[Cracked Sidewalks] 2011 Net Points Contributions

[NersEllenson]

Which games were those 15/I'll do the work myself but just don't know where to find it. I'm not trying to jump in, I'm just legitimately curious.

Here you go:

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/marquette/davante-gardner/game_stats

[brewcity77]

What if Vander shot the ball better than 25% from the field in Big East play?  What if Vander turned the ball over half as much as he did?  What if Vander shot better than 60% from the Free Throw line?  Here's an answer - he would have made a much better impact on the 2010-2011 team.

How am I playing what if when I isolate the 15 games Gardner got more than 10 minutes, and in those games his points per game average doubled to 9.1 from his season average of 4.6?  Yet in those 15 games of double digit minutes, he only averaged 13.7 minutes per game - not 2x his season average of 8.9 minutes...and still not close to Blue's or Otule's average minutes per game.  15 is a relevant sample size in a 33 game sample set of games Gardner got minutes...

Dude...do the math. His season average was 4.5 ppg. He played 33 games. So in roughly half those games, he doubled that? That means that in the other 18 games he basically didn't score, whether he had 2 minutes, 5 minutes, or 8. If nothing else supports when Buzz played him, this is it. Your "sample size" is half his season. It's pulling the low performances up.

Again, did you ever once stop to consider that Buzz might know what he's doing?



EDIT: In the other 18 games, he averaged 4.9 mpg and averaged 0.8 ppg. If your thought process held up, he should have been averaging 3-4 ppg during that time. I think 18 is a relevant sample size as well, and it's not like he was getting only 1-2 minutes every game. 9 of those games were 5 minutes or more, with quite a few 7 and 8 minute shots in there, but he still wasn't contributing. Buzz played DG when it was to our advantage, and he didn't when he wasn't.

[NersEllenson]

Dude...do the math. His season average was 4.5 ppg. He played 33 games. So in roughly half those games, he doubled that? That means that in the other 18 games he basically didn't score, whether he had 2 minutes, 5 minutes, or 8. If nothing else supports when Buzz played him, this is it. Your "sample size" is half his season. It's pulling the low performances up.

Again, did you ever once stop to consider that Buzz might know what he's doing?



EDIT: In the other 18 games, he averaged 4.9 mpg and averaged 0.8 ppg. If your thought process held up, he should have been averaging 3-4 ppg during that time. I think 18 is a relevant sample size as well, and it's not like he was getting only 1-2 minutes every game. 9 of those games were 5 minutes or more, with quite a few 7 and 8 minute shots in there, but he still wasn't contributing. Buzz played DG when it was to our advantage, and he didn't when he wasn't.

Continued Comedy trying to support your weak argument.  So in 9 of Gardner's under 10 minute games he got less than 5 minutes??  Wow.  Easy to put up stats in 4 minutes of play. You go on to say that there were 9 games where Gardner got roughly 7 and 8 minute shots but "still wasn't contributing?" What does that say about your boy Vander that in Big East play to the end of the season he got 21 games of double digit + minutes, which totaled 348 minutes or 16.57 minutes per game, and scored 54 points for an average of 2.5ppg?  In the 6 games Vander did not get 10+ minutes (yet in those 6 games he got more than 5 minutes in every game - he scored exactly 2 points in 39 minutes of run or (.05ppg).  And you want to keep arguing that he was so much more valuable than Gardner??  Ridiculous.

So Buzz playing Gardner against Wisconsin, Duke, UNC, Georgetown, West Virginia "extensively" by Gardner minute standards (+10) - where he faced Leuer, Plumlees, Zeller, etc were far more favorable matchups than Gardner getting less than 8 minutes scraps against the likes of Rutgers, Providence, USF, DePaul?  Please.  Why did Gardner get 16 minutes at the end of the year against WVU, but not 1 minute against them in the Big East opener?  Did the matchups all of a sudden become so much more favorable 3 months later against the exact same WVU personnel?

As for wanting to say a guy should be averaging 3-4 ppg in less than 5 minutes of play - that is ridiculous - you are basically asking an ice cold guy to come in the game and score 2 baskets in roughly 2 of his teams 4 offensive possessions...given shot clocks of 35 seconds per possession.

