---

Raymar Morgan.

Say WHAT?

Using my modified Dean Oliver Four Factors methodology (for details on the method see the preceding article in this series, i.e. the Pete Maravich effect), I concluded exactly that.

First, lets check out the laundry list of candidates. The criteria to get on the watch list was to be among the top 30 in the league in minutes per game. Those 30 guys are (listed by mpg).

Using this list I ranked each of the 30 guys based on the scoring production (points and assists), turnovers (steals, blocks, turnovers, and fouls), rebounding (offensive and defensive), and free throws (free throws per field goal attempt). Here are the top ten from the list in each category.

For the All Around ranking, I weight each of the above categories (I’m only listing the top ten in each category but when I do the weighting and ranking I am using all 30 players). The top ten from that list are:

I’m sure the name at the top of the list is going to raise a few eyebrows. But, I’ve said many times, the purpose of all this number crunching isn’t to just reaffirm what conventional wisdom says. It’s to open the mind up to additional possibilities, it’s to make you think. And I would hope that any list with Raymar Morgan’s name at the top would get you thinking.

Sniff Test

The quickest and easiest way to evaluate any proposed new methodology is to ask “Does it pass the “Sniff Test”"? When your first reaction here is “something smells”, you should dig deeper into the data.

With the way that Eric Gordon topped each of the other lists, the initial reaction here would have to be “something seems a little fishy”.  However, when you look past Raymar Morgan, the typical names are there. #2 DJ White and #3 Geary Claxton are on everyone’s list of the top players in the league. I doubt that many would argue against Drew Neitzel being one of the top players in the league. Craig Moore placed #5 on each of the other three evaluations (NBA efficiency, Game Score, and Win Score). And Raymar Morgan, himself , was 2,3, and 4 in the other three rankings. So the basic methodology doesn’t appear to have a fundamental flaw.

So why is Eric Gordon so low? Perhaps because, as proficient a scorer as he is, he just isn’t solid enough in the other parts of his game to claim the best overall player crown. He’s clearly the best scorer in the league, by far, - and that huge scoring edge is what carries him to the top in the NBA, Game Score, and Win Score ratings. Gordon is also the best in the league at getting to the free throw line and making his shots, so where does he fall down?

The problem comes from the other two factors. Gordon doesn’t rebound well (25th) plus he’s significantly minus in the turnover department (24th). Interestingly, several of the other top candidates have flaws too. Morgan is below average in the turnover rankings (18th) but rebounds well (5th). Claxton, similarly has a turnover problem (27th) but also rebounds well (4th). Moore and Neitzell are the reverse. They protect the ball well (2nd and 8th) but don’t rebound all that well (17th and 28th). But Gordon is the one that comes up short in both.

That does raise another question? Is there anyone who does all four well. The answer to that is yes. DJ White really has no deficiencies in his game. He’s 10th in point production, 11th in turnovers, 3rd in rebounding, and 4th in free throws. While no one on the list is in the top ten in all four categories, DJ White comes the closest. Unfortunately, the two categories that he’s the lowest in, i.e. point production and turnovers, happen to be the two that carry the most overall weight (about 70% combined) in the equation so he comes up just short of Morgan.

So for the time being at least, Raymar Morgan gets to hold the crown of Best All Around player in the league. My gut feel, though, is that DJ White is going to lay claim to it during conference play. We shall see.

I’ll continue to update all on any changes to the rankings at various times during the season. Nobody is a runaway leader in this system and the rankings could change several times during conference play.

---

My “How does Geary Claxton rank” post offered up a simplistic measure for determining the best players in the B10. There are other measures that are typically used. Here are three:The NBA Efficiency ModelThe NBA uses a very simplistic model for player evaluation. They simply give a player one point for each positive result (point, rebound, steal, block, or assist) and subtract a point for each negative (turnover, missed shot, missed free throw).

Using that as a model, here are the top ten performers in the conference (NOTE: for each of these evaluations, I limited my calculations to the top thirty guys in the league in terms of minutes per game).

