Leading Scorers D1 & D2 Boys

SeacoastDad wrote:

EBlessNHSP wrote:Bottom line - you're not going to be able to take a lot from a top scoring list except these are the top scorers - based on the stats provided.

It's not meant to make any assumptions or conclusions about how good a team/player is.

Maybe not, but one of the fun parts about following sports is this type of statistical analysis and the theories you can offer from it. Newtothismom's analysis is a good example. If the top four scoring teams in D-1 each have no more than one player in the top 20 scoring list, what might this tell you? Well, for one thing, it tells me that these teams have balanced scoring (either from the starters and/or a deep bench), and that opposing teams might not be able to focus on shutting down just one or two players.

You could expand the analysis to look at what percentage of his team's points does each player score. As an example, through the three games reported, top scorer Kaleb Marquis of Concord (20.7ppg) has scored more than half of his team's points (62 of 122). It's pretty clear that if you shut down Mr. Marquis, you should beat Concord. On the other hand, second leading scorer Dominic Paradis of Spaulding (20.5ppg) has scored 29% of his team's points (82 of 281). So, you can't assume you can beat Spaulding by simply shutting down Mr. Paradis.

Fun with numbers, fun to analyze, all in good fun.

So how accurate do you think the following formula would be in predicting a winer between two teams (lower score wins):

Variable 1 = The most important stat a team can have. It's won/loss record. Each team that is 4=0 is given a 1. each team that is 3-1 is given a numer that is one more than the number of teams that are 4-0 (i.e 3 teams at 4-0 means each team at 3-1 is 4). We do not factor this value as it is the most significant. lets call it W.
Variable 2= 2nd most important team stat in my opinion DPPG. Same ranking system as above but we now multple this by 2. We will call it X
Variable 3 = 3rd most important stat OPPG. Same ranking again but now multiple this by 3. Call it Y
Variable 4 = The number of players a team has in the top scorers list. To have a large enough relative sample you would need to account for half of the total players in a game in our case you have 20 teams with 5 on the court at a time that equals 100 so 100/2 =50. So variable 4 would be the number of players a team has in the top 50 in scoring. We multiple this variable by 4 and will call it Z.

So our formula would be W+X2+Y3+Z4= Overall team score (OTS)

So what percentage of time do you think a team with a lower OTS beats a team with a higher one? Again for entertainment purposes only.

Newtothismom please don't forget that NHSportPage only reports the stats as they are relayed to the website. Memorial may not have any players on the list, because the coach, AD, parents, etc. have not sent that information to NHSportPage. I know that last year, many of the Memorial games were not recorded.

Edge - I think you need to take your talents all the way to (Manch)Vegas and open a sports book with your new formula - the only problem is you've now let us in on your picking methodology!

One point of clarification on the formula. You use the teams rank of DPPG and OPPG not it's actual value. If you had a high OPPG (a good thing) multiplying by 3 would skew your score the wrong way

Looks like the #10 scorer might be out for a few weeks. Dover senior Captain Mike Wons went down with a leg injury Friday night vs. Memorial and I have heard things dont look positive. A few weeks at the least, possibly out for the remainder of the year. Awful news for a great kid and workaholic. Will be interesting to see how Dover matches up down low without Wons in the mix.

amcman7- Thanks for that information, I had no idea all athletes weren't included. So it looks like this list isn't even accurate and should not have been compiled if all athletes weren't tracked.

The Edge wrote:One point of clarification on the formula. You use the teams rank of DPPG and OPPG not it's actual value. If you had a high OPPG (a good thing) multiplying by 3 would skew your score the wrong way

I like it! I think using the straight up records in variable W might skew the formula. You could refine the formula by somehow including a strength of schedule factor. A matchup of a 4-0 team that has beaten four winless teams and an 0-4 team that has lost to four undefeated teams could be a lot different than the formula results would show.

Also, I think variable Z would be very similar to variable Y, especially if you are using the top 50 as your sample size. The highest scoring teams are likely to have more players in the top 50 scorers.

Great stuff!

newtothismom wrote:amcman7- Thanks for that information, I had no idea all athletes weren't included. So it looks like this list isn't even accurate and should not have been compiled if all athletes weren't tracked.

Thanks for the constructive critisim.

Obviously we'd like to have every kid, but we only can report on stats that people send us. The goal is to get every stat of every game. Unfortunately we can only do so much, there are only 3 of us getting stats. We basically do this for free. On our own time...after working 8-10 hours at our real jobs.

We are very clear about how stats are compiled, and that its a list base on what is reported. Its by no means complete but its better than anything anybody has ever compiled in the state of NH...ever.

