Cumulative Net Points, etc. - Why we won, or didn't | Syracusefan.com

Cumulative Net Points, etc. - Why we won, or didn't

SWC75

Bored Historian
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
32,267
Like
62,385
This is our record when winning each stat and when losing each stat, with a winning percentage and the difference in winning percentages.

2021-22
Team Offensive Possession Efficiency 16-0 0-17 1.000 – 0.000 = +1.000
Adjusted Possession Efficiency 13-3 3-14 0.8125 – 0.176 = +0.7949
Team Shooting Efficiency 14-2 2-15 0.875 – 0.118 = +0.757
Points scored/potential points 14-4 2-13 0.778 – 0.133 = +0.645
Starters 16-11 0-5 0.593 – 0.000 = +0.593
Two-pointers 12-3 4-13 0.800 – 0.235 = +0.565
Manufactured Possessions 10-2 6-15 0.833 – 0.286 = +0.547
Three-pointers 13-6 3-11 0.684 – 0.214 = +0.470
Effective Offensive Rebounding 12-9 1-7 0.571 – 0.125 = +0.446
First Chance Points 13-7 3-10 0.650 – 0.231 = +0.419
Fouls 9-3 7-14 0.750 – 0.333 = +0.417
Points per Takeover 11-5 5-12 0.6875 – 0.294 = +0.3935
Unsettled Situations 11-5 5-12 0.6875 – 0.294 = +0.3935
PIP “The Inner Sanctum” 12-6 4-10 0.667 – 0.286 = +0.381
Assist Percentage 4-1 12-16 0.800 – 0.429 = +0.371
Second Chance Points 9-4 6-12 0.692 – 0.333 = +0.359
Points outside the paint (POP) 9-6 7-11 0.600 – 0.389 = +0.211
Trey “The Outer Limits” 9-5 7-9 0.643 – 0.4375 = +0.2055
“The Twilight Zone” 9-8 4-7 0.529 – 0.364 = +0.165
Free-Throws 10-8 6-9 0.556 – 0.400 = +0.156
Rebounding 7-7 9-10 0.500 – 0.474 = +0.026
Fast Break Percentage 5-6 11-11 0.455 – 0.500 = -0.045
Bench Scoring 0-1 16-16 0.000 – 0.500 = -0.500

Comments: My big takeaway from this is that Jim Boeheim is right – you’ve got to make shots. There is no more important statistic, not even rebounds or turnovers. Oh, an the way the game is called does seem to matter.

I’ll be dropping some of these stats next year for various reasons. The conventional offensive efficiency rating is available form other sources and is always won by the team that won that game, (there was one exception in the last six years, below, due to rounding). It’s more of a reflection of who won the game rather than a cause. I’ll go with my ‘adjusted’ efficiency rating, which deleted subtracting offensive rebounds and adding turnovers, thus considering them as separate possessions. That produces a number that can sometimes be lost by the winning team and tells you more about what happened in the game.

I think I’ll drop Starters and Bench points. They are easily computed and read, respectively and it seems obvious that we need to win the first stat and will lose the second.

I think I’ll drop ‘Effective Offensive Rebounding’ and ‘Points Per Takeover” which are both represented in ‘Unsettled Situations’. What I’m trying to measure is a team’s response when they suddenly have to respond to a failure to obtain or maintain control of the ball and have to play defense when they didn’t expect to. And I needn’t list ‘Second Chance Points’, which are part of the box score. “First Chance Points” is the hidden statistic – how did we do in our opening sets?

‘PIP’, or ‘Points in the Paint’ is in the box score but I want to compare it to ‘POP’ or ‘Points Outside The Paint’ so I’ll continue to keep track of it. I may drop the “Twilight Zone” designation.

I’ll continue to keep track of assist percentage. We tend to get fewer of them but I’m amazed that that stat, over 6 years, has been a better predictor or victory than rebounding, at least the way I compute the latter, (what percentage of each teams misses wind up as offensive rebounds). We don’t do either very well and we tend to win games when we win those stats. It seems to make less difference when we lose the stat as we are more likely to do so.

There’s no need to have two stats for three pointers, so I’ll keep track of the shooting percentage, not the total, (which I have to compete for the shooting percent age anyway.) Fast Break percentage doesn’t seem to matter much, either. It just seems to make me lament the passing of the old days.

I’ve retained these numbers for the last six seasons. Here is their overall ranking over that period:
Offensive Possession Efficiency 113-1 1-83 0.991 – 0.012 = +0.979
Shooting Efficiency 68-5 4-50 0.932 – 0.074 = +0.858
Starters 106-28 3-53 0.791 – 0.054 = +0.737
Points scored/potential points 84-15 11-52 0.848 – 0.175 = +0.673
Adjusted Possession Efficiency 60-9 12-46 0.870 – 0.207 = +0.663
Two-pointers 80-19 26-63 0.808 – 0.292 = +0.516
Manufactured Possessions 81-19 27-63 0.810 – 0.300 = +0.510
Points outside the paint (POP) 78-18 29-64 0.8125 – 0.312 = +0.5005
Three-pointers 84-20 31-59 0.808 – 0.344 = +0.464
PIP “The Inner Sanctum” 75-25 28-54 0.750 – 0.341 = +0.409
Assist Percentage 48-10 60-71 0.828 – 0.458 = +0.370
Rebounding 58-18 52-67 0.763 – 0.437 = +0.326
Points per Takeover 76-30 29-54 0.717 – 0.349 = +0.368
Unsettled Situations 75-32 19-36 0.701 – 0.345 = +0.356
First Chance Points 76-31 32-54 0.710 – 0.372 = +0.338
Trey “The Outer Limits” 41-14 29-37 0.745 – 0.439 = +0.306
Fouls 66-27 44-58 0.710 – 0.431 = +0.279
Effective Offensive Rebounding 76-40 30-44 0.655 – 0.405 = +0.250
Fast Break Percentage 44-20 28-33 0.6875 – 0.459 = +0.2285
“The Twilight Zone” 73-36 28-33 0.670 – 0.459 = +0.211
Free-Throws 59-36 30-32 0.621 – 0.484 = +0.137
Second Chance Points 56-38 47-46 0.596 – 0.505 = +0.091
Bench Scoring 35-21 71-61 0.625 – 0.538 = +0.087
 
We failed because:
our bench could not score
we did not have a dominant player
the highest volume shooter did not have a high percentage
there were some unfairly refereed games
when under pressure our point guard's handle was exposed
Our starting center was injured
our small foward took half a season to develop
Our power foward was not a good passer
Coaching was not a reason for failing.
We went after a lot of high ranked recruits but struck out too often
we lost too much talent in the transfer pool.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
167,128
Messages
4,681,809
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
304
Guests online
2,144
Total visitors
2,448


Top Bottom