There's a bias against guys who spent their careers playing outside of the major conferences in college. No one really knows what to make of the monster numbers they put up. No one really knows what, if any, of their qualities will translate when they start playing against stiff competition. There are ways you can grade their stats on a scale, but today let's take a look at a slice of stats for two players, Eric Maynor and Stephen Curry. Stats after the jump.
This exercise was more to satisfy my own curiosity than to prove or disprove either guy's worth. Both of these guys have eye-popping stats for teams in lesser divisions. Neither was surrounded by talent, so each was forced to shoulder more of the load than they would have had they played for Duke or UNC. The stats below show what each player did against teams from major conferences, or ranked teams (I included Gonzaga, because I believe they were ranked when Davidson played them).
A couple of caveats. First, I don't consider these stats an accurate barometer for comparing a guy who played for UCLA to a guy who played for VCU. Jrue Holiday played on a very, very talented team, and was actually overshadowed by his teammates. Ty Lawson played point for the national champions, and he shared the floor with a number of guys projected to go in this draft. Every time Maynor or Curry played a top team, they were playing against a far superior squad, and that superior team was game planning to stop them, individually.
- 11 games vs. top teams, 3-8 record
- 36.6 minutes/game
- 6.6 FG/game, 14.7 FGA/game, 44.7%
- 5.9 FT/game, 7.4 FTA/game, 80.3%
- 1.1 3P/game, 3.7 3PA/game, 29.3%
- 20.9 PTS/game
- 1.37 Points/Shot
- 4.2 REB/game
- 5.3 AST/game
- 3.1 TOV/game
- 1.7 AST/TOV ratio
- 2.3 STL/game
Best Game: Win at Duke, 8/16 from the field, 6/8 from the line, 0/1 from three. 22 points, 3 boards, 8 assists, 3 turnovers, 3 steals.
Worst Game: Loss at Oklahoma, 5/19 from the field, 3/4 from the line, 2/9 from three. 15 points, 5 boards, 3 assists, 8 turnovers, 3 steals.
Overall, I think Maynor's play was pretty level, no matter who the opponent was. His numbers are pretty much in line across the board, except for a precipitous drop in three-point percentage.
- 19 games vs. top teams, 7-12 record
- 34.8 minutes/game
- 8.7 FG/game, 21.2 FGA/game, 41.0%
- 4.9 FT/game, 5.4 FTA/game, 90.3%
- 4.0 3P/game, 11.3 3PA/game, 35.0%
- 26.2 PTS/game
- 1.24 Points/Shot
- 4.2 REB/game
- 3.7 AST/game
- 3.8 TOV/game
- 0.96 AST/TOV ratio
- 2.3 STL/game
Best Game: Win over Gonzaga, 14/22 from the field, 4/6 from the line, 8/10 from three. 40 points, 3 boards, 2 assists, 2 turnovers, 5 steals.
Worst Game: Loss at Purdue, 5/26 from the field, 1/1 from the line, 2/12 from three. 13 points, 8 boards, 6 assists, 6 turnovers, 3 steals.
Curry saw his shooting percentage and three point percentage drop quite a bit against better competition, but 1.24 points/shot for a guy shouldering that much of the load is still stellar. The assist/turnover ratio is troublesome.
So there you have it, a split to show how these two guys, one the Sixers may be targeting, one I'm targeting, to show how each played against teams which if they played for, and had the same level of success, they'd probably be rated much higher on draft boards. If that makes sense. Have at it in the comments.
For bonus reading, check out what Jeff Teague thinks of Lawson and Maynor.