Bret of Hoopinon has put together an extensive spreadsheet of statistics for this year’s draft prospect crop. It’s really something else. He’s got sortable stats on 92 prospects. So yeah, it’s extensive. (Google docs are really incredible by the way. You can even chat with others viewing the spreadsheet. Safe to say, when I realized this, my mind was blown. Also, to sort the stats, go to “view” and click “list view.” Then click each category to sort just like you would on a video game.)
Bret says to keep this in mind though:
Possessions are estimated (in most cases) from end of season cumulative stats so there’s a decent margin for error (Usage rates ran high — 12 to 18% higher than at kenpom.com though he doesn’t specify which usage formula he uses — so I deleted that column) and stats may not equal a player’s official season totals as I subtracted (both from team and player) any stats compiled against non-Division 1 competition. Plus, I’d be shocked if there’s not a data entry error or five in there somewhere.
There’s so much info there to digest, I feel like I’d need to commit three or four days to comprehend it all. What’s crazy, is that Sam Presti has a guy doing precisely that, all season long. Crunching numbers, understanding key stats and using them to help make informed decisions. There’s great stuff like free throw rate, eFG%, true shooting percentage, assist per 100 possessions and on and on. All the advanced stats some love so much, but for all these prospects.
I definitely don’t think stats like this are the end all, be all, but they are useful. I more lean to how good of a basketball player a guy is based on what I see, rather than what some numbers say. But you really need to use the two together to be a well-rounded basketball person. Interesting to see that James Harden’s true shooting percentage is actually higher than Steph Curry’s. Ty Lawson was tops on the list (and in the country last year) in assists per 100 possessions.
Tyreke Evans was last (or first, depending on perspective) in turnovers per 100 with Curry and Harden close behind. Lawson was 23rd in that category, which is rare because the top 20 is mostly just big men and others that didn’t handle the ball a lot. One other thing that caught my attention was how much Curry got to the free throw line. When you’re as good a shooter as he is, getting to the line is as free of points as you can get.
Should have said
On PER Holiday and DeRozan are very weak... for a potential top 5-10 pick, compared to the others contending for that rank. They are still good.
@Crow
I'd like to get Bryant into camp. He does play in a weak conference, but he did what you would want him to do: he destroyed them. He's also lost 90lbs since freshman year so we know he can stick to a training regimen. He's got some pretty good back-to-the-basket moves and he definitely has the frame to bang down low.
Good point Crow - Derozan and Holiday are weak for multiple reasons . . .
On PER Holiday and DeRozan are very weak.
Marcus Thornton might make a decent pickup at 25 if they don't go shooting guard early.
At 195 lbs he won't be a flea easily moved
Subtracting any stats compiled against non-Division 1 competition is a good idea and some would go even further and focus mostly on games against top 65 in NCAA or perhaps using a formula to weight the stats based on RPI of opponent.
But the game is very different...
Lawson just a small amount behind Harden and DeRozan for best 2pt FG% for perimeter players but way ahead of them from 3 pt land. Lawson may have had it easy playing for UNC but that is as close to being on a pro team as anyone gets in college and he led it fine so this could be seen as demonstrating abilty to do so in the pros though playing pros will be way tougher than college teams. Lawson is light years ahead of any other NCAA draft option as a pure passer and pass first over shoot mentality. He rarely fouls, was high on steals and only 3 players in the draft got to the line more often per possession used (he was slightly better than Harden and got there at a rate 2/3rds higher than Curry (Curry just had more usage). By the college numbers I can't see why Lawson is being discounted. But add in size and combine results teams are. Too much so I'd guess.
Nix, DR% is indeed % of total rebounds available at that end of the court that a defender rebounded.
John Bryant is rated 9th best center draft option but that is out of ten total and draftexpress has no detailed writeup. I assume he is in a weak conference? Not invited to combine. Might indeed not be considered sufficiently an NBA athlete. Probably will be available for a training camp invite if somebody thinks there is a chance. Has a top 10 agent so at least the agent thinks there is a chance to make some money. Aaron Gray got a job.
Anyone know what the deal is with John Bryant? His numbers are beastly. Small school and lack of athleticism aside, I can't figure out why he isn't on anyone's board, even in the second round. Seems like a potential second round sleeper unless I'm just missing something completely. Here's his only Youtube reel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSRUmYXswpg
Nice back to the basket game. Sure, doesn't look like he plays above the rim much, but he's got size and footwork. Are teams just that convinced that he doesn't have the athleticism to succeed in the NBA?
@hoopinion
Oh the information is excellent...
I believe i'm just not good at navigating spread sheets and really boiling down what the information means to me. The only question I have is if you have a key for it.
I'm guess DR% = defenseive rebound % ? (stuff like that...maybe even the forumulas) but obviously you would hope the people surfing through the stats are going to know what they're looking at.
I just happen to be the guy who doesn't.
@Nix
If you have any particular questions, please ask and I'll do my best to make the data more useful than it may initially be in this presentation.
it's pretty cool - thanks for the link - I had no idea what I was doing, so I exported the data to a typical Excel Spreadsheet and moved and sorted data from there . . .
I like stats but that is overwhelming...