Scoop vs. MCW

[SWC75]

A year ago Scoop Jardine completed his much criticized but productive career we'd seen glimpses of what Michael Carter-Williams could do and everybody was looking forward to an upgrade for the 2012-13 at the point guard position. I speculated that MCW might not have better numbers than Scoop but would be less criticized because we'd be focusing on his often spectacular good plays rather than, (as in Scoop's case), his bad ones.

So here are the numbers. Minutes are per game. Points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, missed field goals and free throws turnovers and personal fouls are per 40 minutes. Net Points are the positives minus the negatives. Offensive Efficiency is points minus missed field goals and free throws. Floor Game is NP-OE.

Scoop Jardine, 2011-12
25.2m 14.1p 3.7r 7.8a 2.1s 0.2b = 27.9+ 6.0mfg 1.3mft 3.6to 1.7pf = 12.6- = 15.3NP 6.8OE 8.5FG

Michael Carter-Williams, 2012-13
35.2m 13.5p 5.6r 8.3a 3.2s 0.5b = 31.1+ 6.8mfg 1.6mft 3.9to 2.6pf = 14.9- = 16.2NP 5.1OE 11.1FG

Scoop played less because he was part of a three guard rotation with Brandon Triche, who could also play the point and Dion Waiters, who was our best offensive player. MCW had Brandon, too but the third guard was Trevor Cooney and we couldn't afford to have him play the '2' for extended minutes while Brandon played the points. Scoop was a slightly better scorer, which surprises me as I thought he was clearly better shooter. MCW was a much better rebounder because he's much taller and "longer". Scoop was most as good and assist man and MCW turned the ball over slightly more. Their assist-to-turnover ratios were basicially the same, (2.17-2.13). Carter-Williams made more steals and blocks and was a better defender at the top of the zone. Michael missed a few more shots and commited more fouls. He wound up with more net points and a better floor game, largely because of the rebounds and steals. I don't think he was a better offensive player than Scoop but he was clearly more a factor on defense. I think he was an upgrade.

Not that MCW was made of teflon. He got plenty of criticism, including from a friend of mine who thought he should never have been given a scholarship and who hopes he goes pro so we can be rid of him. I think it was a very good sophomore season and I wish we could have seen what MCW could have done as a junior and senior, as we did with Scoop.

 

[orangenirvana]

Carterwilliams is more than likely the greatest top-of-the-zone defender in Syracuse basketball history.

He'll be greatly missed for that alone. He was also pretty good orchestrating the offense.

 

[SWC75]

Carterwilliams is more than likely the greatest top-of-the-zone defender in Syracuse basketball history.

He'll be greatly missed for that alone. He was also pretty good orchestrating the offense.

I'd pick Andy Rautins but MCW would be a close #2. He was a big ereaosn for those defensive nubmers and the Naitonal POY ahd to go out to 30 feet to find a way to score.

 

[BostonOrange]

Carterwilliams is more than likely the greatest top-of-the-zone defender in Syracuse basketball history.

He'll be greatly missed for that alone. He was also pretty good orchestrating the offense.

Agreed. Bar none the best I've ever seen. I'd love to see a stat on deflections. Honorable mention to Triche, rautins, and waiters.

 

[SoBristol]

A year ago Scoop Jardine completed his much criticized but productive career we'd seen glimpses of what Michael Carter-Williams could do and everybody was looking forward to an upgrade for the 2012-13 at the point guard position. I speculated that MCW might not have better numbers than Scoop but would be less criticized because we'd be focusing on his often spectacular good plays rather than, (as in Scoop's case), his bad ones.

...

Not that MCW was made of teflon. He got plenty of criticism, including from a friend of mine who thought he should never have been given a scholarship and who hopes he goes pro so we can be rid of him. I think it was a very good sophomore season and I wish we could have seen what MCW could have done as a junior and senior, as we did with Scoop.

We could have Pearl, Sherman, Z, Flynn, or anyone short of LeBron and there would be plenty of criticism on this board. It comes with the territory.

Scoop got more than his share, given his role in a 34 and 3 season. MCW deserved accolades for what he accomplished with lesser talent around him, but then again, there were those jump passes to guys in the wrong unis.

 

[alphaorange]

Carterwilliams is more than likely the greatest top-of-the-zone defender in Syracuse basketball history.

He'll be greatly missed for that alone. He was also pretty good orchestrating the offense.

Was going to say the same thing. Rautins was good but MCW is a whole 'nother animal at the top. His value can't be measured in just offensive stats. He also subtracted points from the opponent.

 

[SoBristol]

Was going to say the same thing. Rautins was good but MCW is a whole 'nother animal at the top. His value can't be measured in just offensive stats. He also subtracted points from the opponent.

Would have loved to see MCW paired with Rautins at the top of the zone. Or MCW with Gbinje, but MCW and BT did as well as any pairing at preventing guards from getting into the lane, contesting shots, and then helping on the defensive boards.
I don't know that MCW & BT would be the leaders, though, in turning stops into break-aways.

 

[SWC75]

Would have loved to see MCW paired with Rautins at the top of the zone. Or MCW with Gbinje, but MCW and BT did as well as any pairing at preventing guards from getting into the lane, contesting shots, and then helping on the defensive boards.
I don't know that MCW & BT would be the leaders, though, in turning stops into break-aways.

SU's average fast break points per game since the beginning of the Big East season: 6.9.

 

[Flacusian]

Anyone who would dispute MCW's defensive acumen would only need ask Trey Burke what his opinion of Michael's defensive prowess is.

 

[SWC75]

Anyone who would dispute MCW's defensive acumen would only need ask Trey Burke what his opinion of Michael's defensive prowess is.

