MUScoop

Welcome Jake Thomas - Buzz gets his shooter with a schollie left

Written by: jpudner@concentricgrasstops.com (bamamarquettefan1)

Welcome to Marquette Jake Thomas!

Wow, Buzz and the staff set a new bar for walk-ons last year by grabbing David Singleton - who was the 61st best steals guy in the country.  Now he has grabbed a great 3-point shooter who put in over 30 minutes a game each of his first two seasons at South Dakota and would be expected to rank as one of the Top 50 guys in the Big East Conference this year based on Value Add if he didn't have to sit out.

Anticipated Big East ranks based on Value Add
(if Thomas could play this year)

table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}


BETeamNameORtgDRtgAnt. Value AddValue SubAnt. Tot Value[/tr]

1	Pitt	Gibbs	127.9	96.8	11.98%	-1.52%	13.50%
2	Lville	Kuric	129.9	92.5	7.69%	-4.06%	11.74%
3	UConn	Lamb	115.5	93.5	7.18%	-3.65%	10.83%
4	UConn	Oriakhi	113.1	92.8	6.36%	-4.27%	10.63%
5	Syr	Joseph	108.5	93.4	6.29%	-4.24%	10.54%
6	ND	Abromaitis	117	98.9	9.75%	0.00%	9.75%
7	MU	Crowder	120.1	96.6	8.22%	-1.49%	9.71%
8	WVU	Jones	110.8	96.4	7.38%	-2.06%	9.44%
9	Cin	Gates	108.8	92.2	5.00%	-4.43%	9.43%
10	Lville	Siva	110	91.9	4.74%	-4.37%	9.11%
14	MU	DJO	106.8	99.7	6.02%	0.00%	6.02%
40	MU	Gardner	117.9	99.4	2.64%	0.00%	2.64%
49	MU	Thomas	109.3	115.4	2.04%	0.00%	2.04%
56	MU	Otule	101.3	97.9	1.37%	-0.38%	1.75%
59	MU	Anderson	NA	NA	3.19%	Est.	1.59%
66	MU	Wilson	101.3	103.85	1.06%	0.00%	1.06%
84	MU	Cadougan	94.3	100.0	0.34%	0.00%	0.34%
87	MU	Blue	89.1	98.2	0.00%	-0.28%	0.28%
NR	MU	Singleton	90.7	110.9	0.00%	Est.	0.00%
NR	MU	Mayo	NA	NA	0.00%	Est.	0.00%
NR	MU	Wilson	NA	NA	0.00%	Est.	0.00%
NR	MU	Jones	NA	NA	0.00%	Est.	0.00%

(NBA prospect Jamail didn't have enough minutes to calculate)

Now a 109.3 Offensive Rating is phenomenial for a guy who plays most of the minutes like Jake does.  As you can see, it actually ranks better than many of the top players in the Big East, but the Value Add takes into account the lower level of competition.

To not be completely Pollyanna, I should acknowledge that the Defensive Rating of 115 jumps out on this page.  The bad news is that with the questions regarding Marquette being on the defensive end of the floor, Jamil has a below average defensive rating, David's is a little worse than his, and Jake's is very bad.  

The good news is that defensive ratings are still mainly based on team defense, so 78% of the time a below average Oregon defense, a pretty bad High Point defense, or a terrible South Dakota defense gave up an easy basket, these three got one-fifth of the blame if they were on the court.  While we feel confident that David is probably actually a pretty good defender due to his great steal numbers, it appears a stronger Jamil would be a good defender, that will be the question mark with Jake.  Jake's defensive rebounds, steals and blocked shots are all decent, but playing on such a bad defensive team the only question is if he is a great scorer who is a defensive liability.

