Love vs Mayo, and more...

by Underbruin on Jan 29, 2008 5:25 AM PST

So, as I mentioned in a previous diary, over at my blog I'm putting together a rather sizable new-stats analysis of this year's UCLA team (both as it stands alone, and relative to last season), and of USC. My USC post is now up here, titled "Why O.J. Mayo is overrated - part 9,745,398,606." I started with 'SC because I was curious to see just how much more valuable the addition of Davon Jefferson was than Mayo. Short answer: a sizable amount. If you're not interested in the numbers, the basic gist is that Mayo puts up lots of points, but does so in an inefficient fashion, and without adding much else.

Not only is Mayo not the best player on his team, he barely cracks the starting 5, with a VERY pedestrian 4.568 WS/40 (ed note - WS/40 = Win Score per 40 minutes... The average point guard has a WS/40 of over 7.5)! A closer look at his numbers explains the low total - not only is Mayo an inefficient scorer, but that's about the only thing he's even remotely competent at doing. He doesn't rebound very well, and though he's so/so at acquiring assists, his massive 4 turnovers a game far outweigh whatever benefits his passing might otherwise offer.

Much of the analysis is built on Professor David Berri's Win Score metric. Imagine my surprise when, going to check on his page as I posted my own entry, I found an analysis of many of the current pro draft prospects had just been added, using the same metric! It seems I'm not the only one who had the idea, and in fact, guest poster Erich Doerr came to the same conclusion concerning Mayo, that "Despite the... level of hype, O.J. Mayo has been Telfair-rific (not a good thing in the world of Win Scores)." He covers a number of other top players, and interestingly, upcoming foe Chase Budinger fares even more poorly than Mayo.

Doerr also includes his notes on Kevin Love, as "there are several Win Score powerhouses that are seemingly overlooked. Win Score superstar Kevin Love seems to be projected as a late to mid first rounder." I have my own conclusions concerning Love and the entirety of this season's Bruin team (as well as, like I mentioned, a comparison between last season's team and this one), but that's pretty much the same conclusion I had. Kevin Love has been a huge boost to this year's team - OJ Mayo has been barely a contributor in his team's successes.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Wow...

288 field goal attempts...Dwight Lewis is a distant second at 152. OJ has 72 turnovers. There's a column missing though, it should have the heading JB (Jaws Broken).

by tasser10 on Jan 29, 2008 9:57 AM PST reply actions

We should reserve judgement

Until we take care of business at the Galen Center. He actually played pretty well at Pauley. Seemed more team oriented and much to our chagrin, the team has responded since. How is he doing statistically in the last three games?

by popopapa on Jan 29, 2008 11:59 AM PST reply actions

Mayo etc...

Underbruin,
Man, your system is cool. I have my own "system" involving the raw stats, points-per-shot, missed games, team performance and the team's points per game:
My current top six players for the pac-10:

Kevin Love
James Harden
Jon Brockman
Ryan Anderson
Brook Lopez
OJ Mayo

Boisebruin

by boisebruin on Jan 29, 2008 12:44 PM PST reply actions

sometimes

OJ is a detriment but sometimes he is a damn good player. OJ's problem is his hype and expectations. He was supposed to be the next Carmelo Anthony and lead his team to greatness, but he's not that. He's a super talented freshman learning to play the game and fit in with a team. It's a problem most freshman deal with and if he weren't expected to be a savior, people would write off his struggles as freshman misakes like they do with other freshman. Love has had exceptional coaching and came to UCLA far ahead of the game, but he is an exception, not the norm. Mayo would certainly benefit from another year at SC. His development from the beginning of the year to now is evident and he really needs 1 more year to continue his development.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 29, 2008 1:12 PM PST reply actions

In response...

tasser: Dang, I knew I was forgetting something in there. I'll update it the next time I do one of these analyses for USC. :)

popopapa: One of the tenets of statistical analysis is to try and ignore what our eyes tell us, because we often see what we want to see. Mayo vs. UCLA: 5-12 shooting for 16 points, 1 rebound, 4 assists, 4 turnovers, 4 personal fouls, 1 steal. Pretty much right along his season averages, which, as I noted, aren't really helping his team despite his gaudy point total. As I mention in the full post on my blog, Mayo's usage rate has dropped somewhat in the past couple of weeks, and I think that's why his team is playing better. They're getting more possessions out of their more efficient players, Gibson, Jefferson and Hackett. I did the math, and over USC's current winning streak in the past 4 games, Mayo's WS/40 is almost identical to his WS on the season - 4.9 vs 4.6. But he is shooting less; he's still no more efficient, really, but his more efficient teammates are taking up more of his team's possessions. At least, that's one way to interpret the data.

boise: Hah, thanks, but it's not my system, as I mention, it's David Berri's. I'd love to take credit for something this interesting, but I'm not quite that smart. I'd be very interested in the mechanics of your system - if you don't mind, could you shoot it over to underbruin _at _ gmail?

rye: Mayo is extremely talented, but talent doesn't always translate to production. That being said, Berri and his system are also a lightning rod of criticism because it often seems to punish high-usage players. For example, in the pros, Berri believes Allen Iverson to be one of the most overrated players in the league - low shooting percentage, no other real counting stats, fairly high turnovers. I actually am kind of scared to post some of the UCLA conclusions, given that they will be much disagreed with by almost anybody familiar with the program. =P