one thought: 42, CUSA tourney record

(03-11-2016 06:09 PM)HeadsetGuy Wrote:  one thought: 42, CUSA tourney record

+1

I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

There are many talented players in CUSA. I am not going to debate who deserves POY. I am very hopeful that ODU will win Conference Championship and Trey Freeman will earn Player of the Tournament!

(03-11-2016 06:12 PM)FTW ODU Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 06:09 PM)HeadsetGuy Wrote:  one thought: 42, CUSA tourney record

+1

+2 and I've said it all year.

I honestly can't imagine what more people need to see. Trey Freeman is the only player that I've seen, in this conference, that is totally unstoppable. Best player in the conference? Hell one of the best players in the country.

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

More shot attempts= lower field goal percentage.

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

I understand your concept of extrapolating the data out to show what others could or might have done if they had taken the same number of shots.

Trey led the league in scoring averaging 25 per game in conference games. If you took a seldom used player off of any team that averaged 2 minutes per game and 1 point a game by using the same logic you could say that he would average 20 points a game if he only played 40 minutes instead of 2. It simply doesn't work out that way. If he was good enough to average 20 then he would be playing a lot more.

If the other guys were good enough to effectively shoot at a higher pace then they would be doing so. They aren't so they don't. Hamilton scored 12 against ODU yesterday. If he could have shot and scored more to help his team win yesterday don't you think he would have done so? That is exactly why this concept isn't worth spit. Trey is relentless against any team's defense. Others simply take less shots when defended well which might work for your calculations of extrapolated data, but doesn't work in the real world.

(03-11-2016 07:41 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

More shot attempts= lower field goal percentage.

I considered that and it makes some amount of sense, but I haven't been able to find a study that finds correlation between increasing shot attempts and FG%. Hypothetically, with increasing shot attempts each player's field goal percentage would move towards their mean FG%, so it's entirely possible that each player's FG% would decrease. So certainly take the stats with a grain of salt.

(03-11-2016 08:00 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

I understand your concept of extrapolating the data out to show what others could or might have done if they had taken the same number of shots.

Trey led the league in scoring averaging 25 per game in conference games. If you took a seldom used player off of any team that averaged 2 minutes per game and 1 point a game by using the same logic you could say that he would average 20 points a game if he only played 40 minutes instead of 2. It simply doesn't work out that way. If he was good enough to average 20 then he would be playing a lot more.

If the other guys were good enough to effectively shoot at a higher pace then they would be doing so. They aren't so they don't. Hamilton scored 12 against ODU yesterday. If he could have shot and scored more to help his team win yesterday don't you think he would have done so? That is exactly why this concept isn't worth spit. Trey is relentless against any team's defense. Others simply take less shots when defended well which might work for your calculations of extrapolated data, but doesn't work in the real world.

I get what you're saying and I respect the opinion, but I don't necessarily agree. First off, any stat you can find, regardless of how advanced it is, is going to extremely inaccurate when you look at too small a sample size. For example, according to Basketball Reference's box score +/-, the best player this year was Thomas Smallwood. That doesn't mean BPM is a bad metric, it just means you have to use it in the right setting. Secondly, I don't think you can say that the just because the other guys didn't shoot more doesn't mean they couldn't. I know Marcus Evans could've taken 20+ shots a game if he wanted. Granted, I don't know how Evans/Hamilton/Kelly's FG% would've have changed with the increasing shot attempts. All I presented was a scoring statistic with Freeman's shot rate as the baseline. If I had a correlation statistic that illustrated how FG% is affected by increased shot attempts, I would've factored it in. Again, I have no agenda here, except to provide a rough picture of what other guys could've possibly averaged with the amount of Freeman's shot attempts.

Apparently Freeman has more attempts this year than anyone in the country, I've seen enough games this year to say that most of those have been mid range jumpers where he's either dribbled, got a half step, stopped and popped or caught turned and shot. What's the percentage on those shots? Most any other player that starts taking those is gonna get pulled and an earful from thier coach. He makes those at a crazy high percentage I'd say.

Scoring points are better than possibly scoring points if you took more shots. Its like a giy hitting .400 in 200 at bats vs a guy hitting .330 in 600 at bats.

If that isnt a good analogy, then consider when you take more shots, its prolly bc your team is relying on you to take some tough shots

Other teams are unable to stop Trey although he has a huge target on his back. He is double teamed and earlier in the season when his teammates forgot how to score, Trey was triple teamed. He makes the most difficult shots that makes you drop your jaw and wonder how does he continue to do that every game. He just has that x factor...intangibles. That is why IMO he should have been POY. Hopefully. ODU wins tomorrow and he will be named MVP of the Tournament. Go MONARCHS!

