So there I was on Christmas morning, reading the collected box scores of the 20th century, when it finally came to me. Is it better to be a big Santa in a small chimney? Or the other way around?
In other words, is it better to score a ton of points while taking a disproportionate number of your team's shots? Or is it more valuable to be an efficient, high percentage player?
|
Stat of the Week
|
|
This week's factoid comes from the e-mail bag:
Ben Miraski asked: "Did you happen to notice that when Jacksonville State beat Charleston Southern on Dec. 21, they only used five players? All five guys went the distance, and I believe they won by 16. I remember seeing teams in the past use six guys (Clemson did it at least once last year), but this is the first time I have ever seen five."
If you don't believe Ben, check out the box score on either team's ESPN.com page. And my favorite thing about the game is that the five "ironmen" committed only 11 fouls among them. I believe the Gamecocks were also missing some
players.
|
This is what the "Points Per Shot" statistic is all about. It separates the one-dimensional scorers from the more rounded offensive performers. Think of it in NBA terms: Last season, Allen Iverson averaged 28.4 points per game (on 24.7 field goal attempts). Karl Malone averaged 25.5 ppg, but needed only 18 shots per game to reach that number.
Yes, Iverson outscored Malone by nearly three points per game, which is significant. However, if you were an NBA coach, would you rather have the 2.9 points or the 6.7 field goal attempts? I'd like to think that, with a roster full of NBA talent, my guys could get a whole lot more than three points on nearly seven shots.
I'll grant you the situation is a bit different in college. On many rosters, the talent level between a team's No. 1 and No. 2 scorers can be dramatically different. A college coach often instructs his No. 1 option to load up at the offense end.
What I'm saying is that, way more often than not, it's still a bad strategy.
Now don't get me wrong; I live in Philadelphia and think Iverson is a wonderful talent and player. But I understand how Larry
Brown would go nuts watching him, and how Allen could separate a shoulder just from shooting so much.
At the college level, coaches also lean on their No. 1 guy too much. When the difference is as great as it is between an Iverson-type (1.15 points per shot) and a Malone-type (1.42 points per shot), you're simply wasting too many possessions watching your alleged meal ticket miss.
Which brings us to the nation's current leading scorers, re-ranked according to the
highest "Points Per Shot" (PPS) average. PPS also rewards players for
reaching -- and converting from -- the free throw line, as they score points
in that manner without "wasting" a field goal attempt.
|
More for Less
|
|
PLAYER/TEAM
|
PPG
|
PPS
|
|
Michael Bradley, Villanova
|
21.0
|
1.85
|
|
Brandon Wolfram, UTEP
|
24.8
|
1.64
|
|
Austin Ganly, New Hampshire
|
23.5
|
1.55
|
|
Wes Burtner, Belmont
|
20.9
|
1.54
|
|
Luke Recker, Iowa
|
21.4
|
1.51
|
|
Casey Calvary, Gonzaga
|
21.7
|
1.50
|
|
Preston Shumpert, Syracuse
|
22.6
|
1.49
|
|
Marvin O'Connor, St. Joseph's
|
22.3
|
1.47
|
|
Henry Domercant, E. Illinois
|
24.1
|
1.46
|
|
Chris Bjorklund, Cal Poly-SLO
|
21.0
|
1.44
|
|
Troy Murphy, Notre Dame
|
23.0
|
1.43
|
|
Rashad Phillips, Detroit
|
21.3
|
1.40
|
|
Devin Brown, Texas-S.A.
|
23.0
|
1.40
|
|
Isaac Spencer, Murray State
|
24.8
|
1.38
|
|
Durelle Brown, Manhattan
|
21.6
|
1.37
|
|
Kareem Rush, Missouri
|
21.3
|
1.33
|
|
Joe Crispin, Penn State
|
21.8
|
1.29
|
|
Will Solomon, Clemson
|
21.2
|
1.28
|
|
Carlos Arroyo, Florida International
|
21.4
|
1.27
|
|
Ron Williamson, Howard
|
21.2
|
1.26
|
|
Demond Mallet, McNeese State
|
21.5
|
1.26
|
|
Steven Howard, St. Francis (N.Y.)
|
21.9
|
1.24
|
|
Kyle Hill, E. Illinois
|
22.4
|
1.22
|
|
Rasual Butler, La Salle
|
21.1
|
1.17
|
These numbers are truly revealing.
When Villanova's Michael Bradley can produce 21.0 points per game on 11.4 field goal attempts compared to
cross-town rival Rasual Butler of La Salle (21.1 ppg on 18 shots), it tells me two things:
Bradley is a far superior offensive player also blessed with better teammates.
Butler, unless every one of his teammates is in junior high, shoots way too often.
A difference of 0.69 points per shot is H-U-G-E.
Want to see some more cool numbers? Check out how the nation's leading
shooters (not necessarily scorers) compare in the PPS category:
|
Making 'em Count
|
|
PLAYER/TEAM
|
FG %
|
PPS
|
|
David Fisher, Colorado State
|
.692
|
1.90
|
|
Brad Martin, Maryland-B.C.
|
.686
|
1.88
|
|
Michael Bradley, Villanova
|
.747
|
1.85
|
|
Chuck Hedde, Evansville
|
.667
|
1.82
|
|
Theanthony Haymon, Austin Peay
|
.700
|
1.76
|
|
Kimani Ffriend, Nebraska
|
.750
|
1.75
|
|
Nakiea Miller, Iona
|
.719
|
1.75
|
|
Steffon Bradford, Nebraska
|
.692
|
1.74
|
|
Greg Jenkins, Iona
|
.691
|
1.71
|
|
Terry Black, Baylor
|
.667
|
1.70
|
|
Cliff Owens, Texas Tech
|
.667
|
1.68
|
|
Bill Phillips, St. Joseph's
|
.667
|
1.65
|
With all due respect to David Fisher (11.0 ppg) and Brad Martin (10.7 ppg), neither is in Bradley's class as an overall talent. Looking at the two charts, then, one could make a credible case for Villanova's Michael Bradley as the best player in the country to date.
