StepCross
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2010
- Messages
- 1,026
- Likes
- 584
With all the talk about how the media is discounting the vols' roster, I thought I'd do a deep dive. I picked Texas because they're consistently mentioned above Tennessee, they're in our conference, and the comparisons line up pretty nicely.
Here is their presumed starting lineup:
PG: Isaiah Johnson (6'1" soph, Colorado)
SG: Mikey Lewis (6'3" jr., St. Mary's)
SF: Elyjah Freeman (6'8" jr., Auburn)
PF: David Punch (6'7" jr., TCU)
C: Matas Vokietaitas (7'0" jr., returnee)
Now for the deep dive.
PG: Isaiah Johnson vs. Terrence Hill, Jr.
Isaiah Johnson was considered one of the top PGs available in the portal by industry experts; possibly the very top (some services named him #1). He gets to the line a lot, drawing 5.8 fouls per 40. He attempted 195 FT, of which he hit 82% (for comparison, Nate shot 248 FT and Jakobi shot 140, so this would be halfway between them). One recent writeup called him a foul magnet; I don't think he's that. Big man Vokietaitis might be, but not Johnson.
Anyway. He also shoots the three well, at 38%. He made 56 of them. And he made 106 2's, which he shot very efficiently, at 57%. His assist-to-turnover ratio is 3:1.
Terrence Hill, Jr. is taller, at 6'3". He draws 4.7 fouls per 40, and shot 133 FT, of which he hit 86%. So less of a foul-drawer than Johnson for sure. He hit 91 of 150 2-pointers, for 61%. So he shot slightly fewer 2's at an even higher efficiency (61% for a guard is fairly ridiculous). Hill shoots a similar 3-point percentage to Johnson, but he shoots a lot more: he hit 81 3's at 37%.
His assist:turnover ratio is weaker at 2.5:1.
The industry likes both guys but seems to prefer Johnson, presumably due to his slightly higher assist:to ratio. Hill was more of a shooter, but both can shoot it.
Call it slight advantage Texas, probably.
PF: David Punch vs. Jalen Haralson
We'll go in the order of Texas's prizes. David Punch and Jalen Haralson are both going to be playing at the 4 spot for their respective teams, one assumes. They're both 6-7 and both were highly productive at prior stops.
Punch shot a whopping 304 2-pointers, and hit them at a reasonably efficient 54%. He also got to the line 170 times, drawing 5 fouls per 40 minutes.
Haralson also shot a truckload of 2's, 276, of which he also hit 54%. So really similar volume and efficiency from 2, in fact.
Haralson, though, actually *is* a foul magnet. He ranked #8 in the entire NCAA with 7.5 fouls drawn per 40 minutes. So arguably Haralson is actually the better scorer. Despite being labeled as a volume guy, Haralson was pretty efficient with 54% 2-point percentage and 7.5 fouls drawn per 40.
Where Punch shines is on the glass and on defense. He is a much better rebounder than Haralson, a top-100 shot blocker despite being a 6-7 PF, and has steal rates like a guard. He's really a menace on defense and the glass.
Haralson's one odd stat is assist rate--he played some point forward and racked up a decent number of assists. So again, reputation of a volume guy but he's actually quite efficient and unselfish.
But anyway, again, one can see why the industry prefers Punch here. Small advantage Texas, again (but also, it depends on how RB can transform Haralson on the defensive end).
SG: Mikey Lewis vs. Dai Dai Ames
Again, Mikey Lewis is widely considered a lockdown defender. More power to him, I say; I valued Mashack and loved watching him play. Mikey adds to this a dangerous 3-ball, as he's yet another 37% shooter. He shot 181 of them, hitting 67.
He is not dangerous, though, from 2. He shot a really poor 42% from 2. He is not notable for assists, steals, rebounds, or getting to the line (he's fine at these things, just not notable).
Pure 3-and-D, with a side helping of "sucks inside the arc."
Dai Dai Ames does not suck inside the arc. But let's back up a little: Ames shoots (again) 38% from the arc, hitting 56 last year. Similar efficiency and volume as a deep shooter to Lewis. Ames, though, shines inside the arc. He shot 289 2-pointers (that's more than Haralson, you'll note) at 51%. Crazy volume and efficiency for a 6-1 guard.
Like Lewis, Ames is not remarkable in assists or steals or anything.
