relied upon more heavily because their talented brethren are in the NBA rather than teammates, and thus skew comparisons, I must also point out another skew in perception that is not often mentioned.

We love to talk about all time lists (JJ scoring record at Duke) but we rarely acknowledge the discrepancy in number of games played across eras. The studs from the 60's Heyman, Mullins, Marin, Verga and other played 3 seasons of 25 +/- games. Their career stats can never match the totals of the 4 year players with 35+ games per year.

Now with the "one and done's", I have to wonder whether the career scoring stats at Duke may start to gather dust as the 4 year studs' numbers are out of reach.


The premise that records will gather dust because it's a new era of one-and-done's at Duke is something with which I don't agree. I do think K wants to win NC's and in the 5 or 6 years he has left, this is the best roadmap to get to that goal.
But it is a bit presumptuous to think his successor will be able to immediately attract OAD talent. If for no other reason than that, this could be a rather brief era with the present recruiting approach

Des Esseintes
01-07-2015, 12:30 AM
The premise that records will gather dust because it's a new era of one-and-done's at Duke is something with which I don't agree. I do think K wants to win NC's and in the 5 or 6 years he has left, this is the best roadmap to get to that goal.
But it is a bit presumptuous to think his successor will be able to immediately attract OAD talent. If for no other reason than that, this could be a rather brief era with the present recruiting approach

Expectations for K's successor will be completely unreasonable. However, I think it's completely reasonable to expect Duke to continue to be in the running for the best talent. Perhaps not the overwhelming trove we've enjoyed at times under K, but high-end talent on the regular. We'd BETTER keep getting OADs.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
01-07-2015, 09:34 AM
I think no matter who replaces K, Duke remains a top program in hoops. We may have a down year here or there as we adjust to life without K, but his replacement will most likely be someone he hand picked and trained. Johnny Dawkins, Tommy Amaker, Chris Collins, Wojo, Capel, maybe even Quinn Snyder. The possibilities are fun to think about, but I prefer to stay here in the K era as long as humanly possible. Lots of smart folks on here, maybe we can find a way to transplant Ks coaching talent into someones brain and not skip a beat?