Ball State Recap - 10 Things I Think I Thought

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

There is one thing Derrick doesn't do, and that's pass the eye test. When he drives, it's rarely the flashy drive with the crossover dribble, it's just an efficient drive that usually results in a score. When he makes a pass, it's not the no-look pass that grabs everyone's eyes, it's a straight pass that gets the ball to the player in position to score. And when Derrick does make a great play, he doesn't pose or posture, he just exchanges a few high-fives and goes about getting ready for the next play.

The mythology that has been created around Junior this year is incredible. I still think Derrick is the better fit for this team than Junior would be. But because he's not a highlight-reel kid in terms of play or pomp, he gets criticized. Quite simply, he's going to play. I'd much rather start accepting him for what he is than slamming him for what he isn't, because the simple truth is that what he is hasn't been nearly as bad as people are claiming.

[WindyCityGoldenEagle]

Can we stop with this "not creating for others" falsehood?

So far this year, Derrick has 37 assists in 271 minutes. That's one every 7.32 minutes. Last year Junior had 133 assists in 982 minutes. One every 7.38 minutes. All with having a A/TO ratio of 2.8...Junior's was 1.5.

Derrick's OR right now is 98.7. Junior's was 96.2. This despite the fact that Junior was a better shooter and scored more points. And of course Derrick is a much better defender than Junior was.

Now of course Derrick's numbers may fade as we get into BE play. But he has been more than adequate about "creating for others."

Selected numbers can be manipulated to make a player look better or worse, you know that as well as I do (as you allude to in your last sentence). Would you say the competition Junior played against in his 30 games last year was more or less difficult than the 11 games Derrick has played in this year? If your answer is more difficult, which I would imagine it would be, than those numbers don't hold water as they arent comparing apples to apples.

Also, is getting an assist the only true measure of "creating for others?" Does Derrick really pose a threat to the defense and make the defense move and put his teammates in a better position to score or are the majority of his assists simple passes to an open man who is forced to create his own shot? Having watched every game as the majority of you have, I would argue that latter.

You would have to explain what OR (I assume offensive rating?) stands for and how it's calculated before I am able to comment on that.

Brew - I do accept Derrick for what he is, I'm not trying to bash the kid. I realize he's going to be our pg this year as we dont have any other options unless the JW pg experiment ends up working. He's a decent defender who has done a much better job at reducing his ticky tack fouls. That being said, just because he's a member of our team doesnt mean we can't critique him (positively and negatively) --- isn't that part of the fun of message boards?

[TheSultan]

windy, sorry but when I read your post, I look at someone who is trying to confirm something they believe and not someone who is looking at it without bias.

Offensive rating is a pretty complex calculation that is explained here.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ratings.html

It is a pretty common rating that takes into effect points produced through scoring, assists, offensive rebounds minus things like missed shots, turnovers, etc. It has its downfalls. For instance it rewards efficient players who aren't used as often, versus players who are volume scorers. But in general I think it gives a good indication of the offensive value that a player brings to a team when compared to another player.

We'll see how it goes for the rest of the year.

[WindyCityGoldenEagle]

I hear ya regarding my potential bias towards Derrick but in all honesty I'm just going with what I see. I'm certainly not trying to ignore your numbers as I believe they certainly tell a story as well but sometimes that story can be a bit skewed. It's certainly possible that we just differ in our definition of "creating for others." I don't believe Derrick does this very well (baesd on my definition stated above). Sure he protects the ball, but it's much easier to protect the ball when you aren't attacking and with our lack of scoring from the guard/wing position I believe the team would be better off with more of an attacking pg (which obviously Derrick is not, nor do I think he has the skill set to become one). Derrick would be much better suited on a team that has wings that can create their own shot and attack without having the need for a pg to "set them up." ....which possibly leads to the conclusion that since Derrick isn't going anywhere, maybe we need an adjustment at the 2, i.e. jjj, mayo (which may already be taking place)

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

Derrick has been attacking a lot more since the start of the season. The first four games he didn't. He averaged 1 ppg over that stretch and the only time he tried to make any offense for himself was Ohio State, when he went an abysmal 1/7 from the field. Since then, 20/44 from the field (45.4%), averaging 7.7 ppg, and shooting 76.4% (13/17) from the line. I realize he's not a lights out scorer, but he is starting to attack and look for his shot. Those first four games, Ohio State was the only time he attempted more than 2 field goals. Since then, he has attempted at least 3 in every game (averaging 6.3 FGA).

I really think the biggest problem is still eye test. Derrick doesn't have the flash we expect of a starting point guard. We are used to guys like Cadougan, Buycks, James, and Diener, that always look like they are going 100%. Derrick doesn't look like he's going 100% even when he is. Just look at the numbers over those past 7 games:

7.7 ppg, 4.3 apg, 3.6 rpg, 45.4% FG%, 76.4 FT%, while only turning the ball over 1.4 times per game.

Anyone wearing blue and gold would have been overjoyed with those numbers, but because his numbers were so bad the first 4 games (1.0 ppg, 4 apg, 4.8 rpg, 10.0 FG%, 25.0 FT%, 1.5 tpg) and that was everyone's first impression, he still gets a lot of flack. I'm not trying to say you are attacking the kid, but if you look at what he's done recently in a larger sample size than the rather ugly metrics in the first four games when everyone formulated their opinions, he looks like a pretty solid player, especially with a 3:1 A:T ratio.