And - we get more and more stats each year. Its a process. Next year we'll get maybe 80% of schools reporting, year after, 85%. Eventually we'll have a complete list. I believe the saying goes "Rome wasn't built in a day".

SeacoastDad wrote:

The Edge wrote:One point of clarification on the formula. You use the teams rank of DPPG and OPPG not it's actual value. If you had a high OPPG (a good thing) multiplying by 3 would skew your score the wrong way

I like it! I think using the straight up records in variable W might skew the formula. You could refine the formula by somehow including a strength of schedule factor. A matchup of a 4-0 team that has beaten four winless teams and an 0-4 team that has lost to four undefeated teams could be a lot different than the formula results would show.

Also, I think variable Z would be very similar to variable Y, especially if you are using the top 50 as your sample size. The highest scoring teams are likely to have more players in the top 50 scorers.

Great stuff!

Good point on variable W for a 4 game sample. But over the course of say a half a season the strength of schedule for any one team, when you play each team only once, would most likely be statistically insignificant.
But lets say you did want to factor in strength of schedule for W. Simply add your opponets combined record and come up with a delta of wins to loses (i.e the opponets were say a combined 10-6, delta =4) divide the W by 4. So now the formula with the added variable of D for the delta is:
(W/D)+X2+Y3+Z4=OTS
(

Well said Mr Bless.

I have to admit it's kind of funny to see the directions this thread has taken. I'm fully expecting Bill James to register to the Forum and give a Sabermetric explanation to the leading scorers in NH high school basketball.

Believe it or not I posted this list as informational and not to get members fired up on the Forum. As of this writing this thread has over 30 replies and 700 views. The thread on a coach who brings up racism directed towards his team and alleges bias by officials towards his team in a UL article has 1/3 the replies and half the views of a simple scoring list. I find this very interesting.

Youth angst over a scoring list? Well, then a parent of any youth suffering from this angst should gather minutes played, assists, steals and rebounding stats from around the state to alleviate this youth angst over a scoring list.

T&F -- I'll stop now but statistical analysis is kind of what I do as I am building a smarter planet. When they make a movie based on my formula they will need Brad Pitt to take my role not Jonah Hill.

One more thing.

If my child had angst over a scoring list. I would drop him off at the gym and tell him to keep shooting until he is over it.

"If my child had angst over a scoring list. I would drop him off at the gym and tell him to keep shooting until he is over it."
The Edge

The above quote is the smartest thing posted on this whole thread.

[quote="SeacoastDad"]

EBlessNHSP wrote:
You could expand the analysis to look at what percentage of his team's points does each player score. As an example, through the three games reported, top scorer Kaleb Marquis of Concord (20.7ppg) has scored more than half of his team's points (62 of 122). It's pretty clear that if you shut down Mr. Marquis, you should beat Concord. On the other hand, second leading scorer Dominic Paradis of Spaulding (20.5ppg) has scored 29% of his team's points (82 of 281). So, you can't assume you can beat Spaulding by simply shutting down Mr. Paradis.

Fun with numbers, fun to analyze, all in good fun.

Try explaining to that to North. They lost to Concord and Marquis wasn't even in the gym.

EBlessNH - I guess I get that you are trying to do something no one else does. I don't know what the list does for anyone except perhaps make the kids and parents who report the kids scores feel good. Maybe there is a reason no one else does it. Sometimes no information is better than inaccurate information. I have no problem you keeping track of athletes points whose parents want to send them to you. I just don't think a list or topic title indicating top 20 point scorers in the state should be created if it is not accurate.

newtothismom wrote:EBlessNH - I guess I get that you are trying to do something no one else does. I don't know what the list does for anyone except perhaps make the kids and parents who report the kids scores feel good.

We're not trying to make anybody "feel good". I think parents do a plenty fine enough job putting their athletes on a pedestal as it is these days, no need for us to do it. You want to pick a bone with someone perhaps you should look at the various "rankings" of NH players. At least we're providing hard stats based on performance, not one persons opinion.

newtothismom wrote:Maybe there is a reason no one else does it. Sometimes no information is better than inaccurate information.

Actually our information is 100% accurate for what we receive. The right adjective would have been "incomplete", which I would agree with. The scoring leaders is to be viewed as list of players we receive data from (its caveated repeatedly throughout the year with that point).

The reason nobody else does it is because they don't have the time, energy or connections with the athletic departments, coaches and players to accumulate statistics. By your assessment MaxPreps.com should shut down its nationally recognized site b/c they don't get complete scores, schedules and box scores. From which they do rankings and standings from.

newtothismom wrote:I have no problem you keeping track of athletes points whose parents want to send them to you. I just don't think a list or topic title indicating top 20 point scorers in the state should be created if it is not accurate.

