Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [APBR_analysis] Re: Let's discuss scouting (How would you do a better job?) (long)

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Dickey
    ... Actually, I don t think anyone expects players to replicate their college stats. Laettner was a very good player statistically in college, but not
    Message 1 of 55 , Jun 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      >From: "Michael Tamada" <tamada@...>
      >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
      >To: <APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com>
      >Subject: RE: [APBR_analysis] Re: Let's discuss scouting (How would you do a
      >better job?) (long)
      >Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:14:31 -0700

      > Another possibility would be to split players by quality of team, although
      >it could very well be that players from high-powered college teams might
      >have *worse* predictability, because their teams and teammates might simply
      >be overpowering weak college opponents, giving them stats that they won't
      >be able to replicate in the pros (Laettner, Hurley).

      Actually, I don't think anyone expects players to replicate their college
      stats. Laettner was a very good player statistically in college, but not
      phenominal (like David Robinson or Duncan or Shaq, etc). Laettner has been
      a solid pro. Hurley's stats were solid in college (mainly his assists and
      three point shooting) - but his lower scoring average and ok defensive
      statistics didn't foretell a great pro future. I predicted him personally
      to be a major bust.

      Of the Duke stars - I fully expected Grant Hill, Brand, and Shane Battier
      (in a Ron Artest sort of way) to be NBA stars. I expected Ferry could be a
      good NBA scorer (maybe like Tom Chambers statistically) - he disappointed
      obviously. I expected Laettner to be good NBA PF, but not a star - he as
      disappointed a little. And of course - I thought Boozer was just as good at
      what he does as Dunleavy and J. Williams were at their strengths.

      One thing that cracks me up about very good white, tall, college shooters
      (talking about Duke made me think of this) is that they are always compared
      by someone to Larry Bird. Anyone that knew anything knew that Ferry,
      Laettner, Van Horn, Croshere, etc - NONE of them could be Bird. One reason
      - although all solid shooters in their own way - none could be the high
      volume scorer Bird was capable of. The other BIGGEST reason is that they
      couldn't PASS like Bird, and didn't ave his court awareness. They couldn't
      create opportunities for their teamates - and thus create even more
      opportunities for themselves (by keeping the defense honest).

      The only guy in college above 6'8" that had the court awareness of Bird and
      Magic that I can think of is Luke Walton. He may not be their level - but
      he's close. However, his game has MANY glaring weaknesses that theirs
      didn't have.

      Back to the subject - I think rebounding prowess could be predicted a bit.
      I'd use percentage of rebounds compared to opponents totals in college -
      then use a strength of schedule multiplier. (I have using Sagarin's, (team's
      SoS/80)^2). From this you could rank all the college players - and I bet it
      will give very good insight on well they'll rebound at the NBA level
      comparitevely.

      Does ANYONE know where I can find past team totals (and opponent totals) -
      so I can do some real statistical comparisons? If I had that and past
      strength of schedules - I could attempt a similarity scores between players
      and their college careers. I think that could be a good predictor.

      I can promise you - after making adjustments for pace and schedule strength
      - the similar past college players of Dwayne Wade would foretell a future
      star, for example.

      _________________________________________________________________
      MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page � FREE
      download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
    • Mike G
      ... The ... have to ... much all top ... mediocre ... Take it further and just state that the vast majority of college stars do not succeed at the NBA level --
      Message 55 of 55 , Jun 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- <danthestatman@h...> wrote:

        > >From: "John Hollinger" <alleyoop2@y...>
        > >One other thing: High assist guys almost never succeed as pros.
        The
        > >reason is that to be good enough to be in the NBA, you almost
        have to
        > >be the best player on your college team. And if you're the best
        > >player, you're probably leading the team in points rather than
        > >assists.
        > >
        > I assume you mean high assist, lower scoring guys. Pretty
        much all top
        > tier PGs were high assist guys in college - but very few were
        mediocre
        > scorers in college ...

        Take it further and just state that the vast majority of college
        stars do not succeed at the NBA level -- be they assist guys,
        scorers, or whatever.

        Is the best player on a bad team more likely to succeed in the NBA
        than the sidekick on a championship team? I doubt it.

        Bobby Hurley was often likened to Bob Cousy. I imagined we might
        find out how Cousy would do in the '90s NBA. Did we ?
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.