MBB: NESCAC

[Friar T]

Why not add in that they need to committ 0 turnovers, shoot 93.2% from the right wing and outrebound Dwight Howard... I skip the intros to games on TV to avoid the absurd color comentator's "Key's to the Game."

As for the Olson vs. Shalvoy debate, with the exception of one game it's no contest. I know, the one game was a big one, and it was at Amherst, but 7-of-9 from three is an amazing and improbable performance. The numbers of these two guys head-to-head speak volumes...

Olson
10.4 points, 6.1 assists, 1.4 TOs, 2.6 rebounds
47.5% FG, 22.7% 3s, 80% FTs

Shalvoy
8.1 points, 2.7 assists, 2.7 TOs, 2.0 rebounds
34.8% FG, 28.9% 3s, 100% FTs

Let me throw in notes that Shalvoy has only attempted one free throw in seven games against Amherst and if you take out the 07 NESCAC title game he's only 11.5% from 3. He's also never had a steal, and had more turnovers than assists in four of the seven outings.

Olson is a 42.7% career shooter from behind the arc, so his low % against the Ephs is interesting. Other than that stat, his numbers against Williams are pretty much on par with his career stats. Can we say consistency?

As for equal talent, I don't know about the rest of you, but I'll take an amazing senior class over an amazing sophomore class everyday.

[nescac hoops]

[quote author=Friar T link=topic=4491.msg845830#msg845830

As for the Olson vs. Shalvoy debate, with the exception of one game it's no contest. I know, the one game was a big one, and it was at Amherst, but 7-of-9 from three is an amazing and improbable performance. The numbers of these two guys head-to-head speak volumes...

[/quote]

I never said there was a "debate" but when you take the two best players from each team and when they happen to play the same position, I think it's a big matchup.

[toad22]

One thing to keep in mind about Shalvoy is that he has improved dramatically over his four years. Though I am also in awe of Olson's talent, that in no way diminishes my respect for Shalvoy. It should be a great match-up.

[fpc85]

Woops, my bad Dman. I was thinking the 2001 nescac tourney was a neutral court, but I forgot that first round games are played on the higher seeded team's court (in that case, Amherst)... I will correct later on. 

fpc85 (who I assume is suggesting Amherst has more talent) providing some bulletin board material for Williams -- that is, if players actually read these boards. 

Here is what I'd say ... the talent is even, but Amherst's talent is a lot older / more experienced: of the top nine guys in Amherst's rotation, you are talking six seniors, one junior, one sophomore, and one frosh, and the seniors have already played in multiple final fours.  Of the top nine guys in Williams' rotation, there are three seniors, three juniors, and three sophomores (two of whom start), with a grand total of one NCAA game among them.   Amherst has a loaded senior class, while Williams has a loaded sophomore class (by next year, more guys from that class will in the rotation).  That makes a difference.  Add the home court advantage, and this will be a tough one to pull out.  To do so, the Ephs will need to accomplish three things, all of which have been sporadic this year: hit around 40 percent from 3 or better, go inside early and often to open up things a little on the perimeter and maybe get the Amherst bigs in foul trouble, and hit at least 75 percent from the foul line.  I am assuming that Williams will put in a good effort on rebounding and defense, because that has been there all season long.   

I would say Williams has more talent....they proved that the last game. Maybe the Jeffs can hang with them this weekend.

[nescac hoops]

Wow, these are perhaps the most ironic postings I have seen in a while. Amherst fans thinking Williams is more talented and Williams fans thinking a win this weekend is going to require perfection behalf of the Ephs.

[ephoops]

Amherst has more experience, more talent and is playing at home.  Williams has the better coach -- unfortunately for the Ephs, Paulsen's coaching does not trump Amherst's experience, talent and home court.

Jeff's by 12...

[eclinchy]

In news from the other side of Massachusetts for a change...

...he did it again.

Another huge game for Pierce.  He goes for 34 and 13 as the Jumbos roll over a pathetic UMass Boston squad (now 1-10, yikes -- where have you gone, Tony Barros?).

Other key stats:

-20 points for Weitzen including 8-for-9 free throws
-New career high for Dan Cook (11)
-Assists/turnovers 10/2 for Black
-Season-high 10 points for Dave Beyel
-Solid game for Amigo Paniagua in a losing effort... 18 and 6.

