CougCenter: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Along The Olentangy for Ohio State Fans!

The CougCenter 2009-10 All-Conference Team

We've had our initial reaction. You've had your chance to comment.

Now, we throw down the gauntlet. Nuss, Craig and I make our choices known for the 2009-2010 Pac-10 All-Conference team. You will notice some stark differences between our selections and those of the conference coaches. We don't care about points per game, for example. Anyone - even our beloved Klay - can jack up 20 shots a game and score a lot of points. How efficiently someone scores matters more. Also: how efficiently a player rebounds, assists and/or steals the ball. No wussy old-school stats here (well, at least not most of the time). Tempo-free stats are the standard. Also - defense matters. Silly idea, I know.

We also did our best to make the teams look like actual teams. Meaning that, in theory, one of these teams could be thrown out on the court and actually function as a unit - not just consisting of four or five point guards out there at the same time.

It goes without saying the selections for this year were extremely difficult. Sometimes I wondered if there actually were 15 good players in this conference. The most disagreement among the three of us, naturally, came on the third team where there just aren't any clear-cut choices. You hit players 12 through 15 and already feel like you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. In some ways, you are. This conference is just that short on elite players.

I had to become overly, painfully aware of the kenpom.com profiles for all ten teams in the conference. The result was my ballot turned out quite a lot like Nuss'. Great minds study Ken Pomeroy, apparently. Craig's picks were fairly similar, but I feel he valued defense more than the rest of us. In some ways I wish I had done that - after all, score prevention is just as important as scoring - but there just aren't many good defensive metrics available to us. The eye test becomes the key - and that's how a zone defender ends up being named defensive POY by the coaches. Don't worry, Seth Tarver didn't make our defensive team.

I'll post the winners here. Read on for the explanations:

Individual awards: (* indicates unanimous selection)

Player of the Year - Landry Fields, Stanford
Coach of the Year - Herb Sendek, ASU
Defensive Player of the Year - Nikola Vucevic, USC
Most Improved Player - Nikola Koprivica, WSU*
Freshman of the Year - Derrick Williams, Arizona

All-Pac-10: First Team

G - Jerome Randle, Cal*
G - Patrick Christopher, Cal
G/F - Landry Fields, Stanford*
F - Quincy Pondexter, Washington*
F/C - Derrick Williams, Arizona

Second Team

G - Ty Abbott, ASU
G - Isaiah Thomas, Washington
G/F - Theo Robertson, Cal
F - Jamal Boykin, Cal
F/C - Nikola Vucevic, USC

Third Team

G - Nic Wise, Arizona
G - Derek Glasser, ASU
G/F - Jeremy Green, Stanford
F - Nikola Koprivica, WSU
F/C - DeAngelo Casto, WSU

Freshman Team

G - Reggie Moore, WSU*
G - Trent Lockett, ASU*
G/F - Tyler Honeycutt, UCLA*
F - Reeves Nelson, UCLA*
F/C - Derrick Williams, Arizona
*

Defensive Team

G - Venoy Overton, Washington*
G - Jorge Gutierrez, Cal*
G - Patrick Christopher, Cal
F/C - Nikola Vucevic, USC
*
F/C - DeAngelo Casto, WSU*

Star-divide

Player of the Year - Landry Fields, Stanford

No, we aren't intentionally trying to irk Husky fans. Craig's vote even went to Pondexter, while Nuss and I preferred Fields. This wasn't an easy call. Randle is a great player, but he won POY on the virtue of being the best player on the best team. The reality is, by most standards, Pondexter and Fields were simply better. Q-Pon has a disgusting 123.2 offensive efficiency rating right now - 50th best in the nation. He is the conference's marquee point-scoring threat. He rebounds well. He's a good player. Just not better than Fields.

Lorenzo Romar's argument - at least on a soundbyte on KJR - was that Pondexter deserved to win by being conference player of the week a record five times. I don't like this argument - remember, POW generally goes to the player who's team had the best week, or went off for 30-40 against somebody (hello, Klay vs. San Diego). It's often wrong, and based on waaay too small a sample size. Better arguments for Pondexter involve the fact he's just a phenomenal scorer and rebounder - much better than Randle, with less help around him.

