Cusick should start

I believe it's wishful thinking.

Gunk wrote:

Too bad Calvert is going on a mission next year. We could really use him next year that's for sure. Maybe Kyle Collinsworth can run the point next year somewhat. If we land Jabari Parker you guys think Calvert may stay??

Calvert gets trapped. I don't think Calvert is any better than Carlino. Plus we're forgetting Carlino is just a sophomore.



Kyle's ball handling is horrid. He may have gotten away a bit in HS running the point but in college if he dribbled more than 3 times he got picked. That said, I am looking forward to him returning so that we have a legit 2. Either Kyle or Haws can play the 2.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

LOL - Kyle play the 2 - that's funny right there. Dude couldn't hit an outside shot to save his life

hawkwing wrote:
Exactly. I'm concerned that Carlino's only good game against a decent opponent was his first game ever in a BYU uniform.

Wrong.



Here's a break down of Carlino vs. Cusick against last year's "good" teams. To be fair, I did a point/min comparison as well.



Carlino:



Baylor - 18 pts in 24 min; 0.75 pts/min

@SMC - 13 pts in 27 min; 0.5 pts/min

@VTech - 7 pts in 35 min; 0.2 pts/min

SMC - 20 pts in 28 min; 0.71 pts/min

Gon - 18 pts in 28 min; 0.64 pts/min

@USF (not a "good" team but great performance by Carlino) - 30 pts in 37 min; 0.8 pts/min

@Gon - 18 pts in 33 min; 0.5 pts/min (nearly identical to his previous performance)

Gon - 12 pts in 33 min; 0.36 pts/min

Iona - 6 pts in 20 min; 0.3 pts/min

Marquette - 7 pts in 32 min; 0.2 pts/min



What this tells me is Carlino got tired at the end of the season. The idea Carlino doesn't show up against "good" opponents is completely false. With the exception of VTech, Iona and Marquette, Carlino scored in double digits against every legit opponent. In fact, you could make a case that Carlino shows up in big games. Unfortunately for Carlino, the only games fans seem to remember are his Baylor game and his Marquette game. Carlino started hot and ended cold. People tend to only remember your latest performance; hence the false perception that Carlino doesn't "show up."



Cusick:



Baylor - 2 pts in 18 min; 0.1 pts/min

@SMC - 5 pts in 15 min; 0.3 pts/min

@VTech - 0 pts in 5 min; 0 pts/min

SMC - 3 pts in 13 min; 0.2 pts/min

Gon - 0 pts in 15 min; 0 pts/min

@USF -1 pts in 13 min; 0.08 pts/min

@Gon - 3 pts in 14 min; 0.2 pts/min

Gon - 0 pts in 10 min; 0 pts/min

Iona - 0 pts in 26 min; 0 pts/min

Marquette - 12 pts in 29 min; 0.4 pts/min



I know Cusick appears to be playing better this season than he did last season...marginally. But looking at these stats, solely based off point production nothing there seems to indicated Cusick should be starting over Carlino against "good" teams. Quite the opposite actually. Again, sadly for Carlino, Cusick's best game and the only game he out performed Carlino in was against Marquette. That's it.



Carlino's average pts/game ratio for these series of games is 0.5 pts/game. That's still better than Cusick's best game. Cusick's best game, 0.4 pts/min, would be Carlino's 4th worst performance.



As Qman and I mentioned, Carlino needs to get to the basket. That's where he is most effective. Ditch the 3. Get in the lane and either shoot or pass it. We need the points, especially given we don't have a 2 or a 4. Cusick isn't going to be able to provide those points, not at least playing PG.

Tonight was a good step forward, Carlino was trying to get the hoop but not forcing things as often as in the past.



He needs to continue to build on the last two games. For those of you that didn't watch the game Carlino threw at least 3 passes to players in position to score who were then fouled- quasi-assists.

Carlino is still a drain on the rest of the team, all anecdotal evidence and scoring spurts aside. If you want a flashy PG regardless of W/L, Carlino is your guy. If you want BYU to win more games Carlino, at the present, needs to see fewer minutes until he busts his slump or figures out what the other four guys are doing:



Look at his plus/minus and RR ( = [On Court +/-] - [Off Court +/-])for the season:



TSU = +13, RR = +11

GSU = +25, RR = +32

FSU = -25, RR = -32

ND = -11, RR =-12

UTSA = 0, RR = -19

CSUN = +1, RR = -10

Mont = +10, RR = -5



In only two games has the team done better with Carlino playing than with him on the bench--TSU and GSU....where we really needed him to win.



Contrast to Cusick:



TSU = +13, RR = +11

GSU = -7, RR = -32

FSU = -1, RR = +16

ND = -4, RR = +2

UTSA = +24, RR = +29

CSUN = +11, RR = +10

Mont = +20, RR = +15



In all but one game, BYU has played better when Cusick is on the floor compared to when he is on the pine, and his one off-game was GSU....again, where it didn't matter (the "really" above was sarcasm btw).