The good news is that down the stretch, Marquette played phenomenial defense in their last six wins of the season, giving up just 0.91 points per trip against six very good offenses including the national champions on their home court.  A 0.91 makes you one of the Top 20 defenses in the country, and once adjusted for level of competition, MU would have challenged for the best defense in the country if those games were the whole season.


table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}


OppPtsAllPossPer trip[/tr]

Uconn	67	72	0.93
Prov	62	77	0.81
Prov	66	73	0.90
WVU	61	62	0.98
Xav	55	63	0.87
Syr	62	64	0.97
Total	373	411	0.91

So there seems no doubt that Jake will be a great offensive player on the court, and the only question is whether he is a liability on defense to offset some of that.

Either way, there will be huge value to finally having a pure shooter to complement all our drivers.  Not to compare him to Novak, but obviously as our guys drive to the rim knowing if the collapse Jake can make them pay with a kick-out for the trey will be key the year after DJO is gone.  Here are his numbers from behind teh arc:


table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}


Year3ptM3PtA%[/tr]

2010	89	202	44%
2011	86	248	35%
Career	175	450	39%

Certainly the skeptic will note the drop in percentage, but 3-point percentage drops the more of them you have to take.  Obviously defenses knew by last year that you had to contest the three, so a guy who shoots this much from behind the arc is shooting tired with a lot of defensive pressure and still hitting.

South Dakota rarely got to the line or grabbed an offensive rebound, so with little threat to drive, it is probably safe to assume Jake is going to see a lot more space for his shots with teams collapsing around our other players.

With him signed as a walk-on, Buzz gets the shooter to replace DJO after this season, and still has a scholarship to find the right JUCO player to add value for next year if he chooses.

You know the program is going in the right direction when you get excited about walk-ons every year.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2011/06/welcome-jake-thomas-buzz-gets-his.html

Quote from: CrackedSidewalksSays on June 08, 2011, 08:30:07 AM
Either way, there will be huge value to finally having a pure shooter to compliment our drivers.

Certainly the skeptic will note the drop in percentage, but 3-point percentage drops the more of them you have to take.  

Ugh...  First of all, Buzz has two scholies left...not one.

But secondly, I am continually frustrated by people calling this guy a "pure shooter."  He has a worse shooting percentage from three than a good portion of last year's team.  Now, he writes this off by saying the "more of them you take, the percentage drops."  First off, I am not really sure that is the case.

But more importantly, look at the stats...

2010: 89/202
2011: 86/248

So yeah he took more shots...but he *never*made the same number of shots as he did the year before?  So even after he took 202 shots, at best he could have made three less.

Look, I'm going to drop it because I have said my share, and yes I realize this is a no cost addition, but I really wish people wouldn't get so excited about someone who I doubt will make any difference whatsoever.

Give the kid a chance, you do not have to be so negative.  he is a walk-on, if you get anything out of him
it is a huge plus.  If not, hopefully he will be a good teammate like Rob Forzena.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 08, 2011, 08:54:16 AM

Ugh...  First of all, Buzz has two scholies left...not one.

But secondly, I am continually frustrated by people calling this guy a "pure shooter."  He has a worse shooting percentage from three than a good portion of last year's team.  Now, he writes this off by saying the "more of them you take, the percentage drops."  First off, I am not really sure that is the case.

But more importantly, look at the stats...

2010: 89/202
2011: 86/248

So yeah he took more shots...but he *never*made the same number of shots as he did the year before?  So even after he took 202 shots, at best he could have made three less.

Look, I'm going to drop it because I have said my share, and yes I realize this is a no cost addition, but I really wish people wouldn't get so excited about someone who I doubt will make any difference whatsoever.

I agree with our Negative Nancy.

We need shooters.  Let's wait and see how he fits in with the team.  It's the law of the wolf pack.  The good players will play.  A pecking order will naturally develop.  It'll be interesting to see how he competes.  He will definitely play if he can help the team win.  And there have been plenty of games over the years, where we lost due to the lack of good shooters.

I am sure you will see him play in the Pro-Am league this summer.  After that, he has 1 year to improve with
Todd Smith physically, a boot camp, and if he is a gym rat, there should be a huge improvement.