[brewcity77]

So are we going by his per minute/per 40 stats, or are we waiting for DG to warm up? When he got double-digit points, did he score all of those after he had already played 8 minutes? If not, that argument falls apart. Maybe if he did something with the first 5 minutes he would've been given more to work with. And far more likely than your inane "he had to warm up" argument is that in those higher minute outings, he did produce early on which warranted him getting into the 10-15 range.

Pretty sure this thread was focusing on CO, but either way, the minutes Blue (and Otule) got were with defense in mind. If you don't value that, I guess that's your prerogative.

As for WVU, might DG still have been nursing an injury the first time? Or did Buzz maybe go back to tape and see something after the first game that he thought he could exploit in the rematch?

[NersEllenson]

So are we going by his per minute/per 40 stats, or are we waiting for DG to warm up? When he got double-digit points, did he score all of those after he had already played 8 minutes? If not, that argument falls apart. Maybe if he did something with the first 5 minutes he would've been given more to work with. And far more likely than your inane "he had to warm up" argument is that in those higher minute outings, he did produce early on which warranted him getting into the 10-15 range.

Pretty sure this thread was focusing on CO, but either way, the minutes Blue (and Otule) got were with defense in mind. If you don't value that, I guess that's your prerogative.

As for WVU, might DG still have been nursing an injury the first time? Or did Buzz maybe go back to tape and see something after the first game that he thought he could exploit in the rematch?

Give it up already Brew...your arguments are an absolute joke on this topic of Vander/Gardner.  Funny you chose not to address Blues performances where he got NO GAMES of less than 5 minutes, but even worse when he played 5-10 he averaged a paltry .05 of a point per game  (2 points in 39 minutes), yet you want to crucify Gardner's performance in games he got less than 5 minutes??!!  Give Gardner 10+ minutes and he's good for 9.1ppg over a 15 game sample set.

You want to say if Gardner had done something in his first 5 minutes, then maybe he'd have been given more to work with??  So why should Blue have gotten more minutes if he didn't produce in his first 4 minutes in a game?  Pretty sure there were many games he didn't get a steal or a bucket in his first 4 minutes, much less an entire 20 minutes of game action?  Perhaps if Blue had done something more in his time on the court - we wouldn't be having this ridiculous debate.

The ends you are willing to go to defend Blue are silly - calling him the MVP of the South Florida game where he goes 1-9 from the field, but his defense was so stifling and amazing that he single handedly shut down the entire USF 5-man roster..which made up for his putrid shooting?  Give those shots to Jimmy, DJO, Jae, Gardner, Buycks, whoever....and likely at least 3-4 of the 9 are made.  Doubt Blues defense that game kept 6-8 South Florida points off the board.

Buzz had way too short of leash with Gardner - and he would yank him after 1 possession he saw that he didn't like defensively - but the upside benefit gained defensively by putting Otule or Vander in the game was completely nullified due especially to Vander's terrible offensive performances, and to a lesser extent Otule.

[77ncaachamps]

Brew and Ners...think it's time to take it to PMs? jk

Thanks for the analyses Suga!

[brewcity77]

Give it up already Brew...your arguments are an absolute joke on this topic of Vander/Gardner.  Funny you chose not to address Blues performances where he got NO GAMES of less than 5 minutes, but even worse when he played 5-10 he averaged a paltry .05 of a point per game  (2 points in 39 minutes), yet you want to crucify Gardner's performance in games he got less than 5 minutes??!!  Give Gardner 10+ minutes and he's good for 9.1ppg over a 15 game sample set.

Regarding Blue, he was there to play defense. I guess that's not worth mentioning to you, because apparently you don't care about defense. And are you really saying that if Gardner had gotten an extra 2-3 minutes in those games he would have suddenly scored 9 points in that span? And you call my arguments a joke...

You want to say if Gardner had done something in his first 5 minutes, then maybe he'd have been given more to work with??  So why should Blue have gotten more minutes if he didn't produce in his first 4 minutes in a game?  Pretty sure there were many games he didn't get a steal or a bucket in his first 4 minutes, much less an entire 20 minutes of game action?  Perhaps if Blue had done something more in his time on the court - we wouldn't be having this ridiculous debate.

