Comments/questions? Leave them below or e-mail hoopinion (at) yahoo (dot) com.
My draft bona fides: 2005 Preview and Grades.
Loosely organized and incomplete 2006 player rankings here.
Dick Vitale, his half-genuine enthusiasm notwithstanding, doesn't know that much about college basketball. He knows less about professional basketball and he knows nothing about international basketball. On the last count, he knows even less than I do as I'm more than willing to make snap judgments about international players based on 90 seconds of grainy highlights immediately after they're drafted. His annual involvement during the NBA Draft broadcast should have kept us from being surprised that ESPN would hire Dave O'Brien and Marcelo Balboa as their lead World Cup broadcast team.
1. TORONTO: Andrea Bargnani -- I've never seen him play, but he played fairly significant minutes in the Euroleague at the age of 20 and shot 59.6 eFG%. So he's good. That his statistics both in Euroleague and Lega A show a limited rebounder who almost never creates a good shot for a teammate (39 assists in 106 games according to nba.com). So he's a complimentary player for the foreseeable future. Toronto needs those and if Bargnani can contribute immediately he may make either Charlie Villanueva or Joey Graham expendable in the pursuit of a point guard.
2. PORTLAND: LaMarcus Aldridge -- Aldridge is going to be a good player on both ends of the court. For all the focus on his offensive game, he has tremendous potential as defensive player as well. His steal percentages have been strong both seasons at Texas to go along with his excellent blocked shot percentage. He also rebounds well on both ends.
People worry about his tendency to disappear for stretches last year, but he almost always played well against the best competition Texas faced and he never had a point guard to get him the ball. That Aldridge deferred shots and space at times to PJ Tucker is not necessarily a mark against Aldridge.
When the trade's announced by someone other than Andy Katz, I'll make it official here. Khryapa?
3. CHARLOTTE: Adam Morrison -- I expect him to be a bigger Jeff Hornacek, though even that might flatter Morrison as he can't pass as well as Hornacek. One could even argue just how much better Morrison is on the glass than Hornacek was. For all his limitations, Morrison is obviously a clever player and should be a good enough scorer to stay in the league long enough to learn the tricks that officials ignore that poor defenders use to keep themselves from being a complete liability to their teams.
At current count, Charlotte has two point guards (Felton and Knight), two power forwards (Brezec and May), two small forwards (Wallace and Morrison), and Emeka Okafor. It's an interesting method of roster composition. Unlike, the Hawks, I have some faith that Charlotte will turn their depth at certain positions into a functional basketball team.
4. CHICAGO: Tyrus Thomas -- Even though I think Aldridge is a safer pick than Thomas, should Thomas develop any sort of an offensive game either he or Randy Foye will be the best player to come out of this draft. Worst case scenario, Thomas will block a ton of shots and grab even more rebounds. Plus, Hinrich and whichever other guard sticks around in Chicago will appreciate having a big man around who can catch a pass and dunk it when running their constant pick-and-rolls.
5. ATLANTA: Shelden Williams -- I like Shelden Williams. A month ago, I thought he'd be a great pick in the middle of the first round for Chicago or Indiana or Washington. I guess the benefit for Atlanta here is that it slightly increases their options in brokering a sign-and-trade involving Al Harrington but, really, this is just the second year in a row they should have traded down and picked up more of the necessary pieces to build a basketball team. A real point guard from the D-League could still improve this team.
6. PORTLAND: Brandon Roy -- Roy will become a solid starter immediately, become an All-Star within five years, and maintain that level of play for five to seven years. Roy's passing and ball-handling could aid Jarrett Jack in his development.
7. MINNESOTA: Randy Foye -- Foye is going to be an excellent player. He can do pretty much whatever he wants on the offensive end including handle the ball a lot without turning it over. He and Garnett will love each other. Ricky Davis will look quite out of place. The last time Minnesota acquired a good player in the lottery ('96, Marbury) he came via draft-day trade as well.
8. MEMPHIS: Rudy Gay -- The ESPN talking heads can compare Gay to Jordan and Grant Hill if they want, but both those guys deferred to upperclassmen who lead their teams to national championships. Last year's UConn team was more like the '97 Kansas team that failed to get out of the Sweet Sixteen with four first-round draft picks. Unlike Paul Pierce (another guy who was young relative to his college class), though, Gay never established himself as the obvious best player on the team for any length of time this season. Marcus Williams is a little better than Jacque Vaughn as far as overrated college point guards go, but Gay is far too talented to provide any reasonable person with evidence to make the case that Williams is a better player than he is.
9. GOLDEN STATE: Patrick O'Bryant -- Make no mistake, Patrick O'Bryant is a project. Bradley got better when he became eligible, but he did not lead them to the tournament. Had the Braves relied on O'Bryant to be their best player they would have made their post-season run toward MSG. He's a shot-blocker and rebounder who will need to develop an offensive game. Right now, he's a more athletic Adonal Foyle.
10. SEATTLE: Saer Sene -- I have no idea how he fits on a roster with Robert Swift and Johan Petro. The Sonics must really not like playing Nick Collison at center. I can't blame them for that, but I'm not sure that they've found an immediately better option as of yet.
11. ORLANDO: JJ Redick -- Personally, I would have taken Ronnie Brewer, an immediate offensive upgrade over DeShawn Stevenson who would match Stevenson's defenseive production fairly quickly, but this is a great fit for Redick and still improves the Magic. His relative lack of athleticism has been blown out of proportion (assuming his back does, in fact, still work) following the LSU loss in the NCAA Tournament. Redick will never be the focus of a defense again. Jameer Nelson and Dwight Howard will insure a fair number of open looks. There may be some problems created playing Redick and Turkoglu at the same time, but they're both smart players and should figure things out.
I will, however, be rooting for Travis Diener during shooting contests at practice.
12. NO/OKC: Hilton Armstrong -- Armstrong's destined to be a career backup. His rebounding ability is overrated as his production slants heavily toward the defensive glass. He's everything he's advertised to be as a shot blocker. There's no real difference between Armstrong and O'Bryant right now and there are better basketball players still on the board.
13. CHICAGO: Thabo Sefolosha -- Is the Serie A below the the Lega A in Italian basketball? Bargnani played in Lega A, Sefolosha played in Serie A and looks to have played well, showing a marked improvement as a three-point shooter this year. On the heels of the Nocioni signing, Chicago's international scouting gets the benefit of the doubt.
14. UTAH: Ronnie Brewer -- Ronnie Brewer's a sure thing. He's Marquis Daniels only we know he's coming. The only thing he lacks now is a consistent perimeter shot. He can shoot free throws effectively (and often), handle the ball, pass, and his defensive skills should develop rapidly once he gets some time in a man-to-man system.
15. NO/OKC: Cedric Simmons -- Here's one of those guys that offers you much the same today that O'Bryant and Armstrong offer while you giving some concrete hopes for offensive improvement. Simmons shot a ton of free throws last year as NC State's lone post threat. His free throw rate increased during ACC play before taking a dip in post-season play. Ideally, he'd have demonstrated greater rebounding prowess in college but I suspect that Herb Sendek artificially deflated Simmons' offensive rebounding numbers.
16. PHILADELPHIA: Rodney Carney -- Shawne Williams must be a real knucklehead to get drafted below Carney, the rarest hybrid, an extremely athletic three-point specialist. Carney should provide decent-to-good defense on the wing to go with his shooting, but he really hasn't demonstrated any ability to handle or pass the ball.
His draft night revelation that he refused to play AAU ball makes me a fan of his and a greater fan of his high school coach. The AAU system is leading the ruination of American basketball.
17. INDIANA: Shawne Williams -- Shot selection kept Shawne Williams from being an All-American candidate. The rest of his game (work ethic questions aside) is extremely precocious. He can shoot (79 percent on free throws), rebound, and, though a raw defender (back to basketball IQ and work ethic concerns) he managed a block or a steal on eight percent of the defensive possessions for which he was on the court.
I think Darius Washington magnified Williams' problems last year. A good point guard would have limited the number of decisions Williams had to make.
18. WASHINGTON: Oleksiy Pecherov -- Looks to be a finesse, rebounding center. I see a little Raef LaFrentz in the highlights.
19. SACRAMENTO: Quincy Douby -- He's somewhere between Ben Gordon and Salim Stoudamire on the spectrum of undersized shooting guards who have some uses. Both his assist-to-turnover ratio (1.8:1) and his shooting percentages (51.5% on 2PTFGA and 40.1% on 3PTFGA) were outstanding considering that everyone knew he was handling the ball until he shot or drew enough attention for one of his teammates to have an outside chance at making a shot on nearly every possession. He'll never be a point guard but he might score enough and be smart enough to steal minutes at the point with the second unit.
20. NEW YORK: Renaldo Balkman -- Huh. A perfect Larry Brown player. Balkman's Adrian Griffin without the European sabbatical to start his career. I don't see what he brings to a bad team, but Balkman's work in the margins might make a difference for a good team.
