Fred Van Vleet Is The Most Statistically Dominant Point Guard Of The Modern Era

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

The most fair comparison would of course be on a per minute basis but that is way too much of a pain in the butt. Kidd's quantities would still be superior but significantly less so.

Per 40 minutes:

Jason Kidd - 17.8 pts, 10.0 assists, 4.9 TOs, 4.1 stls, 7.1 rebouds, 3.0 fouls
Fred VanVleet - 13.5 pts, 6.6 assists, 2.1 TOs, 2.4 stls, 4.9 rebounds, 2.4 fouls

Jason still wins hands down, but once again, this is a compliment to Fred that he is even being compared to the greatest set of statistics ever put forth by a college PG.

[jdshock]

Per 40 minutes:

Jason Kidd - 17.8 pts, 10.0 assists, 4.9 TOs, 4.1 stls, 7.1 rebouds, 3.0 fouls
Fred VanVleet - 13.5 pts, 6.6 assists, 2.1 TOs, 2.4 stls, 4.9 rebounds, 2.4 fouls

Jason still wins hands down, but once again, this is a compliment to Fred that he is even being compared to the greatest set of statistics ever put forth by a college PG.

We posted at the same time, but I discussed this in my post.

Essentially, I said that Kidd is just a reason this might not be the best metric; not that Kidd is a better pg than FVV under this metric. Under the guidelines in the first post, FVV is the better pg. The production statistics suggest that might be a reason to rethink this as the metric. That's a separate argument, though.

[Rlh04d]

You can't even do that good on an Xbox.

I don't know. You haven't seen my Ron Baker create-a-player.

[Rlh04d]

We posted at the same time, but I discussed this in my post.

Essentially, I said that Kidd is just a reason this might not be the best metric; not that Kidd is a better pg than FVV under this metric. Under the guidelines in the first post, FVV is the better pg. The production statistics suggest that might be a reason to rethink this as the metric. That's a separate argument, though.

Purely looking at this statistically:

I think this measure is a very good first step to creating some kind of true statistical analysis of the point guard role, but it does clearly need some work. A>TO and Steal>TO are fun, but a binary outcome isn't great for this kind of analysis. This could be expanded into a more comprehensive look weighting each individual statistic and coming out with an overall number.

[jdshock]

Purely looking at this statistically:

I think this measure is a very good first step to creating some kind of true statistical analysis of the point guard role, but it does clearly need some work. A>TO and Steal>TO are fun, but a binary outcome isn't great for this kind of analysis. This could be expanded into a more comprehensive look weighting each individual statistic and coming out with an overall number.

Exactly.

It would be neat to see something like that. I think everyone would agree turnovers and assists would be weighted heavily. The rest is probably so subjective, though. And not just based on a coach's preference for a point guard's scoring but also on the team. Curry had to do a lot for that Davidson team. FVV did have the benefit of having Early and Baker to pass to in his career while Curry had to take more of the load.

[Cdizzle]

Per 40 minutes:

Jason Kidd - 17.8 pts, 10.0 assists, 4.9 TOs, 4.1 stls, 7.1 rebouds, 3.0 fouls
Fred VanVleet - 13.5 pts, 6.6 assists, 2.1 TOs, 2.4 stls, 4.9 rebounds, 2.4 fouls

Jason still wins hands down, but once again, this is a compliment to Fred that he is even being compared to the greatest set of statistics ever put forth by a college PG.

Should pace be considered in an evaluation like this? When we're looking at raw numbers like this, or even per 40 numbers, the team tempo matters a great deal. For instance, FVV plays on a team that KenPom currently rates at 329 in AdjTempo. I don't know how you make the best comparison in this regard. One could argue, somewhat successfully in my mind, that it is the PG's job to dictate pace, so their raw numbers are a result of their own tempo-setting. But one could just as easily argue, somewhat successfully in my mind, that it is the PG's job to dictate a pace that is conducive to his team's victory, something FVV probably rates at/among the best in modern NCAA BB history.

I think these numbers are interesting, and fun to look at. But I also think the metrics are just kindof made up in a way that accentuates FVV's strengths and minimizes his weaknesses. I do think they do a pretty good job of pointing out that anyone riding the "FVV is overrated" train isn't the brightest bulb in the light factory.

[Art Bunch]

I think Free Throw percentage needs to be figured into this as well. The Gottlieb post made me think of that even though it was tongue-in-cheek. Because another critical part of being a pg is having to handle the ball at the end of games and hitting clutch free throws when one is ahead and the opponent has to foul.

