Basketball: Wins per draft pick
Good stuff by our GTech site.
almost 2 years ago
Bud Elliott
7 comments
0 recs |
Comments
So what can I gather from this data?
That FSU is middle of the pack in the ACC in terms of talent and their ability to capitalize on it?
SCALP 'EM SEMINOLES!
Not exactly
It means out of the 365 or so schools that feature basketball programs we are in the top 10% in terms of talent, but we have 0 NCAATourney wins. So yes, underperforming based of his metric.
Would liked to have seen standard error on that “~2 tournament wins per draft pick.”
Taking into account ONLY teams who had players drafted
Average is 1.58 tournament wins per NBA Draft pick. That accounts for 112 different Division I colleges that had Draft picks. Standard error… 0.16.
I didn’t factor in all of the teams who had zero draft picks but won games (not original intent of article). Obviously, this would lower the average number of tournament wins per Draft Pick.
Also, some of our readers suggested breaking it down by 1st/2nd round as there’s a pretty big gap in the NBA concerning talent levels in the 1st versus 2nd rounds.
I spun around... and there I was, face-to-face with a six-year old kid. Well, I just threw my guns down and walked away. Little bastard shot me in the ass.
by BirdGT on Mar 9, 2010 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Obviously, this wouldlowerthe average number of tournament wins per Draft Pick.
I meant increase. I didn’t count teams that didn’t have picks because they were relative outliers and irrelevant to discussion. My bad for confusion.
I spun around... and there I was, face-to-face with a six-year old kid. Well, I just threw my guns down and walked away. Little bastard shot me in the ass.
Also, if you want meaningful insight into how much teams are getting out of their talent,
Tourney wins isn’t the way to go. Tourney wins might be the only thing fans care about, but it’s such a crap shoot that one favorable draw can have a huge impact on the study results. Consistent competition – ie, conference wins – would be a much better way to go.
Well the tourney is an even playing field
Conference wins don’t mean much. Let’s compare the SEC to the ACC. Since I have the data for the Paul Hewitt Era (2001-present), the average ACC team has had 5.17 NBA Draft picks. The SEC has had only 3.25 picks. It takes less talent to win in the SEC.
The tournament really lets the dominant, more talented programs rise to the top. Here’s a list of Final Teams and the number of Draft picks they’ve had since 2001:
UCLA (14), Arizona (13), UNC (13), Duke (12), UConn (12), Kansas (11), Memphis (9), Florida (9), Texas (8), Michigan St. (8), Illinois (7), Maryland (7), Syracuse (6), Georgetown (6), Ohio St. (6), Georgia Tech (5), Indiana (5), LSU (5), Louisville (4), Villanova (4), Marquette (3), OK St. (3), Oklahoma (2), and George Mason (0).
That’s 14 of the top 17 teams concerning total NBA Draft picks. It takes talent and depth to win the tourney. It’s a lot less of a crap shoot than regional conference play, in my opinion.
I spun around... and there I was, face-to-face with a six-year old kid. Well, I just threw my guns down and walked away. Little bastard shot me in the ass.
Right, but with a small sample size it doesn' t make sense to artificially make it smaller -
ie, the tourney, when there’s a much larger sample size available – ie the regular season. The cream rises to the top even more due to the larger schedule + it doesn’t inflate tourney runs made on favorable draws/upsets in their brackets, etc.. + it includes data on teams that don’t make the tourney. If you’re concerned about comparing apples to oranges (ACC vs SEC) then there is the OOC schedule which facilitates a larger sample size without the artificial restrictions, AND you can still use tourney games since the vast majority are OOC.





