21. BOSTON: Rajon Rondo -- No, he can't shoot and, yes, he had a pretty bad sophomore year but I think he's the best point guard in this draft unless you count Randy Foye as a point guard. He will immediately provide good defense, rebound like Jason Kidd, and push the ball up the court.
I think Rondo struggled last year because lacked the ability to be the first option on a good college team and lost confidence in his teammates. The first of those problems is not going to occur with any NBA team and the second, one hopes, is a problem of maturity rather than temperment. Rondo's not good enough to make his teammates better but his skills compliment good players should they surround him.
22. NEW JERSEY: Marcus Williams -- He's overrated, but he's as useful as a slow guy who doesn't shoot a good percentage from anywhere but the free throw line. His rebounding prowess is overblown and he looks like a smart player on the court which leads optimists to hope that l'affaire des laptops and the poor conditioning can be outgrown.
23. NEW JERSEY: Josh Boone -- He could be better than Jason Collins, but he might not have the selfless, ruthlessness to be Jason Collins should he not develop his skills further. Boone plays with a air of melancholia which seemed to make Jim Calhoun hate him. Having Jim Calhoun hate you counts as a character reference as far as I'm concerned but may not be indicative of a successful professional basketball career.
24. MEMPHIS: Kyle Lowry -- I think Lowry's destined to be a career backup and a good one. He took great advantage of the unique concentration of perimeter talent at Villanova last year to score a significant percentage of his points at the free throw line. I'm skeptical that he'll be able to get to the line as often in the NBA. He did improve his shooting across the board in his sophomore season. If he continues to do that he could develop into something more special.
25. CLEVELAND: Shannon Brown -- LeBron needs a lot of help. Brown should provide some just by backing up Larry Hughes (i.e. starting the 20 games Hughes will miss) at first while trying to grow into the Flip Murray role, except Brown will try to be a good player. There is much work left to be done in Cleveland.
26. LA LAKERS: Jordan Farmar -- Kirk Hinrich without the jump shot, which, quite frankly, is what Kirk Hinrich is about 25% of the time. Farmar wastes too many possessions on bad shots and turnovers borne of aggression. He got away with that even on a low-possession, Ben Howland team because he is a fine, fine defensive player already. If his decision making improves he'll be quite valuable.
27. PORTLAND: Sergio Rodriguez -- He appears to be little more than el Steve Blake at this point. Is my boyhood idol, Kevin Pritchard, collecting point guards worse than he was in a subconscious effort to show that he deserved a better shot at sticking in the Association?
28. DALLAS: Maurice Ager -- I'm not sure what Ager brings to the Mavericks. He's an inconsistent player whose skills overwhelmingly tilt toward the offensive end of the court. If they get rid of Stackhouse and give those minutes to Howard and Daniels, Ager could provide some of Stackhouse's production in certain situations.
29. NEW YORK: Mardy Collins -- See Balkman above. Larry Brown would have loved Collins. The machinations of the Knicks franchise become ever more interesting. I love Collins, too. If he could shoot at all, he'd be a lottery pick. Still, having Eric Snow's skills in Aaron McKie's body should make Collins a millionaire.
30. PORTLAND: Joel Freeland -- I fully expect Joel Freeland to have the same impact in the NBA as Jonathan Spector will have in the English Premier League.
end of guaranteed contracts
David Stern's final introduction of Russ Granik was somewhat moving. I love the NBA Draft too much.
31. INDIANA: James White -- He might be able to step in and give you a good amount of Fred Jones' production. The pessimists amongst us might point out that it took White five years of college ball to demonstrate his usefulness.
Dear Steve Patterson,
Raef LaFrentz may be three years younger than Theo Ratliff but Raef's knees barely allow him to do the two things he could still do well on a basketball court (make 24' set shots, and reverse the ball from the top of the key). I don't think he'll be phyiscally able to play for half the remaining length of his contract.
32. HOUSTON: Steve Novak -- Novak will challenge Matt Bonner as the next link in the Matt Bullard-Pat Garrity chain.
33. ATLANTA: Solomon Jones -- The Hawks definitely needed an older, less polished version of Josh Smith.
34. LA CLIPPERS: Paul Davis -- The Clippers definitely needed a less athletic version of Chris Kaman.
35. TORONTO: PJ Tucker -- Joey Graham is done in Toronto. PJ Tucker, the Big 12 Player of the Year, is this year's Josh Howard. The meme that Tucker is an undersized power forward smacks of ignorance of both Tucker's game and Brad Buckman's existence. I criticized Rick Barnes for not playing Tucker at power forward enough last year but that doesn't mean he can't succeed as an inside-out player in the NBA. Tucker took on some playmaking duties following Daniel Gibson's failure at the point last season.
In this draft, Tucker is a lottery talent. He can play basketball. He doesn't need a position. He'll make you have to figure out who can matchup with him. If the league really is going small and multidimensional (and even if it's not, Toronto probably is) Tucker will make it look like a good decision both in terms of aesthetics and results.
36. MINNESOTA: Craig Smith -- Kevin McHale must really miss Gary Trent. When he gets healthy, I fear Smith will be a very good college player who is the wrong size to succeed in the NBA. You know, the guy PJ Tucker is supposed to be.
37. PHILAEDLPHIA: Bobby Jones -- Does Trenton Hassell need an understudy? Apparently not, but Andre Iguadala (and now Rodney Carney) do.
38. GOLDEN STATE: Kosta Petrovic --A center who doesn't rebound or block shots much in either the Euro or Adriatic leagues. Meh.
39. MILWAUKEE: David Noel -- I always found Noel difficult to watch. He displaces a lot of air without touching the ball much through rebound, steal, or block for such a great athlete. He turns the ball over a lot when he tries to pass or dribble. However, he was an extremely effective shooter last year on both two- and three-point shots so he must understand the game on some level.
40. SEATTLE: Denham Brown -- I don't get what Denham Brown does well enough to make an NBA team.
41. ORLANDO: James Augustine -- I like Augustine a lot. He's a more athletic Andrew DeClercq and should have his legitimate uses.
42. CLEVELAND: Daniel Gibson -- He can shoot. He can defend. He is never going to be a good point guard. Still, he's a better player today than Flip Murray.
43. NO/OKC: Marcus de Souza -- I'll go out on a limb and guess that he's more skilled than Anderson Varejao but less "high energy." Man, he looks raw in the highlight package.
44. HOUSTON: Lior Eliyahu -- I don't know much about the talent level in the Israeli Premier League, but Eliyahu's stat line looks nice. He looks like he has a nice frame in the highlight clips so he could have a chance to stay at power forward.
45. MEMPHIS: Alexander Johnson -- Johnson's a raw rebounder and shot blocker who teaches us all a lesson (with the help of Hilton Armstrong) the difference in earning power between being 6-11 and 6-9.
46. UTAH: Dee Brown -- He'll have to find the right situation, but once he does he'll be a bigger (and possibly better) Earl Boykins.
47. UTAH: Paul Millsap -- The rebounder probably won't be more than the new Michael Ruffin but I always liked Michael Ruffin.
48. WASHINGTON: Vladimir Veremeenko -- He shoots free throws well and in the Russian Superleague he shoots a good number of free throws. Competition caveats apply, but he seems to be a tall international player with some interest in rebounding.
49. BOSTON: Leon Powe -- If he stays healthy, Powe should find consistent work on NBA second units for five or six years. He's clever and talented but small and already limited by previous injuries.
50. CHARLOTTE: Ryan Hollins -- Hollins will do well to make the Charlotte roster. If he gets any playing time something disastrous will have happened to their frontcourt.
51. DETROIT: Cheick Samb -- An underfed (7-1, 195) project on Barcelona's U-20 team.
52. LA CLIPPERS: Guillermo Diaz -- I had Diaz on my potential bust list when some were projecting him as a late firs-round pick. It's perfectly reasonable to draft him here. He's big for an undersized shooting guard and he's all upside, though a foot shorter than the guys who are usually drafted (in part) on the basis of not having played basketball that long. If he makes a roster will he be the best volleyball player in the NBA since Wilt?
53. SEATTLE: Yotam Halperin -- When you're older than my girlfriend, you're in danger of not being much of a prospect. You need to be able to step in and help right away.
54. NEW JERSEY: Hassan Adams -- Adams has spent the last two season un-making himself one of my favorite players. He seems to have no grasp on his strengths and weaknesses. If he figures that out he can be a role player in the league for a long time.
55. CLEVELAND: Ejike Ugboaja -- May be less skilled than Varejao. Shot under 30% from the floor in the U-21 World Championships.
56. PHILADELPHIA: Edin Bavcic -- When nba.com lacks a profile of a draftee, I can't even make stuff up about the international players.
57. MINNESOTA: Loukas Mavrokefalidis -- Looks to be a big lug. WIll likely never contribute in the NBA. Unlike, say, Mike Gansey.