Do I think Carlino has the ability to be a good/great PG and help us win games? Yes. Do I think he should start? No--not until he sorts his yips out and starts showing he can get a positive RR in limited minutes off the bench.

We don't have enough data for plus/minus. At a glance wasn't Davies in foul trouble against FSU and ND. I wonder if Cusick's plus/minus is being driven by Davies more than himself.

Qman wrote:
We don't have enough data for plus/minus. At a glance wasn't Davies in foul trouble against FSU and ND. I wonder if Cusick's plus/minus is being driven by Davies more than himself.

If you don't think we have enough data for +/-, you don't understand the statistic--it is what it is, and no amount of additional data will change it. Maybe you were trying to make another point? As for the influence of Davies, feel free to run through the data and figure it out rather than saying "we don't know about this!" and pretending it moots the strongest argument based on facts for Carlino to stick to the pine. Here's a link to help you get started:



http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/brigham-young/craig-cusick/plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You can compare the charted times and see who is sharing the floor with who.

snoscythe wrote:

We don't have enough data for plus/minus. At a glance wasn't Davies in foul trouble against FSU and ND. I wonder if Cusick's plus/minus is being driven by Davies more than himself.

If you don't think we have enough data for +/-, you don't understand the statistic--it is what it is, and no amount of additional data will change it. Maybe you were trying to make another point? As for the influence of Davies, feel free to run through the data and figure it out rather than saying "we don't know about this!" and pretending it moots the strongest argument based on facts for Carlino to stick to the pine. Here's a link to help you get started:



http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/brigham-young/craig-cusick/plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You can compare the charted times and see who is sharing the floor with who.

I tend to side with Kenpom when it comes to plus/minus - it's useless: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/a_treatise_on_plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



The basic principle of the stat is measuring a player by comparing the performance of a team when a player is on the court versus when that player is off the court. As kenpom points out there are too many variables. A player can actually have a really good game, but end up with a negative plus/minus because the rest of the team under performs or the opponent outperforms. Likewise, a player can end up with positive plus/minus doing almost nothing because the rest of the team performs well.



Looking at plus/minus you'd say Haws was a bad influence on the team against FSU since he had an RR of -16. In reality, Haws was our best player with 23 points, 9 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 steals, and 1 blocked shot. Would you really have benched Haws? If you were going off plus/minus, though, Haws should have been benched. :skeptic:



Davies ended up with an RR of +26 against FSU (lead the team in RR), yet he spent the majority of the game on the bench. In fact, I'd say his lack of being on the court for significant minutes cost us the game. Looking at plus/minus you'd think Davies had a great game against FSU.

IMO plus/minus for a 5 man group can be useful if you have a 20-30 games of data to work with. Plus/minus for individual players IMO is of limited value.

Qman wrote:
IMO plus/minus for a 5 man group can be useful if you have a 20-30 games of data to work with. Plus/minus for individual players IMO is of limited value.

Kenpom would agree with you.

I'd like to see Cusick and Carlino start with Zylstra coming off the bench to spell Haws

Gunk wrote:

Qman wrote:
We don't have enough data for plus/minus. At a glance wasn't Davies in foul trouble against FSU and ND. I wonder if Cusick's plus/minus is being driven by Davies more than himself.

If you don't think we have enough data for +/-, you don't understand the statistic--it is what it is, and no amount of additional data will change it. Maybe you were trying to make another point? As for the influence of Davies, feel free to run through the data and figure it out rather than saying "we don't know about this!" and pretending it moots the strongest argument based on facts for Carlino to stick to the pine. Here's a link to help you get started:



http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/brigham-young/craig-cusick/plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You can compare the charted times and see who is sharing the floor with who.

I tend to side with Kenpom when it comes to plus/minus - it's useless: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/a_treatise_on_plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



The basic principle of the stat is measuring a player by comparing the performance of a team when a player is on the court versus when that player is off the court. As kenpom points out there are too many variables. A player can actually have a really good game, but end up with a negative plus/minus because the rest of the team under performs or the opponent outperforms. Likewise, a player can end up with positive plus/minus doing almost nothing because the rest of the team performs well.



Looking at plus/minus you'd say Haws was a bad influence on the team against FSU since he had an RR of -16. In reality, Haws was our best player with 23 points, 9 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 steals, and 1 blocked shot. Would you really have benched Haws? If you were going off plus/minus, though, Haws should have been benched. :skeptic:



Davies ended up with an RR of +26 against FSU (lead the team in RR), yet he spent the majority of the game on the bench. In fact, I'd say his lack of being on the court for significant minutes cost us the game. Looking at plus/minus you'd think Davies had a great game against FSU.

