Maya Moore, Jantel Lavender, and Boxscores Values
I recently finished a spreadsheet listing the 2008-09 season stats for all 73 of the "power conference" teams in women's college basketball- the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big Twelve, Pacific Ten and Southeastern Conferences. I limited the season stats to just those 73 teams for two reasons:
a) it was a lot easier to collect stats for 73 teams than to do 340 Division I teams, and
b) the argument can be made that these are the important teams, anyway. Of these 73 teams, 54 had winning records. Furthermore, 37 teams - the majority - had 20 win seasons. Christopher Thompson at Full Court Press makes the argument that the mid-majors and lower-majors are on the decline.
Most WNBA draft picks are going to come from either the power conferences or from overseas.
Granted, the various conferences didn't make it easy. The ACC, Big East, Big 10 and Pac 10 get a thumbs-up for making stats fairly easy to find. The SEC forces you to go to each of the member websites. The Big Twelve combines all of the stats...on a .pdf file, leaving you the choice to go to member websites or to type the stats in off the .pdf.
The argument will come up that power conference (PC) stats are skewed by the various schedules that each of the member teams play. Unfortunately, not every team complies its "conference only" stats, and I was left with the regular season stats.
A very interesting metric to look at is the "Boxscores" metric by David Sparks, which attempts to take the simple stats found in box scores and develop an estimate of team wins. (Sparks's initial blog post is here.) I adjusted his formula slightly to allow negative Boxscores values, which doesn't affect the final calculations that much - players with negative Boxscores values don't play that much, for obvious reasons.
I finally normalized every player to a 30-game season. These were the leaders in women's college basketball from 2008-09:
1. Angel McCoughtry, Louisville, 9.21
2. Ashley Walker, California, 8.01
3. Courtney Paris, Oklahoma, 7.61
4. Maya Moore, Connecticut, 7.54 (*)
5. DeWanna Bonner, Auburn, 7.17
6. Jantel Lavender, Ohio State, 7.06 (*)
7. Marissa Coleman, Maryland, 6.83
8. Jayne Appel, Stanford, 6.35 (*)
9. Danielle Gant, Texas A&M, 6.12
10. Lindsey Wisdom-Hylton, Purdue, 5.94
Three of these players - the ones marked with (*) - are underclassmen. Of the seven remaining players, all went in the first two rounds of the WNBA Draft. Three of them were top five draft choices.
Moore was only a sophomore last year, implying that Moore will be a huge player in the WNBA when she leaves Connecticut. You can think of Moore has having contributed about 7 1/2 or 8 wins out of Connecticut's 39 win season last year. Almost every linear metric - a metric that uses "plus, minus, and times" - is an additive metric, and those metrics grant greater rewards for more minutes. Seniors tend to get the most minutes; for a sophomore to be so dominant is a testament to greatness.
Another 2009-10 junior to keep an eye on is Jantel Lavender of Ohio State. We usually don't hear much out of Ohio State for the simple reason that Ohio State usually finds some reason or another to fold in the early rounds of the NCAA tournament despite having won the last five regular season Big Ten championships. In 2008, Ohio State ended up as a #6 seed and was upset in the first round by #11 seed Florida State - a team that was blossoming into an ACC power. Last year, Ohio State was a #3 season, and they made it to the Sweet Sixteen but no farther, falling to Stanford 84-66 in the Berkeley Regional semi-finals.
So who is this Jantel Lavender person? Lavender is a 6-4 center, who "led the Big Ten in scoring (20.8), rebounding (10.7), FG percentages (.541) and double-doubles (24) in all games despite constant doubled and triple teams" according to her bio.
Could the 2011 WNBA Draft (if there is one) come down to Moore vs. Lavender? It's something to think about, and a good reason to watch the random Ohio State women's basketball game when it pops up on television.
20 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Very nice post and a good approach to evaluating NCAA Bball at the individual level
Interesting that Moore, not Montgomery, had the top score on UConn (perhaps I’m demonstrating my ignorance about WCBB)
But I have to ask — how did Shalee Lehning rank in that scheme? :)
Just to further enhance the way we analyze players in relation to WNBA potential, I wonder if there would be a way to look at Boxscores and some sort of “athleticism” score. Basketball Prospectus has worked on something like that for NBA players, but I wonder if it could be translated to the NCAA level to predict pro success (and accounting for the first year impact of McCoughtry/Bonner vs. Paris/Walker…
SwishAppeal.com, women's basketball...covered SBN-style... twitter: @qmccall3
Maya Moore was a 2 time HS player of the year. She was 1st All-American as a freshman, and basically swept the
National Player of the year awards as a sophomore. After two years she’s shooting 61% inside the arc and 41% behind the arc. The only thing that will keep her off the 2010 World Championship team next fall is an injury. If you’ve never seen her play here’s a good highlight video from her freshman year.
Renee was the third most statistically impressive Husky behind Tina Charles who is in the same class as Courtney Paris, Jayne Appel, and Jantel Lavender statistically on a per minute basis.
It's the PG effect.
Point guards, imo, rarely have a very big impact in terms of stats. Unless one averages over eight assists. So stats-wise, numbers-wise, Maya Moore had a bigger impact. But numbers don’t exactly equate to leadership. Connecticut has often relied heavily on guardplay, even in 2002 when they had the big three inside. Who got them the ball? Sue Bird.
Unfortunately, Montgomery has been rather underwhelming in the WNBA. Maybe in a year or so, or with an overseas season under her belt. Moore, however, will probably be an impact player. I haven’t seen anyone as talented as her yet.
That's the problem with applying an NBA metric to women's basketball or even men's college basketball
The formula for Boxscores came from a regression of NBA stats. I know David has posted Boxscore stats for the WNBA, but I don’t believe he ran a separate regression.
