Career Wrap: Paul Scruggs

[MHettel]

For the last 4 years, at the end of the Season, I've taken a look back at the statistical performance of any player that has played his final game for XU.

When I say statistical, it really is just an analysis of the stats a player put up and compared against other recent XU players. Just tendencies and rates at which a certain player did something. The idea is that the analysis may provide some insight into the performance of the player and the teams he played on. There are a lot of things about a player that can be judged by what you see only, and I’m not really attempting to weigh in there unless a particular stat seems to support an opinion about what I’ve witnessed.

Alot of this is based on "per minute" stats so you can "normalize" players who played more than others. It allows for cleaner comparisons.

The "pool" of players consists of 85 players going all the way back to 1990. It's not EVERY player, but rather guys that played some kind of consistent role over a few years (1000 career minutes is loose criteria), or in the case of Grad Transfers, maybe just one season. Guys like Reggie Butler, Duwaun Rose, Kenny Harvey and those types are not included due to their minimal roles.

Although there are 85 total players, I only have minutes played for 75 of them (10 guys omitted from the early / mid 90s). In addition, I'm missing Offensive/ Defensive rebounding splits from 23 guys mostly through the 1990s.

I grouped the players into 3 position categories: Guards (31), Swing Players (21), and Bigs (33).

I designated someone as a "shooter" if they took 100 career 3's or at least 35% of their shots were from 3. There are 54 “shooters”.

There are 5 "active" players in the pool (Odom, Free, Colby, Nunge, Kunkle), with their stats up to date as of 2022 Season end.

Lets look at Paul Scruggs

1. Scruggs certainly packed the stat line over his 5 year career as a "do-a-little-bit-of-everything" kind of guy. He was around so long and was so consistent that it's almost hard to compare him to other players WITHOUT using stats. I figure his scoring and shooting performance, trends, and tendencies should get the first look.

(Ranking are in Parenthesis expressed as "#x of x")

Overall, Scruggs shot 45.2% from the field, (#42 of 85), which of course is almost dead center of this population. The combined average of ALL the players was 46.3%, but of course there are some guys that dont take 3's so their % is going to be better. If we look at just 2 pt shots, Paul hit 51.5% (#37 or 85). All signs pointing to "fairly average" at this point.

Narrowing the analysis to just the "shooter" population, he hit 34.5% of his 3 point attempts (#34 of 54). In terms of % of his shots that were 3 attempts, he ranked #36 of 54. In terms of 3pt attempts per minute, he ranked #29 of 48. Bottom line is that as a 3pt shooter, he was maybe a little below average, and didnt seem to take a disproportionate number of attempts.

Back to 2 Pt attempts per minute, and he ranked #41 of 75. Again, right in the middle of the pack.

In terms of Scoring from the Line, I found that Paul's Free Throw Attempts per minute was rather lackluster, coming in at #54 of 75. Paul's lower rate of getting to the line was a long standing critique that I had, and the analysis bears that out. Another way to analyze his ability to get to the line is to evaluate the how many FTA Paul had per 2PT attempt. This would give a general idea for how often he's getting to the line when taking the ball to the rim. Paul comes in at #60 of 85 in that category. Once at the line, Paul's FT% was solid, coming in at #31 of 85. Finally, in terms of what percentage of his career points came from the line, Paul came in at #65 of 85.

All told, Scruggs scored 1631 points in his career, which to some degree was a byproduct of the sheer number of minutes he played. On a per minute basis, Paul ranked #42 of 75.

I looked at Paul's game stats and found that he scored less than 10 points 71 times in his career. He Scored 10-19 points 62 times. And he scored 20+ on 18 occasions.

I suppose my conclusion with Paul is that he was a little below average as a scorer due mostly to his very average 3Pt percentage and low rate of getting to the line. Paul had 16 games as a 5th year senior where he failed to score in double figures. I would have preferred to have seen considerably more assertiveness from Paul on the scoring end, particularly attacking the rim while seeking contact.

[MHettel]

CONTINUED

2. Paul Scruggs as a PG. I know running an offense includes a bunch of qualitative and quantitative considerations. It is by no means a "cut and dry" science to use stats to draw a conclusion about this and have it be universally accepted. The quality of the players around the PG and the style of play can have as much to do (if not MORE) with the perception that someone is effective (or ineffective) at running an offense. So I'll be clear up front that I'm not weighing in with any overall conclusions, and will limit my analysis to those few items which can be measured statistically for a PG.

