Arkansas-Pine Bluff

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Thanks For sharing.

 

[sedziobs]

Here's a selection of 2-Foul Participation rates from last season:

Syracuse 58%
Duke 42%
Kansas 29%
West Virginia 21%
D-1 Average 20%
Gonzaga 15%
Kentucky 10%
Cincinnati 8%
Michigan St 6%
Virginia 4%
Michigan 1%

So while coach K is successful keeping players with 2 fouls on the floor in the first half, there are also many very successful coaches who do the opposite.

 

[cincrulz11]

Here's a selection of 2-Foul Participation rates from last season:

Syracuse 58%
Duke 42%
Kansas 29%
West Virginia 21%
D-1 Average 20%
Gonzaga 15%
Kentucky 10%
Cincinnati 8%
Michigan St 6%
Virginia 4%
Michigan 1%

So while coach K is successful keeping players with 2 fouls on the floor in the first half, there are also many very successful coaches who do the opposite.

welcome back, first posts of this season?

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

welcome back, first posts of this season?

I'll second this welcome back.

 

[sedziobs]

welcome back, first posts of this season?

Thanks. Yeah, first posts but I've been here reading most days. I just don't have much to contribute to debates about lineup decisions or style of play. I have my opinions, but we're all operating on what we see on TV, which isn't quite enough information to form concrete conclusions. I prefer to analyze things where we have some data to provide clarity. I do enjoy reading all of the banter though. I'll probably become a lot more active midway through the season when bracketology starts to become meaningful.

 

[waterhead]

Cumberland could avoid a lot of his fouls by reducing off ball fouls and reducing his charges by staying under control when he goes to the rack.

I think the plan with him has to be more proactive than reactive. If he gets one dumb off ball foul and one out of control charge...you have lost half the battle.

He could probably go a whole season without trouble if those two areas were addressed sufficiently.

 

[sedziobs]

Coincidentally, Arkansas Pine Bluff has a 100% 2-foul participation this year. That means their starters haven't seen the bench at all with two fouls in the first half.

 

[waterhead]

Thanks. Yeah, first posts but I've been here reading most days. I just don't have much to contribute to debates about lineup decisions or style of play. I have my opinions, but we're all operating on what we see on TV, which isn't quite enough information to form concrete conclusions. I prefer to analyze things where we have some data to provide clarity. I do enjoy reading all of the banter though. I'll probably become a lot more active midway through the season when bracketology starts to become meaningful.

I always enjoy a good objective stat/data breakdown. Keep it coming. I would agree much of the subjective fan opinion does not always include all of the necessary information (mine included). It's a fan board though so it's going to come with the territory.

 

[cincrulz11]

Thanks. Yeah, first posts but I've been here reading most days. I just don't have much to contribute to debates about lineup decisions or style of play. I have my opinions, but we're all operating on what we see on TV, which isn't quite enough information to form concrete conclusions. I prefer to analyze things where we have some data to provide clarity. I do enjoy reading all of the banter though. I'll probably become a lot more active midway through the season when bracketology starts to become meaningful.

you'll probably have fun with NET. i guess we'll get to see if its any better than RPI was.


ive read a few things about it i dont like, capping wins at 10 points, and the quality of your opponent doesn't matter for the stats you put up (holding duke to .98 ppp is the same as holding arkansas-pine bluff to .98ppp) but im not sure if thats actually true or people misinterpreting the data.


if it is true, it is probably a big benefit to us considering our schedule. rpi sucked but was actually great for us last year.

 

[cincrulz11]

you'll probably have fun with NET. i guess we'll get to see if its any better than RPI was.


ive read a few things about it i dont like, capping wins at 10 points, and the quality of your opponent doesn't matter for the stats you put up (holding duke to .98 ppp is the same as holding arkansas-pine bluff to .98ppp) but im not sure if thats actually true or people misinterpreting the data.


if it is true, it is probably a big benefit to us considering our schedule. rpi sucked but was actually great for us last year.

after reading what adam silver wrote earlier today i think what i said is correct. of the 5 components used for your ranking only 1 of them factors in strength of opponent. this should really help us this year.


he doesn't seem to think NET will self correct much from early rankings the way RPI would (at least the final RPI rankings were vastly different than the early ones)

 

[GarradJ21]

There might be an easier/better way to find these numbers than looking back at box scores, but that's what I did, so sorry if they are incorrect. We need to score more, plain and simple. We need to at least close the gap in free throw points because it will be a struggle for 3 pt shooting most likely all year.