Advantage statistically seems to be with Ames--he's a bucket. If you think Lewis is an all-world defender and you count that as more valuable than scoring, then maybe Lewis has the nod here. I didn't watch St. Mary's so I can't comment on defense.
I say slight advantage to Tennessee, but you can be the judge.
SF: Elyjah Freeman vs. Juke Harris
Yeah, not close. Juke hit 81 threes to Freeman's 35. Juke hit 147 2's to Freeman's 83. Juke attempted more FTs (249) than the aforementioned Nate Ament, and hit 78% of them (Freeman attempted only 113).
Juke rebounds better on the defensive end than Freeman. Freeman has a higher steal rate and better offensive rebounding rate.
But...this one isn't close. Juke is widely considered one of the top portal players to move this year, where Freeman is just a guy.
Huge nod to Tennessee on this one.
C: Vokietaitis vs. Rubin
Tricky comparison. Rubin is here to block shots. He had a top-25 national block rate all three of the past years. His freshman year he was #1 nationally at 14%. This year he dropped to 20th, with 9.4%. Miles also has a better defensive rebounding rate than Vokietaitis. Both shot a gajillion 2-pointers (292 Vok, 274 Rubin) and both were really efficient (61% and 59%, respectively). Vok was 3rd nationally at drawing FT, 8.3 fouls drawn per 40. That's higher than Jalen Haralson (who is next best in this group), and far higher than "foul magnet" Isaiah Johnson. Vokietaitis doesn't block shots, though, which one usually wants in a 5.
Here you can see the offensive nod from the industry: Vok shoots a little more and a little better than Rubin, and draws a LOT of fouls.
But would Tennessee even want that profile at the 5? Tennessee wants a shot-eraser at the 5, and wouldn't accept less if they could pick.
Also Vokietaitis scored 4 points on Tennessee in their matchup this year.
I think advantage Tennessee.
***
It's close-ish overall, right? Tennessee has the better defender at the 5, Texas has more scoring there. The 2 and 4 are flipped, with Texas having the better defenders and Tennessee more scoring (a lot in Ames, it's really close in Haralson v. Punch).
PG position is also close, with slight lean to Texas per the industry. But Juke Harris simply doesn't have a comparable longhorn.
The better roster is the one in Knoxville, on a deep dive. I can see why the early voters are noticing Texas, but Tennessee on paper is legit.
Go Vols!
Here is their presumed starting lineup:
PG: Isaiah Johnson (6'1" soph, Colorado)
SG: Mikey Lewis (6'3" jr., St. Mary's)
SF: Elyjah Freeman (6'8" jr., Auburn)
PF: David Punch (6'7" jr., TCU)
C: Matas Vokietaitas (7'0" jr., returnee)
Now for the deep dive.
PG: Isaiah Johnson vs. Terrence Hill, Jr.
Isaiah Johnson was considered one of the top PGs available in the portal by industry experts; possibly the very top (some services named him #1). He gets to the line a lot, drawing 5.8 fouls per 40. He attempted 195 FT, of which he hit 82% (for comparison, Nate shot 248 FT and Jakobi shot 140, so this would be halfway between them). One recent writeup called him a foul magnet; I don't think he's that. Big man Vokietaitis might be, but not Johnson.
Anyway. He also shoots the three well, at 38%. He made 56 of them. And he made 106 2's, which he shot very efficiently, at 57%. His assist-to-turnover ratio is 3:1.
Terrence Hill, Jr. is taller, at 6'3". He draws 4.7 fouls per 40, and shot 133 FT, of which he hit 86%. So less of a foul-drawer than Johnson for sure. He hit 91 of 150 2-pointers, for 61%. So he shot slightly fewer 2's at an even higher efficiency (61% for a guard is fairly ridiculous). Hill shoots a similar 3-point percentage to Johnson, but he shoots a lot more: he hit 81 3's at 37%.
His assist:turnover ratio is weaker at 2.5:1.
The industry likes both guys but seems to prefer Johnson, presumably due to his slightly higher assist:to ratio. Hill was more of a shooter, but both can shoot it.
Call it slight advantage Texas, probably.
PF: David Punch vs. Jalen Haralson
We'll go in the order of Texas's prizes. David Punch and Jalen Haralson are both going to be playing at the 4 spot for their respective teams, one assumes. They're both 6-7 and both were highly productive at prior stops.