Assists: Paul registered 510 career assist. Just for raw numbers he would rank 4th (J Walker, Tu, Q) among my stats for 85 players. On a per minute basis, though, he comes in at #12 of 75. Now, #12 seems good in general, but when narrowed down to just PGs and Combo guards, the competition gets a little tighter and the analysis a bit more meaningful. Without too much detail, here is a shortened list of 18 guys and how they stack up for "assist per minute." In order: Lavender, Hawkins, Sumner, Dee Davis, Goodin, Holloway, Finn, Semaj, McAfee, Odom, Lumpkin, SCRUGGS (#12), Chalmers, Lenny, Burrell, Lyons, Crawford, Dante.

Of course the assists analysis does need to also point out that some guys were not the PRIMARY ball handler their entire career, and that others were counted on being a scorer as opposed to a facilitator during certain circumstances. All told, Scruggs ranking among his peers seems to be just about right.

Turnovers: Similar to Assists with the same considerations needing to be made. Scruggs had 373 turnovers, which rank #1 of 65 in my data (#1 NOT in a good way). In turnovers per minute, he ranked #59 of 65. Narrowing down to the smaller group of guards (but excluding Lenny, Lumpkin and Mo because I don't have TO data), Scruggs ranks #13 of 15 for MOST Turnovers per minute. I dont have the details, but I suspect the patented Scruggs "spin move in the lane" may be one of the reason he's so low on this list. Add to that his tendency to not get fouled on the drive (losing the ball and not selling the contact) and you end up with a pretty lousy TO record for a PG.

The last piece, of course, is the Assist to TO ratio. No surprise here, given the above. Scruggs ranks #18 of 65 in overall A/TO ratio, but against the 15 "ball handlers" in the data, he comes in at #11 of 15.

I've known all along, and will punctuate this analysis with the obvious, but Scruggs just simply is not a primary Ball Handler and was playing out of position for a couple years. It's admirable that he was up to the task, but its pretty obvious that he was one of our least productive / efficient lead guards we've had in the last 25 years. I'm laying part of this on the coaching staff who failed to address the PG problem that existed even BEFORE Paul took over. Paul would be the IDEAL guy to play SF in a small lineup, providing defensive versatility, a third ballhandler, and a potential offensive mismatch for the opponent.

3. Rebounds, Blocks, Steal, & Fouls- this should be brief

Rebounds per minute- Scruggs came in at #56 of 75 in overall rebounds. His offensive rebounding was #42 of 62, and defensive rebounding was #37 of 65. Pretty decent for a guard. To be fair to Paul, when comparing him to the same group of ballhandlers above, he finishes #5 of 18.

Blocks per minute- overall #36 of 75. Among the "ball handler cohort" he comes in at #2 of 18. Although not a featured part of his game, this was a nice "plus" to have guard that could block the occasional shot and alter others as well.

Steals per Minute- Overall #16 of 75. #8 of 18 among ballhandlers. I always thought Paul could flourish as a passing lane menace given his size, but his steal results were really just average.

Fouls per minute- #39 of 65 (#1 would be the LEAST fouls per minute). Among the ballhandlers, he comes in at #13 of 15. Cant help but think that guarding the opposing PG might have been alot to ask of Paul. He's an ideal defender against a 2 or 3 because he's long and those guys are not always SUPER quick. But against the opposing PG, he just had trouble staying in front....


In summary, the numbers speak for themselves with Paul. Certainly a guy that did enough to earn all of those minutes and it's hard to find fault in a guy that seemed to love this team and this school for 5 years. I don't think the circumstances for Paul were always the best circumstances for Paul. He will always be a "what if" guy for me. By that I mean what if Paul could have been the #3 guy on a loaded team where he could just play the complimentary role instead of being thrust into a key role playing out of position. His role as a freshman on that #1 seed team was just right for him THEN, but his later 4 years were filled with some knuckleheads and poor coaching. What if indeed!

[xukeith]

CONTINUED

2. Paul Scruggs as a PG. I know running an offense includes a bunch of qualitative and quantitative considerations. It is by no means a "cut and dry" science to use stats to draw a conclusion about this and have it be universally accepted. The quality of the players around the PG and the style of play can have as much to do (if not MORE) with the perception that someone is effective (or ineffective) at running an offense. So I'll be clear up front that I'm not weighing in with any overall conclusions, and will limit my analysis to those few items which can be measured statistically for a PG.

Assists: Paul registered 510 career assist. Just for raw numbers he would rank 4th (J Walker, Tu, Q) among my stats for 85 players. On a per minute basis, though, he comes in at #12 of 75. Now, #12 seems good in general, but when narrowed down to just PGs and Combo guards, the competition gets a little tighter and the analysis a bit more meaningful. Without too much detail, here is a shortened list of 18 guys and how they stack up for "assist per minute." In order: Lavender, Hawkins, Sumner, Dee Davis, Goodin, Holloway, Finn, Semaj, McAfee, Odom, Lumpkin, SCRUGGS (#12), Chalmers, Lenny, Burrell, Lyons, Crawford, Dante.