58. LA LAKERS: Danilo Pinnock -- In no way is Pinnock, generously the fourth-best player on about the 35th-best team in college basketball last year, a better basketball player than Mike Gansey.
59. MILWAUKEE: Damir Markota -- International big man who favors playing on the perimeter. Fran Fraschila's exicted, though, possibly because if he's talking then he isn't listening to Stephen A. Smith.
60. DETROIT: Will Blalock -- Marcus Banks, more or less, without the comfort of a guaranteed contract. Like so many others, Blalock could be a backup point guard never or forever.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
2006 NBA Draft Preview
Last year, in a far more in-depth preview than will be attempted this year (due to the World Cup), I ended things by placing 40 potential draftees in four categories: Best players in the draft, Safe picks to fill needs, Worth a flyer, and Potential busts.
One year later, those lists aren't hugely embarrassing. Of the eleven players I ranked as the best players in the draft, seven of them made the first or second All-Rookie teams. Granted, one can't brag too much about ranking Chris Paul as the fourth best prospect in the draft (though I did call him "the next Steve Nash") or Channing Frye as the second most likely bust in the draft, but I'll take my player evaluations (both prescient and misguided) against those of other amateur analysts.
I'll live blog the draft tomorrow night and give the reasons, such as they are, for these rankings then.
Best players (I've seen) in the draft
1. Brandon Roy
2. LaMarcus Aldridge
3. Randy Foye
4. Ronnie Brewer
Safe, useful picks to fill needs (some even with upside)
1. Rudy Gay
2. Shelden Williams
3. Rajon Rondo
4. PJ Tucker
5. Adam Morrison
6. Rodney Carney
7. Mardy Collins
8. Maurice Ager
9. JJ Redick
10. James Augustine
Worth a flyer if you can afford it (good role players/high-risk talents)
1. Tyrus Thomas
2. Jordan Farmar
3. Quincy Douby
4. Mike Gansey
5. Shannon Brown
6. Shawne Williams
7. Kyle Lowry
8. Cedric Simmons
9. Patrick O'Bryant
10. Renaldo Balkman
11. Hassan Adams
12. James White
Hoping your team doesn't waste a valuable pick on a bust
1. Marcus Williams
2. Gullermo Diaz
3. Hilton Armstrong
4. Alexander Johnnson
One year later, those lists aren't hugely embarrassing. Of the eleven players I ranked as the best players in the draft, seven of them made the first or second All-Rookie teams. Granted, one can't brag too much about ranking Chris Paul as the fourth best prospect in the draft (though I did call him "the next Steve Nash") or Channing Frye as the second most likely bust in the draft, but I'll take my player evaluations (both prescient and misguided) against those of other amateur analysts.
I'll live blog the draft tomorrow night and give the reasons, such as they are, for these rankings then.
Best players (I've seen) in the draft
1. Brandon Roy
2. LaMarcus Aldridge
3. Randy Foye
4. Ronnie Brewer
Safe, useful picks to fill needs (some even with upside)
1. Rudy Gay
2. Shelden Williams
3. Rajon Rondo
4. PJ Tucker
5. Adam Morrison
6. Rodney Carney
7. Mardy Collins
8. Maurice Ager
9. JJ Redick
10. James Augustine
Worth a flyer if you can afford it (good role players/high-risk talents)
1. Tyrus Thomas
2. Jordan Farmar
3. Quincy Douby
4. Mike Gansey
5. Shannon Brown
6. Shawne Williams
7. Kyle Lowry
8. Cedric Simmons
9. Patrick O'Bryant
10. Renaldo Balkman
11. Hassan Adams
12. James White
Hoping your team doesn't waste a valuable pick on a bust
1. Marcus Williams
2. Gullermo Diaz
3. Hilton Armstrong
4. Alexander Johnnson
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Preview: Kansas vs. Bradley
Bradley got the rawest of the several raw deals teams in the top half of the Oakland received from the Selection Committee. In drawing Kansas as their first round opponent, Bradley has a far slimmer chance of pulling an upset than inferior teams (San Diego State, Montana, Wisconsin-Mailwaukee, Pacific) with equivalent or higher seeds.
From Kansas' perspective, Bradley is a far better team than they would hope to meet in a 13-seed, but still, Kansas hasthe solace of being a better team than Bradley and should win the game.
Bradley relies heavily on two scorers (Marcus Sommerville (6-7, 225) and Patrick O'Bryant (7-0, 260)) neither of whom shoot very well from the floor or get to the free throw line often. That both Sommerville and O'Bryant are far more likely to shoot than pass further complicates matters. Kansas has generally done a fine job of suppressing the field goal percentages of their opponents' primary offensive options. Guards Tony Bennett (6-0, 175) and Daniel Ruffin (5-10, 165) are more likely to be open than Sommerville or O'Bryant but relatively unlikely to have the ball in their hands. That's not even taking into account the possessions Bradley will lose to a Kansas steal. It's a nice comfort to have the bigger, quicker guards in a matchup.
Bradley's greatest liability on offense may be defensive specialist JJ Tauai (6-3, 215). In 375 minutes this season Tauai attempted just 35 shots and 11 free throws. In the 5 games he played against the Missouri Valley's NCAA tournament teams, he attempted only 7 shots and no free throws in 86 minutes. Tauai passes the ball much better than Marcus Dove, but he doesn't provide the offensive rebounding that the taller Dove gives Oklahoma State. It will be interesting to see the extent to which the 6-3 Tauai can trouble Brandon Rush.
Bradley doesn't shoot many threes, less than 30% of their field goal attempts on the year, and they make less than a third of those they take. Kansas still leads the nation in two-point field goal percentage defense.
Forwards Zach Andrews (6-8, 225) and Lawrence Wright (6-4, 198) give Patrick O'Bryant some help on the offensive glass, but, as a team, Bradley's offensive rebounding falls off against better competition. Southern Illinois, the Valley's most athletic team, dominated Bradley on the glass in their last two meetings. Should O'Bryant get into foul trouble, the only other big men on the Bradley roster, Brandyn Heemskerk (7-1, 260) and Sam Singh (6-9, 260), have played a combined 124 minutes this year.
Bradley's defensive numbers may be deceivingly strong. There wasn't a lot of offensive talent in the Missouri Valley Conference this year. Wichita State and Missouri State were the only top-50 offenses in the league and Northern Iowa, ranked 71st, was the only other Valley team in the top-90 nationally. As a point of reference, Kansas State would have been an upper division offensive team in the MVC.
The numbers show that Bradley limits their opponents' field goal shooting (though not to the extent that Kansas does), forces a decent amount of turnovers, and (usually) controls the defensive glass. Sommerville, in particular, is a fine defensive rebounder. I assume his paltry offensive rebounding numbers are due to the volume and length of his shot attempts.
The numbers also show that Bradley's strong defensive performances have come in the slowest-paced games they've played. It's no secret that Kansas is far more effective offensively in high-possession games (unless Oklahoma State is involved). Bradley allowed 1.03 points per possession in at-risk games (road, neutral, home games against NCAA tournament teams) with at least 70 possessions per team. Kansas averages just under 70 possessions per game.
In all likelihood Bradley can't allow 1.03 points per Kansas possession. Only three teams (Nevada, St. Joseph's, and Texas) and Thomas Gardner have scored more than 1.03 points per possession in a game against Kansas this year. Bradley averages just 1.03 points per possession on the season. Looking at either at-risk games or just games against NCAA tournament teams, Bradley's offense shrinks to 0.97 points per possession. There are, as I said, some good defensive teams in the Valley. None of them are as good as Kansas.
Prediction: Kansas 71 Bradley 62
Friday, March 03, 2006
Preview: Kansas at Kansas State
Nobody in the Big 12 has guarded
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Preview: Colorado at Kansas
Here's Colorado's defensive performances on the road in conference play this year: at Texas, 1.22 PPP (loss); at Missouri, 1.15 PPP (win, but with a defense even more generous than the Jayhawks' in their loss in Columbia); at Oklahoma St, 1.09 PPP (win, but Oklahoma State's third most efficient offensive game in conference play); at Iowa State, 1.22 PPP (loss); at Texas A&M, 0.95 PPP (loss); at Kansas St, 1.02 PPP (loss); at Nebraska, 1.28 PPP (loss). That's an average of 1.13 PPP allowed and a median of 1.15 PPP allowed.
No conference visitor to the Fieldhouse has scored more than 0.95 PPP this season. A Colorado victory tonight will depend on seriously atypical play from both teams. Only Iowa State has appeared more willing than Colorado to play at Kansas' pace in conference play, which should further help the Jayhawks cause.
Looking back to the first meeting in Boulder, Kansas (50.0 OR%, 77.5 DR%) outrebounded Colorado essentially to the same degree that Texas (54.5 OR%, 72.7 DR%) outrebounded Kansas in Austin. The Jayhawks won rather handily behind 18 points in 30 minutes from Christian Moody. Jeff Hawkins played poorly (0 points, 4 turnovers, and five fouls) in 25 minutes. Julian Wright played only eight minutes. Granted, this was back when Darnell Jackson was playing well. Downs, Vinson, and Case combined for as many minutes as Mario Chalmers: 17. In their minutes, Downs, Vinson, and Case combined for no points and four turnovers.