Yes, it has limited value as a per-game analytical tool, which is what you have tried to use it as. But it is useful in the aggregate--Carlino's RR (which was developed to get around some of KenPom's issues with +/-) is bad in all but one game, and Cusick's is good in all but one game, with both playing significant minutes.



You've done a fine job picking an individual outlier with Haws as if it disproves the entirety of the analysis, but in this instance the bulk of the stats support the notion that the team is better with Cusick than Carlino presently, and the only outliers work against that. So if you're arguing to throw out outliers, then by all means, let's do that. You've also misrepresented what RR demonstrates re: Davies, and somewhat proven my point. Davies did have really good RR against FSU, which means that when he was on the floor we were working them. It means Davies should have been on the floor more, which you are correct to point out he wasn't. RR proves your point in that instance, so I don't know how that is an argument against it as you've tried to do.

snoscythe wrote:

snoscythe wrote:

We don't have enough data for plus/minus. At a glance wasn't Davies in foul trouble against FSU and ND. I wonder if Cusick's plus/minus is being driven by Davies more than himself.

If you don't think we have enough data for +/-, you don't understand the statistic--it is what it is, and no amount of additional data will change it. Maybe you were trying to make another point? As for the influence of Davies, feel free to run through the data and figure it out rather than saying "we don't know about this!" and pretending it moots the strongest argument based on facts for Carlino to stick to the pine. Here's a link to help you get started:



http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/brigham-young/craig-cusick/plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You can compare the charted times and see who is sharing the floor with who.

I tend to side with Kenpom when it comes to plus/minus - it's useless: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/a_treatise_on_plus_minus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



The basic principle of the stat is measuring a player by comparing the performance of a team when a player is on the court versus when that player is off the court. As kenpom points out there are too many variables. A player can actually have a really good game, but end up with a negative plus/minus because the rest of the team under performs or the opponent outperforms. Likewise, a player can end up with positive plus/minus doing almost nothing because the rest of the team performs well.



Looking at plus/minus you'd say Haws was a bad influence on the team against FSU since he had an RR of -16. In reality, Haws was our best player with 23 points, 9 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 steals, and 1 blocked shot. Would you really have benched Haws? If you were going off plus/minus, though, Haws should have been benched. :skeptic:



Davies ended up with an RR of +26 against FSU (lead the team in RR), yet he spent the majority of the game on the bench. In fact, I'd say his lack of being on the court for significant minutes cost us the game. Looking at plus/minus you'd think Davies had a great game against FSU.

Yes, it has limited value as a per-game analytical tool, which is what you have tried to use it as. But it is useful in the aggregate--Carlino's RR (which was developed to get around some of KenPom's issues with +/-) is bad in all but one game, and Cusick's is good in all but one game, with both playing significant minutes.



You've done a fine job picking an individual outlier with Haws as if it disproves the entirety of the analysis, but in this instance the bulk of the stats support the notion that the team is better with Cusick than Carlino presently, and the only outliers work against that. So if you're arguing to throw out outliers, then by all means, let's do that. You've also misrepresented what RR demonstrates re: Davies, and somewhat proven my point. Davies did have really good RR against FSU, which means that when he was on the floor we were working them. It means Davies should have been on the floor more, which you are correct to point out he wasn't. RR proves your point in that instance, so I don't know how that is an argument against it as you've tried to do.

An outlier that completely scews the value of the best player on the court is a pretty big outlier, which I believe are critics' point when determing the accuracy of plus/minus and RR.



At what point do the outliers indicate inaccuracy? Here are some more:



Haws vs. ND

RR of - 8 despite 21 points, 8 boards, 4 assists, 2 steals



Zylstra vs. FSU

RR of -12 despite 10 points, 3 boards, 4 assists, 4 steals, 0 turnovers



Zylstra vs Montana

RR of -7 despite 8 points, 50% shooting, 5 boards, 2 assists, 1 steal, 1 turnover



Calvert vs FSU

RR of +32 (guess I was wrong about Davies having the highest RR) but only had 4 points, 2 assists, and 1 turnover



Calvert vs ND

RR of +10 but had 0 points, 0 rebounds, 0 assists; just 1 foul and only played 2 min



Carlino vs CSUN

RR of -10 despite 8 points, 2 boards, 6 assists, 1 steal, and only 1 turnover



In the cases above you have good games from good players with negative RR and a player with a positive RR that hardly did a thing. Based on RR and plus/minus Calvert should be starting over Cusick and Carlino when BYU plays "good" teams.



As for Davies vs FSU and his RR. My point with that is you have a player who, in reality wasn't effective in a game due to fould trouble, but came out with an extremely positive RR. No one in their right mind would say Davies had a good game against FSU. Similar to Calvert having a RR of +32 in only a few minutes of play. It doesn't accurately measure a player's skill level or contribution.