I'm looking at this as a positive addition, but with Sultan's expectations in mind. If he's willing to forgo a scholarship to return home to Marquette, I love it. I can't blame anyone for wanting to come here. He gives us another experienced body for practice and another guy to play in mop-up time. Sometimes, guys exceed expectations. Jimmy Butler was much better than we expected when he committed. Maybe Jake will be in the same vein. I don't think he'll ever be a 32 mpg, 15/6 guy here, but maybe he will be able to give us 8-12 mpg off the bench and provide an offensive spark as a shooter. If not, no scholarship spent and we still get the practice benefits and Frozena minutes out of him. It's win-win, especially if we choose not to schedule South Dakota anymore.

Sultan -the offensive drop off the more you are used is absolutely true and verifiable.

For example, kemba walker is not one of the top 100 offensive players in the country if you. Don't believe there is a dropoff.  His offensive rating is not in the top 100 in the country, his shooting percentages are nowhere near top 100 (believe his 3 pt shooting was lowerthan jakes last year) etc. This is why I try to gently get on you and others when you compare players basedon pure oRth.  Pomeroy even breaks it off by percent of possessions used.

You simply can't contend that a guy who a defense knows is going to be asked to put up 7 or 8 treys in a game would hit the same percentage as a guy who willonly take one or two if he isleft wide open at his favorite spot on the arc.  Its not just that the numbers so overwhelmingly contradict you, its just common sense.

Itwould be like saying joel anthony was a better shooter than dwyanewade one night because he only missed one of his 3 uncontested layups to shoot 67 percent while wade only hit 10 of 20 shots against help defense and double teams.  Lesser shooters or players only take the easiest possible shots.  I love that jimmy added the occasional open three pointer to keep teams honest onhis drives, but by yourlogic, if buzz had told jimmy he had to put up 7 three point shots every game he would have shotthe same percentage he did only shooting when it was a good, open look?

Sorry, now I've gone on to long, but it can just lead to such a misunderstanding of the game and players worth if someone accepts your statement is not clear if there is a drop off in effectiveness and shooting with more use.

Nothing personal, just one poinþ - now for your 2 legitimate points:

1. Yes, the drop off in percentage the 2nd year was not meant to be written off by more shots by jake, just noted that a freshman shooter can sometimes get a lot of open looks early in his career until word gets around and scouting catches up and you start finding the spots you need to pushhim off of.the reference to more shots was to a guy like jake shooting a couple ofhundred treys a year vs a guy who takes 20 open looks a year as covered above.  But you are correct to point out that he clearly had a better shooting year his first year than his second.

2. As for him not contributing, that is possible because his defense and other aspects of his game may not be up to big east standards. Atveryleast though, he will be an option you put on the court at the end of a half or when you just have to have a trey.  The best case is his shooting opens up the floor for drivers and he gets some real minutes by getting his defense up to passable and the rest of the defense is improved enough that the offense is worth it.

3. Yes, an extra schollie.

marquette99...nothing personal whatsoever.  Your explanation makes perfect sense.

Thanks, and particularly for not making fun of me for all the typos.  These entries are all from a blackberry whose space bar keeps sticking- uggghhh!

DJO's 3 pt percentage fell his last year also. Part of it could have to do with defenses adjusting to him and another part could  have to do with him looking to drive more instead of setting up for the three. However, most of it in my opinion had to do with the change in offense from 2009-2010 where you often had four three point shooters on the floor (Hayward, DJO, Culliban and Acker) and the ball was quickly passed around for the open three point shot. I have no idea what, if anything, changed at South Dakota St. this past year, but his shooting percentage may have dropped because he was more responsible for creating his own shots just as DJO was this year.

Can't argue with having a traditional player on the roster. Someone's got to have country western music on their IPod.