Punch shot a whopping 304 2-pointers, and hit them at a reasonably efficient 54%. He also got to the line 170 times, drawing 5 fouls per 40 minutes.
Haralson also shot a truckload of 2's, 276, of which he also hit 54%. So really similar volume and efficiency from 2, in fact.
Haralson, though, actually *is* a foul magnet. He ranked #8 in the entire NCAA with 7.5 fouls drawn per 40 minutes. So arguably Haralson is actually the better scorer. Despite being labeled as a volume guy, Haralson was pretty efficient with 54% 2-point percentage and 7.5 fouls drawn per 40.
Where Punch shines is on the glass and on defense. He is a much better rebounder than Haralson, a top-100 shot blocker despite being a 6-7 PF, and has steal rates like a guard. He's really a menace on defense and the glass.
Haralson's one odd stat is assist rate--he played some point forward and racked up a decent number of assists. So again, reputation of a volume guy but he's actually quite efficient and unselfish.
But anyway, again, one can see why the industry prefers Punch here. Small advantage Texas, again (but also, it depends on how RB can transform Haralson on the defensive end).
SG: Mikey Lewis vs. Dai Dai Ames
Again, Mikey Lewis is widely considered a lockdown defender. More power to him, I say; I valued Mashack and loved watching him play. Mikey adds to this a dangerous 3-ball, as he's yet another 37% shooter. He shot 181 of them, hitting 67.
He is not dangerous, though, from 2. He shot a really poor 42% from 2. He is not notable for assists, steals, rebounds, or getting to the line (he's fine at these things, just not notable).
Pure 3-and-D, with a side helping of "sucks inside the arc."
Dai Dai Ames does not suck inside the arc. But let's back up a little: Ames shoots (again) 38% from the arc, hitting 56 last year. Similar efficiency and volume as a deep shooter to Lewis. Ames, though, shines inside the arc. He shot 289 2-pointers (that's more than Haralson, you'll note) at 51%. Crazy volume and efficiency for a 6-1 guard.
Like Lewis, Ames is not remarkable in assists or steals or anything.
Advantage statistically seems to be with Ames--he's a bucket. If you think Lewis is an all-world defender and you count that as more valuable than scoring, then maybe Lewis has the nod here. I didn't watch St. Mary's so I can't comment on defense.
I say slight advantage to Tennessee, but you can be the judge.
SF: Elyjah Freeman vs. Juke Harris
Yeah, not close. Juke hit 81 threes to Freeman's 35. Juke hit 147 2's to Freeman's 83. Juke attempted more FTs (249) than the aforementioned Nate Ament, and hit 78% of them (Freeman attempted only 113).
Juke rebounds better on the defensive end than Freeman. Freeman has a higher steal rate and better offensive rebounding rate.
But...this one isn't close. Juke is widely considered one of the top portal players to move this year, where Freeman is just a guy.
Huge nod to Tennessee on this one.
C: Vokietaitis vs. Rubin
Tricky comparison. Rubin is here to block shots. He had a top-25 national block rate all three of the past years. His freshman year he was #1 nationally at 14%. This year he dropped to 20th, with 9.4%. Miles also has a better defensive rebounding rate than Vokietaitis. Both shot a gajillion 2-pointers (292 Vok, 274 Rubin) and both were really efficient (61% and 59%, respectively). Vok was 3rd nationally at drawing FT, 8.3 fouls drawn per 40. That's higher than Jalen Haralson (who is next best in this group), and far higher than "foul magnet" Isaiah Johnson. Vokietaitis doesn't block shots, though, which one usually wants in a 5.
Here you can see the offensive nod from the industry: Vok shoots a little more and a little better than Rubin, and draws a LOT of fouls.
But would Tennessee even want that profile at the 5? Tennessee wants a shot-eraser at the 5, and wouldn't accept less if they could pick.
Also Vokietaitis scored 4 points on Tennessee in their matchup this year.
I think advantage Tennessee.
***
It's close-ish overall, right? Tennessee has the better defender at the 5, Texas has more scoring there. The 2 and 4 are flipped, with Texas having the better defenders and Tennessee more scoring (a lot in Ames, it's really close in Haralson v. Punch).
PG position is also close, with slight lean to Texas per the industry. But Juke Harris simply doesn't have a comparable longhorn.
The better roster is the one in Knoxville, on a deep dive. I can see why the early voters are noticing Texas, but Tennessee on paper is legit.
Go Vols!
Last edited:
