Post by jhb on Jul 1, 2021 9:21:48 GMT -5
So, mostly due to all of the complaints about this class I wanted to see truly how they matched up against other classes so far. So I took a look at PER, P/TSA, P36, R36, A36, S36, B36, TO36, Free Throw Rate, 3Point Rate for average and max to see how the total classes stack up and how they stack up by position.
All Positions
PG
SG
SF
Wings
PF
C
Bigs
Quick Takeaways
1. Personal soapbox: there could be an argument made that there continues to be a huge disparity between talent at the C and PF position and talent at the SF and SG position as evidenced by the average PER, but the average P/TSA doesn't bear that out. The problem is that it's much easier to upgrade bigs' scoring ability with a direct injection to inside scoring so there is an argument to be made that wings (and point guards, who also lag in scoring efficiency) should start out at a higher P/TSA on average to compensate for the differences in how upgrades get applied.
2. Just in general...I don't think this class is bad relative to the others. Average PER difference class to class is negligible, and the 3008 and 3009 max PER were both much higher than 3007. Differences in P/TSA are negligible even though the top end of the class isn't as good as the other two. This class has more scoring volume, less passing, and more shot-blocking in aggregate (~30% higher average than the other two classes). While there isn't as much three point shooting based on three point rate, there's likely more strength due to much higher free throw rate.
3. Looking at the bigs, it looks like 3008 is the best class we've had so far in the college stats era. They have the best average PER and P/TSA and the best max values in those categories. They're the best rebounders on average, but they do trade off by being the biggest in turnovers (although also the most scoring volume as a group). The only knock is that the 3009 class is probably the best defensive group and features the best rebounder on the high end and also better free throw volume. The only thing the 3007 class has to hang their hat on is their slightly the best steals and three point shooting group.
4. Looking at wings, it's really hard to distinguish any group from the others as the best so far. The differences in average stats are pretty negligible across the board aside from the most recent class having the best scoring volume, the biggest differences come at at the top end of each class. The max values of PER and P36 were much higher in the 3009 class although they give away a lot in terms of P/TSA to 3007 and 3008. The 3007 class also featured the best passer and rebounder to come out so far while 3008 has featured the best steals and blocks guy. Three point shooting ability seems to have decline each year but I don't think that's a trend so much as a function of which years the classes represent.
5. Finally, looking at PG, the biggest difference I have noticed appears to be that average passing is decreasing, while handling appears to be decreasing as well. It's hard to compare max values because 3008 and 3009 are fairly similar while 3007 blows the other two out of the water due to the presence of Kyrie Irving. The high end of the turnovers in the most recent two classes is a little disturbing, especially considering who they belong to. There's a weird dip in average three point rate in the 3008 class that seems odd considering the 3009 class is an early 90s class.
All Positions
PG
SG
SF
Wings
PF
C
Bigs
Quick Takeaways
1. Personal soapbox: there could be an argument made that there continues to be a huge disparity between talent at the C and PF position and talent at the SF and SG position as evidenced by the average PER, but the average P/TSA doesn't bear that out. The problem is that it's much easier to upgrade bigs' scoring ability with a direct injection to inside scoring so there is an argument to be made that wings (and point guards, who also lag in scoring efficiency) should start out at a higher P/TSA on average to compensate for the differences in how upgrades get applied.
2. Just in general...I don't think this class is bad relative to the others. Average PER difference class to class is negligible, and the 3008 and 3009 max PER were both much higher than 3007. Differences in P/TSA are negligible even though the top end of the class isn't as good as the other two. This class has more scoring volume, less passing, and more shot-blocking in aggregate (~30% higher average than the other two classes). While there isn't as much three point shooting based on three point rate, there's likely more strength due to much higher free throw rate.
3. Looking at the bigs, it looks like 3008 is the best class we've had so far in the college stats era. They have the best average PER and P/TSA and the best max values in those categories. They're the best rebounders on average, but they do trade off by being the biggest in turnovers (although also the most scoring volume as a group). The only knock is that the 3009 class is probably the best defensive group and features the best rebounder on the high end and also better free throw volume. The only thing the 3007 class has to hang their hat on is their slightly the best steals and three point shooting group.
4. Looking at wings, it's really hard to distinguish any group from the others as the best so far. The differences in average stats are pretty negligible across the board aside from the most recent class having the best scoring volume, the biggest differences come at at the top end of each class. The max values of PER and P36 were much higher in the 3009 class although they give away a lot in terms of P/TSA to 3007 and 3008. The 3007 class also featured the best passer and rebounder to come out so far while 3008 has featured the best steals and blocks guy. Three point shooting ability seems to have decline each year but I don't think that's a trend so much as a function of which years the classes represent.
5. Finally, looking at PG, the biggest difference I have noticed appears to be that average passing is decreasing, while handling appears to be decreasing as well. It's hard to compare max values because 3008 and 3009 are fairly similar while 3007 blows the other two out of the water due to the presence of Kyrie Irving. The high end of the turnovers in the most recent two classes is a little disturbing, especially considering who they belong to. There's a weird dip in average three point rate in the 3008 class that seems odd considering the 3009 class is an early 90s class.