Quote from: bilsu on June 08, 2011, 11:00:58 AM
DJO's 3 pt percentage fell his last year also. Part of it could have to do with defenses adjusting to him and another part could  have to do with him looking to drive more instead of setting up for the three. However, most of it in my opinion had to do with the change in offense from 2009-2010 where you often had four three point shooters on the floor (Hayward, DJO, Culliban and Acker) and the ball was quickly passed around for the open three point shot. I have no idea what, if anything, changed at South Dakota St. this past year, but his shooting percentage may have dropped because he was more responsible for creating his own shots just as DJO was this year.

Another example: Novak shot 51.5% from 3 as a freshman. As a sophomore, without Wade and Jackson carrying the offense, he found himself as the #2 option and his 3pt% dropped to 43% and in his final 3 seasons, he never finished with a 3pt% higher than 46.7%. Still damn impressive though I doubt anyone would argue that Novak's shooting had gotten worse.

That said, I'm not expecting Thomas to be Novak. I'm expecting him to be a guy who sees a few minutes here and there and hopefully can hit some open shots. I also predict that he goes off for 4 or 5 threes in garbage time of an early-season cupcake game causing mass hysteria amongst MU fans and constant questions as to why (All-conference player/future NBA 1st Round pick) Vander Blue gets all of the minutes at the 2  ;)

Novak should of shot more. He always seemed to pass up a shot unless he was wide open. He in my opinion was way to worried about taking a bad shot. I always figured the end of the half must of been torture to him as he often had to take the long shot as the clock expired. Look at the potential effect. 52-100 good shots =52%. Add to that 10 first half ending heaves and you are now 52-110, which is =47%. It seemed like every game Novak would pass up two or three shots that I thought he should shoot and then the team would turn the ball over as they continued to run their offense. If he had even made 1/5th of those passed up shots, MU would have been better off. Also, anytime you shoot with a player coming at you, you have a chance to be fouled and if you miss the team has a chance for the offensive rebound. Novak simply should of shot more, which would of resulted in a lower percentage, but MU would have been more successful overall.

It could be just a simple as shooters have bad years sometimes.

Look at Ray Allen....his 2nd year with the Bucks he shot .364 from 3 point range. The year aftter he shot .356. Not horrible but not "greatest shooter of all time" stuff either.

Then he went on a great 3 year shooting run. .423, .433, .434.

So we would expect that he now has this shooting thing figured out right?

Well his next 5 years were .377, .395, .351, .392, and .376.

So he went 5 years without breaking the magic 40% mark.

shooters can be streaky....especially in smaller samples(ie a college season vs an NBA season).

Quote from: bilsu on June 08, 2011, 11:32:26 AM
Add to that 10 first half ending heaves and you are now 52-110, which is =47%.

Agreed, but why didn't he just work on hitting those half court heaves more often!  Just kidding.  you are probably right that he should have shot a bit more.

Not to belabor the point, but if you look at the best BCS players in the country by % of possessions on kenpom, I believe you get a good idea of the slop as more and more is demanded of a player either in minutes on the court or possessions.

The best ORtg of BCS players who handled less than 20% of possessions was Ohio State's Jon Diebler at 140.6.
Of players who handled it 20% to 24% was Ashton Gibbs 127.9
24% to 28% was Jordan Taylor 126.9
28% to 30% was Derrick Williams 122.7
30% or more Kemba 116.7 (over 31%).

So you see how it trails off as they go to you more and more, and the same basic slope occurs with more and more minutes.

All of these are GREAT players and it wouldn't be crazy to argue that any of the five were better than any of the other five, though I believe Kemba was the best.  However, I think it's a good guess that if Kemba could rest more and just be the No. 2 or 3 option, he would have been pretty close to Diebler's 140 rating instead of his 116.7.  If he had to step up 20% of the time, he is still probably around Ashton Gibbs 127.9, etc.  But being the go-to guy every game and only resting 3 minutes a game on average, he finished at 116.7.

