Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

IUc2016

NCAA MBB Transfer Portal

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I'm not sure I'm on board either, but devil's advocate:

-- he was a top 120 recruit out of high school, so he didn't just come out of nowhere.

-- plus passer, especially for his size.

-- did pick up quite a bit of experience last year, playing 23 minutes/game for a decent Dayton team.

If Woodson wants him and he signs here I am good with it because I trust the coaching staff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned his number of years of eligibility he has as a possible concern.  Doesn't that become a moot point in the new world order of college basketball and the transfer portal?  Every scholarship player in theory can be a one and gone.    If you go back and scan through the pages of this thread you'll see how many portalers have already changed schools once.  And it's no different on the women's side.  A number of woman entrants have already been at 1 or 2 previous schools.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are a couple pro-Sharavjamts morsels for thought:

1. Torvik’s got a player statistical similarity tool. Many, many of his top freshman year comps turned in to really good college players. One of the top comps: frosh Armaan Franklin.

They’re different — see @Demo‘s comments on the vision, not really a Franklin strength — but I find that sort of instructive. A guy who wasn’t great in year one, but showed some things that might not jump off the page in his cumulative stats.

2. Torvik also categorizes player position based on size, stats, who he shares the floor with. It tabs Sharavjamts as a PG. Obviously when you’ve got a 6’8” one, you have some lineup flexibility, but speaks to the vision.

3. I know there was some grumbling about why he declared…even if you don’t watch much NBA, surely you can understand why a prospect with his size and skill would still get invited to some workouts. Figure out the shot, add 20 lbs, continue developing, and you can envision at least a productive college player, and maybe at least a chance to play at a higher level than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Someone mentioned his number of years of eligibility he has as a possible concern.  Doesn't that become a moot point in the new world order of college basketball and the transfer portal?  Every scholarship player in theory can be a one and gone.    If you go back and scan through the pages of this thread you'll see how many portalers have already changed schools once.  And it's no different on the women's side.  A number of woman entrants have already been at 1 or 2 previous schools.  

I think the number of players that fit that category has a lot to do with the extra year and players being grad transfers.  Short of graduating in three years, a player can only transfer once in college without receiving a waiver.  I believe the NCAA sent out a memo this year to schools indicating that they shouldn't take the waiver for granted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, lillurk said:

Here are a couple pro-Sharavjamts morsels for thought:

1. Torvik’s got a player statistical similarity tool. Many, many of his top freshman year comps turned in to really good college players. One of the top comps: frosh Armaan Franklin.

They’re different — see @Demo‘s comments on the vision, not really a Franklin strength — but I find that sort of instructive. A guy who wasn’t great in year one, but showed some things that might not jump off the page in his cumulative stats.

2. Torvik also categorizes player position based on size, stats, who he shares the floor with. It tabs Sharavjamts as a PG. Obviously when you’ve got a 6’8” one, you have some lineup flexibility, but speaks to the vision.

3. I know there was some grumbling about why he declared…even if you don’t watch much NBA, surely you can understand why a prospect with his size and skill would still get invited to some workouts. Figure out the shot, add 20 lbs, continue developing, and you can envision at least a productive college player, and maybe at least a chance to play at a higher level than that.

Of note, since I've used the Torvik rostercast tool quite a bit:

Basically the rostercast tool orders players from 1 to 10 in expected minutes and puts them in a model and tweaks from there.  There seems to be a default in terms of minutes that is slightly adjusted:

player #1 in minutes is around 32;  #2 is around 30;  #3 is 28; #4 is 26;  #5 is 24; #6 is 22;  #7 is 15;  #8 is 12; #9 is 8;  and #10 is 4.  They get slightly tweaked, but the patterns are always very similar.  Currently, Torvik puts IU's minutes per game for their top ten at 32, 30.8, 27.6, 26, 24.8, 20.8, 14.8, 12.4, 7.2, and 4.0.

Minutes calculated are based upon:

1.  For incoming freshman or redshirt freshman, player ranking as a recruit;

2.  For sophomores or greater, playing time for their teams in the past, heavily weighted to the previous year and

3.  Player overall efficiency rating (note that this is adjusted for level of play, so Peyton Sparks actually sees a predicted efficiency drop of 2% for next year as he moves from the MAC to the Big 10.

----------------

From what I have gathered so far, there are areas where player's minutes got over and under predicted.  Previous minutes do seem to get a higher weight than projected efficiency does.  For instance, Malik Reneau has a projected efficiency of 108.8 and Peyton Sparks checks in at 107.7.  Despite this, Torvik projects Sparks at 24.8 minutes per game and Reneau at 20.8 minutes per game.  I think this is largely in part to the number of minutes that Sparks has played in his first two years

Where this does produce some issues is that players transferring from a mid to low major at a higher number of minutes/game than will probably occur.  I would expect that Reneau will be at 25 or more minutes per game in reality and Sparks will be under 15.

I bring this up because of how minutes are distributed on Torvik, the overall team ratings are effected.  If you add Mike Sharajamts to IU's current roster, it predicts that he would get 25.2 minutes per game and have the fifth most minutes and has IU as a team drop two spots in the rating.  But because of how it figures ratings and simply orders players in minutes regardless of position, the two players losing minutes in their model are not players at the 2 or 3 positions -- rather it's the players that were fifth and sixth in minutes previous, which are Sparks and Reneau.  What's closer to reality is that he would be competing for minutes against other 1, 2, or 3's on Indiana's team.

Torvik is a nice little tool, just can't take it as gospel.  It's basically built to build interest and have some fun, but don't get too hung up in the rankings.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, lillurk said:

3. I know there was some grumbling about why he declared…even if you don’t watch much NBA, surely you can understand why a prospect with his size and skill would still get invited to some workouts. Figure out the shot, add 20 lbs, continue developing, and you can envision at least a productive college player, and maybe at least a chance to play at a higher level than that.

I think 1 thing to keep in mind on this piece is that the NBA combine and draft process aren’t solely consumed by NBA decision makers. International scouts are scoping things as well. In Sharavjamts, we’re talking about a foreign-born player who, while of course the NBA is option 1, may well have a more expansive view of professional options that he would be happy to embrace. He might be happy to play in the ABL or Europe or China or wherever the best immediate opportunity presents itself. If so, putting himself in front of scouts at every opportunity makes perfect sense. It’s also why I feel pretty comfortable looking at him as strictly a 1-year guy, which seems ideal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×