Did They Get the Memo?
It may be pure coincidence, but the constant chatter about "too many fouls" seems to have lessened. In fact, it turns out that, of the eight 60-plus foul games in the country so far this season, only one has occurred
since Dec. 11.
Certainly the light, exam-period schedules play a part in this. But I can tell you, having examined all 1,284 Division I box scores to date, that the number of whistles is going way down since the November tweet-fest.
Maybe coaches are now instructing their teams as to the new points of emphasis. Maybe players have adjusted to the quick whistles they were hearing early on. Or maybe, just maybe, this so-called "point of emphasis" has been quietly de-emphasized.
We may never know. But I can say for certain that only two of the nation's 22 games with 75 or more free throws has occurred since the same Dec. 11 date. Coincidence?
We'll keep looking for that top-secret memo.
Better Wear a Helmet!
Just when you thought it was safe to stand under the basket, the following "sharp shooters" came along. Contrary to what most coaches believe these days, maybe 3-point shooting doesn't have all that
much to do with winning and losing.
| 3-point-less in loss |
3-point-less in win |
.000, 0-9; Marquette
vs. Wisconsin, Dec. 23
|
.000, 0-8; Connecticut
vs. Rhode Island, Dec. 26
|
.000, 0-11; S. C. State
at Oregon State, Dec. 23
|
.000, 0-8, Illinois-Chicago
vs. Old Dominion, Dec. 21
|
.000, 0-7; Bucknell
at Penn State, Dec. 22
|
.000, 0-3; Liberty
at Virginia Tech, Nov. 28
|
.000, 0-10; Loyola-Chicago
vs. Loyola Marymount, Dec. 21
|
.000, 0-5; South Florida
vs. George Washington, Nov. 28
|
.000, 0-8; Ball State
at Indiana, Dec. 9
|
.000, 0-10; Tulane
vs. Nicholls State, Nov. 17
|
.000, 0-7; High Point
vs. Jacksonville, Dec. 9
|
|
.000 0-10; Georgia Southern
at Winthrop, Dec. 3
|
|
.000, 0-14; Santa Clara
at Pacific, Nov. 22
|
|
Special Holiday Banter
We've only got one column this week and next, and I didn't want to let the moment pass without running at least some of your feedback. Keep the e-mails coming into 2001 (jlunardi@home.com.).
"In reading your article on Michigan State vs. Kentucky, I find myself both encouraged by your comments and displeased with the sentiment portrayed by many in covering college hoops. I am in total agreement with you when you state that, 'In other words, only really good teams would be able to post such numbers when the ball isn't dropping.'
Michigan State is arguably the best team in the country right now. They have a stifling defense that usually dictates the tempo and the outcome of the game. They are aligned with marksmen shooters who can drain a 25-footer with ease, and have the discipline (due to great coaching) to execute a game plan and literally dominate their opponent. This being said, I am NOT a Spartans fan. But they execute a game plan and philosophy that is what true basketball is supposed to be, that of a team sport.
I am a Wisconsin fan, and have been for almost 40 years. I have stood by poor to mediocre teams at best in my past affiliations, and take great offense at those who make such demeaning comments of the true challenge of two teams giving their all in competition. Kentucky put on their jerseys to play Michigan State. There is no apology that needs to be given by either side. Yes, the better team won, but no, it was not a bad thing by either the victor or the loser. Because there really was no loser, except in the strictest sense of the word. Kentucky was bested by a very good team, maybe the best team.
Every team has moments when the ball becomes a brick. Be it in backyard ball, college ball or the pros. The true character of a team comes out not when everything that goes up touches nothing but net, but when each player has to roll up their sleeves (so-to-speak) and have a thorough understanding of passing, rebounding and defense. Or, as some would say, the 'boring' aspects of the game.
Being from Wisconsin, I can say this with all sincerity. I'll take five average guys, who play with heart and intensity, over five individuals posing for their next commercial. After all, that's why it's called a 'basketball TEAM.'
If someone has a problem with that, why don't they take up croquet? Red anyone?"
-- Jeff Bykowski,
Baraboo Wisconsin
Hey, I like offense as much as the next guy. My point, like yours, is that not all low-scoring games represent bad basketball. Just as I doubt many complain after witnessing a 2-1 pitchers duel between Pedro Martinez and Roger Clemens.
"I have enjoyed reading your column over the past few weeks. I think your choice of Wake Forest as the "Biggest Overachiever" so far this season is rather interesting. Had the overachiever/underachiever awards been given last year (for the whole season), Wake would have been the "Biggest Underachiever."
How quickly some of us may forget that Wake started last season 8-1, beating opponents such as Wisconsin and Temple in impressive fashion. The only loss was to Georgia on an off-balance, buzzer-beating trey.
Wake has the same talent as last year, only now they have another year of experience under their belts. This talent and experience is finally paying off, since Wake has simply been playing well with a balanced attack. I think some may have had rather conservative expectations for the Deacs, which has made them appear that they are overachieving this
year.
-- Mike Beabout,
Richmond
Well put, Mike. I don't think you'll see another post-New Year's flameout this winter.
Joe Lunardi is a regular in-season contributor for ESPN.com. He is also
contributing editor of the Blue Ribbon College Basketball Yearbook,
www.collegebaskets.com. Write to Joe at jlunardi@home.com.
|
|
ALSO SEE
Box Score Banter
Box Score Banter archive
|