Of course the assists analysis does need to also point out that some guys were not the PRIMARY ball handler their entire career, and that others were counted on being a scorer as opposed to a facilitator during certain circumstances. All told, Scruggs ranking among his peers seems to be just about right.

Turnovers: Similar to Assists with the same considerations needing to be made. Scruggs had 373 turnovers, which rank #1 of 65 in my data (#1 NOT in a good way). In turnovers per minute, he ranked #59 of 65. Narrowing down to the smaller group of guards (but excluding Lenny, Lumpkin and Mo because I don't have TO data), Scruggs ranks #13 of 15 for MOST Turnovers per minute. I dont have the details, but I suspect the patented Scruggs "spin move in the lane" may be one of the reason he's so low on this list. Add to that his tendency to not get fouled on the drive (losing the ball and not selling the contact) and you end up with a pretty lousy TO record for a PG.

The last piece, of course, is the Assist to TO ratio. No surprise here, given the above. Scruggs ranks #18 of 65 in overall A/TO ratio, but against the 15 "ball handlers" in the data, he comes in at #11 of 15.

I've known all along, and will punctuate this analysis with the obvious, but Scruggs just simply is not a primary Ball Handler and was playing out of position for a couple years. It's admirable that he was up to the task, but its pretty obvious that he was one of our least productive / efficient lead guards we've had in the last 25 years. I'm laying part of this on the coaching staff who failed to address the PG problem that existed even BEFORE Paul took over. Paul would be the IDEAL guy to play SF in a small lineup, providing defensive versatility, a third ballhandler, and a potential offensive mismatch for the opponent.

3. Rebounds, Blocks, Steal, & Fouls- this should be brief

Rebounds per minute- Scruggs came in at #56 of 75 in overall rebounds. His offensive rebounding was #42 of 62, and defensive rebounding was #37 of 65. Pretty decent for a guard. To be fair to Paul, when comparing him to the same group of ballhandlers above, he finishes #5 of 18.

Blocks per minute- overall #36 of 75. Among the "ball handler cohort" he comes in at #2 of 18. Although not a featured part of his game, this was a nice "plus" to have guard that could block the occasional shot and alter others as well.

Steals per Minute- Overall #16 of 75. #8 of 18 among ballhandlers. I always thought Paul could flourish as a passing lane menace given his size, but his steal results were really just average.

Fouls per minute- #39 of 65 (#1 would be the LEAST fouls per minute). Among the ballhandlers, he comes in at #13 of 15. Cant help but think that guarding the opposing PG might have been alot to ask of Paul. He's an ideal defender against a 2 or 3 because he's long and those guys are not always SUPER quick. But against the opposing PG, he just had trouble staying in front....


In summary, the numbers speak for themselves with Paul. Certainly a guy that did enough to earn all of those minutes and it's hard to find fault in a guy that seemed to love this team and this school for 5 years. I don't think the circumstances for Paul were always the best circumstances for Paul. He will always be a "what if" guy for me. By that I mean what if Paul could have been the #3 guy on a loaded team where he could just play the complimentary role instead of being thrust into a key role playing out of position. His role as a freshman on that #1 seed team was just right for him THEN, but his later 4 years were filled with some knuckleheads and poor coaching. What if indeed!

The math teacher in me really enjoys this analysis. Thank you so much. Noting too surprising. I do remember watching Paul drive to the hoop and think, " he is a very good driver, uses his height well". The post up move and turnaround jump shot was inconsistent. Good leader, good defender vs 2s and 3s.

Coaches really misused him.

[drudy23]

I think Paul could have been much better utilized as a dog defender who's capable of scoring. His frame and length would have made him a pest for opposing guards. There really wasn't anyone on this team that had a defense first attitude. You need those guys.

I disagree on the post fade-away jumper. He was pretty consistent with that shot.

I agree he was misused, especially with the PG experiment.

[UCGRAD4X]

I think Paul could have been much better utilized as a dog defender who's capable of scoring. His frame and length would have made him a pest for opposing guards. There really wasn't anyone on this team that had a defense first attitude. You need those guys.

I disagree on the post fade-away jumper. He was pretty consistent with that shot.

I agree he was misused, especially with the PG experiment.

Unfortunately, it was much more than an experiment, it was a foregone conclusion. If it was an experiment, one that took 5 years, it was not a particularly successful one. Analysis of the data collected from the 'experiment' at several points along the way did not bear out the conclusion.

Final analysis; inconclusive, at best.

[Xer4ever]

Great stuff! Thanks for taking the time to assemble. Do you have a spreadsheet of all that could be shared? Also, since you are clearly into stats, I’ve been trying to finds stats for charges, both taken and given. No luck. I believe this is a very important stat never discussed.