Hawkins, Vinson, and Moody are sure to play some minutes on Senior Night, and deservedly so, but Colorado will be facing a somewhat different team than defeated them in Boulder.
Colorado doesn't seem to have a similar argument to expect a better performance in he re-match. They shot a mere 44.7 eFG% in Boulder, but they did make 40.9% of their three-point attempts. They attempted slightly fewer threes than normal (38.6% of FGA versus a season average of 39.7% of FGA), so they can't realistically hope for better perimeter shooting tonight in Lawrence. The Buffalos can hope to better their two-point shooting (34.3% in Boulder) and free throw shooting (52.2% in Boulder), though it took LaMarcus Aldridge to get the Big 12 collectively making more than 40% of the two-point shots attempted against Kansas this year.
Kansas, on the other hand, can certainly expect to shoot better than the 46 eFG% they managed in Boulder. They'll need to as it's unlikely they can replicate the extreme rebounding advantage they secured in Boulder. Colorado allows conference opponents to shoot 48.3 eFG% and the Jayhawks shoot 52.7 eFG% on average. Specifically, Kansas made only 2 of 13 three-point attempts in their first meeting with Colorado. Though not a good three-point shooting team, I think it's safe to assume the Jayhawks will make more than 20% of their three-pointers tonight.
Even after the game in Austin, Kansas has the third most efficient offense and the stingiest defense in Big 12 play. Kansas is 18 points per 100 possessions better than their conference opponents. Colorado is only 2 points per 100 possessions better than their conference opponents.
The Texas game demonstrated how far the Jayhawks have to go to compete with an excellent team. There is no reason to believe the blowout loss impaired their ability to dispense with mediocre teams.
Prediction: Kansas 81 Colorado 67
No conference visitor to the Fieldhouse has scored more than 0.95 PPP this season. A Colorado victory tonight will depend on seriously atypical play from both teams. Only Iowa State has appeared more willing than Colorado to play at Kansas' pace in conference play, which should further help the Jayhawks cause.
Looking back to the first meeting in Boulder, Kansas (50.0 OR%, 77.5 DR%) outrebounded Colorado essentially to the same degree that Texas (54.5 OR%, 72.7 DR%) outrebounded Kansas in Austin. The Jayhawks won rather handily behind 18 points in 30 minutes from Christian Moody. Jeff Hawkins played poorly (0 points, 4 turnovers, and five fouls) in 25 minutes. Julian Wright played only eight minutes. Granted, this was back when Darnell Jackson was playing well. Downs, Vinson, and Case combined for as many minutes as Mario Chalmers: 17. In their minutes, Downs, Vinson, and Case combined for no points and four turnovers.
Hawkins, Vinson, and Moody are sure to play some minutes on Senior Night, and deservedly so, but Colorado will be facing a somewhat different team than defeated them in Boulder.
Colorado doesn't seem to have a similar argument to expect a better performance in he re-match. They shot a mere 44.7 eFG% in Boulder, but they did make 40.9% of their three-point attempts. They attempted slightly fewer threes than normal (38.6% of FGA versus a season average of 39.7% of FGA), so they can't realistically hope for better perimeter shooting tonight in Lawrence. The Buffalos can hope to better their two-point shooting (34.3% in Boulder) and free throw shooting (52.2% in Boulder), though it took LaMarcus Aldridge to get the Big 12 collectively making more than 40% of the two-point shots attempted against Kansas this year.
Kansas, on the other hand, can certainly expect to shoot better than the 46 eFG% they managed in Boulder. They'll need to as it's unlikely they can replicate the extreme rebounding advantage they secured in Boulder. Colorado allows conference opponents to shoot 48.3 eFG% and the Jayhawks shoot 52.7 eFG% on average. Specifically, Kansas made only 2 of 13 three-point attempts in their first meeting with Colorado. Though not a good three-point shooting team, I think it's safe to assume the Jayhawks will make more than 20% of their three-pointers tonight.
Even after the game in Austin, Kansas has the third most efficient offense and the stingiest defense in Big 12 play. Kansas is 18 points per 100 possessions better than their conference opponents. Colorado is only 2 points per 100 possessions better than their conference opponents.
The Texas game demonstrated how far the Jayhawks have to go to compete with an excellent team. There is no reason to believe the blowout loss impaired their ability to dispense with mediocre teams.
Prediction: Kansas 81 Colorado 67
Friday, February 24, 2006
Prediction: Kansas at Texas
I think Kansas will be able to play the game at a faster pace than Texas typically plays.
I don’t think Kansas will be able to play the game as fast as they would prefer.
I think both teams will shoot a hair below 50 eFG% from the field.
I think both teams will get to the free throw line about 20 times.
I think if Robinson, Chalmers, and Jackson take the bulk of those free throw attempts, Kansas will at least match Texas’ production at the line.
I think Daniel Gibson will score 19 points on 17 shots.
I think Mario Chalmers and Brandon Rush will combine for 12 three-point attempts, making 5.
I think both teams will get about 40% of their offensive rebound opportunities.
I think PJ Tucker gets, at minimum, 12 rebounds.
I think both teams will turn the ball over on just over 20% of their possessions.
I think point differential between Jeff Hawkins and AJ Abrams will be very close to the point differential between the two teams.
I think that PJ Tucker will present such a unique set of complications for Brandon Rush that Rush can play well and still be less effective than Tucker.
I think it’s unlikely that Kansas wins this game.
I think it’s less likely that the outcome of the game is decided with more than 30 seconds left on the clock.
I think the game will be close enough that a bad call could impact its outcome.
I think that Brandon Rush takes and misses Kansas’ final shot.
I think PJ Tucker gets the rebound, is fouled, and makes at least one free throw.
I think Kansas throws the ball away attempting a long inbounds pass.
I think Texas wins 71-68.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Preview: Kansas at Texas, Part Four
Click here for Part One (Team Stats)
Click here for Part Two (Backcourts)
Click here for Part Three (Rush v. Tucker)
stats glossary
Post players
The efficiency of the Kansas frontcourt, and the five players’ cumulative production, has been somewhat hidden because none of them average 20 minutes a game in league play.
Here are the cumulative scoring lines for the Kansas and Texas post players:
LaMarcus Aldridge will be a lottery pick whenever he declares for the draft. For whatever reason, his production in Big 12 play has matched neither his talent nor the excellent production he provided in non-conference play.
Brad Buckman and Darnell Jackson are excellent free throw shooters. Aldridge is adequate. CJ Giles has shot better from the line as of late, but is below 60% on the season as are Kaun, Wright, and Moody.
Since Texas can’t afford for either Buckman or Aldridge to get into foul trouble they most likely be unable to take full advantage of the biggest Jayhawks’ struggles from the foul line.
Here are the cumulative rebounding lines for the Kansas and Texas frontcourts:
Just as we saw with scoring numbers, the Texas post players, against Big 12 opposition, have been no more productive as rebounders than have the Kansas post players. The marginal advantage Texas has on the glass over Kansas comes from PJ Tucker being a better rebounder than Brandon Rush.
Of the post players, only Julian Wright and Brad Buckman are credited with very many assists and both have assist-to-turnover ratios of less than one. Aldridge doesn’t turn the ball over very often considering how many touches he gets. Sasha Kaun almost never turns the ball over and gets a surprising number of steals for a man his size.
Again, the cumulative lines are roughly equal:
Kansas wins the post matchup if…
Texas wins the post matchup if…
Click here for Part Two (Backcourts)
Click here for Part Three (Rush v. Tucker)
stats glossary
Post players
The efficiency of the Kansas frontcourt, and the five players’ cumulative production, has been somewhat hidden because none of them average 20 minutes a game in league play.
| Player | eFG% | Pts/100 | PPWS | %min |
| Wright | 58.8 | 24.9 | 1.19 | 48.6 |
| Kaun | 66.7 | 19.7 | 1.23 | 45.5 |
| Jackson | 55.6 | 25.9 | 1.24 | 40.6 |
| Giles | 52.6 | 20.9 | 1.16 | 30.5 |
| Moody | 58.9 | 16.4 | 1.21 | 30.3 |
| Aldridge | 50.7 | 26.0 | 1.10 | 84.4 |
| Buckman | 52.7 | 21.5 | 1.17 | 73.3 |
| Williams | 26.7 | 6.6 | 0.70 | 23.8 |
Here are the cumulative scoring lines for the Kansas and Texas post players:
| Player | eFG% | Pts/100 | PPWS | %min |
| KU | 58.7 | 22.0 | 1.21 | 39.1 |
| UT | 50.0 | 21.6 | 1.10 | 36.3 |
LaMarcus Aldridge will be a lottery pick whenever he declares for the draft. For whatever reason, his production in Big 12 play has matched neither his talent nor the excellent production he provided in non-conference play.
| Player | FTA | FT% | FT Rate |
| Wright | 21 | 57.1 | 14.1 |
| Kaun | 38 | 39.5 | 29.4 |
| Jackson | 34 | 79.4 | 42.9 |
| Giles | 29 | 65.5 | 50.0 |
| Moody | 23 | 56.5 | 46.4 |
| Aldridge | 66 | 65.2 | 31.6 |
| Buckman | 39 | 79.5 | 33.0 |
| Williams | 8 | 62.5 | 33.3 |
Brad Buckman and Darnell Jackson are excellent free throw shooters. Aldridge is adequate. CJ Giles has shot better from the line as of late, but is below 60% on the season as are Kaun, Wright, and Moody.