Thanks for your opinion...my suggestion is don't comment on the thread and pump its views/comments up if you don't agree with it.

Tuesday and Friday wrote:"If my child had angst over a scoring list. I would drop him off at the gym and tell him to keep shooting until he is over it."
The Edge

The above quote is the smartest thing posted on this whole thread.

Wow ... I am simutaneously flattered and dinged by one comment

[quote="BoscoD39"]

SeacoastDad wrote:

EBlessNHSP wrote:
You could expand the analysis to look at what percentage of his team's points does each player score. As an example, through the three games reported, top scorer Kaleb Marquis of Concord (20.7ppg) has scored more than half of his team's points (62 of 122). It's pretty clear that if you shut down Mr. Marquis, you should beat Concord. On the other hand, second leading scorer Dominic Paradis of Spaulding (20.5ppg) has scored 29% of his team's points (82 of 281). So, you can't assume you can beat Spaulding by simply shutting down Mr. Paradis.

Fun with numbers, fun to analyze, all in good fun.

Try explaining to that to North. They lost to Concord and Marquis wasn't even in the gym.

Which is why I said "should" beat Concord and not "will" beat Concord. Statistical analysis.

PAT MAHONEY FOR PREZ!!

Thought I'd point out that in addition to encouraging/relying on the coaches, parents and players to send in their scoring stats to NHSportspage.com for us to compile and publish these numbers...we also do quite a bit of daily box score searching online and in the various newspapers to find the stats for almost 90 boys basketball playing schools in NH. I think everybody that reads this forum knows that with the ever changing/evolving local media landscape, finding game stories and box scores on high school sports isn't as easy as it used to be. Not looking for a medal or anything because I love covering high school sports, I just wanted to make it known that we don't just sit around waiting for people to send us the info.

For anyone who cares , most likely only Seacoast Dad, my formula was 8 for 10. Got the Alvirne vs Bedford and Merrimack vs. Dover games wrong.

This was based of a top 20 scoring list though as I do not have a top 50.

I believe that one of Dovers top scorers did not play so that can account for that one. But I would take an 80 % accuracy any day if I was betting purely for entertainment purposes.

Tarrier - Here is the link to a couple of Memorial box scores that may no be in your statisitics. Seems like some of these boys should be in there.

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20121222/SPORTS2101/121229697

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20130108/SPORTS2101/130109220/0/news11

Thanks newtothismom - we monitor every paper, we had those in earlier today.

WOW...................
I need to check back more often...are we really arguing about Top 20 scoring leaders?

Newtothismom thank you for your opinion, I’ve been criticized before and I’m always happy to respond from my end of the discussion.
First off...New Hampshire Sportspage has now been around for 6 years and we have been tracking the scoring leaders for 5. There isn’t a coach in the state who isn’t aware of who we are. Most coaches are tremendously supportive of what we are doing, others choose not to send stats (John Langlois) so we then rely on either newspapers (The Telegraph is great..the others spotty at best) and parents. We get a lot of stats from parents who call in the scores or email them.

To call a list of scoring leaders 'inaccurate' is about five steps past where you should have turned right. We get stats from about 80 of the 90 high schools in the state (or about 95%) and that includes schools like Gorham, Lisbon, Sunapee and Profile. Am I to understand that until we get stats from Lin Wood, Woodsville, Memorial and Campbell we should suspend statistics for the 80 teams we have numbers for?

Look...no one provides these kind of stats in New England and I'm not aware of any site that has scoring stats for an entire state in the country. Maybe we can celebrate these kids getting recognized for their scoring efforts, the coverage our state provides and not turn this discussion into a negative. I play basketball with Dana Breerly, former standout at Concord (he's still nasty) and he graduated the year before I began the site. He laments all the time that this did not exist when he played and talks about how much he would have loved it as a high school player. The fact that a kid like Keith Brown at Pelham has no clue that no other state does this and that the concept of top 20 scoring leaders did not exist 6 years ago is a wonderful thing because we aren’t going anywhere.

We've been here for 6 years...coaches and players know who we are so if we don’t have their stats, frankly that is on them..sending stats can be as easy as assigning a manager or a parent to do it…in fact that happens all the time.
I sent an email to every single coach in the state of NH (Fact)...if they want to send their stats...we're right here and ready to take them. If not there is little we can do and it does not make what we do ‘inaccurate’ or incomplete.

-Removed-