@gE strikes again!

[kso_FAN]

I know this will get me in trouble on this board, but I think Stokes was better as a freshman than Angel.  And Angel has turned out to be a great player.

Yes, it will get you in trouble, because it is just flat our wrong by any measurable standard.

But what about free throw %?!

83%, 2nd on the team behind Will, seems pretty good.

[Steffy08]

I know this will get me in trouble on this board, but I think Stokes was better as a freshman than Angel.  And Angel has turned out to be a great player.

Yes, it will get you in trouble, because it is just flat our wrong by any measurable standard.

The only stat that Angel is superior to Stokes is number of assists.  No doubt, Angel was good at driving and dishing, even as a freshman.  But Stokes does other things better than Angel that don't necessary show up in stat sheet.  Breaking/handling full court pressure is one thing that comes immediately to mind.  Angel would've had 7/8 turnovers if we asked him to handle the ball like Stokes did against West Virginia in Manhattan.  Stokes is much quicker than Angel and a better ball handler in open court breaking pressure.  Along the same lines, Stokes has a much quick shot than Angel.  If the shot clock is winding down, Stokes has the ability to create space and rise and shoot; Angel never really had that.

They are close.  But that should mean that Stokes has the potential to be really good in a couple of years, right?

[Trim]

cDubya is probably the only non-cat who knows who Deathbite (or is he Dogbite?) is.

[kso_FAN]

Stokes will be a fine player and I was pleasantly surprised by his abilities this year.

The rest of your analysis I don't agree with at all. Angel's assist rate is over twice that of Stokes AND he had a better assist to TO ratio. He scored at a much higher rate and his steal rate is much higher. He got to the FT line more and shot better from there. The only thing Stokes has a slight edge on is defensive rebounding and 2PT%.

I mean, its like you didn't even really look at the stats I posted.

There is absolutely no basis for the "quicker" or "breaking down pressure" or "rise and shoot" comments. None. Its only a perception and hope that Stokes is better because there is absolutely nothing to back that up.

[420seriouscat69]

I know this will get me in trouble on this board, but I think Stokes was better as a freshman than Angel.  And Angel has turned out to be a great player.

Yes, it will get you in trouble, because it is just flat our wrong by any measurable standard.

But what about free throw %?!

83%, 2nd on the team behind Will, seems pretty good.

Welp!

[kso_FAN]

Steffy, you could have made a somewhat reasonable claim by saying Angel was surrounded by superior, experienced talent, because he was. That has some merit to me. 

But that still doesn't quite explain Angel having the best assist rate for any K-State player since 2002. Nor does it explain why Angel has a scoring rate 20% better than Stokes. Granted, Angel and his turnovers is more of a concern because he did play on a much better team.

[pissclams]

angel just didn't pass steffy's eye test

[Steffy08]

angel just didn't pass steffy's eye test

Eye test is definitely part of it.  I'm a numbers person generally, but they don't tell the entire story, particularly in basketball.  There is no question that Stokes is quicker with the ball in open court and against pressure.  This means that he was asked to handle the ball more often than Angel was when facing pressure.  (If I recall Frank often protected Angel by having Southwell bring ball up against press.). That distinction isn't going to show up on a stat sheet (if anything, it hurts Stokes because only negative stats can happen 60 feet from the basket.). But it is a real asset to have a point guard who can do that.

The other stats besides assists are in the same ball park.  Angel more steals, better free throws, Stokes better rebounding and fewer turnovers.  But I don't think stats tell the entire story.

I'm guessing if you give 100 D1 coaches the oppurtunity to pick freshman Angel or freshman Stokes, 70 pick Stokes.

[Trim]

[Kat Kid]

WHERE IS THE 70% COACHES PICK STAT IN YOUR FANCY SPREAD SHEET??

HUH???

BETTER GET YOUR STATS STRAIGHT!!

[sys]

good lord.

[sys]

people make fun of trump voters, but at least they're backing a winner.

[Steffy08]

Steffy, you could have made a somewhat reasonable claim by saying Angel was surrounded by superior, experienced talent, because he was. That has some merit to me. 

But that still doesn't quite explain Angel having the best assist rate for any K-State player since 2002. Nor does it explain why Angel has a scoring rate 20% better than Stokes. Granted, Angel and his turnovers is more of a concern because he did play on a much better team.