Even though Calhoun isn't a big stat guy, I believe a great coach like him can finally conclude that a very tired Kemba may be down to what I would term a 105 or 110 ORtg guy by the time he works free for his 20th shot of the game.  He isn't nearly as good as the rested Kemba who might have been in a groove in the 1st half of a game, but even in his 37th minute Calhoun still senses he is still more effective than bringing a well rested Donnell Beverly off the bench, who was a 96.1 ORtg in his 7 or 8 minutes a game he played.

OK, I'll shut up.  Just hit a pet peeve of mine.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on June 08, 2011, 11:07:54 AM
Can't argue with having a traditional player on the roster. Someone's got to have country western music on their IPod.

Didn't one of the "MU Revealed" episodes before last season show that JFB loved country music? Was it Fulce?

Quote from: mug644 on June 08, 2011, 02:08:13 PM
Didn't one of the "MU Revealed" episodes before last season show that JFB loved country music? Was it Fulce?

I recall Fulce loving all kinds of music and Buzz really liking that he could talk about Country music to Fulce.

I don't know about Butler, though.  It's always tough to tell with those country boys :)

Quote from: bamamarquettefan on June 08, 2011, 11:58:59 AM

Even though Calhoun isn't a big stat guy, I believe a great coach like him can finally conclude that a very tired Kemba may be down to what I would term a 105 or 110 ORtg guy by the time he works free for his 20th shot of the game.  He isn't nearly as good as the rested Kemba who might have been in a groove in the 1st half of a game, but even in his 37th minute Calhoun still senses he is still more effective than bringing a well rested Donnell Beverly off the bench, who was a 96.1 ORtg in his 7 or 8 minutes a game he played.

yep, not resting Kemba cost him the title.  When will people learn that stat geeks should run the world?

Quote from: RawdogDX on June 08, 2011, 02:25:56 PM
yep, not resting Kemba cost him the title.  When will people learn that stat geeks should run the world?

I think his point was that a tired Kemba was still better than his rested back up.

Quote from: bamamarquettefan on June 08, 2011, 11:58:59 AM
Agreed, but why didn't he just work on hitting those half court heaves more often!  Just kidding.  you are probably right that he should have shot a bit more.

Not to belabor the point, but if you look at the best BCS players in the country by % of possessions on kenpom, I believe you get a good idea of the slop as more and more is demanded of a player either in minutes on the court or possessions.

The best ORtg of BCS players who handled less than 20% of possessions was Ohio State’s Jon Diebler at 140.6.
Of players who handled it 20% to 24% was Ashton Gibbs 127.9
24% to 28% was Jordan Taylor 126.9
28% to 30% was Derrick Williams 122.7
30% or more Kemba 116.7 (over 31%).

So you see how it trails off as they go to you more and more, and the same basic slope occurs with more and more minutes.

All of these are GREAT players and it wouldn’t be crazy to argue that any of the five were better than any of the other five, though I believe Kemba was the best.  However, I think it’s a good guess that if Kemba could rest more and just be the No. 2 or 3 option, he would have been pretty close to Diebler’s 140 rating instead of his 116.7.  If he had to step up 20% of the time, he is still probably around Ashton Gibbs 127.9, etc.  But being the go-to guy every game and only resting 3 minutes a game on average, he finished at 116.7.

Even though Calhoun isn’t a big stat guy, I believe a great coach like him can finally conclude that a very tired Kemba may be down to what I would term a 105 or 110 ORtg guy by the time he works free for his 20th shot of the game.  He isn’t nearly as good as the rested Kemba who might have been in a groove in the 1st half of a game, but even in his 37th minute Calhoun still senses he is still more effective than bringing a well rested Donnell Beverly off the bench, who was a 96.1 ORtg in his 7 or 8 minutes a game he played.

OK, I’ll shut up.  Just hit a pet peeve of mine.

What we've learned from all these numbers is that a coach doesn't need a bunch of stats to tell him that a tired All-American is better than a rested back-up.

A tired (sick) Nowitzke(sp) is still better than his backup.