There are fewer assists in women’s basketball and more turnovers. In the NBA the top point guards like Chris Paul are capable of a 4:1 assist to turnover ratio. Whalen led the WNBA with a 2.5:1 assist to turnover ratio. 2.5:1 is usually about as good as it gets in WCBB as well. It was both Sue Bird and Diana Taurasi’s best season in college. Temeka Johnson was able to post some 2.8:1 seasons, but that’s as good as I can ever remember seeing by a star college player.
That’s the reason there isn’t a single guard in the top ten list above. For players like Renee Montgomery it’s best to look at how good she was in to relation to her peers in the backcourt, rather than a full list if you’re going to apply an NBA metric to women’s basketball.
Yup, I agree.
That is a big problem with Boxscore, or rather, a problem with applying a metric designed for one league to another league. Most of the standing metrics out there are NBA ball metrics; it’s a real weakness of the method but at least we know that the problem is there. I’d be glad to send David my spreadsheet if he could run such a regression, I’d love to see how the numbers come up.
Regarding point guards: I find that most metrics, even Wins Score and Adjusted Wins Score, underestimate what point guards contribute. Q has done some work with evaluating point guards but there isn’t a single-number point guard metric out there. I wonder if one could be created along the lines of the NFL’s quarterback efficiency.
by James Bowman on Oct 19, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Unfortunately...
I just heard from David recently and his work was so good that he is now employed in a capacity that does not allow him to do statistical work for us little people anymore…
I believe the strongest weakness for boxscores was that it overestimates the value of rebounds for the WNBA… and I imagine it does that similarly for WCBB…
But my question, as you said petrel, is whether you could get “good enough” results by comparing things positionally or if the results come out in ways that reflect the judgment of people who follow these players closely. I think that for the most part, David’s work translates pretty well…
SwishAppeal.com, women's basketball...covered SBN-style... twitter: @qmccall3
by Nate Parham on Oct 19, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
I would like to see what Kristi Toliver’s Boxscore was in 2007-08. She averaged about 17 and 8 that season.
Her assist to turnover ratio would hurt her, though.
I don't have Boxscores, but have another metric called Game Score on hand.
It has similar issues to boxscores, but for comparison sake here are some scores.
Freshman through senior year
Per Game
Tolliver: 7.5, 9.7, 13.0, 12.6
Montgomery: 7.0, 10.1, 10.3, 12.6
Pace Adjusted per 40 minutes
Tolliver: 9.9, 13.7, 14.9, 14.1
Montgomery: 10.2, 12.7, 13.0, 16.0
Latta: 12.2, 16.0, 11.9
Temeka Johnson: 15.4, 14.5
Bird: 12.5, 19.1
Kara Lawson: 15.2, 12.3, 13.6, 16.8
The best forwards and centers
all have paced adjusted stats per 40 minutes scores over 20 to show the guard bias.
Interesting.
Are Latta’s Game Scores for her sophomore to senior year? And Johnson’s and Bird’s for their junior and senior years?
One question — if I wanted to adjust say, Kristi Toliver’s per 40 minutes statistics from this past season, how would I go about doing that?
That’s one I’ve always been stumped with, but it seems like per 40 minutes stats are a solid predictor for a player’s future. Of course, depending on if you have an adequate sample size.
Yes. You have the players' years correct.
I just posted the seasons I had on hand.
If you want to simply adjust a player’s stats to per 40 minutes, you divide each stat by the player’’s minutes and then multiply by 40.
Adjusting for pace like I did requires the team’s statistics and some additional calculations.
Yeah, I know how to calculate per 40 minutes stats, but
I was wondering how I could adjust that to take into account the fact that she only averaged 14.3 MPG.
Also, is Game Score suppose to be adjusted?
Or is that just because it was per 40 minutes?
Some More Numbers
Currently Active Players on 2008-09 List
1. Maya Moore, Connecticut 7.54
2. Jantel Lavender, Ohio State, 7.06
3. Jayne Appel, Stanford, 6.35
4. Tina Charles, Connecticut, 5.93
5. Carolyn Swords, Boston College, 5.56
6. Jacinta Monroe, Florida State, 5.48
7. Danielle Wilson, Baylor, 5.41
(7b. Epiphanny Prince, Rutgers, 5.35)
8. Monica Wright, Virginia, 5.17
9. Danielle McCray, Baylor, 5.14
10. Ashley Sweat, Kansas State, 4.96
As for certain other people: Shalee Lehning was one step behind Tina Charles at 5.83 wins per 30 games. Kristi Toliver was at 4.91 wins per 30 games.
by James Bowman on Oct 19, 2009 9:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Moore over Montgomery
There’s nothing particularly surprising about Moore ranking ahead of Montgomery in any metric. Most everyone was in agreement that Moore was the team’s best player, and possibly the country’s best.
Maya Moore, Jayne Appel, Jantel Lavender, along with Tina Charles
are the 4 best players in WCBB this season and there’s really not any debate about that. Maya is the consensus best player in the country, and will be the 1st pick in the 2011 draft. People will disagree about how to rank the three centers, but most people agree that Lavender is third.
Lavender has Prahalis
Just my two cents, quickly -
Lavender will continue to impress and her stats will get better and better not only because of her innate talents but also because her point guard, Samantha Prahalis, is now only a sophomore. I’m sure you all saw her in the tournament last year, if not much during the season. She’s the real deal and was already making major contributions as a freshman. Ohio State has a 1-2 punch there that I am really looking forward to seeing in action this season. Between that pair and Joe McKeown at N’western – there are reasons to look in on Big 10 Basketball for me this year – if I can find it on my cable system and I’m not out at a game somewhere! :)

by 















