Carlino compared to other top WCC guards

I thought I'd post my findings about how Carlino compared to other top guards in the conference.



Overall Season

First is overall season, keep in mind that Carlino did not play until Dec. 17th

Matt Carlino

SEASON	TEAM	MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
2011-12	BYU	692	110-274	.401	41-124	.331	 44-58	 .759	  75	115	7	36	58	75	305

Matthew Dellavedova

SEASON	TEAM	MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
2011-12	SMC	1236	157-352	.446	60-169	.355	138-161	.857	109	212	2	28	57	96	512

Kevin Pangos

SEASON	TEAM	MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
2011-12	GONZ	1044	137-318	.431	79-197	.401	97-114	.851	89	111	2	40	56	60	450

Anthony Ireland

SEASON	TEAM	MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
2011-12	LMU	1206	181-412	.439	48-142	.338	115-148	.777	127	164	0	54	64	101	525

End of Season

This section shows how the guard played from mid-Feb through the end of their season.

Matt Carlino

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
201	22-83	0.265	8-29	0.276	7-15	0.467	  15	  35	  1	 9	 16	 32	 61

Matthew Dellavedova

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
236	27-68	0.397	5-24	0.208	35-37	0.946	  19	  39	  0	 6	 13	 21	 94

Kevin Pangos

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
251	33-84	0.393	19-50	0.38	20-26	0.769	 19	 22	 0	 10	 19	 17	 107

Anthony Ireland

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
231	51-86	0.593	5-25	0.2	26-34	0.765	  29	  35	  0	 12	 10	 14	 109

VS Other top WCC guards

This is how the guard performed playing against the other top WCC guards

Matt Carlino

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
170	29-85	34.1%	9-36	25.0%	11-17	64.7%	  15	  27	  0	  6	20	14	78

Matthew Dellavedova

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
231	27-56	48.2%	24-32	75.0%	31-37	83.8%	  23	  39	  0	  5	14	19	97

Kevin Pangos

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
193	26-59	44.1%	16-31	51.6%	23-27	85.2%	  17	  23	  0	  6	13	12	91

Anthony Ireland

MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
221	35-63	55.6%	13-24	54.2%	30-36	83.3%	  13	  29	  0	  9	15	22	113

Conclude what you will from these stats.

i'd say he's a freshman so doesn't quite compare...except some of the WCC guards are freshman too.



and at least one of them are still playing in the dance.

We have Fr, Jr, Fr, So in that order.

Thanks for the stats. He shows great potential. As another put it, he hopes its just freshman mistakes and not visual/spacial/court awareness problems. He seems to have one speed-a veritable speed demon. Bt unless he is going to score 25+night in and out, ala jimmer, yes, jimmer, then preventable turnovers and quick shots will hold him back.

So I went through and took what Carlino, Cusick, Dellavedova, Pangos and Ireland all did against BYU, LMU, Gonzaga and St. Marys and extrapolated those stats out per 40 minutes. Then I ranked the players from best to worst in each category.



Here were the categories I tracked: FG, FGA, FG%, 3FG, 3FGA, 3FG%, FT, FTA, FT%, OReb, DReb, TReb, PF, AST, TO, BLK, STL, Total Points, Points Available Percentage, True Shooting%, Effective FG%.



Lowest point totals should show the best PG?



No one tallied any blocks so they all got the same number of points for that category.



If you want to see the raw numbers, let me know and I can post them.

Final totals:

Ireland 49

Pangos 56

Dellavedova 56

Carlino 67

Cusick 74



Individual Stat Rankings (from 1 to 5 - so whomever averaged the most per 40 min (or fewest for TO & PF) was awarded 1 point, whomever the fewest got 5 points):

FG:

Carlino

Ireland

Pangos

Dellavedova

Cusick



FGA:

Carlino

Pangos

Ireland

Dellavedova

Cusick



FG%:

Ireland

Dellavedova

Pangos

Carlino

Cusick



3FG:

Pangos

Cusick

Ireland

Carlino

Dellavedova



3FGA:

Carlino

Pangos

Cusick

Dellavedova

Ireland



3FG%:

Ireland

Pangos

Cusick

Dellavedova

Carlino



FT:

Ireland

Dellavedova

Pangos

Carlino

Cusick



FTA:

Ireland

Dellavedova

Pangos

Carlino

Cusick



FT%:

Dellavedova

Pangos

Ireland

Carlino

Cusick



OReb:

Dellavedova

Carlino

Ireland

Cusick

Pangos



DReb:

Cusick

Pangos

Carlino

Dellavedova

Ireland



TReb:

Cusick

Dellavedova

Carlino

Pangos

Ireland



PF:

Dellavedova

Pangos

Ireland

Cusick

Carlino



AST:

Dellavedova

Carlino

Ireland

Pangos

Cusick



TO:

Cusick

Pangos

Carlino

Dellavedova

Ireland



STL:

Cusick

Ireland

Carlino

Pangos

Dellavedova



Points:

Ireland

Pangos

Carlino

Dellavedova

Cusick



Points Available:

Ireland

Dellavedova

Pangos

Carlino

Cusick



TS%:

Ireland

Dellavedova

Pangos

Cusick

Carlino



eFG%:

Ireland

Dellavedova

Pangos

Cusick

Carlino

Some of my observations from my post above.



- A fair argument can be made that the best defender is Cusick as he was the best defensive rebounder and had the best steals.



- He was also a poor shooter (worst in FG% and PAP).



- Best shooter/scorer was easily Ireland who led in points and all shooting stats except FT%.



- I didn't rank Assist:Turnover ratio, so here they are: Cusick 2.5, Pangos 1.9, Dellavedova 1.7, Carlino 1.6, Ireland 1.3.



- Cusick didn't attempt any FTs in any of those games. Carlino took a total of 19 in seven games. Against BYU this year, Dellavedova took 15, Ireland 20 and Pangos 19.

What does the point total + or - while the player is on the floor? I know that got poo-pooed earlier inthe year. Im not familiar with one of the categories, so maybe that is it. I still think it is as good an indicator as some of these categories.

I'm not sure I agree with the idea of # of FG being a positive category. I want my point guard bringing the ball up the court and getting it to other guys. His shots should be limited and smart.

hawkwing wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with the idea of # of FG being a positive category. I want my point guard bringing the ball up the court and getting it to other guys. His shots should be limited and smart.

With you on this. Facilitating the offense should be first and foremost.



What's interesting with Carlino is he appears almost jekyll and hyde like. In one stretch he'll be an assist machine, feeding the ball and making great passes as attested by his ranking just below Dellawhatever in the assists category.



Then, for a stretch or two he'll launch shots all over the place. He ranks 1st in FGs and 1st in FGA, but second to last in FG%. Meaning, he takes a lot of bad shots. If he were to adopt a slightly more conservative approach to his game, I suspect his output would increase.



It's hard because we do need someone that can put it on the floor, drive, and create and we also need someone that can facilitate the offense. If Carlino worked on his driving and dishing, that'd be great.



Course a 2 that can actually do something with the ball would do wonders for us.

Gunk wrote:

I'm not sure I agree with the idea of # of FG being a positive category. I want my point guard bringing the ball up the court and getting it to other guys. His shots should be limited and smart.

With you on this. Facilitating the offense should be first and foremost.



What's interesting with Carlino is he appears almost jekyll and hyde like. In one stretch he'll be an assist machine, feeding the ball and making great passes as attested by his ranking just below Dellawhatever in the assists category.



Then, for a stretch or two he'll launch shots all over the place. He ranks 1st in FGs and 1st in FGA, but second to last in FG%. Meaning, he takes a lot of bad shots. If he were to adopt a slightly more conservative approach to his game, I suspect his output would increase.



It's hard because we do need someone that can put it on the floor, drive, and create and we also need someone that can facilitate the offense. If Carlino worked on his driving and dishing, that'd be great.



Course a 2 that can actually do something with the ball would do wonders for us.

I agree with everything you've said here.