Who has disputed it?

 

[Flacusian]

Who has disputed it?

I would hope not a soul!

 

[Henny & Coke]

I find this site pretty useful for advanced stats:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2013.html

Here is the info they list for a senior Scoop (2011-12) vs sophomore MCW (2012-13) comparison (only listing the stats that are normalized to adjust for the difference in playing time per game between the two players, since MCW had to play much more per game than Scoop did):

Player Efficiency Rating:
MCW - 20.9
Scoop - 19.7

Assist %: (An estimate of the percentage of teammate field goals a player assisted while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 40.1%
Scoop - 35.7%

Steal %: (An estimate of the percentage of opponent possessions that end with a steal by the player while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 4.7%
Scoop - 3.3%

Turnover %: (An estimate of turnovers per 100 plays.)
MCW - 22.2%
Scoop - 22.1%

Block %: (An estimate of the percentage of opponent two-point field goal attempts blocked by the player while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 1.8%
Scoop - 0.5%

Total Rebound %: (An estimate of the percentage of available rebounds a player grabbed while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 7.8%
Scoop - 5.3%

Offensive Rating: (An estimate of points scored (for teams) or points produced (for players) per 100 possessions.)
MCW - 104.6
Scoop - 108.0

Offensive Win Shares: (An estimate of the number of wins contributed by a player due to his offense.)
MCW - 2.7
Scoop - 2.0

Defensive Rating: (An estimate of points allowed per 100 possessions.)
MCW - 87.4
Scoop - 96.8

Defensive Win Shares: (An estimate of the number of wins contributed by a player due to his defense.)
MCW - 3.6
Scoop - 1.6

Win Shares: (An estimate of the number of wins contributed by a player due to his offense and defense.)
MCW - 6.3
Scoop - 3.6

NOTES:
1.) The win share data is not exactly normalized to adjust for the difference in minutes played per game. (Which would inflate MCW's numbers, due to fact he played more MPG than Scoop. Although, one can argue that after a certain point, the longer a player plays per game, a decline in performance may creep in, due to fatigue.)
2.) There is no real way to adjust the numbers to account for the fact that the 2011-12 roster was simply more talented (and experienced) than the 2012-13 roster, so, as always, in comparing players that played on different teams/rosters, one should also consider the talent level of the players surrounding them. (Which would inflate Scoop's numbers, IMO, due to the fact that he played with a better surrounding cast - all the players on the 2012-13 roster plus 3 players that were good enough to be drafted within the first 51 picks of the 2012 NBA Draft, lol.)
3.) Finally, please keep in mind we are comparing a 5th year senior player (in his 3rd year of having played heavy mins per game) vs a 2nd year sophomore player (in just his first year of playing heavy mins per game).

 

[SWC75]

I find this site pretty useful for advanced stats:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2013.html

Here is the info they list for a senior Scoop (2011-12) vs sophomore MCW (2012-13) comparison (only listing the stats that are normalized to adjust for the difference in playing time per game between the two players, since MCW had to play much more per game than Scoop did):

Player Efficiency Rating:
MCW - 20.9
Scoop - 19.7

Assist %: (An estimate of the percentage of teammate field goals a player assisted while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 40.1%
Scoop - 35.7%

Steal %: (An estimate of the percentage of opponent possessions that end with a steal by the player while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 4.7%
Scoop - 3.3%

Turnover %: (An estimate of turnovers per 100 plays.)
MCW - 22.2%
Scoop - 22.1%

Block %: (An estimate of the percentage of opponent two-point field goal attempts blocked by the player while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 1.8%
Scoop - 0.5%

Total Rebound %: (An estimate of the percentage of available rebounds a player grabbed while he was on the floor.)
MCW - 7.8%
Scoop - 5.3%

Offensive Rating: (An estimate of points scored (for teams) or points produced (for players) per 100 possessions.)
MCW - 104.6
Scoop - 108.0

Offensive Win Shares: (An estimate of the number of wins contributed by a player due to his offense.)
MCW - 2.7
Scoop - 2.0

Defensive Rating: (An estimate of points allowed per 100 possessions.)
MCW - 87.4
Scoop - 96.8

Defensive Win Shares: (An estimate of the number of wins contributed by a player due to his defense.)
MCW - 3.6
Scoop - 1.6

Win Shares: (An estimate of the number of wins contributed by a player due to his offense and defense.)
MCW - 6.3
Scoop - 3.6

NOTES:
1.) The win share data is not exactly normalized to adjust for the difference in minutes played per game. (Which would inflate MCW's numbers, due to fact he played more MPG than Scoop. Although, one can argue that after a certain point, the longer a player plays per game, a decline in performance may creep in, due to fatigue.)
2.) There is no real way to adjust the numbers to account for the fact that the 2011-12 roster was simply more talented (and experienced) than the 2012-13 roster, so, as always, in comparing players that played on different teams/rosters, one should also consider the talent level of the players surrounding them. (Which would inflate Scoop's numbers, IMO, due to the fact that he played with a better surrounding cast - all the players on the 2012-13 roster plus 3 players that were good enough to be drafted within the first 51 picks of the 2012 NBA Draft, lol.)
3.) Finally, please keep in mind we are comparing a 5th year senior player (in his 3rd year of having played heavy mins per game) vs a 2nd year sophomore player (in just his first year of playing heavy mins per game).

Scoop's Numbers could also be deflated due to his talent teammates as he was require to do less than MCW. That MCW is a sophomore and Scoop a 5th year senior is relevant in evaluating them. I would love to see what MCW looked like, (in Orange) in 2 years. But my original purpose was to see how their performances compared vs. how the degree of praise/criticism compared.