Since Texas can’t afford for either Buckman or Aldridge to get into foul trouble they most likely be unable to take full advantage of the biggest Jayhawks’ struggles from the foul line.
| Player | OR% | DR% | TR% |
| Wright | 10.4 | 17.2 | 14.1 |
| Kaun | 12.1 | 16.6 | 14.6 |
| Jackson | 14.2 | 21.1 | 17.9 |
| Giles | 12.1 | 20.4 | 16.6 |
| Moody | 9.9 | 13.5 | 11.8 |
| Aldridge | 10.7 | 18.0 | 14.5 |
| Buckman | 12.4 | 14.3 | 13.4 |
| Williams | 8.8 | 14.4 | 11.7 |
Here are the cumulative rebounding lines for the Kansas and Texas frontcourts:
| Player | OR% | DR% | TR% |
| KU | 11.8 | 17.8 | 15.0 |
| UT | 11.1 | 16.0 | 13.7 |
Just as we saw with scoring numbers, the Texas post players, against Big 12 opposition, have been no more productive as rebounders than have the Kansas post players. The marginal advantage Texas has on the glass over Kansas comes from PJ Tucker being a better rebounder than Brandon Rush.
| Player | A/100 | TO/100 | S/100 | BS/100 |
| Wright | 5.57 | 6.01 | 1.98 | 3.30 |
| Kaun | 1.43 | 0.95 | 2.11 | 3.76 |
| Jackson | 1.07 | 3.20 | 2.11 | 0.26 |
| Giles | 1.06 | 4.97 | 1.40 | 4.91 |
| Moody | 1.43 | 4.29 | 0.35 | 1.06 |
| Aldridge | 0.86 | 2.58 | 2.27 | 2.98 |
| Buckman | 3.64 | 4.79 | 1.47 | 3.27 |
| Williams | 0.51 | 1.52 | 1.51 | 0.00 |
Of the post players, only Julian Wright and Brad Buckman are credited with very many assists and both have assist-to-turnover ratios of less than one. Aldridge doesn’t turn the ball over very often considering how many touches he gets. Sasha Kaun almost never turns the ball over and gets a surprising number of steals for a man his size.
Again, the cumulative lines are roughly equal:
| Player | A/100 | TO/100 | S/100 | BS/100 |
| KU | 2.33 | 3.82 | 1.70 | 2.68 |
| UT | 1.93 | 3.34 | 1.85 | 2.71 |
Kansas wins the post matchup if…
1)They get either Aldridge or Buckman in foul trouble.
Texas wins the post matchup if…
1)Aldridge and Buckman outscore and outrebound the five Kansas post players.
Preview: Kansas at Texas, Part Three
Click here for Part One
Click here for Part Two
stats glossary
Rush v. Tucker
One’s essentially a guard, the other’s essentially a forward. They’re both arguably the best players on their respective teams. If forced to make one overriding, potentially foolish prediction, I’d say that the player who makes this matchup of disparate types a mis-match will lead his team to victory.
Brandon Rush is a little more efficient from the field than PJ Tucker…
…but Rush takes a lot more jump shots even though less than a quarter of his field goal attempts are three-point shots. Tucker’s free throw rate is solid in conference play, but well below his season rate.
Brandon Rush is a good rebounder for his size. PJ Tucker is a good rebounder for anybody’s size. The degree to which both players have an advantage on the glass over a typical college small forward is masked to some degree by playing alongside two good rebounders at all times.
Tucker is a better passer and ball-handler than Rush. Both are good defensive players, though Tucker has quicker hands and plays the passing lanes better. Rush has become an effective on-the-ball defender, using good lateral movement to keep smaller players in front him and his long arms to challenge their jump shots. When guarding his man off-the-ball, Rush can still get caught ball-watching and be slow to react.
Kansas wins this matchup if…
Texas wins this matchup if…
Click here for Part Two
stats glossary
Rush v. Tucker
One’s essentially a guard, the other’s essentially a forward. They’re both arguably the best players on their respective teams. If forced to make one overriding, potentially foolish prediction, I’d say that the player who makes this matchup of disparate types a mis-match will lead his team to victory.
Brandon Rush is a little more efficient from the field than PJ Tucker…
| Player | eFG% | Pts/100 | PPWS | %min |
| Rush | 56.3 | 25.7 | 1.17 | 85.0 |
| Tucker | 51.0 | 27.8 | 1.11 | 85.8 |
…but Rush takes a lot more jump shots even though less than a quarter of his field goal attempts are three-point shots. Tucker’s free throw rate is solid in conference play, but well below his season rate.
| Player | FTA | FT% | FT Rate |
| Rush | 32 | 75.0 | 15.2 |
| Tucker | 54 | 75.9 | 26.8 |
| Player | OR% | DR% | TR% |
| Rush | 5.7 | 15.8 | 11.2 |
| Tucker | 9.2 | 22.7 | 16.2 |
Brandon Rush is a good rebounder for his size. PJ Tucker is a good rebounder for anybody’s size. The degree to which both players have an advantage on the glass over a typical college small forward is masked to some degree by playing alongside two good rebounders at all times.
| Player | A/100 | TO/100 | S/100 | BS/100 |
| Rush | 3.44 | 4.84 | 2.14 | 1.38 |
| Tucker | 4.66 | 4.94 | 2.80 | 0.42 |
Tucker is a better passer and ball-handler than Rush. Both are good defensive players, though Tucker has quicker hands and plays the passing lanes better. Rush has become an effective on-the-ball defender, using good lateral movement to keep smaller players in front him and his long arms to challenge their jump shots. When guarding his man off-the-ball, Rush can still get caught ball-watching and be slow to react.
Kansas wins this matchup if…
1)Rush makes the open three-point attempts he gets against Texas’ zone defense.
2)Rush can penetrate the Texas zone without turning the ball over excessively.
Texas wins this matchup if…
1)Tucker uses his superior strength to get Rush in foul trouble.
2)Tucker dominates Rush on the offensive glass.
Preview: Kansas at Texas, Part Two
Click here for Part One.
stats glossary
Backcourts
Make no mistake, these are the two best backcourts in the Big 12.
Daniel Gibson and Mario Chalmers both have the ability to create their own shot.Gibson is more likely to find space for himself beyond the arc (two-thirds of his field goal attempts in conference play are three-pointers), while Chalmers shoots
many more two-point shots and free throws.
Russell Robinson is a poor three-point shooter who also struggles to finish in the paint. He almost makes up for his poor field goal shooting with his excellent ability to get to the free throw line.
Kenton Paulino has taken full advantage of the attention his teammates have drawn this year, as well as the passing skills of Tucker and Buckman. I think he’s an all-conference candidate, but he’ll undoubtedly trail inefficient, volume scorers like Curtis Stinson and Terrell Everett in the voting.
Hawkins and Abrams are both good back up guards who rarely hurt their teams and, on a good night, knock down a couple of jump shots to provide some active help.
Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line than Gibson and Paulino. Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line more than PJ Tucker. Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line more than Brad Buckman. Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line more often than LaMarcus Aldridge. Robinson and Chalmers do a lot of damage at the line.
Texas doesn’t typically allow that many free throw attempts, but they’ve been allowing more as the conference season has progressed.
Robinson and Gibson boost their value a bit by helping out on the boards. None of the other guards in this game typically do more or less rebounding than is expected of perimeter players.
The above numbers are more variable than the scoring or rebounding numbers. I think that has more to do with the systems the players play in than their relative abilities.
Kansas, as a team, assists on 64% percent of their field goals. Texas, as a team, assists on 56% of their field goals.
The Kansas guards turn the ball over more often than the Texas guards, but they play at a much faster pace (70.5 possessions per game vs. 64). The Kansas guards also create more turnovers than the Texas guards, but the Kansas guards play man-to-man almost exclusively while the Texas guards usually play as part of a 2-3 zone.
