Here is a link to a preview of our team by MGoBlog, a Michigan fan blog, It's pretty focused on statistics, and they seem to think that they matchup with us pretty well. Pretty fair, though I don't think they give us enough credit for how dominate the team was against UNC, and they are pretty tough on Starks.

Texas A&M: Large Men And Dollar Store Rob Gray

Quote:

---

Maybe try a man bun? In Wilson's absence A&M has turned to freshman TJ Starks, the aforementioned Dollar Store Rob Gray. Like Gray, Starks is a 6'2" PG with 30 percent usage and a healthy assist rate. There the comparisons stop. Starks has a TO rate higher than his assist rate and is shooting 43/33 from the floor with a mediocre free-throw rate. He's had at least 4 TOs in 10 of his last 11 games and aside from one anomaly against Vanderbilt hasn't gotten his ORTG above 106 during that span. On the season he's at 88, and there is no recent upward trend.

Starks is completely bonkers, and I have the stat to prove it. Despite spending much of the year as a backup he leads A&M with 92 transition attempts. eFG on those? 41%. IE, worse than his half court offense.

A&M's highest usage guy is by far their least efficient. Not a great combination.

---

Quote:

---

And they D up. A&M doesn't have any real weaknesses on defense. The worst aspect of their D is that about 26% of opposition shots are spot-ups and they're only a little bit above average at defending those. Everything else is very good to excellent. There is a glaring issue on Kenpom, as A&M is in the 300s at forcing turnovers, but they're so good at everything else it doesn't really matter. As you might imagine, they block a lot of shots8th nationally.

The Aggies are mostly a man team but do run out a 2-3 zone on about a fifth of their possessions. Michigan is definitely going to get some of that early and possibly a lot of it if Michigan bogs down against it. With traditional bigs at the 4 and 5 chasing around Wagner, Robinson, and Livers it might be A&M's plan from the drop.

---

Quote:

---

General shape of game. This is going to be another slugfest. A&M is going to dump it in to their big guys and dare Michigan not to double them, both because they're excellent at posting and Michigan has weak post defense and because they might get a foul on Wagner that would limit his ability to stretch A&M's defense out of shape.

---

There is a lot more, but I tried to pick out some of the key parts of the article.

lol we posted this at the exact same time

Starks has not been consistent, but that's to be expected of a freshman. Especially one forced into a starting role part way through the season. He's playing his best ball of the season right now, though.

Stats may be nerdy, but over the long run they are right. We need Gilder to be assertive like he was early in the Providence game. He's our best perimeter player, protects the ball best and is the upper classman. He needs to get 8-10 shots in the game.

yes we would be so much better is caldwell were still around playing all his minutes

jaxisback said:

---

We need Gilder to be assertive like he was early in the Providence game. He's our best perimeter player, protects the ball best and is the upper classman. He needs to get 8-10 shots in the game.

---

I would love for him to realize how good he is.

wacarnolds said:

---

Quote:

---

A&M's highest usage guy is by far their least efficient. Not a great combination.

---

stat nerds

---

I'd be interested to see Starks' stats since he took over starting rolo solo, essentially.

PatAg said:

---

wacarnolds said:

---

Quote:

---

A&M's highest usage guy is by far their least efficient. Not a great combination.

---

stat nerds

---

I'd be interested to see Starks' stats since he took over starting rolo solo, essentially.

---

his splits for Feb/March (which covers all but the first few games he came in as starter) are

44/35/65 shooting
11ppg
3.6 apg
4.1 topg
1.8 rbg

I'm pretty sure even over that stretch he had the same combo of highest usage + lowest efficiency (Hogg might have something to say on the efficiency measure) but he has definitely upped his game on the offensive end after a midseason slump

bobinator said:

---

Normally I'm a stats guy, but Starks is something of a complicated story.

---

is it that complicated? He's explosive and confident and infinitely better than a walkon or a 2-playing-the-1 next to a 3-playing-the-2, like we had last year. But he's a high usage player with an inconsistent outside shot that struggles to finish at the rim.

