Interesting stats from draftexpress

[bajaden]

I posted just the graphs that summed up the PF's being rated and not their scoring or rebounding stats.


Player Efficiency Rating

Player efficiency rating was created by John Hollinger to measure the overall impact of a player in one catch-all stat. The rating uses an average PER of 15 derived from the NBA, which leads to inflated PERs for top college players in some cases. Michael Beasley has an astronomical rating of 39.3 on the season, which emphasizes the degree to which he dominated college basketball ranks this seasons. Kevin Love impressively comes in second on this list, and his PER of 36.4 ranks second of any player we have looked at in our statistical comparison series. Richard Hendrix and Ryan Anderson also ranked in the top 5. D.J. White and J.J. Hickson scored towards the top of the list as well. Anthony Randolph again does not impress here. It’s unfair to rank players from different leagues (an average player—ranking a 15 in the Euroleague or ULEB Cup-- is far different than an average player in the extremely large pool of players in the NCAA), which helps explain the poor placement of the European players at the bottom.

Efficiency Per 40-Minutes

The "EFF" Statistic was created by the NBA to measure the overall statistical production of a player on the court. It adds up all the positive stats a player accumulates and subtracts all the negatives. For all intents and purposes, this stat makes more sense when calculated over 40 minutes rather than per game. Beasley and Love again dominate in this category, followed by Hendrix and Anderson. Darrell Arthur, Anthony Randolph, and James Mays all sit near the bottom of the list.

Win Score Per 40-Minutes

David Berri’s statistic is created by taking PTS + TRB + STL + .5* BLK + .5*AST - FGA - .5*FTA - TO - .5*PF / Min * 40. The average win score for an NBA power forward is 8.6, but the number will typically be higher for a college player. No suspense here, as Beasley and Love again rank at the top. Richard Hendrix, Joey Dorsey and D.J. White complete the top five, while Anthony Randolph and Davon Jefferson rank at the bottom. Darrell Arthur’s placement is nothing to write home about either.

 

[Bricklayer]

Not going to argue that the above stats are not worth posting, however while normally I would repeat my normal observation that I consider Hollinger and his PER fetish to be accountant-in-lieu-of-actual-basketball-knowledge hooey, but in this case that observation is given extra weight for all the stuff-everything-together statistical compilations just by the extreme differences in conferences, strength of schedule, wildly different paces and systems that populate the college landscape, and the entirely different world/rules over in Europe. That's true to some degree in the NBA, where a 20ppg scorer in Phoenix is not at all the same thing as a 20ppg scorer in Cleveland. But in college it can truly be apples and oranges, let alone when we start throwing in European guys. Add in different ages, growth potential vs. guys who are already mature...and those sorts of combo stats are at best tip of the iceberg in this situation.

 

[bajaden]

Not going to argue that the above stats are not worth posting, however while normally I would repeat my normal observation that I consider Hollinger and his PER fetish to be accountant-in-lieu-of-actual-basketball-knowledge hooey, but in this case that observation is given extra weight for all the stuff-everything-together statistical compilations just by the extreme differences in conferences, strength of schedule, wildly different paces and systems that populate the college landscape, and the entirely different world/rules over in Europe. That's true to some degree in the NBA, where a 20ppg scorer in Phoenix is not at all the same thing as a 20ppg scorer in Cleveland. But in college it can truly be apples and oranges, let alone when we start throwing in European guys. Add in different ages, growth potential vs. guys who are already mature...and those sorts of combo stats are at best tip of the iceberg in this situation.

I would agree for the most part, but it is one more tool to use. The WIN scores have in the past been a pretty good indicator of a players ability. But your right, you will sometimes see players no one has ever heard of ranked pretty high in the WIN scores.
To me, where its valuable is when you compare players that played in similar conferences with similar difficulty.

 

[CruzDude]

I'm a stats freak (duh!) and tried to understand those stats over the weekend then equate them to the NBA potential of many of the 4-5position players, but could not figure out what they mean to a GM/PlayerPersonnel/Coach guy in lieu of: does he have an NBA body? is he aggressive enough to make it down low? does he have BB smarts to know what to do under various situations? and does he have NBA type skills without requiring a lot of coaching.

You look at the above PER list yet you only see 4 guys, Beasley, Love, Arthur and Randolph, who show up on ANY top 20 or top 25 list. There is a reason and the list don't or rather can't show it: the NBA ready element.

