Net Point, etc. - Notre Dame

[SWC75]

I will again be doing a report after each game this season and a summary report at the end of the non-conference season, the ACC season and the post season.

Net Points
(points + rebounds + assists + steals + blocks minus missed field goals and free throws, turnovers and personal fouls)

Marek Dolezaj +21NP in 40 minutes = +186/462 = +16.1NP/40 for season
Buddy Boeheim +20NP in 40 minutes = +148/480 = +12.3NP/40 for season
Elijah Hughes +17NP in 40 minutes = +262/525 = +20.0NP/40 for season
Joe Girard +16NP in 34 minutes = +152/423 = +14.4NP/40 for season
Quincy Guerrier +13NP in 17 minutes = +63/232 = +10.9NP/40 for season
Howard Washington +2NP in 6 minutes = +25/66 = +15.2NP/40 for season
Bourama Sidibie +1NP in 22 minutes = +120/338 = +14.2NP/40 for season

DNP coach’s decision
Jesse Edwards 0NP in 0 minutes = +34/73 = +18.6NP/40 for season
Brycen Goodine 0NP in 0 minutes = +3/114 = +1.2NP/40 for season

Injured
Robert Braswell 0NP in 0 minutes = +13/48 = +10.8NP/40 for season
Jalen Carey 0NP in 0 minutes = -3/23 = -5.2NP/40 for season

Suspended
None

Redshirting
John Bol Ajak

Out for the year
None

Left Team
None


Awards

Offensive Dude of the Game, (O-Dog)
(Points plus assists)
Buddy Boeheim 23 points + 4 assists = 27

Shooting Efficiency
(Points minus missed field goal and free throw attempts)
Buddy Boeheim 23 points – 8 mfg – 0 mft = +15

Scoring Efficiency
(Percentage of points scored divided by points they would have scored if they made every shot- minimum 10 possible points)
Quincy Guerrier 10 points of 11 = 90.9%

Sat Us Down
(Who scored the first SU basket of each half?)
1st Half- Buddy Boeheim trey at 19:00 2nd Half- Marek Dolezaj lay-up at 19:11

TACO Bell MVP
(Who scored the point that got us to 70, which gets you free tacos with your ticket stub)
Joe Girard free throw at 5:24

My Man
(Who played the most minutes?)
Buddy Boeheim, Marek Dolezaj and Elijah Hughes 40 minutes


TEAM STATS

Possession

Rebounding
(Add each team’s offensive rebounds to their opponent’s defensive rebounds. Then figure the offensive rebounds as a percentage of that)
We rebounded 13 of our 35 misses = 37.1%
They rebounded 17 of their 40 misses = 42.5%

Effective Offensive Rebounding
(Divide second chance points by the offensive rebounds)
We got 14 points on 13 O-Rebs = 1.077 points/O-Reb
They got 24 points on 17 O-Rebs = 1.412 points/O-Reb

Unforced Turnovers
(Total turnovers – the other team’s steals = unforced turnovers)
We had 11 turnovers – 4 steals = 7 unforced
They had 9 turnovers – 4 steals = 5 unforced

Points per Takeover
(Points off turnovers divided by the number of turnovers the other team had)
We had 9 points from 9 takeovers = 1.000 points/takeaway
They had 21 points from 11 takeovers = 1.909 points/takeaway

Unsettled Situations
(Effective offensive rebounding + Points per Takeover: [Second Chance Point s+ Points off Turnovers] divided by [Offensive Rebounds + Opposition Turnovers)
We had 23 points in 22 unsettled situations = 1.045 points
They had 45 points in 28 unsettled situations = 1.607 points

Manufactured Possessions
(One teams rebounds + the other team’s turnovers)
We had 36 + 9 = 45
They had 39 + 11 = 50

Hustle Stats
One of the radio sponsors gives an award to the team that had the most “hustle stats”, which they define as rebounds + steals + blocks. I decided to keep track of that, too:
We had 36 + 4 + 6 = 46
They had 39 + 4 + 4= 47

Scoring

Shooting
(Shots made and attempted and the percentage for two point goal attempts, three point attempts and free throws)
We were 16 for 33 on twos, (48.5%), 15 for 31 on threes (48.4%) and 10 for 13 on frees (76.9%)
They were 16 for 38 on twos, (42.1%), 15 for 31 on threes (48.4%) and 11 for 15 on frees (73.3%)
Combined percentages were: 1738 (485 + 484 + 769) vs. 1638 (421 + 484 + 733) = +100

Points
(PIP= points in the paint, “The Inner Sanctum”
POP = points outside the paint, which is total points – PIP -free throws made
OL= points from “The Outer Limits” (three point shots)
TZ= “Twilight Zone”, which is POP – TREY, (two point jumpers from outside the paint)
FBP = fast break points
POTO= points off turnovers