He's been a godsend with Duane's injury and he deserves some portion of the glory in this team's turnaround. Hope he and the team continue playing like they are right now.

I agree that the stats don't tell the full story of Starks. It doesn't factor in how he played last weekend. He's certainly improved, though he faces another tough challenge on Thursday.

Anyway, I think these stats show the following:

- we need to limit our turnovers. We will lose the turnover battle, but if we keep it close, we're in good shape.
- kill them on the boards. I wouldn't be shocked if UM gives up on offensive rebounding this game in order to get their defense back and set each possession.
- free throws. Both teams are sub-par, so one team getting hot from the line could make a difference.
- 3pt shooting. UM actually is just okay from the 3pt line. Either team getting super hot or ice cold could decide things. I expect UM to take a ton of 3s.

It is spot on about Starks. He is a high usage, low efficiency player. But so were Allen Iverson and Kobe Bryant. As long as Starks limits his bad shots, I am generally okay because he puts pressure on the defense. But he has to stop shooting long step back jumpers without making a single pass. As I think Grant Hill said on the broadcast, as long as the ball has swung from side to side and the shot clock is under 10, Starks can do his thing one on one all he wants.

bobinator said:

---

I meant that capturing his significance statistically is complicated. It's not at all complicated narratively.

For example, I think his "I got this" attitude has bled into the rest of the team. Starks went into Sunday's game matched up against one of the best point guards in all of college basketball, the most outstanding player of last year's Final Four, and was basically like "Who? I'm better than this guy."

---

I get what you're saying, and he is undoubtedly part of the reason this team is playing with so much confidence. But how much of that is "Starks is such a unique player that stats don't matter" and how much is "holy crap we're not forced to play a bunch of guys in spots they shouldn't be playing"?

I think those are both part of it. That's kind of what I'm saying is that judging Starks just by his statline doesn't tell the whole story. Normally when people say that I think they're probably letting their feelings cloud judgement of a player, but in this particular case I think it's true.

That's really all I'm saying is that I'd normally consider myself a "the numbers don't lie" guy, but I think it's more complicated with Starks.

bobinator said:

---

I think those are both part of it. That's kind of what I'm saying is that judging Starks just by his statline doesn't tell the whole story. Normally when people say that I think they're probably letting their feelings cloud judgement of a player, but in this particular case I think it's true.

That's really all I'm saying is that I'd normally consider myself a "the numbers don't lie" guy, but I think it's more complicated with Starks.

---

Guess it depends on your perspective. Are we comparing ourselves to A&M Basketball 2016-2017? To the generic history of A&M basketball? Or to the best teams across the nation?

Starks passes with flying colors on the first 2, but on the last, which seems the most relevant, the picture is less rosy.

I think maybe we're talking about two different things because I'm not sure I understand your question.

bobinator said:

---

I think maybe we're talking about two different things because I'm not sure I understand your question.

---

You made the statement "judging Starks just by his statline doesn't tell the whole story". But this is essentially a generic statement that applies to every stat for every player and every team in every sport. Usage rate, fg%, offensive efficiency, turnover rate, even wins and losses, are completely arbitrary #s that require a frame of reference.

So you have to first establish a standard, and then judge the individual or team by that standard. And I think there is an extremely wide variance in the standard used to judge Starks, leading to disparate views on his plays and what is/isn't critiquable (is that even a word?)

Motracicletraficificker said:

---

Starks is our only guard who can create his own shot. He's the only one who can get deep into the defense on a dribble drive. If he elimates turnovers, he will be a great collegiate PG offensively. He still has some work to do on defense. Lowering turnovers and understanding situational basket will really take Starks to the next level as a player. He has the physical ability and mental toughness to get there I think. Hopefully he just keeps getting better on Thursday...

---

While he has made some big plays in big moments, he's also done the exact opposite. I feel like he needs more mental toughness as he has made a few bone-headed mistakes down the stretch.