[SHOXAAC]

So that half court shot that the Loyola player made wasn't considered a shot attempt?

I believe the general rule from my Friends U SID days were not to penalize a player that heaved a half or three-quarter court shot at the end of a half or game, because time forced the shot. If the attempt was made, however the shot attempt was recorded.

[Rlh04d]

Exactly.

It would be neat to see something like that. I think everyone would agree turnovers and assists would be weighted heavily. The rest is probably so subjective, though. And not just based on a coach's preference for a point guard's scoring but also on the team. Curry had to do a lot for that Davidson team. FVV did have the benefit of having Early and Baker to pass to in his career while Curry had to take more of the load.

Seems like something could be done for this using points as a common measure.

The PG's points themselves are easy. They should probably be subtracted for missed shots, though, to stress efficiency in scoring.
An assist would rank somewhere between 2-3 points, closer to 2.
A turnover would rank somewhere between -1 and -2 points, closer to -1. (Turnovers don't consistently turn into points.)
A steal would rank somewhere between 1-2 points, closer to 2. (Steals turn into points at a higher level than turnovers.)

And all of that adjusted for possessions per game, per Cdizzle's point.

[jdshock]

Seems like something could be done for this using points as a common measure.

The PG's points themselves are easy. They should probably be subtracted for missed shots, though, to stress efficiency in scoring.
An assist would rank somewhere between 2-3 points, closer to 2.
A turnover would rank somewhere between -1 and -2 points, closer to -1. (Turnovers don't consistently turn into points.)
A steal would rank somewhere between 1-2 points, closer to 2. (Steals turn into points at a higher level than turnovers.)

And all of that adjusted for possessions per game, per Cdizzle's point.

I agree with all of this. I would just make one change to the turnover value. I don't have a good stats background, so I don't know if maybe the calculation is wrong in my head or not. It seems to me, though, turnovers should be closer to -2 or higher since it has the possibility of points for the opponent plus the loss of potential points for your team. So obviously on the one extreme you could have a turnover that cost your team 6 points because you "would have" made a three and the other team made a three off of the turnover.

Is that the correct way to calculate that statistically? Or am I effectively double counting it? I could be convinced that the hypothetical three I mentioned for the opponent may have occurred on the next possession anyway, so it's really just the lost possession for your own team? Suddenly I have a great deal of respect for Adam Silver and KenPom.

[Rlh04d]

I agree with all of this. I would just make one change to the turnover value. I don't have a good stats background, so I don't know if maybe the calculation is wrong in my head or not. It seems to me, though, turnovers should be closer to -2 or higher since it has the possibility of points for the opponent plus the loss of potential points for your team. So obviously on the one extreme you could have a turnover that cost your team 6 points because you "would have" made a three and the other team made a three off of the turnover.

Is that the correct way to calculate that statistically? Or am I effectively double counting it? I could be convinced that the hypothetical three I mentioned for the opponent may have occurred on the next possession anyway, so it's really just the lost possession for your own team? Suddenly I have a great deal of respect for Adam Silver and KenPom.

Very good point. Wasn't thinking about the loss of potential points on your own team as well.

Then yeah, I'd guess that value should be right around 2. Somewhere around one-point-per-possession seems to be a fairly average mark around college basketball. Maybe something like a subtraction of 2.1 points.

I've got tons of respect for Silver/Pom.

[jocoshock]

@Dan:CohenWREX: "I kicked the door down." The impact of @FredVanVleet on Rockford recruiting has been amazing. Story at 6 on @13WREX. http://twitter.com/DanCohenWREX/stat...285633/photo/1

[jocoshock]

http://m.wrex.com/w/sports/story/125111266/

"Fred was the frontrunner for us, you know. He's the reason we got our looks early in our careers and he definitely opened up the doors for us," says Auburn senior and UW-Green Bay commit Antoine Pittman.

[jocoshock]

Video interview from Rockford/Chicago

http://www.mystateline.com/fulltext-sports/d/story/van-vleet-has-shockers-rolling-again/17899/2GbeDW9bUkCaFTyQw1VlnQ

[Shocker Mama]

Great post Good News, thank you!!

I only see one glaring omission, your failure to include the hands down all-time greatest PG in history, Doug Gottlieb. LOL it was quite difficult typing that even in sarcasm.

Well, then we would have to add a couple of new metrics -- number of roommates' credit cards stolen, and number of schools expelled from.