Kansas wins the backcourt matchup if…
Texas wins the backcourt matchup if…
stats glossary
Backcourts
Make no mistake, these are the two best backcourts in the Big 12.
| Player | eFG% | Pts/100 | PPWS | %min |
| Robinson | 41.4 | 20.1 | 1.03 | 76.0 |
| Chalmers | 54.7 | 27.4 | 1.23 | 75.0 |
| Hawkins | 58.5 | 14.4 | 1.19 | 37.5 |
| Gibson | 55.3 | 27.7 | 1.17 | 88.3 |
| Paulino | 63.9 | 25.4 | 1.34 | 73.5 |
| Abrams | 59.6 | 16.5 | 1.23 | 49.2 |
Daniel Gibson and Mario Chalmers both have the ability to create their own shot.Gibson is more likely to find space for himself beyond the arc (two-thirds of his field goal attempts in conference play are three-pointers), while Chalmers shoots
many more two-point shots and free throws.
Russell Robinson is a poor three-point shooter who also struggles to finish in the paint. He almost makes up for his poor field goal shooting with his excellent ability to get to the free throw line.
Kenton Paulino has taken full advantage of the attention his teammates have drawn this year, as well as the passing skills of Tucker and Buckman. I think he’s an all-conference candidate, but he’ll undoubtedly trail inefficient, volume scorers like Curtis Stinson and Terrell Everett in the voting.
Hawkins and Abrams are both good back up guards who rarely hurt their teams and, on a good night, knock down a couple of jump shots to provide some active help.
| Player | FTA | FT% | FT Rate |
| Robinson | 49 | 81.7 | 44.1 |
| Chalmers | 49 | 84.5 | 42.9 |
| Hawkins | 2 | 100 | 4.9 |
| Gibson | 51 | 70.6 | 24.0 |
| Paulino | 31 | 80.6 | 24.8 |
| Abrams | 6 | 83.3 | 9.6 |
Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line than Gibson and Paulino. Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line more than PJ Tucker. Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line more than Brad Buckman. Robinson and Chalmers do more damage at the line more often than LaMarcus Aldridge. Robinson and Chalmers do a lot of damage at the line.
Texas doesn’t typically allow that many free throw attempts, but they’ve been allowing more as the conference season has progressed.
| Player | OR% | DR% | TR% |
| Robinson | 7.0 | 7.4 | 7.2 |
| Chalmers | 0.6 | 7.8 | 4.5 |
| Hawkins | 1.2 | 9.3 | 5.6 |
| Gibson | 5.5 | 8.0 | 6.8 |
| Paulino | 1.9 | 4.7 | 3.3 |
| Abrams | 1.9 | 4.8 | 3.4 |
Robinson and Gibson boost their value a bit by helping out on the boards. None of the other guards in this game typically do more or less rebounding than is expected of perimeter players.
| Player | A/100 | TO/100 | S/100 | BS/100 |
| Robinson | 9.11 | 4.98 | 4.36 | 0.56 |
| Chalmers | 9.08 | 6.49 | 5.70 | 0.28 |
| Hawkins | 6.63 | 2.59 | 2.56 | 0.00 |
| Gibson | 4.94 | 2.47 | 1.90 | 0.95 |
| Paulino | 7.75 | 4.62 | 3.59 | 0.33 |
| Abrams | 9.59 | 2.95 | 1.95 | 0.00 |
The above numbers are more variable than the scoring or rebounding numbers. I think that has more to do with the systems the players play in than their relative abilities.
Kansas, as a team, assists on 64% percent of their field goals. Texas, as a team, assists on 56% of their field goals.
The Kansas guards turn the ball over more often than the Texas guards, but they play at a much faster pace (70.5 possessions per game vs. 64). The Kansas guards also create more turnovers than the Texas guards, but the Kansas guards play man-to-man almost exclusively while the Texas guards usually play as part of a 2-3 zone.
Kansas wins the backcourt matchup if…
1)Robinson and Hawkins knock down their open three-point opportunities.
2)Robinson and Chalmers get to the free throw line.
3)The Jayhawk guards play the high quality defense which has stymied every guard in the conference (save Thomas Gardner in Columbia).
Texas wins the backcourt matchup if…
1)Paulino, Gibson, and Abrams don’t turn the ball over against the Kansas pressure.
2)Ball movement creates open three-point opportunities for Paulino.
3)Gibson is, on this night, a better offensive player than Robinson and/or Chalmers are defensive players.
Preview: Kansas at Texas, Part One
I've got too many tables for a single preview post, so here's the breakdown:
Part One: Team stats
Part Two: Backcourts
Part Three: Rush v. Tucker
Part Four: Frontcourts
Part Five: Prediction
Stats glossary
Team Stats
Kansas has almost closed the efficiency gap with Texas. The Jayhawks are more reliant
on their defense while the Longhorns have the best offense in the conference by a considerable margin.
There’s not a lot of difference between the two teams in terms of field goal offense and defense or rebounding.
Texas has more of the possessions in their games end with a shot attempt than does Kansas. The Jayhawks and their opponents are more likely to turn the ball over.
It will be incumbent upon the Jayhawks to force Texas into more turnovers. An average Texas possession in conference play is worth 1.18 points to the Longhorns. Over a 67 possession game (Kansas plays at about 70 possessions a game; Texas plays at 64.), there’s a difference of 3 turnovers between the turnover rate Kansas forces on average and the average rate at which Texas turns the ball over. That’s three-and-a-half points the Jayhawks could gain on Saturday.
On the other hand, Texas will likely do a better job of keeping Kansas off the free throw line (their lack of depth forbids them from getting into foul trouble) than the typical conference opponent and could pick up an equal number of points versus the season averages.
Part One: Team stats
Part Two: Backcourts
Part Three: Rush v. Tucker
Part Four: Frontcourts
Part Five: Prediction
Stats glossary
Team Stats
Kansas has almost closed the efficiency gap with Texas. The Jayhawks are more reliant
on their defense while the Longhorns have the best offense in the conference by a considerable margin.
| Team | PPP | Opp PPP | Diff |
| KU | 1.09 | 0.86 | +0.23 |
| UT | 1.18 | 0.93 | +0.25 |
There’s not a lot of difference between the two teams in terms of field goal offense and defense or rebounding.
| Team | eFG% | FTRate | OR% | TO% |
| KU Off | 53.2 | 28.6 | 39.5 | 23.2 |
| UT Def | 44.8 | 27.2 | 29.8 | 20.5 |
Texas has more of the possessions in their games end with a shot attempt than does Kansas. The Jayhawks and their opponents are more likely to turn the ball over.
| Team | eFG% | FTRate | OR% | TO% |
| KU Def | 43.4 | 30.4 | 29.7 | 23.8 |
| UT Off | 53.3% | 26.2 | 42.1 | 19.3 |
It will be incumbent upon the Jayhawks to force Texas into more turnovers. An average Texas possession in conference play is worth 1.18 points to the Longhorns. Over a 67 possession game (Kansas plays at about 70 possessions a game; Texas plays at 64.), there’s a difference of 3 turnovers between the turnover rate Kansas forces on average and the average rate at which Texas turns the ball over. That’s three-and-a-half points the Jayhawks could gain on Saturday.
On the other hand, Texas will likely do a better job of keeping Kansas off the free throw line (their lack of depth forbids them from getting into foul trouble) than the typical conference opponent and could pick up an equal number of points versus the season averages.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Despite the evidence presented in the Field House on Saturday by the Missouri Tigers, I still contend that the Baylor Bears are the worst team in the Big 12. Working toward that contention, I offer the offensive and defensive efficiency numbers from each and every Baylor game this season.
Baylor has only been competitive in four games against three teams this season. They are last in the league in both offensive (though they do score 3 points more per 100 possessions than the average Kansas opponent in conference play) and defensive efficiency.
Kansas is better than Baylor in every statistical category. Every time a shot is attempted, Kansas is more likely to make the shot and more likely to rebound a missed shot. Kansas attempts more free throws and makes a higher percentage of their attempts than Baylor. Baylor gives their opponents more opportunities from the free throw line, force fewer turnovers, and turn the ball over slightly more often than Kansas.
Seven of the first eight players in Baylor’s rotation are less efficient scorers than Russell Robinson (who is at least 10% less efficient than any of his teammates). The eighth, Curtis Jerrells, is a promising young player but unlikely to get the best of Kansas’ perimeter defenders.
Prediction: Kansas 82 Baylor 48
| Opp | PPP | Opp PPP | Diff/100 |
| at TT | 0.97 | 1.27 | -30 |
| OSU | 0.71 | 0.99 | -28 |
| at CU | 0.75 | 1.25 | -50 |
| UT | 0.84 | 1.21 | -37 |
| OU | 0.78 | 1.27 | -49 |
| at A&M | 0.99 | 1.07 | -8 |
| KSU | 1.06 | 1.08 | -2 |
| at NU | 0.72 | 1.02 | -30 |
| MU | 1.32 | 0.98 | +34 |
| at OU | 0.77 | 1.15 | -38 |
| at UT | 0.89 | 1.27 | -38 |
| A&M | 0.86 | 0.93 | -7 |
Baylor has only been competitive in four games against three teams this season. They are last in the league in both offensive (though they do score 3 points more per 100 possessions than the average Kansas opponent in conference play) and defensive efficiency.
