Sitarz, Dovey shine in Clay Rating System

I’ve been developing my own rating system for basketball players and I’ve spent quite a bit of time applying it to the KU women’s teams from the last few years. It does rival the Hollinger Player Index, but my formula takes a few more things into consideration. Unfortunately for me, stats like plus/minus are not available for division II basketball, so my progress will be limited.

With that said, I’ve developed a formula that focuses on per-minute production. The big pro to such a method is that it places players who play significant minutes on an even playing field with those who play in limited action. The obvious con here, however, is that a player who comes out and grabs 3 boards and scores 6 points in 5 minutes of mop up work will have a significantly inflated score. The only cure for that is to manually weed out the players who rarely play in key situations. If you’ve seen a few games, this is easy to do.

Here are the ratings for the 2007-08 Lady Bears as of January 30, 2008.

1. Weidensaul 33.3
2. Sitarz 30.3
3. McQuade 29.6
4. Van Wagner 26.3
5. Dovey 26.0
6. Wisemiller 22.7
7. Dellegrotti 19.6
8. Melvin 16.2
9. Schroeder 14.6
10. Reyna 14.0
11. Starr 12.0
12. Brown 7.8
13. Percich 5.1
14. Petriello -9.9

The only two players I would consider to have inflated ratings would be Schroeder and Petriello. Schroeder has seen little action and Petriello is no longer on the team.

If you’ve seen a few games, you are probably not surprised to see names like Weidensaul and McQuade at the top of this list. However, names such as Sitarz (pictured)and Dovey might be shocking. Neither of them sees significant action, but both make quite an impact when they do. Sitarz has scored, rebounded, and caused problems for opposing offenses in the lane. Dovey might be the most fearless player on the KU roster and is an absolute machine on the boards.

So, now you’re probably thinking: Are you saying Sitarz should be seeing more minutes than everyone except Weidensaul? Not necessarily. As coach Malouf was quick to point out when we discussed this type of formula, it fails to take into consideration intangibles such as hustle, discipline, consistency, awareness, etc. Sure the production is there, but this formula is not perfect. Watching a team practice or play a game every day might be enough to evaluate talent for some. This rating system is meant to be used as a tool to help support what you might already know and maybe bring to light something you may have been missing.

What does the formula mean to me? Well, the reason I even decided to formulate it was because I noticed the impact Sitarz and Dovey were making despite limited work. In my opinion, both need to see more action. Van Wagner and McQuade block them from significant minutes, but it can’t hurt to give them extra rest when you have playmakers riding the bench.

As you might imagine, there will be plenty more on this topic later. Comment below.