You can be incredibly efficient in college but that same guy in the NBA is on just about everybody's bench, if he even gets that far. Even in the NBA the pts/rebs/stls per 48 min table shows a lot of guys who are bench types near the top of the table list.

As Bajaden says, "...it is another set of stats" but I add it has no real NBA elements and too many "normalized" elements. Fun tho' to see.

 

[Gary]

I like per40, and per40 paced stats. Anytime you get a guy that's paced per40 is better than his per40 it's a major plus in my books.

 

[bajaden]

I'm a stats freak (duh!) and tried to understand those stats over the weekend then equate them to the NBA potential of many of the 4-5position players, but could not figure out what they mean to a GM/PlayerPersonnel/Coach guy in lieu of: does he have an NBA body? is he aggressive enough to make it down low? does he have BB smarts to know what to do under various situations? and does he have NBA type skills without requiring a lot of coaching.

You look at the above PER list yet you only see 4 guys, Beasley, Love, Arthur and Randolph, who show up on ANY top 20 or top 25 list. There is a reason and the list don't or rather can't show it: the NBA ready element.

You can be incredibly efficient in college but that same guy in the NBA is on just about everybody's bench, if he even gets that far. Even in the NBA the pts/rebs/stls per 48 min table shows a lot of guys who are bench types near the top of the table list.

As Bajaden says, "...it is another set of stats" but I add it has no real NBA elements and too many "normalized" elements. Fun tho' to see.

Damm, I was really hoping you could explain it to me.

 

[BawLa]

These stats just confirm what I was saying earlier in the year...that we need to find a way to draft Richard Hendrix.

 

[bajaden]

These stats just confirm what I was saying earlier in the year...that we need to find a way to draft Richard Hendrix.

I sort of figured you would jump in on this one. I like Hendrix and would love to pick him up in the second round. Unfortunally I don't think he will be there then. So, unless we find a way to aquire another first, I don't think we'll be seeing him in a Kings uniform..

A couple of guys I like in the second round are Mike Taylor, a pt guard from the DL who played very well in the Pre-draft camp, and Gary Forbes, a small forward that is sort of flying under the radar. Both these guys are very athletic, and both are pretty good defenders and good shooters. God knows we don't need any of those things.

 

[fnordius]

It's unfortunate that no (publicly available) stats kept on college players show much about their defensive abilities.

 

[Entity]

These stats just confirm what I was saying earlier in the year...that we need to find a way to draft Richard Hendrix.

Richard Hendrix is 6'8 on his best day he may at best be as good as Kenny Thomas one day.

 

[bajaden]

Richard Hendrix is 6'8 on his best day he may at best be as good as Kenny Thomas one day.

Actually, according to the pre-draft measurements, he's 6' 7 3/4" in shoes. Totally different type of player than Thomas though. A lot more rugged and not nearly as quick. Probably a much better post defender.

 

[BawLa]

Richard Hendrix is 6'8 on his best day he may at best be as good as Kenny Thomas one day.

Oh please . Hendrix could probably produce more than KT's career average in less minutes in his rookie year. If not, by year two. And Richard can actually play defense, something your dear Kenny could never do.

I like Hendrix because he would give us some size and toughness in our frontcourt instantly. If Jawai and Dorsey don't fall to our 2nd rounders then Hendrix would be a good option IMO. And Hendrix has less question marks than those two so he might be a safer pick.

 

[nbrans]

More interesting numbers now that the Center numbers are posted:

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Just-By-The-Numbers--Evaluating-This-Year-s-Center-Crop-2941/

Overall, kind of reveals what we know: Thompson, Brook Lopez, and Speights fare well offensively, Thompson and Speights are best on the boards, McGee, Hibbert and Robin Lopez are the best shotblockers. Hibbert, B. Lopez, Thompson and Speights are very effecient. McGee is a good outside shooter who turns the ball over too much.

 

[GeraldWallace#3]

More interesting numbers now that the Center numbers are posted:

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Just-By-The-Numbers--Evaluating-This-Year-s-Center-Crop-2941/

Overall, kind of reveals what we know: Thompson, Brook Lopez, and Speights fare well offensively, Thompson and Speights are best on the boards, McGee, Hibbert and Robin Lopez are the best shotblockers. Hibbert, B. Lopez, Thompson and Speights are very effecient. McGee is a good outside shooter who turns the ball over too much.

Man, after looking at this I see Speights and Thompson as BIG possibilities. I know those numbers are....well....just numbers, but im liking these numbers