Using that information, here's how our players stack up:
Player Hgt Exp DR% Act DR% Exp OR% Act OR%Editor's note: I've updated the stats through the Pitt game, and only for KenPom's Top 150 teams - all games except Savannah St. and FIU. Individual and team splits on the right side bar will be updated after tonight's game.
Monroe 6-11 17.4 13.7 10.4 6.5
Sims 6-10 16.5 7.0 9.2 4.7
Vaughn 6-9 16.5 5.7 9.3 9.2
Summers 6-8 16.1 9.3 9.1 4.9
Wattad 6-5 12.3 10.9 6.0 4.5
Freeman 6-4 11.6 12.7 4.8 5.6
Sapp 6-3 10.1 12.1 3.7 5.6
Clark 6-2 9.6 9.9 3.0 5.4
Wright 6-1 8.9 9.3 2.7 1.2
Couple of notes on this:
1. This is before the Pittsburgh game.
2. The expected values are versus the players' heights, not positions.
3. Defensive rebounding tends to be much more of a team activity. Those numbers are harder to parse individually.
That all said, it seems pretty clear who is rebounding and who isn't, doesn't it?
A revealing table. Sapp might be doing well in part because of the inability of the forwards and centers to get rebounds--as in there are more balls around for him to grab: both the ones that a guard might naturally get and the ones that his front-line team mates are failing to retrieve.
ReplyDeleteNote the total percentages, too, suggested (loosely) by this table: Georgetown is getting 76% of height-predicted rebounds on defense and 82% of height-predicted rebounds on offense. Ugh.