Rick Issanza (C, 7'1", 225) to visit

[superjohn]

Against stronger competition, his play can be summarized as: much worse. His finishing was significantly worse in the toughest games and the stats back it up. He shot 75% in easy games (16 games), and 40% in KenPom A+B games (17 games).

He could benefit more than any other player from gaining strength and explosiveness. He's never going to be a great athlete but it looks like Alosi has him lifting some serious weights to get him more ready to hold his position and to finish around the tin.

 

[auror]

He could benefit more than any other player from gaining strength and explosiveness. He's never going to be a great athlete but it looks like Alosi has him lifting some serious weights to get him more ready to hold his position and to finish around the tin.

For sure. His footwork is pretty good already, and I liked him starting to dunk a lot last year. But he didn't get those same dunks against the better teams, because he doesn't have the explosion and better defenders either weren't fooled or weren't overpowered.

 

[selles]

This is the type of comparison that the stat win shares helps enlighten. The share of credit that a player earns based on the team's actual wins and his individual share of that production. So comparing larger role/production on mediocre/bad team to quieter role on very good team is possible.

Sports-Reference has only Knight's last season in the database unfortunately, and he earned 1.4 offensive and 4.4 defensive win shares. Carlton (as a sophomore) earned 1.7 offensive and 1.2 defensive win shares. Both these numbers line up with my eye test in light of their respective contexts, with maybe Carlton's d being slightly overrated.

As far as relative competition quality, both had 4 non-UConn NCAA tournament teams from the respective conferences. Big East had a FF, E8, and 2 2nd rounds for 10 wins total. AAC had a S16, 2nd round, 1st round, and first four for measly 3 wins (Though all 4 of Temple, Cincy, UCF, and Houston led at some point in the last 10 minutes of their losses and gacked them away). Clear edge to Big East, but the fact that both got 4 non-UConn teams into the dance shows the leagues were a little closer than some might expect. The main difference between the conferences is that one had good UConn on top of those other teams, and one didn't. Plus a lucky Syracuse F4 run.

Knight was much worse on offense as a sophomore than as a senior, though. He took 1/3 less shots and he made them at a much worse clip (so both usage and efficiency were worse). An eFG of .439 is also very not good. He'd be in the 0.0-0.2 offensive win share range based on similar players. His defensive block rate was about the same, but his foul rate was double and his rebound rate was 33% worse. The actual team's defense was a few points per game worse, too, though still outstanding, and he played only half the minutes compared to as a senior. So if we adjust that 4.4 figure down (for possession share 4.4 -> 2.2, team d wins -> 2.0, and performance stats ->1.4), we end up with an estimated 1.4 defensive win shares, for a total of about ~1.6 win shares.

So that's 1.6 win shares vs. 2.9 win shares for Carlton. However, we have to consider Carlton's higher minutes played. If you take it as ws/40, Carlton is at .158 ws/40 and Knight would be around .164 ws/40. Very, very close, with Knight earning the edge and the competition advantage widening his lead a bit more. And I think that's pretty much where we landed as a board consensus. Knight was a bit better on a much better team, but didn't have as big a role and wasn't as outwardly productive. Let's hope Carlton's career finishes with just as much improvement as Knight's did.

There's an assumption underlying several posts in this thread that Travis didn't play much as a sophomore because he was behind really good players. That's not remotely true.

Travis didn't play much as a sophomore because he wasn't good. He was gangly and foul-prone and soft. He couldn't beat out Eric Hayward, who was maybe 6'6" on his tiptoes and not particularly skilled. 1994 was a donut team and there were plenty of post minutes to be had. Travis wasn't good enough to take them.

This whole soph Carlton vs soph Knight discussion is academic because Knight improved so much between his sophomore and junior years that it would be unreasonable to expect Carlton to improve to the same degree. Comparing their sophomore years isn't at all useful for predicting Carlton's future.

But so long as we're having the academic discussion, let's give Josh his due. Sophomore Carlton was better than sophomore Knight, and it's not a close call.

 

[auror]

This whole soph Carlton vs soph Knight discussion is academic because Knight improved so much between his sophomore and junior years that it would be unreasonable to expect Carlton to improve to the same degree. Comparing their sophomore years isn't at all useful for predicting Carlton's future.

Josh kinda already had that increase. His freshman to sophomore year improvement was immense. I'd be surprised if he improved that much again. BUT, if he does, we're in really good shape. Even if it's only an incremental increase, he'll be an All-League player assuming the team improves as well..

 

[David 76]

OK
1 level of competition
2 Carlton gained from additional playing time in a weaker team

But I would just say we don't really know yet.

 

[CL82]

Can we at least change the name of this thread to:
Is Josh Carlton better than Travis Knight (and some stuff about a former prospect that we don't care about anymore.)

 

[UconnFanDC]

Against stronger competition, his play can be summarized as: much worse. His finishing was significantly worse in the toughest games and the stats back it up. He shot 75% in easy games (16 games), and 40% in KenPom A+B games (17 games).

You said it best!

 

[Towney007]

I don't know why everyone's so apoplectic about this thread. It's actually a fun discussion.

 

[Towney007]

There's an assumption underlying several posts in this thread that Travis didn't play much as a sophomore because he was behind really good players. That's not remotely true.