Through the first 6 games:

2017-2018 3PT Shooting
13 for 39
9 for 21
12 for 29
4 for 10
13 for 24
7 for 14
58 for 137 = 42.3%

2017-2018 FT Shooting
12 for 24
27 for 34
21 for 36
27 for 35
12 for 17
9 for 14
108 for 160 = 67.5%


2018-2019 3PT Shooting
6 for 26
5 for 14
4 for 19
5 for 13
2 for 7
6 for 14
28 for 93 = 30.1%

2018-2019 FT Shooting
16 for 21
6 for 12
12 for 20
13 for 17
15 for 21
25 for 35
87 for 126 = 69.0%

That's 109 more points last year's team scored in 3 point shooting and free throws alone through the first 6 games of the year. We have shot 33 more free throws than 3 pt shots this year. Last year we shot 23 more 3 pt shots than free throws, so it looks like we are really learning to shoot more free throws than 3s, so that's good.

 

[cincrulz11]

There might be an easier/better way to find these numbers than looking back at box scores, but that's what I did, so sorry if they are incorrect. We need to score more, plain and simple. We need to at least close the gap in free throw points because it will be a struggle for 3 pt shooting most likely all year.

offense probably isn't going to be any better. 74 on kenpom is probably pretty decent for the offense we run and players we have.



like i posted earlier our schedule doesn't have a lot of good defensive teams, so the hope is our defense can hold them to fewer than we can score. if teams hit a lot of tough shots though, there might not be much we can do in those games.



our starting lineup still has 2 guys you dont really have to guard, and as long as you keep tre scott away from the rim you dont have to worry too much about him either (shooting 82% at the rim, 33% on all other 2 point shots). a small lineup from us is better offensively, but then we struggle to defend and rebound.

 

[waterhead]

I was looking for a good plus/minus data source and in doing so stumbled on this on Sports Reference. I have been looking for actual plus/minus numbers but they have the box plus/minus which will have to do for now. Anyway...




Box Plus/Minus Yearly Leaders and Records

Leaders are based on stats from the 1985-86 through 2018-19 seasons.
Not all leaderboards are available for seasons prior to 1992-93.

Since 2010-11
Minimum 20 MP/G and 75% of school games

Season Player BPM School
2018-19 Brandon Clarke 21.61 Gonzaga
2017-18 Gary Clark 15.53 Cincinnati
2016-17 Sindarius Thornwell 16.17 South Carolina
2015-16 Denzel Valentine 16.54 Michigan State
2014-15 Karl-Anthony Towns 17.30 Kentucky
2013-14 Joel Embiid 14.94 Kansas
2012-13 Victor Oladipo 16.97 Indiana
2011-12 Anthony Davis 18.67 Kentucky
2010-11 Draymond Green 13.64 Michigan State

 

[waterhead]

Looking around a bit more on BPM (box plus minus) on Sports Reference. Some interesting things show up.

Last year Keith Williams was last on the team in BPM. This year so far he is 1st!! Last year Jenifer was 2nd last to Williams and this year he is also 2nd last to Nsoseme.

 

[cincrulz11]

Looking around a bit more on BPM (box plus minus) on Sports Reference. Some interesting things show up.