Jumbos get their first win of 2008, improve to 7-4, and head to Wheaton Saturday afternoon for the fifth of their eight straight road games.

You can return to your Western Mass coverage now...

[ILive4This]

Okay side note, I know assist/turnover is a stat used very often, but for some reason it just makes no sense to me. The two do not really relate to one another, yet this is a key stat especially for point guards.

[Rhodes Scholar]

There's no direct correlation between turnovers and assists, but both are good indicators of how a point guard is performing. A lot of assists means he's making good passes and distributing the ball properly, while having few turnovers means he's taking good care of the ball (not getting stripped or making bad passes). One of the ways you can judge the performance of a point guard is by this ratio. Scoring and defense are factors as well.

[fpc85]

assist to turnover ratio can be misleading. some point guards are caretakers of the ball and won't risk a to for a chance for a tough assist. others may be in a pg dominant system where the pg makes most of the scoring decisions. both of these scenarios inflates the a:to ratio. I think watching a pg and looking at his stats is the best way to judge them.

[nescac1]

But fpc, that is precisely why the ration is so important.  A caretaker point guard will get fewer turnovers, but also likely fewer assists, whereas a point guard in a run and gun system like Phoenix runs will get tons of assists, but likely more turnovers due to higher-risk passes (and more passes, period).  A point guard can artificially wrack up an inflated assist total (see, e.g., Grinnell) or can keep turnovers to a minimum with conservative play, but when he gets a lot of assists PER turnover, you know he is being efficient in whatever system his team employs.  What none of this considers, of course, is the skill of the players around the point guard --- a guy who plays with great finishers will get a lot of extra assists, whereas a guy whose big men have bad hands will often be unfairly credited with turnovers. 

[fpc85]

I agree the skill of players is important..I think the stat is only one indicator of great pg play. Some coaches/fans/commentators think a high a:to ratio should be primary factor for determining the effectiveness of your pg...i disagree.

[jbergman]

Anyone who relies on statistics to determine the value of a basketball player is just lazy or naive about the essence of the game.  Sure, in general, if a PG has a 3:1 assist-to-turnover ratio, then he is probably playing more efficiently than another PG who is at 1:1 , but you don't really know unless you see them in the context of their teams' styles and teammates' skills.  It drives me nuts when people (usually the casual fans) will say that a player who scores, say, 20 ppg is "a better basketball player" than someone who's a 10 ppg scorer.  That's absolutely not necessarily true - it could be true, but it's impossible to tell unless you see the entire skill set that each player brings.  I like looking at shooting percentages and defensive abilities (by the way, in my opinion, no stats work for this most important element - defense - not even steals or blocked shots).

[T990]

Sometimes turnovers should be a team statistic.  It's somewhat clear when a T-O occurs, but it is often a judgement of the scorekeeper about who's fault the T-O is, IMO. 

For example, let's say a ball handler on the run attempts a pass to a cutter.  The pass is high and a little wild, the cutter reaches for it but can't handle it and it goes out of bounds.  Who do you score the T-O to?  The play was the right idea, it almost worked, but whose fault is it that it resulted in a T-O? 

Speaking of Statistics, I think they should keep a statistic for Charging Fouls Taken.  Let's face it, it is a direct change of possession like a steal, yet even more valuable as it tags an opposing player with a foul and a team foul.  They record Blocked Shots, but that does not necessarily result in a change of possession.  So why is that important?  It amounts to the same as a deflected pass really.

I wonder how much the game would change if records were kept of Charging Fouls Taken, meaning players would work more on getting good at it.  I think it would improve High School defense a lot.

[Pat Coleman]

Sometimes turnovers should be a team statistic.  It's somewhat clear when a T-O occurs, but it is often a judgement of the scorekeeper about who's fault the T-O is, IMO. 

For example, let's say a ball handler on the run attempts a pass to a cutter.  The pass is high and a little wild, the cutter reaches for it but can't handle it and it goes out of bounds.  Who do you score the T-O to?  The play was the right idea, it almost worked, but whose fault is it that it resulted in a T-O? 

It's a judgment call but it's no different than an assist. The statistician needs to make that call on a regular basis.