[MHettel]

Great stuff! Thanks for taking the time to assemble. Do you have a spreadsheet of all that could be shared? Also, since you are clearly into stats, I’ve been trying to finds stats for charges, both taken and given. No luck. I believe this is a very important stat never discussed.

Yes i have a spreadsheet with all this data. Happy to share it, but I'm not sure how I can. If you private message me with an email address i 'll send it to you

[XU 87]

CONTINUED



Paul would be the IDEAL guy to play SF in a small lineup, providing defensive versatility, a third ballhandler, and a potential offensive mismatch for the opponent.




Interesting argument and one I tend to agree with. Good stuff.

[xudash]

Great work MHettel.

Two thoughts hit me immediately with all this:

1. If Travis was such a data driven guy, how did he miss all this coming into this season?

2. I'll always remember Paul in a good light - and some of the brightest light ever in Xavier basketball OOC history will be his dunk against Ohio State.

[XU 87]

Great work MHettel.

Two thoughts hit me immediately with all this:

1. If Travis was such a data driven guy, how did he miss all this coming into this season?



Good question.

MH: I'd be curious as to Odom's stats, even with his limited minutes. Please start working on this, although you can skip three point shooting analysis.

[smileyy]

Paul could/should have been late-career Stanley Burrell. (Maybe a discount Stan, but still that same role of defender who can also score as mentioned above)

[MHettel]

Paul could/should have been late-career Stanley Burrell. (Maybe a discount Stan, but still that same role of defender who can also score as mentioned above)

BINGO. Did you know Stanley led the team in scoring as a Freshman at 12.7 PPG? He then went to 14.4, 12.4 and then finished his career averaging 9.7pts as a Senior. Who does that???

Oh, and the teams won 17, 21, 25, and then 30 games over his 4 seasons.

Thats a guy that changed his game for the benefit of the team.

[drudy23]

BINGO. Did you know Stanley led the team in scoring as a Freshman at 12.7 PPG? He then went to 14.4, 12.4 and then finished his career averaging 9.7pts as a Senior. Who does that???

Oh, and the teams won 17, 21, 25, and then 30 games over his 4 seasons.

Thats a guy that changed his game for the benefit of the team.

This is a great stat to get guys to buy in to being a lock-down defender for the success of the team.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Great stuff! Thanks for taking the time to assemble. Do you have a spreadsheet of all that could be shared? Also, since you are clearly into stats, I’ve been trying to finds stats for charges, both taken and given. No luck. I believe this is a very important stat never discussed.

Very important to never have as we all know we should #BanTheCharge

[bleedXblue]

Paul was miscast for most of his career

Some out of necessity and some b/c of a hard headed coach

Could have been different for him, but nonetheless a dedicated and true Muskie

[whopper]

i will remind you he hit 2 FT against FSU as a freshman to put us up 91-89 with a minute to go.
He became the point when Q blew up and Kyky not ready (and even Bryce Moore injured/ineffective) in Feb 2020. He did yeoman's work but not his strength. Nate was even more of a 2 guard so the last 2 years we played with TWO non PG's(scruggs PG by default). When we went down it seemed that Dwon and Kunkel (especially ) were better PG's. Lack of PG meant little penetration or defending of penetration and that was our overriding problem the past 2 years. Paul kind of got screwed and it played with his head. But thanks for your great efforts Paul and i pray that you have a bright and successful future

[Xer4ever]

#ban the charge…..seriously or am I missing the sarcastic font?

[smileyy]

Just most charges

[D-West & PO-Z]

#ban the charge…..seriously or am I missing the sarcastic font?

Dead serious.

But only help defender charges. On ball defenders can't be barreled over and can still take a charge but a guy coming over from across the floor to slide under a guy and have the ref call a charge? No thanks. Not real defense. Not a safe play. Called wrong 50% of the time.

Guy standing there and not playing defense and then falling down is not good defense, refs blowing that call more times than not, not good for basketball.

Ban. The. Charge.

[MHettel]

Dead serious.

But only help defender charges. On ball defenders can't be barreled over and can still take a charge but a guy coming over from across the floor to slide under a guy and have the ref call a charge? No thanks. Not real defense. Not a safe play. Called wrong 50% of the time.

Guy standing there and not playing defense and then falling down is not good defense, refs blowing that call more times than not, not good for basketball.

Ban. The. Charge.

Think of the consequences of a guy can’t slide over to take a charge. You have whole lot of VERY hard fouls dished out instead

[D-West & PO-Z]

Think of the consequences of a guy can’t slide over to take a charge. You have whole lot of VERY hard fouls dished out instead

The consequence is they guy "sliding over" has to play actual defense.