Because he was there to play defense. Just because you can't quantify what he did doesn't nullify it.

The ends you are willing to go to defend Blue are silly - calling him the MVP of the South Florida game where he goes 1-9 from the field, but his defense was so stifling and amazing that he single handedly shut down the entire USF 5-man roster..which made up for his putrid shooting?  Give those shots to Jimmy, DJO, Jae, Gardner, Buycks, whoever....and likely at least 3-4 of the 9 are made.  Doubt Blues defense that game kept 6-8 South Florida points off the board.

I didn't call him MVP of the South Florida game. But I did do the research and go back to threads from that game...

unpopularly, I say Vander.  I dont think this game is ever close enough for Jae's threes to be remembered without VB's energy in the beginning of the second half.  i know he put up some questionable shots and forced the issue a bit, but he did so when no one else would.  his energy alone carried us for awhile in the second half, and he was the only one with a jump in his step in the first half. I thought he responded extremely well to the extra PT tonight.

Well put, I am a big fan of Blue tonight.  Poor shooting, yes, absolutely.  Almost every other aspect of his game tonight was good.  He definitely made a positive impact on the win.

Good:   We won.  We came back from 16 pts on the road.   Blue was flying around during the second half.  Not always productive, but the potential is there.    8 turnovers on the road.  The press worked.   Nice in-game adjustment, perhaps out of desperation, but it worked.  Joe Fulce.   Got defensive stops at the end.
Bad:   Free throw shooting down the stretch.   IMO, that is on the players, not the coach.    The first half looked like a Crean team.   Unproductive three man weave, no continuity, lots of useful clapping.   DG is still not ready for athletic bigs.  Buycks and DJO were really bad.  I looked up and we had Cadougan, Blue, Fulce, Otule, and Butler on the floor.

I missed the game live, but I'm watching a replay of the second half and so far I'm really impressed with the way we chipped at their lead and got back in.  Vander's 1-9 is deceiving since he was making a difference on the court.  A few mental lapses like the turnovers and some ill-advised shots down low, but he will learn more and improve on the offensive side (obviously).

See? You don't have to score a lot of points to have a positive impact on a win.

Buzz had way too short of leash with Gardner - and he would yank him after 1 possession he saw that he didn't like defensively - but the upside benefit gained defensively by putting Otule or Vander in the game was completely nullified due especially to Vander's terrible offensive performances, and to a lesser extent Otule.

The guy couldn't defend. He was out of shape. And when he was getting 7-8 minutes and not producing, which included 6 games and in which he averaged 1.5 ppg, a far cry from the 9.1 you assert he would have averaged in those games had he been given just an extra 2-3 minutes.

Your entire argument hinges on the belief that he would have consistently scored 7.6 ppg in that 2-3 minute stretch. And that he wouldn't have been a defensive liability while doing it. I guess the only positive to this is how amusing it is trying to watch you continuously dig yourself out of this hole when your only defense seems to be that defense doesn't matter.

[Henry Sugar]

Vander is probably understated in his defensive rating, but his defense would need to be a rating of 86 to move to the net positive category.   (correspondingly, Gardner's defensive rating would need to be 128 for him to move to a net-negative contributor).  

Not to jump too much into the current slap-fight, but these are the numbers.  Each player would require a near-astronomical jump to move from their net impact role.  Gardner was a net-positive role player and Vander was a net-negative.

I feel much more comfortable about Gardner being able to step up his usage this year and remain net-positive than I do about Vander being able to improve his efficiency and become net-positive. 

[bilsu]

Remember that Gardner injured his shoulder, which resulted in less playing time for a few games. I suspect that, if Gardner had not got injured, he would of played in all 37 games and probably would of averaged close to 8 points a game.

[NersEllenson]

I guess the only positive to this is how amusing it is trying to watch you continuously dig yourself out of this hole when your only defense seems to be that defense production doesn't matter.

Absolutely agree!!  Pure comedy.

[brewcity77]

Absolutely agree!!  Pure comedy.

Love how you make a joke and ignore all the valid points, including all the other people that discussed how well Blue played that game despite his poor shooting performance. I've spent the bulk of the day analyzing Gardner's season, and feel like I have a pretty good handle on it, both as a freshman and the plan going forward.