Kansas is better than Baylor in every statistical category. Every time a shot is attempted, Kansas is more likely to make the shot and more likely to rebound a missed shot. Kansas attempts more free throws and makes a higher percentage of their attempts than Baylor. Baylor gives their opponents more opportunities from the free throw line, force fewer turnovers, and turn the ball over slightly more often than Kansas.
Seven of the first eight players in Baylor’s rotation are less efficient scorers than Russell Robinson (who is at least 10% less efficient than any of his teammates). The eighth, Curtis Jerrells, is a promising young player but unlikely to get the best of Kansas’ perimeter defenders.
Prediction: Kansas 82 Baylor 48
Friday, February 10, 2006
Preview: Iowa State at Kansas
Most everything I wrote in my preview for the game in Ames still holds true. Iowa State puts their opponents on the line a lot, doesn’t force many missed field goal attempts, allows a ton of offensive rebounds, and attempts to make up for all of this by creating more turnovers than they commit.
On a night when their opponent misses a bunch of free throws and Curtis Stinson gets hot, the Cyclones can look fairly good. However, their method is not a recipe for consistent success.
I think everyone concedes that Kansas will have a tremendous advantage along the frontcourt, though Rahshon Clark is a far better player than he’s generally credited. Thus, I’ll spend my time today comparing the backcourts.
I’ll be using the players’ stats from conference play only. This is for simplicity’s sake. I’m not attempting to make any conclusions about any player’s true talent, just their production over a roughly equal period of time against roughly equal competition. It also helps that the two offenses have been equally productive in conference play. Kansas has averaged 1.09 points per possession (and 70 possessions per game) and Iowa State has averaged 1.10 points per possession (and 69.5 possessions per game).
First of all, Stinson and Blalock play a higher percentage of their team’s minutes than does the Jayhawk duo of Chalmers and Robinson.
Thus, even though the Jayhawk guards are more efficient than their Cyclone counterparts, they aren’t necessarily more productive:
Russell Robinson has a unique scoring profile. There are only two other players in the conference who play as much as Robinson and have a lower eFG%: Jason Horton and JamesOn Curry. In fact, there are only seven players, besides Robinson, who are permitted to play even half of their team’s minutes while shooting as poorly as Robinson from the field. Of those seven, Curry has the highest PPWS, 0.93. Robinson’s is 1.07. Why? They are 20 players in the Big 12 who have attempted a shot as often as has Robinson. Of those 20, Joseph Jones makes more free throws per shot attempt (FT Rate) than Robinson.
Russell Robinson has made only 25.9% of his three-point attempts and 44.4% of his two-point attempts and he’s still a league average scorer. With even a modest improvement in his shooting Robinson will become a dangerous all-around player.
The rest of Robinson’s game has already solidified into usefulness, as seen below.
However many more assists Chalmers and Robinson get from having quality big men who can (usually) finish, a luxury Stinson and Blalock certainly don’t posses, is countered by the assists that other Jayhawks earn. Stinson and Blalock have two teammates who average three or more assists per 100 possessions: Rahshon Clark (3.00) and Jiri Hubalek (3.33). Chalmers and Robinson have two teammates who average six or more assists per 100 possessions: Jeff Hawkins (6.50) and Julian Wright (6.05).
I see no reason to believe that Iowa State can expect to have an advantage in terms of backcourt play on Saturday, especially when you consider that Stinson and Blalock front a defense that allows 20% more points per game than Kansas. Nor do I have reason to believe that Iowa State's frontcourt is preparing for the game of their collective life.
Prediction: Kansas 84 Iowa State 72
On a night when their opponent misses a bunch of free throws and Curtis Stinson gets hot, the Cyclones can look fairly good. However, their method is not a recipe for consistent success.
I think everyone concedes that Kansas will have a tremendous advantage along the frontcourt, though Rahshon Clark is a far better player than he’s generally credited. Thus, I’ll spend my time today comparing the backcourts.
I’ll be using the players’ stats from conference play only. This is for simplicity’s sake. I’m not attempting to make any conclusions about any player’s true talent, just their production over a roughly equal period of time against roughly equal competition. It also helps that the two offenses have been equally productive in conference play. Kansas has averaged 1.09 points per possession (and 70 possessions per game) and Iowa State has averaged 1.10 points per possession (and 69.5 possessions per game).
First of all, Stinson and Blalock play a higher percentage of their team’s minutes than does the Jayhawk duo of Chalmers and Robinson.
| Player | %min |
| Stinson | 91.8 |
| Blalock | 88.5 |
| Chalmers | 73.4 |
| Robinson | 74.8 |
Thus, even though the Jayhawk guards are more efficient than their Cyclone counterparts, they aren’t necessarily more productive:
| Player | Pts/100 | PPWS | eFG% | FT% | FT Rate |
| Stinson | 32.5 | 1.13 | 53.0 | 72.7 | 21.6 |
| Blalock | 20.7 | 1.08 | 49.6 | 80.0 | 20.7 |
| Chalmers | 27.9 | 1.26 | 57.0 | 81.0 | 39.5 |
| Robinson | 22.2 | 1.07 | 42.6 | 86.4 | 46.9 |
Russell Robinson has a unique scoring profile. There are only two other players in the conference who play as much as Robinson and have a lower eFG%: Jason Horton and JamesOn Curry. In fact, there are only seven players, besides Robinson, who are permitted to play even half of their team’s minutes while shooting as poorly as Robinson from the field. Of those seven, Curry has the highest PPWS, 0.93. Robinson’s is 1.07. Why? They are 20 players in the Big 12 who have attempted a shot as often as has Robinson. Of those 20, Joseph Jones makes more free throws per shot attempt (FT Rate) than Robinson.
Russell Robinson has made only 25.9% of his three-point attempts and 44.4% of his two-point attempts and he’s still a league average scorer. With even a modest improvement in his shooting Robinson will become a dangerous all-around player.
The rest of Robinson’s game has already solidified into usefulness, as seen below.
| Player | A/100 | TO/100 | A/TO | S/100 | BS/100 |
| Stinson | 9.30 | 5.68 | 1.64 | 4.13 | 0.00 |
| Blalock | 8.21 | 5.36 | 1.53 | 3.39 | 0.00 |
| Chalmers | 10.16 | 6.98 | 1.45 | 6.29 | 0.42 |
| Robinson | 8.52 | 3.91 | 1.95 | 3.91 | 0.21 |
However many more assists Chalmers and Robinson get from having quality big men who can (usually) finish, a luxury Stinson and Blalock certainly don’t posses, is countered by the assists that other Jayhawks earn. Stinson and Blalock have two teammates who average three or more assists per 100 possessions: Rahshon Clark (3.00) and Jiri Hubalek (3.33). Chalmers and Robinson have two teammates who average six or more assists per 100 possessions: Jeff Hawkins (6.50) and Julian Wright (6.05).
I see no reason to believe that Iowa State can expect to have an advantage in terms of backcourt play on Saturday, especially when you consider that Stinson and Blalock front a defense that allows 20% more points per game than Kansas. Nor do I have reason to believe that Iowa State's frontcourt is preparing for the game of their collective life.
Prediction: Kansas 84 Iowa State 72
Big 12 Individual Leaders
These stats are from conference games (through February 8th) only. They are tempo free: per 100 possessions for points, assists, steals, and blocks; per opportunity for rebounds. I have included a column indicating the percentage of possible minutes each player has played so that you might weigh their efficiency against the volume of their contributions.
First, of course, comes scoring. Players are ranked by points per 100 possessions. I have also included each player's points per weighted shot (PPWS) to give an idea of their efficiency.
As a point of reference, the league average is 1.07 points per weighted shot.
Below, I've listed everybody in the league who has played at least 40% of their team's minutes and scored 1.2 or more points per weighted shot.
The Texas backcourt scores extremely efficiently.
We also see how much Oklahoma depends on Michael Neal to maximize their offense. The first table of this post shows that Everett and Gray are barely above the league average in PPWS. Bookout is below average (1.04). Austin Johnson sports the lowest PPWS of anyone playing half their team's minutes in the Big 12 (0.62). This is why, as evidenced in Lawrence, the Sooners need everything to go right in order to beat a decent team.
Please keep in mind, when looking at the rebounding stats, that rebounds don't occur in a vacuum. Texas and Oklahoma are easily the best rebounding teams in the conference. Multiple players on both those teams have solid rebound rates, thus supressing individual rates somewhat.
Offensive rebounding:
Defensive rebounding:
Total rebounding (Again, as with the team stats, I don't how to quantify the relative value of an offensive rebound to a defensive rebound thus good offensive rebounders are likely underrated in the list below.):
Assists:
Granted, it stems in large part from the abilities of his teammates and the attention they draw, but AJ Abrams might be the efficiency MVP of the Big 12. His 11.5 A/100, 75.0 eFG%, and 3.44 A/TO all lead the league.