We had 26 PIP, 51 POP, 45 OL, 6 TZ, 9 POTO, 14 FBP
They had 26 PIP, 51 POP, 45 OL, 6 TZ, 21 POTO, 10 FBP

Fast Break Percentage
(FBP/(defensive rebounds + blocks + steals)
We scored 14 FBP in 33 opportunities (42.4%)
They scored 10 FBP in 37 opportunities (33.3%)

First Chance/Second Chance
(FCP is First Chance Points, which is total points - second chance points – fast break points – free throws made. SCP is second chance points.)
We had 49 FCP and 14 SCP
They had 43 FCP and 24 SCP

Starters/Bench
(Total points – bench points = starters points)
Our starters scored 77 points and our bench scored 10 points
Their starters scored 77 points and their bench scored 11 points

Assists
(The percentage of a team’s baskets that were assisted)
We assisted 20 of our 31 field goals = 64.5%
They assisted 26 of their 31 field goals = 83.9%

Team Offensive Possession Efficiency
(Possessions: Field goals attempted - offensive rebounds + turnovers + 47.5% of free throws attempted. Efficiency is total points divided by possessions)
We scored 87 points in 68 possessions = 1.261 points/ possession
They scored 88 points in 68 possessions = 1.294 points/possession
It was a 136 possession game.

If we just use FGA + (47.5% FTA) and thus count an offensive rebound as an additional possession and a turnover as a lost possession:
We scored 87 points in 70 possessions = 1.213 points/ possession
They scored 88 points in 76 possessions = 1.158 points/possession

Team Shooting Efficiency

(Points minus missed field goals and free throws)

We scored 87 points, missed 33 field goals and missed 3 free throws = net +50
They scored 88 points, missed 38 field goals and missed 4 free throws = net +46

(Points scored divided by potential points scored if we’d made every shot)

We scored 87 on 33 two point attempts, 31 three point attempts and 13 free throw attempts = 87 of a possible 172 points = 50.6% of possible points scored.
They scored 88 on 38 two point attempts, 31 three point attempts and 15 free throw attempts = 88 of possible 184 points = 47.8% of possible points scored.

Breakdown by Quarters
(Points scored between the beginning of the game and the 10 minute mark of the first half, then halftime, then the 10 minute mark of the second half, the end of regulation and then overtime of there was one)

18-23, 22-14, 16-27, 31-24

Fouls

(Two point shots and free throws attempted per times fouled.)
We attempted 33 two point shots, attempted 13 free throws and were fouled 11 times = 3.00; 1.18
They attempted 38 two point shots, attempted 15 free throws and were fouled 13 times = 2.92; 1.15
They were more likely to get calls when attempting two point shots but we got more shots per foul. However the difference was minimal – except for the fact that we lost the game by the margin of a made free throw.


Comments

- Here’s the stat that stands out like the Matterhorn in the analysis of where this game was lost: Unsettled Situations, (offensive rebounds and turnovers and the points scored as a result. It’s often a predictor of outcomes. We had 14 second chance points form 13 offensive rebounds and 9 points off 9 turnovers so a combined 23 points in 22 situations = 1.045, which is actually a respectable stat, (we at 1.050 for the season). Notre Dame had 24 points off of 17 offensive rebounds and 21 points off of 11 turnovers. That’s 45 points in 28 unsettled situations = 1.607! (Our opponents this year have averaged 1.006.) So we were -22 points when there was an offensive rebound or turnover. The question is not: Why did we lose? The question is: why was it even close?

- It’s tough to find an area we dominated that would answer that question. Ironically, it’s not the area you would think: We shot 48.5% from two point range to their 42.1% and had the same number of points in the paint, 26-26, despite John Mooney’s dominance inside. You’d have to think that having a guy who could score so easily down low would be a big reason for their advantage in those unsettled situations. And I do think that a player like Mooney is an advantage. Not re Dame could get a turnover or a rebound and dump it down to Mooney and convert with relative ease. We rebound a miss and we have trouble putting it back up, much less in.

- We had the same number of two point field goals and three point field goals as Notre Dame and missed fewer shots. We had the same number of points in the paint, (PIP) and points outside the paint, (POP). We scored the same number of points from the Inner Sanctum, (the paint), the Outer Limits, (three pointers) and the Twilight Zone, (the area in between).Both team’s starters scored 77 points. Their bench scored 11 to our 10. We lost by the margin of one fewer free throw – and our free throw percentage was higher than theirs (76.9%-73.3%) and we missed fewer free throws, too. The refs called two more fouls on us. It would have been even if Hughes and Girard had had gotten their calls in the last minute. But the score wouldn’t have bene even, because they would have won the game for us from the foul line.

 

[tbonezone]

mooney had his usual double double. WHY ? the dude has what our bigs have lacked for several seasons. HANDS.

(although i'll admit while effective i don't get the hitch in his shot.)