When you look at how Buzz handled Gardner, I really think it makes sense. In the non-conference, Gardner had less than 10 mpg against only two cupcakes when he was healthy, South Dakota and Centenary. Both of those teams had adjusted tempo scores among the top 35 in the country. He did play against Mississippi Valley State (10th in tempo) but had his lowest point output of his 10+ mpg games of the non-conference with 7 points. I'm not sure why he didn't play more against Gonzaga, but it's possible he suffered his injury in that game, as he sat out the next two games against UW-Milwaukee and Longwood. The only other preseason game he failed to make 10 minutes was Vanderbilt, and I think Buzz used that as a Big East season tester.

Remember how things changed once we started the Big East season. Buzz predictably shortened the bench and relied a lot more on experience, especially early on. He gave heavy minutes to Otule, Butler, DJO, Cadougan, and Buycks, all of whom had experience in his system. The only newcomers getting heavy minutes were Blue and Crowder. I don't think anyone would disagree that Crowder earned his minutes and was our best option at the 4, while Blue had been our best freshman (10.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.9 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.5 bpg, 1.5/1 A/T ratio in 26.4 mpg, 68% FT, 49.5% FG) and most reliable guard defender in the non-conference. He rounded out the rotation with Fulce, who got double-digit minutes about half the time into March.

So he went to an 8-man rotation. He mostly used guys he trusted because they'd been here before and added in Blue and Crowder. And with his minutes understandably reduced (because of the higher level of play in the Big East) his production also fell off. He wasn't getting high minutes, but he did get 8 minutes 4 times into mid-February and only managed 1.3 ppg in those 4 outings. I know, it's not double-digits, but I think it's pretty clear that when Buzz shortened his bench to correspond with Big East play, Gardner didn't do much to assert that he was deserving.

In mid-February, he got his chance against Georgetown. Their slower pace (259 tempo) suited him and he got 12 points in 10 minutes, but also fouled out against the more skilled Georgetown front line. He only got 2 minutes in the next game (St. John's) but that was largely because Otule was having a great game, playing 28 minutes while chipping in 5 points, 8 boards, and 4 blocks. But Buzz did reward his G'town performance with another double-digit minute game against Seton Hall, and he responded with 7 points and 6 rebounds.

It became clear that Buzz was going to use Gardner more so in games where Otule wasn't needed. In the win at UConn, we needed Otule's presence inside. CO was killing it against Providence (16 points, 6 rebounds, 4 blocks). And against Cincy we needed his defense and rebounding (9 boards) on the front line. But Buzz still rewarded Gardner's previous work. In the Big East tournament, he played double-digit minutes in all three games as I am guessing Buzz knew he couldn't run CO out there for 28 minutes a night. He also played double-digit minutes in 2/3 NCAA games, and the one he didn't, he simply needed Otule's defense against Rick Jackson of Syracuse. Otule held him to 7 points and 4 rebounds in 40 minutes.

While you want to complain about the minutes Gardner got, I think when you slow down and consider that maybe Buzz actually knew what he was doing, it makes sense. He played him as he could in the preseason, usually giving him less minutes against faster-paced teams. He decreased his minutes at the beginning of the Big East season because he was shortening his bench with guys he knew and trusted. The only exceptions were the JUCO transfer Crowder and the multi-position defensive specialist Blue. Then Buzz picked his spots to give Gardner a chance, first against slow-paced Georgetown, then a couple times against Seton Hall in games that were rarely in doubt (both the win and the loss). In the post-season, he wanted to give Otule more time to rest, so he let Gardner get out there more, and he responded well. Seems like a good way to manage a promising freshman to me.

Looking ahead, Gardner will likely be able to get more minutes next year. He's probably lost 20 pounds and is noticeably quicker, sometimes to the point where he doesn't even seem to know how to handle his own body's speed. Despite that, he still gets winded. I'm guessing that for the bulk of the season, we'll see him and Otule as the only guys manning the center position. Over the last 13 games of 2010, Otule averaged 23 mpg. I'm guessing we'll see him getting 22-25 mpg next year, with Gardner picking up the other 15-18 mpg. From watching him numerous times this year, I don't think he'll be ready for more minutes than that. Honestly, my guess is that 15 will be about it. But still, it should address the call for more minutes while also maintaining Otule's defensive presence.

