Kansas College Basketball Season Preview
2006-07
|
Brandon Rush
#25 - Sophomore
Wing Guard
6'6" - 202 lbs
|
Overall ePSAN70
for 2005-06 Season ==> +2.99
(adjusts for quality of opponent, playing
time, and weights recent games most)
|
2005-06 Season Per Game
Averages
|
|
Games |
MIN |
PTS |
REB |
AST |
TO |
STL |
BLK |
PF |
FG% |
FT% |
3FG% |
|
33 |
31.7 |
13.5 |
5.9 |
2.0 |
2.5 |
0.9 |
0.7 |
1.2 |
47.4 |
76.1 |
47.2 |
2005-06 Season ePSAN70
Component Ratings
Per
70 possessions, contribution from each "tangible" stat
category using exclusive
PSAN
calculations
Along with the "intangibles" makes up the ePSAN70
overall rating
|
|
2FG |
3FG |
FT |
AST |
REB |
STL |
TO |
BLK |
PF |
|
0.32 |
1.75 |
0.57 |
0.84 |
2.70 |
0.73 |
-1.98 |
0.41 |
-0.41 |
Note: Brandon Rush played far more minutes than other
players, thus "penalizing" him in the intangibles
category, because in a sense he had more time to get his
impressive numbers. And that extra time comes at
the expense of negative "intangibles," largely because
intangibles measure points surrendered among other
things. So, that explains why the "Team MVP" has
an ePSAN70 overall efficiency rating lower than most
members of the team. I would agree with the
assertion that Rush was not the MVP last season.
|
|
Game Impact (cPSAN)
2005-06 Season Trends
|
Improvement Index
-
-0.20
(Game-to-Game)
-
-0.26
(3-gm
Moving Avg)
|
Range is -1 to +1. Shows correlation between
cPSAN game rating and the game # (i.e., how deep into
season). Index of +1 indicates perfectly steady
improvement, and -1 indicates perfectly steady
worsening. Zero means essentially no correlation. "Game-to-Game" does this using each game #
and the corresponding player performance.
"3-gm Moving Avg" does this using each game # and the
average player performance over the 3 most recent games.
This helps iron out game-to-game variations in case they
are masking a true overall trend. |
Consistency Index
+0.07
|
Range is -1 to +1. Shows correlation between
cPSAN game rating and the cPSAN rating for the previous
game. Basically measures game-to-game consistency.
Positive index means that a good game is usually
followed up by another good game. A negative score
means the player usually performs poorly after a good
game and vice versa. Zero means essentially no
correlation. |
Game-by-Game Ratings
This is a chart showing the impact the player made on each
game last season, using the cPSAN score. The cPSAN does
adjust for the quality of the opponent, but unlike the cPSAN70,
does not adjust for playing time. The rationale for using
this rating is that I wanted to measure the player's impact each
individual game as the season progresses, not just how well he
uses the time he's on court. For my overall season ratings
(ePSAN70), I like to adjust for playing time so we're comparing
fairly. So, don't be confused if a player's ratings on the
chart below don't match his ePSAN70 rating above ... one adjusts
for playing time, and the other doesn't.

|
 |
Analysis
By most conventional measures, Brandon Rush had an amazing freshman
season. Led the team in scoring and rebounding, while shooting
lights out from behind the arc. But look closer, and you'll find
that not all was rosy. Let me break it down using the PSAN system:
- If all games counted equally (i.e., don't weight recent games
more heavily), and we didn't adjust for playing time but did adjust
for quality of opponent, then we'd be measuring total impact on the
season. The cPSAN season rating does this. And on this
measure, Rush is actually a very close 2nd on the team. But
...
- Adjust for playing time (cPSAN70) ... and Rush drops to 4th
- Also weight recent games more heavily (ePSAN70) ... and Rush
is 7th.
So, it's not that Rush doesn't deserve MVP for how much he impacted
the team. Just that other very prominent players contributed more efficiently and still impacted the team quite a bit,
and Brandon's game tailed off as the season came to a close. I may go
into this in future analyses.
Brandon's shining moment probably came against Kentucky (24 pts, 12 reb in a
blowout victory), and he had a few other bright spots in the second half
of the season. But too often, he slipped off the face of the
planet. In 5 of his last 7 games, he impacted the game negatively
or near neutral (cPSAN),
scoring in single digits in 4 of those games. Throughout it all,
he was playing upwards of 35 minutes or so each game.
Rush had a -0.26 improvement index (using 3-game moving average).
Given KU's considerable improvement over the course of the season,
it is troubling that the "MVP" of the team didn't improve during that
time. Rush's stellar 54.3 eFG% was good for #308 in the nation.
Make no mistake though, Rush had an excellent season. Anytime a
freshman averages over 30 minutes a game and leads the team in scoring
and rebounding, you're dealing with someone special. Hopefully,
this season Brandon can avoid the downward drift in the second half of
the season.
What KU Fans Say
Comments from
KUSports.com Message Board:
- POLL: Will Brandon Rush lead the team in
scoring this season?
62% = Yes
38% = No
- I think Brandon will grow into more of a
leader, which can only help our cause. Working out this
offseason should help him find the stamina for our season, I hope.
- I expect Rush's numbers to fall a little bit
and I expect to see increased production from Chalmers and most of
all, Julian Wright.
Comments from Phog.net
(Scout)
Message Board:
- In retrospect, I think a couple of things factor into Rush's
slight decline in the late season.
1. He was playing too many minutes. Downs wasn't stepping up to
help, and we really didn't have anybody else who could cover the
wing when Brandon went to the bench. When your third guard is
Hawkins, it's not all bad but your options are limited. I expect
that to change a little this season.
2. Other teams were covering him better. He wasn't an unknown to
begin with, but certainly opposing coaches could look at our stat
line and see where most of our perimeter offense was coming from.
They also knew that if you guarded BRush tightly he was going to
have trouble going to his left.
3. Brandon never did master the art of assertiveness. This is why I
think it was a good decision for him to play another season of
college ball. A guy with his ability should never be shy about
attacking with the ball.
What will help him more than anything this season will be that the
focus will no longer be on him. Offensively we'll have more weapons,
he'll have some help on the wing when we play 3 guards and with a
true point guard in the lineup I think his shot selection might even
see improvement.
- I always thought Brandon looked tired the last quarter of the
season.
Comments from The
Slant (Rivals)
- POLL: Will Brandon Rush lead the team in
scoring this season?
74% = Yes
26% = No
- I agree for now [that Rush will lead in scoring] just because
he's shown himself to be one of if not the best three point shooter
on the team. But if Sasha can show improvement this year similar to
the steps he made last year he could be the surprise dominant player
on this year's squad.
Comments from
KC Star:
- Stats are wonderful, but will Brandon Rush and everyone else at
KU bother to play as a TEAM rather than attempting to polish their
resumes for that basketball wasteland known as the NBA?
Outlook for 2006-07 Season
Look for upcoming features to discuss this player's potential role on
the team this season.
|