However, by DR%, Fields is a better defensive rebounder than Q-Pon. Fields posts an offensive rating of 110.6 despite jacking up 31.3% of Stanford's shots while on the floor. He scores a lot of points, and does it without forcing shots. He has an assist rate of 19.8 with only a 13.3 turnover rate. He's a better distributor than Pondexter, He draws fouls at a slightly higher rate, and he's better at stealing the ball. Pondexter scores efficiently; Fields does it all. Furthermore, he is Stanford. He is, at least in my opinion, the only reason (other than Mike Littlewood) Washington State sits in last place. Fields' Stanford team is very short on overall talent and just wouldn't be much of anything without Fields (and to a lesser extent, Jeremy Green). Fields is the best player in the conference.

Coach of the Year - Herb Sendek, ASU

Phew. That POY explanation was long-winded. Sendek is pretty straightforward. He lost James Harden and Jeff Pendergraph, and somehow still threw together what should be a tournament team. Nuss dissented, with a vote for Mike Montgomery. My feeling is that - despite Cal's injuries and winning a conference that's anot ctually as horrible as most think - Cal underachieved with four stellar seniors. If Cal makes a run deep into the tournament, I may regret my vote.

Defensive Player of the Year - Nikola Vucevic, USC

Seth Tarver is very much a system defender, and therefore we just can't say he's the best. Vucevic was a consistent force for a USC team that didn't do much else but play phenomenal defense.

Most Improved Player - Nikola Koprivica, WSU*

I don't think the coaches took into account just how awful a three-point shooter Koprivica was prior to this season. Also, he remains an underrated defender, and probably will until he makes it big in the Euroleague.

Freshman of the Year - Derrick Williams, Arizona

Unfortunately for Reggie, Williams made this an easy decision with his play in the second half of the conference season.

All-Pac-10: First Team

G - Jerome Randle, Cal*
G - Patrick Christopher, Cal
G/F - Landry Fields, Stanford*
F - Quincy Pondexter, Washington*
F/C - Derrick Williams, Arizona

No real surprises here, minus Derrick Williams. I think Nuss and I thought we were being super creative and original by awarding Williams with a first team selection. But we weren't - people know him by now. He wasn't dominant against WSU, mind you (thanks, Casto!), but take a look at this. He scores efficiently. Rebounds well offensively and defensively. Doesn't turn the ball over. He's the 12th best player in the nation at getting to the line. I hate the fact Arizona continues to find NBA prospects like this, even in a down year.

Second Team

G - Ty Abbott, ASU
G - Isaiah Thomas, Washington
G/F - Theo Robertson, Cal
F - Jamal Boykin, Cal
F/C - Nikola Vucevic, USC

Vucevic gets the nod thanks in large part to defense (although I had Casto on my ballot). Ty Abbott ticks me off because he was seriously considering WSU at one point in recruiting. IT is fairly obvious, as is Robertson. Boykin was very solid under the radar for Cal. 29th nationally in offensive rating - which is higher than Pondexter. He just isn't as good at some of the other stuff.

Third Team

G - Nic Wise, Arizona
G - Derek Glasser, ASU
G/F - Jeremy Green, Stanford
F - Nikola Koprivica, WSU
F/C - DeAngelo Casto, WSU

Did you know Reggie Moore averaged more PPG than Wise in conference play? Kind of shocking. Wise is still better, but it's a surprise Nic didn't elevate his game to first team status. I think we all thought he was a sure thing - and a POY contender - when the year started. Glasser, to me, was the most underrated player in the conference awards. Great passer, and still a good offensive player. Taylor Rochestie 2K10 (with more help). Jeremy Green is Stanford's Klay Thompson - scores a lot, but not efficiently. I had both on my third team ballot. Nikola Koprivica is WSU's best offensive player by several metrics. He sits alongside DeAngelo Casto, by far our best player during the second half of the conference slate.

Freshman Team

G - Reggie Moore, WSU*
G - Trent Lockett, ASU*
G/F - Tyler Honeycutt, UCLA*
F - Reeves Nelson, UCLA*
F/C - Derrick Williams, Arizona
*

We all agreed on every position, and agreed 100% with the coaches. Four are no-brainers. Trent Lockett takes a little more thought, but frankly there's no one else we could find to take his spot. Husky fans are now beating their heads on a table thinking about Abdul Gaddy. I almost put X on my team, ahead of both Gaddy and Lockett. Who's your five-star recruit now?

Defensive Team

G - Venoy Overton, Washington*
G - Jorge Gutierrez, Cal*
G - Patrick Christopher, Cal
F/C - Nikola Vucevic, USC
*
F/C - DeAngelo Casto, WSU*

Again, fairly obvious. Seth Tarver is notably absent - I was the only one agreeing with the coaches, but ultimately even I was talked into Christopher. If you remember the job he did on Klay in the latter part of the second Cal game, you'll probably come to the same conclusion (hat tip to Nuss for reminding me). Overton/Gutierrez/Vucevic/Casto are no-brainers. All of them return next season. which is a little scary.

0 recs  |  Comment 54 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Rubbing salt

… I respect Landry, but you are just kind of picking and choosing stats to justify your choice. If stats are your only criteria, fine … but at least cite them objectively.

Offensive efficiency: QPon was #2 in the conf, Landry wasn’t even top 10
eFG: QPon was 4 pts better; Landry – again – was not top 10
true SP: QPon 5th in the conf; Landry … not even in top 10
FT Rate: was less than a quarter percentage point in Landry’s favor – not even statistically meaningful
TO Rate: same as FT Rate – Landry slightly but not meaningfully worse
Stl : same as FT Rate and TO Rate – less than a four tenths of a percent in the in number, slightly in Landry’s favor
DReb: advantage Landry BUT (you conveniently forgot to mention)…
OReb: advantage (big) to QPon
Ass: Landry five points better, but does that really make up for the 15+ point advantage that QPon has in offensive efficiency?

The only real stat that Landry has a meaningful advantage in is the Assist stat (and, you can argue DReb if you don’t feel OReb is important) and then you have to ask yourself if that outweighs all of the advantages that QPon has in the offensive efficiency and shooting stats.

If you want to get subjective (e.g., what would Stanford do without Landry), you might also want to take a look at head to head. QPon undeniably outplayed Landry in both matchups (more points, rebs, stls, blocks, and even more assists in one of the two games). It wasn’t even close.

I’m sorry, Landry is a better choice than Randle, but not close to QPon this year.

Damn, my eyeball tastes good.

by Gekko Mojo on Mar 9, 2010 8:24 PM PST reply actions  

It's a tough call, for sure

I’ve been going back and forth on it; I guess I’m a fan of assists, especially when the guys you’re assisting just aren’t very good.

I kind of wish we did this after the Pac-10 tournament so I could have one more good look at them.

by Grady Clapp on Mar 9, 2010 8:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Fields and Pondexter were also in different categories offensively

Fields used just over 31% of his teams possessions, while Pondexter used just over 25%.

This is significant in that Pomeroy stats break them down differently. Pondexter’s numbers were ridiculously good and good for 3rd in the nation in the 24 to 28% category and there’s no denying his offensive presence. Fields numbers were good for 21st in the nation in 28% and up. You’d expect a dropoff when a player is using 6% more possessions and playing 10% more minutes.

Rebounding wise, Stanford as a whole doesn’t appear to crash the offensive boards (I didn’t see them much in person so only looking at the stats). Field’s numbers were second on his team at 7.9%. Meanwhile, UW has Pondexter, Holiday, Gant, Breshers, and MBA all floating around the 10% mark.

Bottom line for me is that they are both good and both deserve the award. I don’t think either is a runaway choice for it, and I would’ve gone with Pondexter (and I saw him a ton more than I did Fields), but choosing either one is a good choice.

by Brian Floyd on Mar 9, 2010 9:01 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh, I'm with you

If it was Fields over Pondexter, there probably wouldn’t be as much uproar. The Randle pick screams of best player on the top team, which I don’t like. Pondexter and Fields both had great seasons and should’ve been at the top of the POY list, if not sharing the award

by Brian Floyd on Mar 10, 2010 2:21 PM PST up reply actions  

By PER it's basically a tie

http://www.draftexpress.com/stats.php?qual=prospects&per=&league=NCAA&year=2009%2F10&stage=&pos=&q=eff&min=20&q=usage

Pondexter at 30.0, Fields at 29.8. Randle at 20.4, not in the discussion statistically. My numbers show something similar. I think head-to-head performance would tip the scale to Pondexter, but I couldn’t have complained about Fields.

by kpelton on Mar 9, 2010 9:10 PM PST up reply actions  

It's always nice when my eyes and brain tell me something

And then the stats confirm it.

Felt Pondexter deserved it, but I’m biased. Can’t complain about Fields, and if UW had taken care of business earlier in the conference schedule, coaches would have given the award to Pondexter over Randle.

by thecassino on Mar 9, 2010 9:13 PM PST up reply actions  

I may be way off on this but I think it's partly the Cougar underdog mentality

I’m personally more impressed with a guy putting up great stats on a bad team than a guy on a good team. Especially when you consider the efficiencies – it’s not like Fields is just putting up everything because he’s a ball hog, he’s actually good. He consistently faced double teams and carried the team. I know Pondexter did too but he had more help around him. But good point about selectively quoting statistics, I noticed that too.

To me, your most impressive statistic is that Pondexter completely outplayed Fields H2H. QPon destroyed Fields in Seattle. That said, you also have to take into account that every Husky starter outplayed their opposite number in the two matchups.

Fields also brought it every night. I know true Husky fans probably can point out a number of ways Pondexter helped the team even when his stats weren’t great, but I don’t think you can expect the Coaches to notice all of that. Pondexter had 3 games where he (relatively) disappeared, looking at PTS-REB-AST: 7-7-2 @ WSU, 2-8-1 @ USC, 7-3-3 @ UA. Fields scored at least 15 points and grabbed 5 rebounds in every Pac-10 game except for the home game against USC (14-8-5).

Well, that’s a lot of why I’d vote for Fields. The award is for which player had the best Pac-10 season, but if it was for flat-out best player I’d probably lean towards QPon.

by johnnycougar on Mar 9, 2010 9:14 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm sorry but I don't know how Klay gets missed entirely

Sure he’s not a 1st teamer, 2nd team is questionable, but not even 3rd team? Meanwhile Kopravicia is 3rd team? That just doesn’t make sense to me. I understand the value of efficiency stats but at some point you have to be able to see, one guy was better than the other. I think people let Klay’s bad stretch at the end influence their descision too much.

by spencer peaty on Mar 9, 2010 8:33 PM PST reply actions  

I believe I explained yesterday

Why I don’t feel like Klay had one of the 15 best seasons in the conference. If we’re stacking up the top 10 or 15 players in talent, then he’s obviously on the list. But he had a pretty putrid offensive season in Pac-10 play. That’s all.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 9, 2010 10:02 PM PST up reply actions  

This was my reasoning too.

I realize that coaches “designed the gameplan” around Klay, but he still didn’t perform well offensively.

CougCenter WSU's second main blog

by Craig Powers on Mar 10, 2010 2:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Well, my point is who would you rather go without?

If we played the whole year without Klay, where would we be? If we played the entire season without Nik, where would we be?

by spencer peaty on Mar 9, 2010 8:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Nik played out of position and didn't miss a step on defense and rebounding.

Plus he was one of the most efficient offensive players in the league. Voting for Nik did not mean I would rather have him on the team over Klay, it just means Nik had a better season.

CougCenter WSU's second main blog

by Craig Powers on Mar 10, 2010 2:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Don't forget it's a team thing too

I think every guard on that ballot had a better season than Klay, at least by the offensive stats. I didn’t see enough games to get a good feel for defensive aptitude.

by johnnycougar on Mar 9, 2010 9:19 PM PST up reply actions  

As I noted below

Grady will have to explain. I know he started with consensus, but after that … well you’ll have to ask him.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 9, 2010 10:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Me too. He's UW's best all around defender, but Overton gets all the attention.

Their styles are just very different. Holiday locks players down, and forces them into tough shots or just denies them receiving the ball, whereas Overton does the noticeable things like getting steals.

by thecassino on Mar 9, 2010 9:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Overton really impressed me this year

He absolutely manhandled Reggie Moore. His foul calls are down, which was a big sticking point for me. He seemed better at staying in front of offensive players, but didn’t sacrifice much disruption.

I hate to admit it, but he’s really developed into a nice player.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 9, 2010 10:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, he's had his best season in every way

And Im not taking anything away from him, but if you told me I had to choose one of those players, I’m not sure who Id take, but Id probably be leaning Holiday.

by thecassino on Mar 10, 2010 8:45 AM PST up reply actions  

The tie breaker in my mind is the fact that Overton does it in more minutes

And with a greater role in the offense. That’s what made what Kyle Weaver did two years ago so dang impressive.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 10, 2010 9:45 AM PST up reply actions  

That's big for Cassino ....

…. he was not an Overton fan last year.

Damn, my eyeball tastes good.

by Gekko Mojo on Mar 10, 2010 2:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Neither was I

And as much as it pains me to admit, he played very well this year on both ends of the floor. He played much more in control defensively, yet still had his harassing presence. Offensively, he stepped it up and played much better and more in control on that end as well.

by Brian Floyd on Mar 10, 2010 2:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Explaining my voting

First of all, you can see all of our ballots here. As for how the final calls were made, Grady will have to explain, as he was charged with compiling that mess.

Since the Pondexter/Fields discussion is a little hard to follow above, I’ll go ahead and explain my reasoning here.

Both have excellent cases, which is the first thing to acknowledge. In attempting to split hairs, what I tried to do was this: Would Fields have been as successful playing for Washington? Would Pondexter have been as successful playing for Stanford? I felt like the answer to the first question was probably yes; the answer to the second probably no. That was kind of my tiebreaker. But again … splitting hairs.

If anyone else has any questions about my ballot, feel free to post them here and I’ll do my best to answer.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 9, 2010 9:51 PM PST reply actions  

Thanks for the transparency!

Now for the snarkiness! :-)

So, Nuss, you thought Kuksis had a better year than Glasser? I thought Glasser was more important to the team’s success than Kuksis for sure…

Wow, Craig REALLY didn’t care for Derrick Williams, huh? Only 3rd team.

I guess that’s all I got. Anything else I disagree on is only minor, and in general that looks about what I voted (I think).

by johnnycougar on Mar 9, 2010 10:34 PM PST up reply actions  

I could be swayed regarding just about anyone on that third team

I guess with Kuksiks, I leaned towards the guy who at least had some big offensive games. Glasser was actually benched for a brief period. But I wouldn’t argue with you on that change.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 9, 2010 10:48 PM PST up reply actions  

I liked Derrick Williams.

I do think he was mostly an impact player on the offensive end, and not so much on the other side. He should have probably been on my second team though over Jamal Boykin, in retrospect.

CougCenter WSU's second main blog

by Craig Powers on Mar 10, 2010 3:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Some of this is a little puzzling

For instance, if you truly think that Vucevic is not merely good but surpassingly good defensively, how on earth do you rank him behind Williams overall? He’s only slightly worse on offense (roughly 1 point per 10 possessions used) despite playing for a team that shoots like they’re blindfolded. He rebounds better at both ends. What gives here?

Second, I must have missed the memo that said that players in zone defenses ipso facto couldn’t be good at it. Half the conference was running zones this season. I completely dissent from the selection of Overton to the defensive team. He committed over 5 fouls per 40 minutes from the guard spot. That’s atrociously horrible— and it’s actually WORSE than last season!

I don’t care what kind of system OSU was using— Tarver’s actual achievements on the basketball court dwarf Overton’s in almost every single respect. He committed ONE THIRD as many fouls on a per-minute basis. He rebounded the ball better. I guess Overton had a couple extra blocks (I seem to have confused Seth with Josh in that respect, since until a few moments ago I was under the mistaken impression that Seth was in the upper echelon of the conference in that category too). Tarver apparently wins the “eye test” (which is probably about the closest we can get to evaluating players’ off-ball defense) based on the coaches’ vote.

I literally do not see any rational argument for claiming that Overton is a better defender than Tarver. More or less the same process puts Tarver in front of Gutierrez, too (plus there’s the added detriment that Jorge missed a bunch of games during conference play).

Dwight Lewis also got no credit from your panel. I submit to you that USC’s national rankings in defensive efficiency over the last four years (24th, 17th, 17th, 2nd) have exactly one thing in common, and that is Dwight Lewis playing the lion’s share of minutes guarding the player on the other team whose offensive responsibility is, in the purest sense, scoring a lot of points.

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Mar 10, 2010 1:02 AM PST reply actions  

agreed

i think Tarver’s omission is short-sighted….i’m pretty sure the same people that said Tarver doesn’t deserve anything because he’s a system guy would also say that no Coug under the Bennett system should ever get defensive honors because their system is designed to hold teams to low point totals.

Somebody go tell Kyle Weaver he has to give his awards back.

by BigWood on Mar 10, 2010 7:45 AM PST up reply actions  

I imagine you made the comment about Weaver for the sake of being argumentative

Because that’s not even remotely an apples-to-apples comparison. And I know you know that.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 10, 2010 9:44 AM PST up reply actions  

Some things

1 point per 10 possessions is a lot
Playing zone leads to less fouling than being the primary on-ball defender as Overton was.
Fouls aren’t a great measure of a player’s defensive ability at all.
Dwight Lewis didn’t receive even Honorable Mention from the coaches either. Those teams were not great defensively because of him, they had 2 defensive coaches, and a bunch of other great defenders. Remember Taj Gibson, last year’s DPOY?

by thecassino on Mar 10, 2010 8:29 AM PST up reply actions  

Fouls are a great measure of players whose defense leads directly to the other team scoring a lot of points

Overton’s defense does that. His ~3 fouls per game goes a long way toward putting the other team into the bonus. I don’t know what the exact point value of a foul is, but I have to imagine it’s a point or more unless you play on a team that hardly ever fouls (and Washington is, shall we say, not that team).

Compared to a player who fouls a Tarverian percentage of the time, that’s at least a layup per game that Overton is costing you.

As for Lewis, you have to admit it’s a little odd that a program which consistently posted mediocre-to-horrible results on the defensive end suddenly becomes awesome when he shows up, then remains awesome through literally 100% roster turnover (including the coach) other than him. I think U-2 wrote a song about this…

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Mar 10, 2010 10:13 AM PST up reply actions  

Not all fouls are created equal

Overton’s typically happen 20 feet or more from the basket. While that does contribute to bonus situations, one has to believe that his steals that lead to transition baskets more than offset whatever negligible effect his fouls have.

As for Lewis … well … WSU’s roster turned over a lot from 2004-2009 and strangely they were always one of the best defensive teams in the country. Correlation doesn’t equal causation; I would think you of all people would know that.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 10, 2010 10:19 AM PST up reply actions  

No,

they were NOT always one of the best defensive teams in the country.

I didn’t list their defensive efficiencies from 2004-2006, but perhaps I should have:

121st
142nd
83rd

Those defenses weren’t just not “one of the best in the country,” they positively sucked for a major-conference school.

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Mar 10, 2010 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Wait, you meant WSU

Sorry. Erase that.

Point remains, though, that whereas with WSU the common factor was “a Bennett coaching the team,” with USC it’s Dwight Lewis guarding the opposing shooting guard.

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Mar 10, 2010 10:24 AM PST up reply actions  

He's never even been the best defender on any one of those teams though

Taj Gibson was a MUCH better defender, and he showed up at the exact same time. O’Neil is a great defensive coach, and Floyd was really good at throwing trick defenses at opponents to frustrate them. And thyve had other better defenders than Lewis (Vucevic and OJ Mayo, to name a couple).

by thecassino on Mar 10, 2010 10:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Did somebody say

OJ Mayo? And yes, you are correct. The constant isn’t just Lewis, it’s the cast that’s been around him. Gibson and Vucevic inside have been the keys to the defense, not Lewis.

by Brian Floyd on Mar 10, 2010 10:32 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Adjusted plus-minus studies have shown

That fouls are actually a positive thing at the individual level in the NBA. I can’t totally wrap my head around it, but it’s difficult to argue they’re as negative as you’re making them out to be.

by kpelton on Mar 10, 2010 11:23 AM PST up reply actions  

There is no chance that a foul is worth a "point or more" to the opposition.

… in fact, I would imagine it has at worst a breakeven and might even have a negative point impact on the opposition.

Damn, my eyeball tastes good.

by Gekko Mojo on Mar 10, 2010 2:20 PM PST up reply actions  

I'll be the first to admit

That I have an inherent bias against zone defense. You won’t find very many coaches that play it willingly — look at our own conference — and most will admit that they only turn to it because of a lack of quality man-to-man players.

This is the analogy I’ll use with Tarver: Did Graham Harrell deserve the Heisman or the Davey O’Brien award in 2008 because he threw for more yards than anyone else, had a higher completion percentage than anyone else, and threw for 45 TDs? The fact that he only got a passing look at the NFL tells you all you need to know about how much of that was him being a great system player. I feel much the same way about Tarver. Nice player, but he plays in a system designed to generate turnovers, which it does. Do you think it’s an accident that OSU had three of the top five players in steal percentage in conference play? Are those guys all superlative defenders?

I’m not saying he can’t be good at it. In fact, he’s great at it, and he deserves a nice pat on the behind for it. I’m just saying it doesn’t make him, by my definition, a great defender.

As for Vucevic, he was a big reason why the USC defense was the No. 2 defense nationally. He anchors it with very, very good defensive rebounding and good shot blocking. I think defensive rebounding is one of the most underrated and underappreciated skills on that end of the floor, as the best possible outcome of any possession (besides a forced turnover) is a defensive rebound. He benefits from the lack of quality big men in the conference, but hey, that’s where we’re at.

As for him being better than Williams … you can’t possibly be serious. But since you generally appear to be serious, I’ll just say that individual contribution to offense is more important than individual contribution to defense (unless you’re Hasheem Thabeet), and Williams runs circles around Vucevic in that regard: His ORtg is 10 points higher despite taking far more shots, and his various components demonstrate the reason why (especially the difference in eFG). Vucevic is a pretty poor offensive player, really only saved by his offensive rebounding skill which results in easy putbacks and fouls.

I felt much the same way as you about Overton last year. But what I saw out of him this year is that he’s developed a better ability to lock guys down when the game situation calls for it. And he’s still as disruptive as ever, even while playing more minutes and taking on a greater role in the offense.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 10, 2010 9:43 AM PST up reply actions  

i think comparing leaving tarver off your all-defensive pac-10 team is a little different than heisman voting...

i think you take the skewed stats into consideration, but you don’t just dismiss system players outright.

by BigWood on Mar 10, 2010 10:51 AM PST up reply actions  

How is it different?

Postseason football awards rarely reward system players anymore.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 10, 2010 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Your analysis is suffering from not quantifying things into points

which is the relevant metric here.

On Williams v. Vucevic:

Williams scored about .15 points above average per possession and used about 365 possessions on the season. Vucevic scored about .06 points above average per possession and used about 312 possessions. From this we get that Williams was about 37 points better in terms of how his offensive possessions ended.

That being said, USC’s defense was about 0.16 points per possession over average against a neutral opponent. Even if you just give Vucevic 1/5 of the credit for the portion of that which happened when he was on the floor (which would make him a “system” defender, but meh) that’s 50 points to Vucevic right there. If one were to go out on a limb (say, by calling him one’s defensive player of the year) and say he was worth as much as 25 percent of that portion, then it shoots up to 62.5 points.