My guess is that was Buzz's hope all along. And my guess is also that he knows what he's doing. To me, it looks like a pretty good plan.

[brewcity77]

On that line, here's a look at other MU freshmen during Buzz's tenure in terms of minutes per game in non-conference play versus minutes per game in Big East and postseason play:

Otule, 2008-09: 12.5 mpg OOC, 5 mpg BE
Cadougan, 2009-10 DNP OOC, 3.9 mpg BE
Williams, 2009-10: 9.8 mpg OOC, 3.9 mpg BE
Mbao, 2009-10: 8.3 mpg OOC, 3.3 mpg BE
Jones, 2010-11: 8.4 mpg OOC, 4.3 mpg
Smith, 2010-11: 9.9 mpg OOC, DNP BE
Blue, 2010-11: 26.6 mpg OOC, 14.9 mpg
Gardner, 2010-11: 10.1 mpg OOC, 8.4 mpg BE

Based on that, most freshmen can expect to have their minutes cut in half or worse once conference play starts. The only guys not to have their minutes cut in half were Jones, Blue, and Gardner, with Gardner seeing the lowest percentage reduction of any freshman during Buzz's tenure.

Further, while the results are incomplete, I have to imagine that Cadougan probably would have played more than 3.9 mpg in the OOC schedule if he'd been healthy as a freshman, and I'm confident Reggie Smith's minutes would have dropped well below 9.9 mpg if he'd finished out his freshman year.

So based on the numbers there, Gardner had his numbers reduced by the lowest percentage of any freshman during Buzz's tenure in going from OOC play to Big East and postseason play. Gardner also played more minutes in Big East and postseason play than any freshman under Buzz except for Vander Blue.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Love how you make a joke and ignore all the valid points, including all the other people that discussed how well Blue played that game despite his poor shooting performance. I've spent the bulk of the day analyzing Gardner's season, and feel like I have a pretty good handle on it, both as a freshman and the plan going forward.

When you look at how Buzz handled Gardner, I really think it makes sense. In the non-conference, Gardner had less than 10 mpg against only two cupcakes when he was healthy, South Dakota and Centenary. Both of those teams had adjusted tempo scores among the top 35 in the country. He did play against Mississippi Valley State (10th in tempo) but had his lowest point output of his 10+ mpg games of the non-conference with 7 points. I'm not sure why he didn't play more against Gonzaga, but it's possible he suffered his injury in that game, as he sat out the next two games against UW-Milwaukee and Longwood. The only other preseason game he failed to make 10 minutes was Vanderbilt, and I think Buzz used that as a Big East season tester.

Remember how things changed once we started the Big East season. Buzz predictably shortened the bench and relied a lot more on experience, especially early on. He gave heavy minutes to Otule, Butler, DJO, Cadougan, and Buycks, all of whom had experience in his system. The only newcomers getting heavy minutes were Blue and Crowder. I don't think anyone would disagree that Crowder earned his minutes and was our best option at the 4, while Blue had been our best freshman (10.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.9 apg, 0.5 bpg, 1.5/1 A/T ratio in 26.4 mpg, 68% FT, 49.5% FG) and most reliable guard defender in the non-conference. He rounded out the rotation with Fulce, who got double-digit minutes about half the time into March.

So he went to an 8-man rotation. He mostly used guys he trusted because they'd been here before and added in Blue and Crowder. And with his minutes understandably reduced (because of the higher level of play in the Big East) his production also fell off. He wasn't getting high minutes, but he did get 8 minutes 4 times into mid-February and only managed 1.3 ppg in those 4 outings. I know, it's not double-digits, but I think it's pretty clear that when Buzz shortened his bench to correspond with Big East play, Gardner didn't do much to assert that he was deserving.

In mid-February, he got his chance against Georgetown. Their slower pace (259 tempo) suited him and he got 12 points in 10 minutes, but also fouled out against the more skilled Georgetown front line. He only got 2 minutes in the next game (St. John's) but that was largely because Otule was having a great game, playing 28 minutes while chipping in 5 points, 8 boards, and 4 blocks. But Buzz did reward his G'town performance with another double-digit minute game against Seton Hall, and he responded with 7 points and 6 rebounds.