(03-11-2016 08:18 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 08:00 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

I understand your concept of extrapolating the data out to show what others could or might have done if they had taken the same number of shots.

Trey led the league in scoring averaging 25 per game in conference games. If you took a seldom used player off of any team that averaged 2 minutes per game and 1 point a game by using the same logic you could say that he would average 20 points a game if he only played 40 minutes instead of 2. It simply doesn't work out that way. If he was good enough to average 20 then he would be playing a lot more.

If the other guys were good enough to effectively shoot at a higher pace then they would be doing so. They aren't so they don't. Hamilton scored 12 against ODU yesterday. If he could have shot and scored more to help his team win yesterday don't you think he would have done so? That is exactly why this concept isn't worth spit. Trey is relentless against any team's defense. Others simply take less shots when defended well which might work for your calculations of extrapolated data, but doesn't work in the real world.

First off, any stat you can find, regardless of how advanced it is, is going to extremely inaccurate when you look at too small a sample size. For example, according to Basketball Reference's box score +/-, the best player this year was Thomas Smallwood. That doesn't mean BPM is a bad metric, it just means you have to use it in the right setting. Secondly, I don't think you can say that the just because the other guys didn't shoot more doesn't mean they couldn't. I know Marcus Evans could've taken 20+ shots a game if he wanted. Granted, I don't know how Evans/Hamilton/Kelly's FG% would've have changed with the increasing shot attempts. All I presented was a scoring statistic with Freeman's shot rate as the baseline. If I had a correlation statistic that illustrated how FG% is affected by increased shot attempts, I would've factored it in. Again, I have no agenda here, except to provide a rough picture of what other guys could've possibly averaged with the amount of Freeman's shot attempts.

I get what you're saying and I respect the opinion, but I don't necessarily agree. If the coaches at Rice (with Evans), LA Tech (with Hamilton), or Marshall (with Kelly) felt that their team would be more successful with any of those players taking more shots then they would be taking more shots. Players that are decent shooters (and some that aren't) all like to shoot. The more shots a player puts up the more the defenses gravitate to them to the point where the team is game planning to specifically stop that player. Once that happens, said player is typically less efficient than what they were before. Trey gets that level of attention every night. There is also the fatigue factor. Trey works his a$$ off running off of screens just to get a split second look at a jump shot. A lot of players probably don't have that stamina to do that every time down the floor, and certainly need more time to size up their shot in order to be successful. Not every starting baseball pitcher can still throw his fastball in the mid 90's in the 9th inning, even though they could in the 5th or 6th inning. Some can though. That's why you can't use statistics to say that those pitchers that couldn't would have more strike outs per game than Nolan Ryan if they had pitched as many innings as he did per game.

This is especially true and easy to see in a team like Rice. Markus Evans is one of the better players in the league and by far the best player on a fairly unsuccessful Rice team. As it is, Evans finished 2nd in the league in scoring. If he could have scored at a much more prolific rate simply by shooting another 10 times or more then the coach would have had him shoot every time down the floor unless someone had a breakaway layup. Of course it is fools gold to think that way because the defenses would adjust to his increased shooting attempts and again his efficiency would go down. Few guys in the college game can get their shot off time and time again (and still make a decent percentage) with defenses keying on them like Freeman can. That's why you don't see it more often and there is no statistic that is going to tell you that.

(03-11-2016 11:44 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 08:18 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 08:00 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

I understand your concept of extrapolating the data out to show what others could or might have done if they had taken the same number of shots.

Trey led the league in scoring averaging 25 per game in conference games. If you took a seldom used player off of any team that averaged 2 minutes per game and 1 point a game by using the same logic you could say that he would average 20 points a game if he only played 40 minutes instead of 2. It simply doesn't work out that way. If he was good enough to average 20 then he would be playing a lot more.

If the other guys were good enough to effectively shoot at a higher pace then they would be doing so. They aren't so they don't. Hamilton scored 12 against ODU yesterday. If he could have shot and scored more to help his team win yesterday don't you think he would have done so? That is exactly why this concept isn't worth spit. Trey is relentless against any team's defense. Others simply take less shots when defended well which might work for your calculations of extrapolated data, but doesn't work in the real world.

First off, any stat you can find, regardless of how advanced it is, is going to extremely inaccurate when you look at too small a sample size. For example, according to Basketball Reference's box score +/-, the best player this year was Thomas Smallwood. That doesn't mean BPM is a bad metric, it just means you have to use it in the right setting. Secondly, I don't think you can say that the just because the other guys didn't shoot more doesn't mean they couldn't. I know Marcus Evans could've taken 20+ shots a game if he wanted. Granted, I don't know how Evans/Hamilton/Kelly's FG% would've have changed with the increasing shot attempts. All I presented was a scoring statistic with Freeman's shot rate as the baseline. If I had a correlation statistic that illustrated how FG% is affected by increased shot attempts, I would've factored it in. Again, I have no agenda here, except to provide a rough picture of what other guys could've possibly averaged with the amount of Freeman's shot attempts.

