[Paint Touches] Player grades from Hoop-Explorer

[rocky_warrior]

Our starting lineup has done quite well

Clemson at the top, Georgetown right under us.  I'm not sure how to read this other than those teams don't do great off the bench.

[PaintTouches]

Not that it makes it feel any better, but grades are updated.
Link

[Shooter McGavin]

Ouch!

[BrewCity83]

Strangely, this analysis says Ben had a poor game last night.  Usually the eye test and the box score matches up well with these results.  How do we explain that?

[mutodd5]

Strangely, this analysis says Ben had a poor game last night.  Usually the eye test and the box score matches up well with these results.  How do we explain that?

The above was the Villanova game and not the Providence game.

[Its DJOver]

The above was the Villanova game and not the Providence game.

If you click on the link, it's updated to include PC. Ben got a 1.3, tied for third worst on the team.  Put me in the camp that would like a little more explanation as to why.

[DoctorV]

If you click on the link, it's updated to include PC. Ben got a 1.3, tied for third worst on the team.  Put me in the camp that would like a little more explanation as to why.

It's gotta be a mistake

[Its DJOver]

It's gotta be a mistake

Hopefully PT will comment with a reason.  Even in the original article it just says the formula is based on RAPM, without giving any details on how that's calculated. Some here may already know, and it may be to complicated for some (me) to fully understand, but it does seem like an extreme outlier compared to the box score, and the eye test.

[PaintTouches]

Hopefully PT will comment with a reason.  Even in the original article it just says the formula is based on RAPM, without giving any details on how that's calculated. Some here may already know, and it may be to complicated for some (me) to fully understand, but it does seem like an extreme outlier compared to the box score, and the eye test.

Yeah, that one shocked me too, because it didn't match the eye test at all. But the thing about RAPM is it's primarily an on/off measure, with a ton of math behind it to try and pinpoint who the main cause of that on/off number is. It does that by running regressions based on all of the lineup combinations. The other thing you have to remember is that garbage time is filtered out. So after a certain blowout threshold (full explanation here) the stats stop counting.

So per Hoop Explorer last night, there were only 56 non-blowout possessions. Ben played 33 of those and MU was +0 in that span. 32 points scored, 32 points allowed. Once you adjust for opp strength and set to 100 poss (which is why single game RAPM is always to be taken with a grain of salt), it shows that MU had an AdjOrtg of 109.9 and an AdjDratg of 92.4. So MU had a net rating of +17.5 in Ben's minutes.

However, that means that MU was significantly better when Ben was off the court. Per HE, MU was +28 with Gold off (excluding garbage time). So MU's AdjNet Rtg with Ben off the court was +112.8. Yes, this is just sample size theatre, but the RAPM calculation will then use these inputs, add in the box score impact and tell us that while Ben was a net positive, MU's results were more about other players than him.

Using raw +/- from CBB Analytics, MU was only +1 until a late 2nd half flurry of +7 from 7:27 to 2:06. So slightly different stats, but similar narrative of most of Ben's impact coming late, with the game decided.

Parham being so high on the game score also surprised me, but he was a +14 in the first half and +17 overall. All of this is to say, I would still say Ben played well overall, and these fancy numbers are a good tool, but not definitive.

[Its DJOver]

Yea, that's a lot of words just to reinforce both the idea that it is to complicated for me to understand and that, while useful, a lot of these stats can still be flawed based on limited sample size, or not having full context of situations.

[PaintTouches]

TL;DR

Ben was a +8 in a 30 point win, which was significantly lower than the rest of the starters.

Kam: +36
Stevie: +23
Chase: +23
Jop: +21

[DoctorV]

Did Ben lose his SoG because of this?

[PaintTouches]

Dashboard has been updated and it really liked Benny.

https://lookerstudio.google.com/u/0/reporting/ffa0615f-e483-4501-b1ed-0fa945dc7946/page/2jCxD

[jfp61]

We are at the point of the season where we don't need to see Hamilton or Owens until next year.

[GoldenEagles03]

We are at the point of the season where we don't need to see Hamilton or Owens until next year.

Owens length is impactful. He and Tre should be getting 1st half minutes as needed.

The other 7 can take them to the finish line in the 2nd half.

[tower912]

Owens is now the 9th man in the rotation.

[MUfan12]

We are at the point of the season where we don't need to see Hamilton or Owens until next year.

Tend to agree, though with Caedin I think there are minutes where he can be useful to give Ben a breather. Royce struggles with the really big, physical posts.

We'll have a heck of a player when Damarius' brain and feet sync up.

[DoctorV]

It was troubling to see Damarius drive into traffic and get into trouble time after time last night.

The staff really has a ton of work to do if they think he should be more of a consistent ball handler than a slashing wing or more of an outside/in type of guy that doesn't handle as much as Jop.

He looks like he has all the tools, but then he seems to get the yips so quickly, it's frustrating for him and Shaka I'm sure.

As for that chart as a whole two things jump out at me-
1) Kam, Stevie, and Chase should get all the minutes they can handle down the stretch. Something we mostly knew, but needs to be re-iterated in the single elimination portion of the season.
Also nice to see B2B solid games by Ben and Jop, so yea we may be heading back towards the starting 5 getting the lions share.

2) B2B reds by Zaide after his huge game. Eye test plays better for him than that chart, but still odd to see

[tower912]

Dr. V, you do realize that you are saying young players can be inconsistent.   They almost always are.  All 10 are going to need to be the best versions of themselves this week.