It became clear that Buzz was going to use Gardner more so in games where Otule wasn't needed. In the win at UConn, we needed Otule's presence inside. CO was killing it against Providence (16 points, 6 rebounds, 4 blocks). And against Cincy we needed his defense and rebounding (9 boards) on the front line. But Buzz still rewarded Gardner's previous work. In the Big East tournament, he played double-digit minutes in all three games as I am guessing Buzz knew he couldn't run CO out there for 28 minutes a night. He also played double-digit minutes in 2/3 NCAA games, and the one he didn't, he simply needed Otule's defense against Rick Jackson of Syracuse. Otule held him to 7 points and 4 rebounds in 40 minutes.

While you want to complain about the minutes Gardner got, I think when you slow down and consider that maybe Buzz actually knew what he was doing, it makes sense. He played him as he could in the preseason, usually giving him less minutes against faster-paced teams. He decreased his minutes at the beginning of the Big East season because he was shortening his bench with guys he knew and trusted. The only exceptions were the JUCO transfer Crowder and the multi-position defensive specialist Blue. Then Buzz picked his spots to give Gardner a chance, first against slow-paced Georgetown, then a couple times against Seton Hall in games that were rarely in doubt (both the win and the loss). In the post-season, he wanted to give Otule more time to rest, so he let Gardner get out there more, and he responded well. Seems like a good way to manage a promising freshman to me.

Looking ahead, Gardner will likely be able to get more minutes next year. He's probably lost 20 pounds and is noticeably quicker, sometimes to the point where he doesn't even seem to know how to handle his own body's speed. Despite that, he still gets winded. I'm guessing that for the bulk of the season, we'll see him and Otule as the only guys manning the center position. Over the last 13 games of 2010, Otule averaged 23 mpg. I'm guessing we'll see him getting 22-25 mpg next year, with Gardner picking up the other 15-18 mpg. From watching him numerous times this year, I don't think he'll be ready for more minutes than that. Honestly, my guess is that 15 will be about it. But still, it should address the call for more minutes while also maintaining Otule's defensive presence.

My guess is that was Buzz's hope all along. And my guess is also that he knows what he's doing. To me, it looks like a pretty good plan.

This is probably the most thoroughly researched and intelligent post I have ever seen on here.  Well done. 

[NersEllenson]

This is probably the most thoroughly researched and intelligent post I have ever seen on here.  Well done. 

I can agree with this.  Good work on your post Brew.  Informative, well thought out, and plausible.  Good debate over the last week.  And though you got under my skin the last few days ATL MU Warrior - like Brew  - I tend to agree with most of your content, thought process, etc.  Cheers.

[bamamarquettefan]

You have to double all of Gardner's numbers due to him getting 50% of the minutes of Chris.  Gardner averages 20 points per 40 mintues, Otule 11.  So, if 1 blocked shot more can somehow offset the 9 point per 40 minutes played benefit Gardner gives the team..then your Otule argument can stand.  Gardner gets to the FT line with far greater frequency, shoots a better FT %, and shots a higher percentage from the Field.  Gardner rebounds the ball at a slightly better rate than Otule per minute played.   

Gardner got 15 games last season of more than 10 minutes.  For those 15 games he averaged 13.8 minutes.  He scored 137 points in those games - which translated into 9.1ppg.  His performance didn't suffer due to stamina issues, he produced more, the more minutes he was given. Granted, he couldn't go for 35 minutes a game...but there was no reason he shouldn't have been utilized 15 minutes every game he was physically able to play in.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=chris-otule&p1=davante-gardner

Oh wow, I'm on client travel a couple of days and miss a whole great discussion on statistical values!  Terrible timing for me.

OK, there are so many great and accurate comments from several perspectives in this strand, but let me focus on this one.

Brewcity is right that you cannot say "you have to double Gardner's numbers" since he played half of Otule's minutes.  But except for disagreeing with that one sentence from Ners, the rest of his insights are very good.

