Statistical Analysis Of The Corey Stokes Injury And How It Has Impacted Villanova

I received an email from Chris on Monday after the Pitt game, and he was wondering how and if I would like to take a stab at analyzing the effect of Corey Stokes’ absence on the game/team.  I replied that although I liked the idea, I felt one game was not a large enough sample size to make any rationalizations.  For whatever reason, after watching the Seton Hall game I felt like 2 games would be enough, or maybe I just needed a topic to write about, or maybe I just liked watching James Bell do the Corey Stokes.

In any event here is my attempt at looking at some of the numbers from the past two games to determine what exactly does missing Stokes mean.  I have my own blog:  Throw Your V’s UP!, shameless plug, which I will link to for some explanation of the terms/stats I use if you are not familiar.  In addition you should check out kenpom.com because he does a good job explaining the stats and his site has more information about ALL college basketball teams then there are brain cells in the average St Joe’s fan’s head.

Several questions came to mind while thinking about this topic.  First: what is it that Stokes brings to the table, what do we need to replace, what are we missing in his absence.  Second, who can replace Stokes/ who has Jay used to replace Stokes.  And finally, as a WHOLE team how do we fare with Corey, and how have we fared without.  Obviously, there are 37 more questions we could ask, but that is what I came up with and focused on.

Question #1: Since the beginning of Big East play (including Maryland), here is what Stokes has brought to the table.  I know I am missing some stats here, but this is really the definition of Stokes:

So, he plays 82.7% of minutes and takes 21.5% of the shots while he is on the floor - not to be confused with % of overall team shots.  He has an eFG% of 50.88, not great but pretty good.  He has a modest FTrate, and he takes most of his shots from behind the arc.  One final note: Stokes has a TORate on the season of 14.8.  That is good and an important note for later.  I did not include Corey’s defensive numbers here because a) they are not very good & b) that’s all you need to know.

Question #2:  Here is the fun part.  The coolest thing about basketball for me at least, is that no matter how much we want to compare players there are just some things that each guy does better, worse, or just differently.  So, as much as we all want to say James Bell = Corey Stokes, with more PT from Bell we will find out the ways in which he is different.  For now, he looks like his game is very similar but no way does he pick up all of Stokes minutes, so moot point.

Below is a chart that shows the %minutes played for everyone from Big East games and then in the Pitt game and Seton Hall game.  I also included the % difference for each game.

This chart clearly illustrates the difficulty of choosing only 2 games as your sample size.  Look at Wayns & Fisher for example.  Both were in foul trouble over these two games.  It’s a pretty easy assumption that Fisher having 21% less playing time in the Pitt game was not part of the game plan with Stokes being out.  Also, it is difficult to judge Armwood’s new role without Stokes.

For the 3 prior games before Stokes was injured, he started instead of coming off the bench, an effort to increase our defensive pressure.  The question with Armwood becomes which game better reflects his new role without Stokes: Pitt at 72.5% (highest all year) or Seton Hall at 52.5%?  How about Wayns?  I believe he has to get more PT without Stokes, so the minutes in the Pitt game are a better reflection.

We also see that Sutton got more PT in both, so Jay has elected to play a little bigger in these games than in the past.  For Bell, we knew he would get more PT, but how much was the question, and same with Cheek.  In short Jay is still playing around with lineups and with foul trouble it gets tricky to judge.  Against Pitt, he opted for size and defense, and against Seton Hall he opted for more guards and offense.

I believe the lineup and rotation for the DePaul game will look like the Seton Hall game more than the Pitt game. And if Stokes is out for the Syracuse game, the lineup will look more like the Pitt game.  In big tough games Jay will choose defense over offense, and in what should be easier games - not this season anyways - he will give the young guys experience.

Ok, how about the dynamic on the court without Stokes?  Who is trying to fill the offensive void?  Below is a chart with % of shots taken while on the floor and the % difference of change.

Look at the Pitt game (which overall I think will be a better reflection of what our team really looks like without Stokes).  So Pena stepped up and so did Wayns; both are to be expected.  I would like to see more offense go through Yarou, but we do not go to him in big games.  The negatives should pop out quickly.  Fisher taking -2.2% of the shots in the Pitt game.  He needs to step up.  Period end of discussion.

I am all for an efficient offense, but we cannot, I repeat, cannot have a game where Cheek is taking 15% more shots while he is on the floor than normal.  He has not shown the ability to make sound decisions.  Maybe next year, or the year after.  But listen Corey, you are the senior, you are the only player on our team who can really play 1 on 5 and still get a good shot.  Your telling me in one of the biggest games of your career without your senior counterpart on the floor, on national tv, with College Game Day on campus all day, with David Stern’s 93 year old grandmother watching (aka the ENTIRE NBA COMMUNITY), you are not going to take more shots?  Crazy right?

Question #3:  Bottom line, how have we played without Stokes?  Here is a chart of our offensive and defensive efficiency from each game compared to our Big East average.

I think this is pretty self explanatory right?  Offensively, we have not figured out how to play without Stokes.  We become a much younger team without him, and we become a much more raw team.  We turnover the rock more in both games, and interestingly enough we did not get to the line that well in either game.  Not a terrible drop off, but that isn’t necessarily a strong part of Stokes’ game, but maybe it is again a reflection of our lack of discipline and inexperience on offense with players in new roles.  Defensively, obvious as well.  Point blank we are a better defensive team without Stokes.  Not a real big surprise.  We give up less offensive rebounds - Cheek, Sutton, and Armwood all rebound better than Stokes – and overall teams do not shoot as well against us.

Ok, last chart.  Here is our style:

Not much here, except I wanted to point out that the % of 3 pt. shots taken did not drop off for us offensively.  That’s not that good.  Stokes is our best shooter and without him we should take even less shots from 3.  I’m chalking this up to youth still, as Cheek does not understand that he needs to get into the lane and to the rim.  Cheek took 71% of his shots from 3 against Pitt, and took 60% of his shots from 3 against the Hall.  In Big East play overall he takes 42% of his shots from 3.  So, he is trying too hard to fill Stokes’s shoes.

Conclusion:  Without Stokes we play better defense and are sporadic on offense.  Wayns and Pena have stepped up, but Fisher really hasn’t.  We need him to step up because otherwise we will see Cheek and Bell try and do it.  For the young guys, don’t just settle for 3’s get to the lane.  The interesting player to look at in the future is Armwood.  Will his minutes go up = defense or will his minutes go down = offense.  Or option 3: will Armwood start taking more shots himself?