I get what you're saying and I respect the opinion, but I don't necessarily agree. If the coaches at Rice (with Evans), LA Tech (with Hamilton), or Marshall (with Kelly) felt that their team would be more successful with any of those players taking more shots then they would be taking more shots. Players that are decent shooters (and some that aren't) all like to shoot. The more shots a player puts up the more the defenses gravitate to them to the point where the team is game planning to specifically stop that player. Once that happens, said player is typically less efficient than what they were before. Trey gets that level of attention every night. There is also the fatigue factor. Trey works his a$$ off running off of screens just to get a split second look at a jump shot. A lot of players probably don't have that stamina to do that every time down the floor, and certainly need more time to size up their shot in order to be successful. Not every starting baseball pitcher can still throw his fastball in the mid 90's in the 9th inning, even though they could in the 5th or 6th inning. Some can though. That's why you can't use statistics to say that those pitchers that couldn't would have more strike outs per game than Nolan Ryan if they had pitched as many innings as he did per game.

This is especially true and easy to see in a team like Rice. Markus Evans is one of the better players in the league and by far the best player on a fairly unsuccessful Rice team. As it is, Evans finished 2nd in the league in scoring. If he could have scored at a much more prolific rate simply by shooting another 10 times or more then the coach would have had him shoot every time down the floor unless someone had a breakaway layup. Of course it is fools gold to think that way because the defenses would adjust to his increased shooting attempts and again his efficiency would go down. Few guys in the college game can get their shot off time and time again (and still make a decent percentage) with defenses keying on them like Freeman can. That's why you don't see it more often and there is no statistic that is going to tell you that.

Okay, so let's suppose for each of the players there was a regression in FG%. Let's use a 3% point decrease (completely random number). Kelly = ~25 points, Hamilton = ~26 points, Evans = ~25 points. My point has nothing to do with whether each guy could shoulder the load of Freeman, it's just meant to give a vague idea of what each's points would look like with Freeman's volume. The numbers hold true even if you assume FG% would go down (which I've looked at, and is completely false).

Perfectly Happy to see Freeman get the POY just as long as MT holds him under 20 pts. this afternoon, and MT takes home the GOLD!!!!!!!
So, is it true that Freeman's Momma we on "Star Trek-The Next Generation"?

(03-12-2016 12:53 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 11:44 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 08:18 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 08:00 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 06:19 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  I just did some quick calculations that I thought were interesting. If you set Freeman's shots attempted (19.8 p/g) as a baseline, and then standardize the other player of the year candidate's shooting numbers (factoring in % of 3PT shots, 2PT FG%, 3PT%, and FTM), here's what you get:
Freeman...21.8 ppg
Hamilton...27.1 ppg
Kelly...26.5 ppg
Evans...26.7 ppg
Again, I'm just throwing this out because I found it interesting. Even with this, if POY voting factored in postseason my vote would've probably changed to Freeman.

I understand your concept of extrapolating the data out to show what others could or might have done if they had taken the same number of shots.

Trey led the league in scoring averaging 25 per game in conference games. If you took a seldom used player off of any team that averaged 2 minutes per game and 1 point a game by using the same logic you could say that he would average 20 points a game if he only played 40 minutes instead of 2. It simply doesn't work out that way. If he was good enough to average 20 then he would be playing a lot more.

If the other guys were good enough to effectively shoot at a higher pace then they would be doing so. They aren't so they don't. Hamilton scored 12 against ODU yesterday. If he could have shot and scored more to help his team win yesterday don't you think he would have done so? That is exactly why this concept isn't worth spit. Trey is relentless against any team's defense. Others simply take less shots when defended well which might work for your calculations of extrapolated data, but doesn't work in the real world.

First off, any stat you can find, regardless of how advanced it is, is going to extremely inaccurate when you look at too small a sample size. For example, according to Basketball Reference's box score +/-, the best player this year was Thomas Smallwood. That doesn't mean BPM is a bad metric, it just means you have to use it in the right setting. Secondly, I don't think you can say that the just because the other guys didn't shoot more doesn't mean they couldn't. I know Marcus Evans could've taken 20+ shots a game if he wanted. Granted, I don't know how Evans/Hamilton/Kelly's FG% would've have changed with the increasing shot attempts. All I presented was a scoring statistic with Freeman's shot rate as the baseline. If I had a correlation statistic that illustrated how FG% is affected by increased shot attempts, I would've factored it in. Again, I have no agenda here, except to provide a rough picture of what other guys could've possibly averaged with the amount of Freeman's shot attempts.