Williams gets some “system” credit defensively as well (his team was, when he was on the floor, about 39 points above average, so he’d get assigned 7.8 points by this measurement) but he now trails Vucevic by a significant margin (3-15 points).

Vucevic should also get some extra credit for his offensive rebounding advantage, because not all of those offensive rebounds are reflected in his own offensive rating.

That took a while, but it indicates that Vucevic was very probably the better player this year, unless there’s something very wrong with how I’m apportioning responsibility for success at the defensive end.

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Mar 10, 2010 10:53 AM PST up reply actions  

Apportioning defensive credit is next to impossible

Additionally, apportioning offensive credit isn’t that simple. Williams became the focal point of opponents’ defensive game plan, which has untold impact on his teammates. It’s not like assigning WAR in baseball.

You make a decent argument. And while I appreciate stats and the knowledge they can bring, I’m not a slave to them. Even under your argument, the difference isn’t substantial enough to overcome Williams when everything is taken in total.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 10, 2010 11:02 AM PST up reply actions  

Hm, slight error there-- USC was only .151 points per possession above average

That reduces the margin to almost exactly 0 points if you’re just giving each player 20% of the credit for total team defense, adjusted for percentage of time he’s on the floor.

In any case, I think I’ve made the point that, to say the least, the question of which one is better is an open one.

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Mar 10, 2010 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Usage?

It doesn’t appear that, other than the total possessions used, you’re crediting Williams for his higher usage rate. Statistical rule of thumb has it each percentage point of usage is worth about one point per 100 possessions. Because Williams is at 25.9 percent of Arizona’s possessions, we’re talking about .06 points per each possession used for which he should be credited given he’s taking on those possessions and leaving his teammates with easier looks.

That’s about 22 more points in Williams’ favor on offense.

Also, as I understand KenPom’s numbers, offensive rebounding should be entirely reflected by offensive rating. I could be wrong there, though.

by kpelton on Mar 10, 2010 11:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to CougCenter, a blog dedicated to Washington State University athletics.

Community Guidelines
Start posting about the Cougars »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Butch_small
TV Schedule Week 1

Recent FanPosts

David_yaardsma_small
Ranking the skill players under Wulff
Cougsss12_small
Party Bus for USC game.
Brianheadshot_small
CougCenter Beer Thread: Round Two
Prosser_small
Basketball video question
Small
Pac 10 Prediction Thread
Arizona_small
Design a shirt for CougCenter
Butch_small
Uniforms
David_yaardsma_small
Then And Now Photos
Brianheadshot_small
Coug Center discussions: Favorite moments

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Facebook

In addition to Twitter @CougCenter, find us on Facebook!

CougCenter.com on Facebook


Go Cougs

SBNation.com Recent Stories

South Carolina's quarterback Stephen Garcia celebrates with fans after defeating Vanderbilt 14-10 in their NCAA college football game  Saturday, Oct. 24, 2009, at Williams-Brice Stadium in Columbia, S.C. (AP Photo/Mary Ann Chastain)

College Football Opening Night Rootability Index: Telling You Which Teams To Like

Florida State's Christian Ponder, left, runs as Miami's Marcus Robinson gives chase during the first quarter of an NCAA college football game Monday, Sept. 7, 2009, in Tallahassee, Fla. (AP Photo/Phil Coale)

2010 ACC College Football Preview: Deep Conference Should Make For Highly Competitive Season

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany speaks in Lincoln, Neb., Friday, June 11, 2010, in front of a Big Ten and a Nebraska backdrop. Nebraska made it official Friday and applied for membership in the Big Ten Conference, a potentially crippling blow to the Big 12 and the biggest move yet in an off season overhaul that will leave college sports looking much different by this time next year.(AP Photo/Nati Harnik) +5 updates

Big Ten Announces Conference Divisions For 2011

More from SBNation.com >


HUMANS WHO WRITE ABOUT SPORTS

Jeff_mug_h2_small Jeff Nusser

Washington-state-2_small Grady Clapp

Arizona_small Craig Powers

Brianheadshot_small Brian Floyd