Rank	Player	Team	NBA	NBA/game	NBA Rank
1	Gordon, Eric	IU	196	21.78	1
2	White, D.J.	IU	207	20.70	2
3	Claxton, Geary	PSU	194	19.40	3
4	Morgan, Raymar	MSU	207	18.82	4
5	Moore, Craig	NU	150	16.67	5
6	Butler, Jamar	OSU	162	16.20	6
7	Ellis, Jamarcus	IU	156	15.60	7
8	Neitzel, Drew	MSU	166	15.09	8
9	Hummel, Robbie	PUR	148	14.80	9
10	Pruitt, Shaun	ILL	143	14.30	10

Game Score

Many, most notably Dean Oliver and John Hollinger, find fault with the simplistic NBA model. They feel that all of these measure should not have equal wait. They modify the NBA model by only assigning half a point to blocks, assists, fouls, and free throw attempts.

Using their model, often called Game Score, the top ten performers are:

Rank	Player	Team	Game Score	GS/game	GS/Rank
1	Gordon, Eric	IU	163.00	18.11	1
2	Morgan, Raymar	MSU	151.70	13.79	2
3	White, D.J.	IU	136.40	13.64	3
4	Claxton, Geary	PSU	134.80	13.48	4
5	Moore, Craig	NU	115.60	12.84	5
6	Butler, Jamar	OSU	123.80	12.38	6
7	Neitzel, Drew	MSU	133.10	12.10	7
8	Crawford, Jordan	IU	76.40	10.91	8
9	Harris, Manny	MICH	114.10	10.37	9
10	Hughes, Trevon	WISC	103.50	10.35	10

Win Score

Lastly there are others, specifically the authors of Wages of Wins, who feel that Oliver and Hollinger were on the right track by assigning weights but were just arbitrary in assigning half weights to certain values. Instead they choose to run a regression analysis to more accurately determine the correct weights. Their conclusions: Points, steals, and turnovers are equal and assigned a weight of 1; field goal attempts, offensive rebounds, assists, and blocks get a .7 weight; made field goals and personal fouls have a .4 factor; and, finally, defensive rebounds weigh in at .3.

Using that formula, called Win Score, here are the top ten in the conference.

Rank	Player	Team	WinScore	WS/game	WS/Rank
1	Gordon, Eric	IU	177.00	19.67	1
2	White, D.J.	IU	190.00	19.00	2
3	Morgan, Raymar	MSU	192.50	17.50	3
4	Claxton, Geary	PSU	172.50	17.25	4
5	Moore, Craig	NU	125.50	13.94	5
6	Pruitt, Shaun	ILL	133.50	13.35	6
7	Butler, Jamar	OSU	132.00	13.20	7
8	Neitzel, Drew	MSU	135.00	12.27	8
9	Ellis, Jamarcus	IU	121.00	12.10	9
10	Crawford, Jordan	IU	82.00	11.71	10

Rather than anointing one as better than the others in this post (I have my own methodology that I’m working on that I’ll cover at a later date), I’m just going to average the three approaches.

Doing that give us this top ten.

Rank	Player	Team	GS/Rank	NBA Rank	WS/Rank	Avg
1	Gordon, Eric	IU	1	1	1	1.00
2	White, D.J.	IU	3	2	2	2.33
3	Morgan, Raymar	MSU	2	4	3	3.00
4	Claxton, Geary	PSU	4	3	4	3.67
5	Moore, Craig	NU	5	5	5	5.00
6	Butler, Jamar	OSU	6	6	7	6.33
7	Neitzel, Drew	MSU	7	8	8	7.67
8	Pruitt, Shaun	ILL	13	10	6	9.67
9	Crawford, Jordan	IU	8	12	10	10.00
10	Ellis, Jamarcus	IU	15	7	9	10.33

It certainly looks like Eric Gordon could be on track to win both the Freshman and the Player of the Year in the B10, although I do suspect that DJ White will pick up a bunch of votes for his body of work.

Also, all of the measures seem to be pretty consistent on who the top five are. Things do start to shuffle around a little bit with the second ten though.

It will be interesting to see how things hold up through conference play.