Steals:
When it comes to taking the ball away in conference play, there's Mario Chalmers and every body else. The difference in steal rate between Chalmers and Stinson is slightly greater than the difference between Stinson and the 37th ranked player in steal rate, Jason Dorisseau (1.99 S/100).
I didn't realize how few shots have been blocked in Big 12 play. Here's the top 9, only six of whom play half their team's minutes:
You’ll see more complete examinations of individual players’ tempo-free stats in the KU-Iowa State preview later today. I have the numbers for everybody who has played 100 minutes in Big 12 play. If there’s someone or something about which you’re curious, please, just ask.
First, of course, comes scoring. Players are ranked by points per 100 possessions. I have also included each player's points per weighted shot (PPWS) to give an idea of their efficiency.
| Player | Team | Pts/100 | PPWS | %min |
| Roby | CU | 38.5 | 1.14 | 79.4 |
| Gardner | MU | 36.2 | 1.15 | 84.9 |
| Jones | A&M | 35.3 | 1.19 | 72.1 |
| Martin | KSU | 33.6 | 1.15 | 81.4 |
| Stinson | ISU | 32.5 | 1.13 | 91.8 |
| Law | A&M | 32.4 | 1.15 | 93.6 |
| Jackson | TT | 31.0 | 1.18 | 97.8 |
| Boggan | OSU | 30.8 | 1.23 | 68.1 |
| Gibson | UT | 29.6 | 1.25 | 92.5 |
| Everett | OU | 28.4 | 1.09 | 89.2 |
| Tucker | UT | 28.1 | 1.13 | 90.0 |
| Rush | KU | 27.9 | 1.19 | 83.6 |
| Chalmers | KU | 27.9 | 1.26 | 73.4 |
| Gray | OU | 27.4 | 1.11 | 75.8 |
| Copeland | CU | 27.1 | 1.17 | 64.2 |
| Clark | ISU | 27.0 | 1.15 | 68.5 |
As a point of reference, the league average is 1.07 points per weighted shot.
Below, I've listed everybody in the league who has played at least 40% of their team's minutes and scored 1.2 or more points per weighted shot.
| Player | Team | PPWS | %min |
| Abrams | UT | 1.52 | 47.2 |
| Neal | OU | 1.37 | 52.2 |
| Paulino | UT | 1.32 | 71.9 |
| Walker | A&M | 1.27 | 63.7 |
| Kaun | KU | 1.27 | 46.0 |
| Chalmers | KU | 1.26 | 73.4 |
| Gibson | UT | 1.25 | 92.5 |
| Stewart | KSU | 1.24 | 66.8 |
| Jackson | KU | 1.24 | 44.9 |
| Boggan | OSU | 1.23 | 68.1 |
| Harris | OSU | 1.23 | 53.0 |
| Kirk | A&M | 1.21 | 69.4 |
| Johnson | OSU | 1.21 | 55.7 |
The Texas backcourt scores extremely efficiently.
We also see how much Oklahoma depends on Michael Neal to maximize their offense. The first table of this post shows that Everett and Gray are barely above the league average in PPWS. Bookout is below average (1.04). Austin Johnson sports the lowest PPWS of anyone playing half their team's minutes in the Big 12 (0.62). This is why, as evidenced in Lawrence, the Sooners need everything to go right in order to beat a decent team.
Please keep in mind, when looking at the rebounding stats, that rebounds don't occur in a vacuum. Texas and Oklahoma are easily the best rebounding teams in the conference. Multiple players on both those teams have solid rebound rates, thus supressing individual rates somewhat.
Offensive rebounding:
| Player | Team | OR% | %min |
| Gray | OU | 14.6 | 75.8 |
| Young | MU | 14.6 | 68.4 |
| Jackson | KU | 14.6 | 44.9 |
| Freeman | CU | 14.6 | 43.1 |
| Maric | NU | 13.4 | 65.8 |
| Diarra | KSU | 13.2 | 71.0 |
| Diene | BU | 13.1 | 58.4 |
| Bookout | OU | 12.6 | 85.0 |
| Dorisseau | NU | 12.2 | 77.8 |
| Boggan | OSU | 12.2 | 68.1 |
| Taggart | ISU | 11.9 | 53.2 |
| Kaun | KU | 11.4 | 46.0 |
Defensive rebounding:
| Player | Team | DR% | %min |
| Maric | NU | 23.9 | 65.8 |
| Tucker | UT | 23.6 | 90.0 |
| Clark | ISU | 21.4 | 68.5 |
| Jones | A&M | 20.3 | 72.1 |
| Jackson | KU | 19.7 | 44.9 |
| Monds | OSU | 19.6 | 51.1 |
| Johnson | OSU | 18.6 | 55.7 |
| Lowhorn | TT | 17.6 | 54.2 |
| Aldridge | UT | 17.4 | 82.5 |
| Ashby | CU | 16.6 | 43.6 |
| Rush | KU | 16.4 | 83.6 |
| Kaun | KU | 16.4 | 46.0 |
| Gray | OU | 16.0 | 75.8 |
| Wilkinson | NU | 15.8 | 74.7 |
| Boggan | OSU | 15.7 | 68.1 |
| Wright | KU | 15.7 | 41.1 |
| Kirk | A&M | 15.6 | 69.4 |
Total rebounding (Again, as with the team stats, I don't how to quantify the relative value of an offensive rebound to a defensive rebound thus good offensive rebounders are likely underrated in the list below.):
| Player | Team | TR% | %min |
| Maric | NU | 18.5 | 65.8 |
| Jackson | KU | 17.4 | 44.9 |
| Tucker | UT | 16.8 | 90.0 |
| Gray | OU | 15.3 | 75.8 |
| Johnson | OSU | 15.0 | 55.7 |
| Jones | A&M | 14.6 | 72.1 |
| Young | MU | 14.6 | 68.4 |
| Kaun | KU | 14.1 | 46.0 |
| Clark | ISU | 14.0 | 68.5 |
| Boggan | OSU | 14.0 | 68.1 |
| Lowhorn | TT | 13.8 | 54.2 |
| Aldridge | UT | 13.6 | 82.5 |
Assists:
| Player | Team | A/100 | A/TO | %min |
| Abrams | UT | 11.51 | 3.44 | 47.2 |
| Everett | OU | 10.26 | 1.31 | 89.2 |
| Chalmers | KU | 10.16 | 1.45 | 73.4 |
| Brown | OSU | 10.16 | 2.64 | 60.5 |
| Stinson | ISU | 9.30 | 1.64 | 91.8 |
| Stewart | KSU | 8.63 | 1.89 | 66.8 |
| Paulino | UT | 8.53 | 1.75 | 71.9 |
| Robinson | KU | 8.52 | 1.95 | 74.8 |
| Blalock | ISU | 8.21 | 1.53 | 88.5 |
| Dora | TT | 8.13 | 2.00 | 74.2 |
| Hall | CU | 7.66 | 1.79 | 71.4 |
| Jerells | BU | 7.40 | 1.35 | 71.5 |
Granted, it stems in large part from the abilities of his teammates and the attention they draw, but AJ Abrams might be the efficiency MVP of the Big 12. His 11.5 A/100, 75.0 eFG%, and 3.44 A/TO all lead the league.
Steals:
| Player | Team | S/100 | %min |
| Chalmers | KU | 6.29 | 73.4 |
| Stinson | ISU | 4.13 | 91.8 |
| Robinson | KU | 3.91 | 74.8 |
| Paulino | UT | 3.87 | 71.9 |
| Jones | A&M | 3.65 | 72.1 |
| Maric | NU | 3.65 | 65.8 |
| Roby | CU | 3.64 | 79.4 |
| Godbold | OU | 3.54 | 70.3 |
| Blalock | ISU | 3.39 | 88.5 |
| White | NU | 3.27 | 52.5 |
| Everett | OU | 3.19 | 89.2 |
| Aldridge | UT | 3.16 | 82.5 |
When it comes to taking the ball away in conference play, there's Mario Chalmers and every body else. The difference in steal rate between Chalmers and Stinson is slightly greater than the difference between Stinson and the 37th ranked player in steal rate, Jason Dorisseau (1.99 S/100).
I didn't realize how few shots have been blocked in Big 12 play. Here's the top 9, only six of whom play half their team's minutes:
| Player | Team | BS/100 | %min |
| Diene | BU | 4.22 | 58.4 |
| Ashby | CU | 4.05 | 43.6 |
| Copeland | CU | 3.75 | 64.2 |
| Diarra | KSU | 3.58 | 71.0 |
| Gray | OU | 3.28 | 75.8 |
| Buckman | UT | 3.06 | 73.9 |
| Kaun | KU | 3.01 | 46.0 |
| Wright | KU | 2.62 | 41.1 |
| Aldridge | UT | 2.53 | 82.5 |
You’ll see more complete examinations of individual players’ tempo-free stats in the KU-Iowa State preview later today. I have the numbers for everybody who has played 100 minutes in Big 12 play. If there’s someone or something about which you’re curious, please, just ask.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)