Stats for MU vs UW

[chapman]

I'm not going to put a ton of stock into the statistical relevance of a guy who has gotten 53 minutes in 9 games.  

Wouldn't this actually be trying to "normalize" his two minutes on Saturday rather than all 53 minutes on the season?  You can get a bit of a feel from the 53, absurd to try to draw anything from two.

[NavinRJohnson]

I'm not going to put a ton of stock into the statistical relevance of a guy who has gotten 53 minutes in 9 games.  

Yet that's enough time for you to decide that he should be playing over Wilson.

[willie warrior]

The flaws of defensive rating are exactly as you lay out. It is based off of the team defensive rating and then adjusted up or down based on defensive box score statistics. Defensive characteristics such as positioning, denying your man the ball, or guarding a shot that is missed are obviously important but not captured in the box score. On the other hand, Burton leads the team in steals and he's #3 in blocks. Those matter too.

To repeat, these stats have flaws. It's why I post them on MUScoop and not on Cracked Sidewalks. However, I think that the Net Points approach generally passes the red-faced test.

Thank you Mr. Sugar for all the work you put into this. You say all the stats have flaws--just like all the players do--so I guess one can safely say one can pretty much make what they want out of the stats. It probably still comes down to the "eye" test.

[willie warrior]

Here is a snapshot on a per-player basis for the season so far.

FWIW - I think that the defensive rating for DWil and Thomas is not entirely accurate. Their defense does not get enough credit because they don't collect box score stats (steals, DRs, blocks). Having said that, I do like using these charts because they generally pass the red-faced test.

Just for example/explanatory purposes, in lay man's terms, exactly what does De. Wilson's -17.6 mean?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I'm not going to put a ton of stock into the statistical relevance of a guy who has gotten 53 minutes in 9 games.  We'll see how it plays out.  I made a vow to not comment on Derrick anymore, so I'm not going to, beyond saying that Sugar's stats/analytics bear out that things aren't "good" at that position, or the 2 guard either - which is all many of us have been arguing.

I actually agree with you!

But, I think that's the entire point of the "John Dawson debate".

We (the fans) haven't seen enough of him to know what he is. Buzz sees him everyday and knows what Dawson is. If Dawson isn't playing, it's for a reason.

If we can all agree with that, then the debate really just becomes: "Why isn't Buzz playing John Dawson?"

I don't think Buzz Williams plays John Dawson because ___________________. (fill in the reason)

[Lennys Tap]

 I made a vow to not comment on Derrick anymore, so I'm not going to, beyond saying that Sugar's stats/analytics bear out that things aren't "good" at that position, or the 2 guard either - which is all many of us have been arguing.

If that was all you were arguing they're wouldn't have been much of an argument.

[NersEllenson]

Yet that's enough time for you to decide that he should be playing over Wilson.

As I said, I don't want to comment any further on Derrick.  All I can say is look at the season numbers and the sample size is quite relevant - and it is going to be hard for any team to be very successful if their starting PG getting 31+ minutes per game ranks last on the team in efficiency/effectiveness.  I don't see what is to be lost/how much worse it could get by trying Dawson for extended run.....that is all...

[Lennys Tap]

As I said, I don't want to comment any further on Derrick.  All I can say is look at the season numbers and the sample size is quite relevant - and it is going to be hard for any team to be very successful if their starting PG getting 31+ minutes per game ranks last on the team in efficiency/effectiveness.  I don't see what is to be lost/how much worse it could get by trying Dawson for extended run.....that is all...

Well, maybe we could be 4-5 with a loss to GW or 3-6 with a loss to Southern, too.

[connie]

God those are brutal numbers.  Checking that with the box score it seems surprising the margin was only 6.