There is a law of dimishing returns, so that the more possessions a player has the lower his rating drops, and that is why you can't double.  I always refer to page 238 of Basketball on Paper, where Dean Oliver studied how the great players offensive efficiency drops the more possessions they are called on in a given game.  To site his numbers for Kobe:

1.25 ORtg at 15% of possessions
1.2 at 25%
1.05 at 32%
0.75 at 37%

So to back up BrewCity's point, you can't say you have to double Gardner's points if he plays half as many minutes, because if we watched kobe compile a 1.25 ORtg when handling the ball 15% of trips and said, "gosh if he only took the ball two and a half times as much he would put up two and a half times as many numbers - which is not true because Kobe is TERRIBLE when he uses 37% of possessions.

However, that is the scale based on possessions where it is almost a straight slope down - the more you have the ball the more your Offensive production goes down per touch.

What Ners has pointed out is that this same slope down did not appear to be the case when Gardner's MINUTES rather than POSSESSIONS doubled.    While a players ORtg clearly drops way off when they have to play over 30 minutes, there is certainly the possibility that a player is actually looser and better player 15 minutes rather than 5 - that the slope down doesn't start until a given player hits 20 minutes perhaps, and then really starts to drop off at 30 minutes, and then he is dead terrible when he has to play 35 minutes, etc.

So while i would edit out Ners one sentence on doubling Gardner's numbers for comparison purposes, I do believe he is making a very good case that Gardner showed every indication that he could have been a very productive player going 15 minutes a game, and that he really should have been in there 15 minutes in a lot of games (and Ners acknowledges he couldn't have gone 35 a game).  Even accepting that his defense was bad, it would have been really, really hard for his defense to be so bad that it offset his offense in light of the fact that his offensive rating was even better than Kemba Walker's.

Certainly BrewCity is right to note that some of Gardner's big numbers were against lesser competition, but in light of how well he played even in obvious pain against Duke and then again at the end of the season against UNC, i would have liked to see him play more, and clearly he will this year.  The fact that the slimmed down Gardner gives us the option this year of going big with Otule at the 5, Gardner at the 4 and Crowder at the 3 has me very excited.  Not saying how much we should go to that option, but if we are getting pushed around like a couple of years ago it is really nice that this is at least an option.

Anyway, great post and everyone is making fantastic points in follow-up.

I actually have a you-tube going up tomorrow where I hit on Gardner being even better than Kemba on offense when he was on the floors.

As for the upcoming season - can't wait.

[brewcity77]

I can agree with this.  Good work on your post Brew.  Informative, well thought out, and plausible.  Good debate over the last week.  And though you got under my skin the last few days ATL MU Warrior - like Brew  - I tend to agree with most of your content, thought process, etc.  Cheers.

Cheers

It has been a good debate and it's nice being able to throw some monstrous posts out there and actually know they're being read. Good research, and honestly, I think that if nothing else you have definitely made an excellent case for DG getting more minutes going forward. I can't wait to see a Marquette team that actually has two good bug men in rotation.

Now if we can just get that athletic face-up four...

[ATL MU Warrior]

I can agree with this.  Good work on your post Brew.  Informative, well thought out, and plausible.  Good debate over the last week.  And though you got under my skin the last few days ATL MU Warrior - like Brew  - I tend to agree with most of your content, thought process, etc.  Cheers.

I agree with most of what you have to say as well Ners.  Didn't really mean to get under your skin...ok, well, maybe I did. 

Maybe I miss Chicos 

[bilsu]

Is looking at Gardner's production, when he played a higher number of minutes a true indication of how he would of done if his minutes would have doubled? I think you have to factor in that Buzz would play Gardner more, if he was effective in the first few minutes. Buzz would not play him as much, if Gardner was not producing. I think it is safe to assume that some of the games that he did not play much, he was not playing effectively in Buzz's eyes and if you doubled his minutes in those games you would not get the same production he got in games he was playing well. However, the most important thing in basketball is to out score your opponent. Otule might hold his opposing center to less points than Gardner would, but he still could be significantly worse than Gardner, because he scored 4 points why holding his opponent to 5 points, but Gardner would have scored 10 points while holding his opponent to 9 points. The factor in Otule's favor is that I think he has a greater chance of covering another player's defenesive mistake. His defense helps the team more. I suspect Gardner would beat Otule in a one and one game, but he would not help the team defense as much as Otule could. I think Buzz has to change his defense so Otule is not out on top trying to steel the ball from a guard. Otule should not be chasing the ball all over the floor.