Yes, that is part of the difficulty in relying too much on stats.  Angel picked up a lot of assists by passing to Southwell, McGruder, and Spradling for jumpers.  Our team this year couldn't throw it in the ocean.

That said, there is no doubt Angel was a better passer; he had great court vision.  But you should acknowledge that you would hold your breath when Angel had to bring the ball up against heavy pressure.  Frank did, too.

[Trim]

people make fun of trump voters, but at least they're backing a winner.

It's kind of mumped up that we at times lament KSU's admission standards or lack thereof, while we let absolutely anybody post here.

[michigancat]

people make fun of trump voters, but at least they're backing a winner.

[wetwillie]

Looks to me like stokes won everything but the stat sheet

[TownieCat]

I know this will get me in trouble on this board, but I think Stokes was better as a freshman than Angel.  And Angel has turned out to be a great player.

Yes, it will get you in trouble, because it is just flat our wrong by any measurable standard.

Can you show Angel's freshman year stats? Those are from his sophomore season.

[nicname]

I know this will get me in trouble on this board, but I think Stokes was better as a freshman than Angel.  And Angel has turned out to be a great player.

Yes, it will get you in trouble, because it is just flat our wrong by any measurable standard.

The only stat that Angel is superior to Stokes is number of assists.  No doubt, Angel was good at driving and dishing, even as a freshman.  But Stokes does other things better than Angel that don't necessary show up in stat sheet.  Breaking/handling full court pressure is one thing that comes immediately to mind.  Angel would've had 7/8 turnovers if we asked him to handle the ball like Stokes did against West Virginia in Manhattan.  Stokes is much quicker than Angel and a better ball handler in open court breaking pressure.  Along the same lines, Stokes has a much quick shot than Angel.  If the shot clock is winding down, Stokes has the ability to create space and rise and shoot; Angel never really had that.

They are close.  But that should mean that Stokes has the potential to be really good in a couple of years, right?

Yep. The only one. Not that important for PGs though. Potato Potahto.

[meow meow]

Steffy, you could have made a somewhat reasonable claim by saying Angel was surrounded by superior, experienced talent, because he was. That has some merit to me. 

But that still doesn't quite explain Angel having the best assist rate for any K-State player since 2002. Nor does it explain why Angel has a scoring rate 20% better than Stokes. Granted, Angel and his turnovers is more of a concern because he did play on a much better team.

Yes, that is part of the difficulty in relying too much on stats.  Angel picked up a lot of assists by passing to Southwell, McGruder, and Spradling for jumpers.  Our team this year couldn't throw it in the ocean.

That said, there is no doubt Angel was a better passer; he had great court vision.  But you should acknowledge that you would hold your breath when Angel had to bring the ball up against heavy pressure.  Frank did, too.

yeah if only Stokes had a Spradling to dish the rock to, he'd probably be the all-time assists leader by now

[kso_FAN]

Can you show Angel's freshman year stats? Those are from his sophomore season.

Oh man. This is a real "get your stats straight!" moment from me. 

I will admit, Steffy's case is much stronger when comparing the correct years. My apologies to Steffy, I'm not so convinced after looking at the correct stats.

[TownieCat]

Can you show Angel's freshman year stats? Those are from his sophomore season.

Oh man. This is a real "get your stats straight!" moment from me. 

I will admit, Steffy's case is much stronger when comparing the correct years. My apologies to Steffy, I'm not so convinced after looking at the correct stats.

It's all good, _BBB. 

Yeah, those stats are very close. In a blind test I'd probably take Kamau. More efficient shooter and better A:TO.

[ChiComCat]

Kamau needs to penetrate more.  I think he has shown he can do it but not frequently enough that he is comfortable doing it.  Hopefully an offseason in the weight room will help quite a bit.

[ksupamplemousse]

If Kamau is on track to break the assist record after next year then I will buy everyone on this board a drink, if not, then y'all need to get Angel's name out of your mouth when talking about Stokes. Angel was on track to be the most productive point guard ever in K-State history. Kamau has shown basically no ability to get into the lane and he rarely makes anything happen on the rare occasion that he finds himself there. Stokes is just like this team, low ceiling, high floor.

[slobber]

KAM played in the early scrub games and missed the big 12 gauntlet. Ang played all year.
(I don't know this for fact, but maybe!)


Gonna win 'em all! (using Tapatalk)

[meow meow]

yeah, comparing Kamau to Angel is borderline steffy