And both guys did that against stiff competition. Things are always better with solid play from the 1 spot

A&M is coming off it's most complete game of the season. Excellent decision making for the most part. Smart passing.

Starks really lit up UNC. He needs to quit taking 3 pointers in transition when we have no one under the basket to get rebounds.

Especially considering our size, we can hit the boards with our big men better than most teams.

Okay, I see what you mean, what I'm saying is that normally I do think your statline does tell almost the whole story. Obviously there are some basic intangibles to everyone so they don't tell 100% of it, but I feel like for the vast majority of players in the vast majority of situations, the stats do tell about 90% of the story. So that's kind of what I was emphasizing is that normally I'm a "what it says is who you are" kind of person.

Which I said to lay the groundwork for when I say that I don't think they tell the whole story with Starks, that it's not something I would normally say. Sort of like "I know this is a cliche, but it's not normally one I believe in..."

Starting with the fact that I think basically any stats from before Wilson was out for the season are basically worthless. His entire role changed at that point, as did the way he's coached. We no longer had a yin to his yang at point guard, he's the whole show now.

So really we're only talking about nine games of data that I think tells us much, and even two of those games we were coming off of the Wilson injury/Chandler suspension/Caldwell dismissal and Kennedy's lineups were just absolutely insane. Like Starks was bad against Arkansas and Missouri, but I don't put that completely on him because the coaching staff was doing some weird stuff.

But even including those games, I just don't think only having 9 or so games of relevant data tells us much about him. The article this thread is about says "on the season he's at 88, and there is no recent upward trend" but if you take all of those other things into account, I think you could say there is an upward trend as he continues to find more of a balance between the player he was, the player we need him to be, and the player he naturally is.

He's like an option quarterback that we put into an air raid offense midway through the season. Sometimes he still wants to scramble, it's in his nature, but he's learning.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. 8,9,10,even 15 games worth of data doesn't really tell the whole story about anyone, especially a freshman experiencing a lot of personal growth. And in a single game elimination tournament, your previous stats don't mean ***** Every player will have 2-3 critical possessions and it's roughly a coin flip on if each one is a positive or negative. Add all of them up and one team gets to move on and the other goes home.

That's all I was really saying is that I think a statistical breakdown of TJ Starks at this point is basically impossible because of all of the variables. I wouldn't expect someone that doesn't follow our team every day to know that really, so it's not really a knock on this blog that I think otherwise does a pretty good job, I just think trying to explain Starks' evolution (and the team's around him) is more complicated than just looking at the numbers since he's been at point guard.

Starks is what he is (so far), and I would say that so far, he is what this blog says and that the stats give a fairly accurate picture. But it's a team game, and he brings attributes that are absolutely critical because of what the rest of the team lacks. Yeah, maybe a more efficient point guard would be a better player and would be better for the average team, but a better point guard who was unable to create something when the clock is running down or when the defense has a strong possession would be worse for this team.

JJxvi said:

---

Starks is what he is (so far), and I would say that so far, he is what this blog says and that the stats give a fairly accurate picture. But it's a team game, and he brings attributes that are absolutely critical because of what the rest of the team lacks.

---

These are my thoughts exactly.

PatAg said:

---

wacarnolds said:

---

Quote:

---

A&M's highest usage guy is by far their least efficient. Not a great combination.

---

stat nerds

---

I'd be interested to see Starks' stats since he took over starting rolo solo, essentially.

---

Since the Ole Miss benching (became the starter two games later):

.438/.368/.644 shooting

25.5 mpg
14.4 ppg
3.4 apg
3.8 topg
2.0 rbg

Averaging 12 shots a game.

I guess the thing I disagree with is that there hasn't been a recent trend upward in his play.

I think there absolutely has been.

bobinator said:

---

I guess the thing I disagree with is that there hasn't been a recent trend upward in his play.

I think there absolutely has been.

---

He's definitely been better. Here are the stats from before the ole miss game:

.291/.250/.600 shooting

14.5 mpg
4.1 ppg
1.1 apg
1.3 topg
2.1 rbg