Travis didn't play much as a sophomore because he wasn't good. He was gangly and foul-prone and soft. He couldn't beat out Eric Hayward, who was maybe 6'6" on his tiptoes and not particularly skilled. 1994 was a donut team and there were plenty of post minutes to be had. Travis wasn't good enough to take them.

This whole soph Carlton vs soph Knight discussion is academic because Knight improved so much between his sophomore and junior years that it would be unreasonable to expect Carlton to improve to the same degree. Comparing their sophomore years isn't at all useful for predicting Carlton's future.

But so long as we're having the academic discussion, let's give Josh his due. Sophomore Carlton was better than sophomore Knight, and it's not a close call.

This is a pretty fair take.

 

[Chief00]

There's an assumption underlying several posts in this thread that Travis didn't play much as a sophomore because he was behind really good players. That's not remotely true.

Travis didn't play much as a sophomore because he wasn't good. He was gangly and foul-prone and soft. He couldn't beat out Eric Hayward, who was maybe 6'6" on his tiptoes and not particularly skilled. 1994 was a donut team and there were plenty of post minutes to be had. Travis wasn't good enough to take them.

This whole soph Carlton vs soph Knight discussion is academic because Knight improved so much between his sophomore and junior years that it would be unreasonable to expect Carlton to improve to the same degree. Comparing their sophomore years isn't at all useful for predicting Carlton's future.

But so long as we're having the academic discussion, let's give Josh his due. Sophomore Carlton was better than sophomore Knight, and it's not a close call.

Calhoun saw NBA potential in Travis early on. True, he wasn’t there yet in year 1 or 2 but Jim saw something there.

 

[pj]

Calhoun saw NBA potential in Travis early on. True, he wasn’t there yet in year 1 or 2 but Jim saw something there.

Everyone saw something - a guy 7' tall who had a nice looking shot, although it disappeared in games for the first few years (nerves?), and a good frame and good speed up and down the court, who could rebound and make outlet passes. It just took him a while to put his game together and gain confidence. With so many great players on the court with him and a coach with a temper and quick hook, it's not too surprising that some players might be overly deferential and nervous until they build their game to a high level.

 

[Palatine]

The competition was much stronger and more frequent. What I've seen Josh do against the weaker opponents was impressive but I can not say much about what he's done against stronger competition. I do not dislike Josh but I'm not completely sold.

What that doesn't account for is that Knight played with a much stronger team around him. So while Josh played against weaker competition, he did it with much less help.

Knight played in the front courts with the like of Donyell Marshall. Ray Allen as a swing man. Ollie on point. Donny Marshall for a while. Ricky Moore came in. He was never the focus of the defense as Josh was late this year.

I'm not taking anything away from Travis. He was a very skilled big guy who could run. Great Husky. But we keep putting Josh down for his competition when he was surrounded by much less.

 

[husky429]

What that doesn't account for is that Knight played with a much stronger team around him. So while Josh played against weaker competition, he did it with much less help.

Knight played in the front courts with the like of Donyell Marshall. Ray Allen as a swing man. Ollie on point. Donny Marshall for a while. Ricky Moore came in. He was never the focus of the defense as Josh was late this year.

I'm not taking anything away from Travis. He was a very skilled big guy who could run. Great Husky. But we keep putting Josh down for his competition when he was surrounded by much less.

Really hard to judge bigs now compared to even 10 years ago. The game is so different than it used to be. Josh's post up ability isn't as valued as it used to be. In 2002, he'd have been more highly regarded.

Rims runs, rebounding, and outlets. PnR coverage and setting screens are the name of the game... and that's not really Josh's strength.

I think jake V would have THRIVED in 2019 for example.

 

[UconnFanDC]

What that doesn't account for is that Knight played with a much stronger team around him. So while Josh played against weaker competition, he did it with much less help.

Knight played in the front courts with the like of Donyell Marshall. Ray Allen as a swing man. Ollie on point. Donny Marshall for a while. Ricky Moore came in. He was never the focus of the defense as Josh was late this year.

I'm not taking anything away from Travis. He was a very skilled big guy who could run. Great Husky. But we keep putting Josh down for his competition when he was surrounded by much less.

I sincerely wish Josh a best and productive Uconn career. As a Husky fan, I'm over comparing players. I honestly just want to win and want the players to have a great season(s)

 

[Towney007]

What that doesn't account for is that Knight played with a much stronger team around him. So while Josh played against weaker competition, he did it with much less help.

Knight played in the front courts with the like of Donyell Marshall. Ray Allen as a swing man. Ollie on point. Donny Marshall for a while. Ricky Moore came in. He was never the focus of the defense as Josh was late this year.

I'm not taking anything away from Travis. He was a very skilled big guy who could run. Great Husky. But we keep putting Josh down for his competition when he was surrounded by much less.

Yeah this is a good point and opposite mine so fair play. That does put a new spin on it. I’d still rather have Knight and I think more of him across the board, but this is perfectly reasonable.

 

[Chief00]

Yeah this is a good point and opposite mine so fair play. That does put a new spin on it. I’d still rather have Knight and I think more of him across the board, but this is perfectly reasonable.

Chief got to know Travis well over the years and good natured kidding him about his Odd Couple freshman year roommate situation with Trey34. Travis was the slop and Ray meticulously neat.