[NersEllenson]

I agree with most of what you have to say as well Ners.  Didn't really mean to get under your skin...ok, well, maybe I did. 

Maybe I miss Chicos 

Nice!  No worries. 

[NersEllenson]

Oh wow, I'm on client travel a couple of days and miss a whole great discussion on statistical values!  Terrible timing for me.

OK, there are so many great and accurate comments from several perspectives in this strand, but let me focus on this one.

Brewcity is right that you cannot say "you have to double Gardner's numbers" since he played half of Otule's minutes.  But except for disagreeing with that one sentence from Ners, the rest of his insights are very good.

There is a law of dimishing returns, so that the more possessions a player has the lower his rating drops, and that is why you can't double.  I always refer to page 238 of Basketball on Paper, where Dean Oliver studied how the great players offensive efficiency drops the more possessions they are called on in a given game.  To site his numbers for Kobe:

1.25 ORtg at 15% of possessions
1.2 at 25%
1.05 at 32%
0.75 at 37%

So to back up BrewCity's point, you can't say you have to double Gardner's points if he plays half as many minutes, because if we watched kobe compile a 1.25 ORtg when handling the ball 15% of trips and said, "gosh if he only took the ball two and a half times as much he would put up two and a half times as many numbers - which is not true because Kobe is TERRIBLE when he uses 37% of possessions.

However, that is the scale based on possessions where it is almost a straight slope down - the more you have the ball the more your Offensive production goes down per touch.

What Ners has pointed out is that this same slope down did not appear to be the case when Gardner's MINUTES rather than POSSESSIONS doubled.    While a players ORtg clearly drops way off when they have to play over 30 minutes, there is certainly the possibility that a player is actually looser and better player 15 minutes rather than 5 - that the slope down doesn't start until a given player hits 20 minutes perhaps, and then really starts to drop off at 30 minutes, and then he is dead terrible when he has to play 35 minutes, etc.

So while i would edit out Ners one sentence on doubling Gardner's numbers for comparison purposes, I do believe he is making a very good case that Gardner showed every indication that he could have been a very productive player going 15 minutes a game, and that he really should have been in there 15 minutes in a lot of games (and Ners acknowledges he couldn't have gone 35 a game).  Even accepting that his defense was bad, it would have been really, really hard for his defense to be so bad that it offset his offense in light of the fact that his offensive rating was even better than Kemba Walker's.

Certainly BrewCity is right to note that some of Gardner's big numbers were against lesser competition, but in light of how well he played even in obvious pain against Duke and then again at the end of the season against UNC, i would have liked to see him play more, and clearly he will this year.  The fact that the slimmed down Gardner gives us the option this year of going big with Otule at the 5, Gardner at the 4 and Crowder at the 3 has me very excited.  Not saying how much we should go to that option, but if we are getting pushed around like a couple of years ago it is really nice that this is at least an option.

Anyway, great post and everyone is making fantastic points in follow-up.

I actually have a you-tube going up tomorrow where I hit on Gardner being even better than Kemba on offense when he was on the floors.

As for the upcoming season - can't wait.

Good stuff Bama - I very much enjoy reading your analysis that you post.  Always interesting content - and by no means am I a numbers/stats expert - and value your expertise in this area.  I look forward to the YouTube on Gardner (but by no means from the perspective of it potentially supporting my argument - just for the analsyis itself).

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I think you have to factor in that Buzz would play Gardner more, if he was effective in the first few minutes. Buzz would not play him as much, if Gardner was not producing.

I think this is a huge point, and something I was trying to get at earlier.

I don't think Buzz really allowed Gardner to have a bad game. If he was playing poorly, or the match-up wasn't good, Buzz went another direction.

Honestly, I think Gardner and Otule are a pretty good combo a center, but my expectations for Gardner this season are still pretty modest. I don't know if he has the stamina or ability to consistently perform at both ends of the floor for more than 15min./game. However, he can be very effective for the 10-15min. he plays.