Last year Keith Williams was last on the team in BPM. This year so far he is 1st!! Last year Jenifer was 2nd last to Williams and this year he is also 2nd last to Nsoseme.

reason being the difference in points allowed with Jenifer at pg vs anybody else isn't actually too much. but the difference on offense is noticeable.



i think defensive stats are probably still rough to take at face value just like they are in baseball. too much is going on, especially with our defense, to really tell who is at fault at times.


but for last year Jenifer had a DRtg of 96.3. Broome had a DRtg of 92.8. The lower the number the better, Gary Clark was at 81.6.



i just think the way we play defense as a team, with brooks and scott behind them, there probably isn't much of a difference in our points allowed per 100 possessions with any of the 3 different PGs in there.

 

[sedziobs]

Kenpom is not a fan of using plus-minus to evaluate players. He ran a simulation with a hypothetical average player over 50 games. In one, his plus-minus was -43. In the next it was +48. Basically, there is too much random noise that drowns out what an individual's impact is on the game score.

It’s true plus-minus captures everything that’s happening, but that includes a whole lot of random things that lead to a hoop or a stop. Things that have nothing to do with the ability of the player you want to analyze. In basketball analysis, we should be filtering out randomness, not embracing it.

 

[cincrulz11]

Kenpom is not a fan of using plus-minus to evaluate players. He ran a simulation with a hypothetical average player over 50 games. In one, his plus-minus was -43. In the next it was +48. Basically, there is too much random noise that drowns out what an individual's impact is on the game score.

assuming hypothetical average player would be worth 0 over 50 games on average?

 

[sedziobs]

assuming hypothetical average player would be worth 0 over 50 games on average?

Yes, in his simulation the player has the exact same attributes as everyone else on his team and the opponents team. It's basically 20 identical players split into two teams, each playing 20 minutes per game. So it's a completely controlled simulation. The only variance is random variability (which over the very long term trends toward zero, but for a smaller sample like a season it can be very large).

You can actually run a 20 game simulation yourself here:
https://kenpom.com/plus-minus.php

Hit refresh and it will run again. The results vary wildly from one "season" to the next.

 

[cincrulz11]

Yes, in his simulation the player has the exact same attributes as everyone else on his team and the opponents team. It's basically 20 identical players split into two teams, each playing 20 minutes per game. So it's a completely controlled simulation. The only variance is random variability (which over the very long term trends toward zero, but for a smaller sample like a season it can be very large).

You can actually run a 20 game simulation yourself here:
https://kenpom.com/plus-minus.php

Hit refresh and it will run again. The results vary wildly from one "season" to the next.

yes that is not at all surprising at all. 700 possession sample size. thats extremely small. variance is insane. do a variance simulator for a 0 winrate poker player over 200k hands. you could win or lose $7600 at a 200$ buy in table with a 95% confidence interval.



looking at his experiment he had the guy out there do nothing while everybody else on the court had 3% chance of scoring 1 point, 30% chance at 2 points, 15% chance of 3 points. i dont know if thats the best experiment to run, clearly those numbers are going to go crazy running simulations.



edit: not that i'd be smart enough to know how to come up with a better one

 

[waterhead]

reason being the difference in points allowed with Jenifer at pg vs anybody else isn't actually too much. but the difference on offense is noticeable.



i think defensive stats are probably still rough to take at face value just like they are in baseball. too much is going on, especially with our defense, to really tell who is at fault at times.


but for last year Jenifer had a DRtg of 96.3. Broome had a DRtg of 92.8. The lower the number the better, Gary Clark was at 81.6.



i just think the way we play defense as a team, with brooks and scott behind them, there probably isn't much of a difference in our points allowed per 100 possessions with any of the 3 different PGs in there.

I believe the defensive box plus minus DBPM counts blocks, steals and rebounds so it's naturally going to favor the bigs. While Cronin loved the way KJ played D...Kyle Washington rated out higher in the defensive box plus minus. Like you say the DBPM cannot factor in "guarding" or defensive breakdowns etc. Just stats and box scores

The overall BPM is going to therefore be weighted towards the bigs as well because the DBPM favors them. But I think we can get a pretty good general picture of a players overall worth (in terms of stats/production) by comparing guards to guards and bigs to bigs. It's definitely not as good as actual plus minus and I have no idea why nobody is tracking that anymore.