I get what you're saying and I respect the opinion, but I don't necessarily agree. If the coaches at Rice (with Evans), LA Tech (with Hamilton), or Marshall (with Kelly) felt that their team would be more successful with any of those players taking more shots then they would be taking more shots. Players that are decent shooters (and some that aren't) all like to shoot. The more shots a player puts up the more the defenses gravitate to them to the point where the team is game planning to specifically stop that player. Once that happens, said player is typically less efficient than what they were before. Trey gets that level of attention every night. There is also the fatigue factor. Trey works his a$$ off running off of screens just to get a split second look at a jump shot. A lot of players probably don't have that stamina to do that every time down the floor, and certainly need more time to size up their shot in order to be successful. Not every starting baseball pitcher can still throw his fastball in the mid 90's in the 9th inning, even though they could in the 5th or 6th inning. Some can though. That's why you can't use statistics to say that those pitchers that couldn't would have more strike outs per game than Nolan Ryan if they had pitched as many innings as he did per game.

This is especially true and easy to see in a team like Rice. Markus Evans is one of the better players in the league and by far the best player on a fairly unsuccessful Rice team. As it is, Evans finished 2nd in the league in scoring. If he could have scored at a much more prolific rate simply by shooting another 10 times or more then the coach would have had him shoot every time down the floor unless someone had a breakaway layup. Of course it is fools gold to think that way because the defenses would adjust to his increased shooting attempts and again his efficiency would go down. Few guys in the college game can get their shot off time and time again (and still make a decent percentage) with defenses keying on them like Freeman can. That's why you don't see it more often and there is no statistic that is going to tell you that.

Okay, so let's suppose for each of the players there was a regression in FG%. Let's use a 3% point decrease (completely random number). Kelly = ~25 points, Hamilton = ~26 points, Evans = ~25 points. My point has nothing to do with whether each guy could shoulder the load of Freeman, it's just meant to give a vague idea of what each's points would look like with Freeman's volume. The numbers hold true even if you assume FG% would go down (which I've looked at, and is completely false).

You could use most big players and project their shots to freemans and tbey would score more bc they shoot more effeicient shots at a closer range. But that doesnt mean anything, bc they would never be able to average 20 efficient shots. Your logic doesnt hold water.

Except I didn't, and wouldn't, project a big man who solely plays around the basket. I projected two guards and a stretch 4. You don't have to believe the stat, because I know there are clear faults in it. But if you look at metrics on Freeman he ranks behind Hamilton and Kelly in PER, behind Hamilton in Win Shares, and behind Hamilton (and interestingly enough Brandan Stith) in box score plus minus. I like to think in terms of stats and numbers, and it isn't like what I wrote is too much of an outlier.

(03-12-2016 02:13 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  Except I didn't, and wouldn't, project a big man who solely plays around the basket. I projected two guards and a stretch 4. You don't have to believe the stat, because I know there are clear faults in it. But if you look at metrics on Freeman he ranks behind Hamilton and Kelly in PER, behind Hamilton in Win Shares, and behind Hamilton (and interestingly enough Brandan Stith) in box score plus minus. I like to think in terms of stats and numbers, and it isn't like what I wrote is too much of an outlier.

You're absolutely right. They all could have easily averaged 30 a game and dozens of people could have scored 42 on Friday against WKU to set the new conference tournament scoring record in a game. Heck, I don't know why they don't just take every shot, average 80 a game and watch the victories stack up. I guess guys like Evans of Rice just don't want to score that much to help their team win ... go figure?

(03-13-2016 09:52 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 02:13 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  Except I didn't, and wouldn't, project a big man who solely plays around the basket. I projected two guards and a stretch 4. You don't have to believe the stat, because I know there are clear faults in it. But if you look at metrics on Freeman he ranks behind Hamilton and Kelly in PER, behind Hamilton in Win Shares, and behind Hamilton (and interestingly enough Brandan Stith) in box score plus minus. I like to think in terms of stats and numbers, and it isn't like what I wrote is too much of an outlier.

You're absolutely right. They all could have easily averaged 30 a game and dozens of people could have scored 42 on Friday against WKU to set the new conference tournament scoring record in a game. Heck, I don't know why they don't just take every shot, average 80 a game and watch the victories stack up. I guess guys like Evans of Rice just don't want to score that much to help their team win ... go figure?

I don't even know how to argue with this type of stupidity. Nothing I've said is an indictment of ODU's system this year, just what would happen if you put other guys in a similar system. Disagree with my stat all you want, but you can't disagree with every metric that illustrates the same point. I'm done with this conversation. I don't dislike Freeman, I think he's a great player, and as I've said before, he has the potential to play in the NBA.