Analysis: Season Review, Pt. 2

Picking up where we left off in the last post, here are three more sets of stats for the Hoyas players for this season, breaking the season into three chunks: OOC (13 games, Nov. 11 - Dec. 30), BE regular season (16 games, Jan. 6 - Mar. 3) and post-season (8 games, Mar. 8 - 31).


Points per Weighted Shot

PPWS simply divides the points scored by a player by the sum of his field goal attempts and a fraction of his free throw attempts. As the (former) Big Ten Wonk says, PPWS is not the end-all of statistical analysis, but it's easy to calculate and can give an objective indicator of a struggling or surging player.

PPWS = PTS/(FGA + (0.475 x FTA))

A general rule is that a player under 1.0 is having a rough go of it, and a player over 1.3 is doing extremely well. Keep in mind that small sample size can give some curious results.

Player	OOC	BE	Post
Green	1.28	1.17	1.13
Sapp	1.00	1.03	1.06
Wallace	1.32	1.33	1.42
Hibbert	1.34	1.45	1.25
Summers	1.26	1.06	0.97
Ewing	1.34	1.25	1.06
Egerson	1.11	-	-
Rivers	1.10	0.71	1.01
Macklin	1.39	1.45	1.22
Crawford	1.10	0.95	1.50
Spann	0.00	1.40	2.00
Dizdarevic	0.00	1.50	2.11
Izzo	0.51	0.00	0.00

First thing that I notice is that the much-maligned guards showed no drop-off in performance as the competition improved, although Sapp's shooting was merely pedestrian, while Wallace was superb. Hibbert and Green slumped a bit in the post-season, but you just couldn't expect Roy to keep up that insane pace from the BE regular season. That stat may indicate just how little competition Hibbert had in the Big East this year (outside of Gray). Summers and Ewing, in their 1st year playing for Georgetown, did struggle to score later in the year. Rivers' offense was a real problem during conference play (he desperately needs a mid-range and long-range shot), but he didn't embarrass himself when it mattered most. And, dare I say, play Vernon Macklin.


Points per Possession Used

Speaking of that old post, I developed a couple of new (to me, at least) statistics then, based on the idea that you can credit - or blame - individual players for possessions used in addition to weighted shots. This is the same stat that was used to calculate possession stats in Part 1, albeit without explanation there.

Poss. Used = FGA + 0.475*FTA + TO - OR

The idea here is that a player ends a possession by shooting, by getting fouled and heading to the line or by turning the ball over. But a player who can get an offensive rebound saves a possession for his team, and should be rewarded. So a new stat, points per possession used [PPP] accounting for all possessions used rather than just shots, is simply:

PPP = PTS/(FGA + 0.475*FTA + TO - OR)

Here we go:

Player	OOC	BE	Post
Green	1.11	1.08	1.15
Sapp	0.95	0.86	1.03
Wallace	1.02	1.12	1.38
Hibbert	1.52	1.66	1.65
Summers	1.08	1.05	0.92
Ewing	1.28	1.25	0.95
Egerson	1.15	-	-
Rivers	0.87	0.46	0.67
Macklin	1.35	2.02	1.22
Crawford	0.99	0.87	1.13
Spann	0.00	3.50	2.00
Dizdarevic	0.00	0.75	0.68
Izzo	0.34	0.00	0.00

While this stat gives some interesting results, it tends to bias towards inside players who can accrue offensive rebounds while avoiding turnovers. So, instead of commenting, I'll just go straight to the final stat.


Points + Assists per Possession Used

And this stat is exactly as it reads, although I have come up with a funky acronym (take that Mr. Gasaway).

PAPU = (PTS + ASST)/(FGA + 0.475*FTA + TO - OR)

The idea here is to reward ball-handlers for their extra risk of turnovers that they assume by crediting them for finding teammates in scoring position. Traditionally, that would be the guards, although the sharing philosophy of Georgetown's offensive scheme isn't as heavily weighted that way as most teams (he says without a shred of statistical evidence to back it up).

Player	OOC	BE	Post
Green	1.43	1.34	1.28
Sapp	1.29	1.19	1.39
Wallace	1.32	1.39	1.71
Hibbert	1.67	1.75	1.82
Summers	1.13	1.20	1.08
Ewing	1.52	1.56	1.23
Egerson	1.29	-	-
Rivers	1.39	0.71	1.60
Macklin	1.60	2.41	1.22
Crawford	1.14	1.13	1.13
Spann	0.00	3.50	2.00
Dizdarevic	0.00	0.75	0.68
Izzo	0.34	0.00	0.00

I don't have a good enough feel for PAPU yet to make any absolute statements (another post for another day), but it seems that a score above 1.25 is an indicator of solid play.

What I find interesting here is that, for the 6 core players, three played above their season average in the post-season (Hibbert, Wallace and Sapp), while three did not. This is similar to what was shown in the PPWS table above, except that Roy is now being credited for his yeoman's effort on the offensive glass (3.8/g). Other winners are Rivers, although his post-season stat is heavily biased by the 7 assists he recorded mostly in garbage time against Belmont and (dare I say again?) Vernon Macklin.