Scholarship table
Question for the group: How much does a player's role effect his efficiency (or potential efficiency)?Example: Jake Thomas was never born to be a world beater, but in theory, he could have been more efficient in a limited role. Same for Derrick. In theory, if Derrick's minutes decreased and his role is more limited, wouldn't his efficiency go up (but I suppose his usage would go down, right?)Or, what about a PG who is surrounded by great players/shooters. Wouldn't his efficiency look pretty good because he would rarely have to shoot unless wide open, and he could rack up a lot of assists?
Buzz's offensive statistics were the mirror opposite of his defensive stats, and they separated further the longer he was here. Paint touches, prevent paint touches. Get fouled, don't foul. Take a two, make them take threes. Low turnovers, force turnovers.But coaches adjusted over time to him and the talent he recruited matched his philosophy for better or worse. MU's three point shooting (rate and shooting %) declined over time, while the opponents' increased. MU's two point field goal stats similarly increased while the two defensive stats got better as MU protected the paint. Free throw rates were high on offense and low on defense. Same with turnovers. End of the day, Buzz's <over> obsession with paint touches was his strength and weakness (see Henry's previous CS article). But his real weakness was his inability/unwillingness to adapt to his talent and game planing over time. His over reliance on paint touches came at the loss of perspective on spacing.The Midgets was perhaps the best coaching job I have seen, while last year's job was perhaps the biggest misuse of natural resources (usage), really starting out of the gate, and made worse by transfer and injuries.These individual stats will be very different under the new coach mainly because of style of play. Duane will be a star, Juan will not be a PF trapped in a 2 guard's body, and Burton will be unleashed. Carlino will be the floor leader missing last year. The end record may be the same or slightly better, but the use of the resources and style of play will match the talent. But, the one thing that has to happen, that didn't last season, is this team really needs to bond together, of which, I am leery.
No worries Rocky - just want to point out that once again I didn't start the "debate" again in this thread ...wasn't going to comment on Sugar's offering...but yet again others feel compelled to re-hash and provoke with their opinion on John/Derrick. I do appreciate you realizing it takes two sides to debate/argue, and certainly Sultan, Tower, TAMU and Lenny have been the perpetuators of the debate and are just as much to blame for the discussion continuing as am I. I appreciate you recognizing this, and placing them under the same ban warning.
Agreed. Not sure there is a leader on this team. I, personally, don't think the living situation is helping. And from what I've heard about the off-season/pro-am, it's not starting out well for the players becoming a cohesive, tight unit
Three things... I feel who is the leader questions in the off-season is the forgotten meme of Scoop. We never know who the leader is. That living situation bugs the crap out of me, do we think with Slappy gone and new leadership coming in that things revert to the previous model? What are you hearing about the off-season cohesion? I've been hearing some definite cliques are forming and I'd hope Wojo would focus on that come "bootcamp" time to get that corrected.
I think a lot of Taylor's issues last year were lingering affects from his knee surgery. I expect him to be an improved version of the freshman STJ.