SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,997
- Like
- 65,592
I’ll continue doing a statistical analysis of games this year with some of the off-beat numbers I like to look at. I’ll post them after each game, probably the next day.
The first thing I’ll look at is “NET POINTS”. The idea is that each statistic in the box score is arguably worth a point, (that is, somewhere between 0.5 and 1.5 points). A point is a point. Teams score an average of a point per possession so anything that gets you possession is a point. A missed shot will more often than not wind up in the possession of the other team. Most baskets are for two points so if the passer who set up the shot is given half credit, that’s worth a point. One half of the blocked shots will likely have gone in and they are almost always two pointers, so that’s a point. If you add up the “positives”, (points, + rebounds + assists + steals + blocks) and subtract the “negatives”, (missed field goals, missed free throws, turnovers and fouls), you have a number that summarizes a player’s statistical contributions to a game. Then, by averaging the net points per 40 minutes of play, you factor out differences in playing time and have a look at the player’s rate of production. Both are important. The game is won based on what you actually did, not the rate at which you did it. But the rate is a better measure of the skills you can bring to the game.
Of course, there are things players do both on and off the court that contribute to victory. Leadership, hard work, keeping the team loose, scrambling for loose balls, (that could be a statistic: when neither team is in control of the ball, who winds up with it?), sneaker-sneaker defense, keeping the ball moving on offense, etc. etc. My experience is that with rare exceptions, the players who are the most statistically productive are the ones who grade highest in the things not measured by statistics, as well.
Here are the NET POINTS of our scholarship players in the most recent game and their averages per 40 minutes of play for the season, (exhibitions games not included):
(Note: This covers the Clemson and North Carolina games.)
Tyler Roberson had 32 net points in 72 minutes, has 178 NP in 526 minutes for the season = 13.5NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 388 minutes = 12.9NP/40. Conference: 53NP in 138 minutes = 15.4NP/40.
Trevor Cooney had 32 net points in 82 minutes, has 166 NP in 637 minutes for the season = 10.4NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 480 minutes = 10.4NP/40 Conference: 41 NP in 157 minutes = 10.4NP/40.
Mal Richardson had 29 net points in 78 minutes, has 148 NP in 555 minutes for the season = 10.7NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 96 NP in 410 minutes = 9.4NP/40. Conference: 52NP in 145 minutes = 14.3NP/40.
Michael Gbinije had 14 net points in 79 minutes, has 238 NP in 643 minutes for the season = 14.8NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 226 NP in 486 minutes =18.6NP/40. Conference: 12 NP in 157 minutes = 3.1 per 40.
DaJuan Coleman had 12 net points in 40 minutes, has 92 NP in 272 minutes for the season = -13.5NP/40
Pre-Conference: 84 NP in 200 minutes = 16.8NP/40. Conference: 8 NP in 72 minutes = 4.4 per 40.
Tyler Lydon had 7 net points in 61 minutes, has 224 NP in 542 minutes for the season = 16.5NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 198 NP in 421 minutes =18.8NP/40. Conference: 26 NP in 121 minutes = 8.6NP/40.
Chinoso Obokoh had 1 net points in 1 minutes, has 9 NP in 51 minutes for the season = 7.1NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 8 NP in 39 minutes = 8.2 NP/40. Conference: 1 NP in 12 minutes = 3.3NP/40.
Franklin Howard had -1 net points in 5 minutes, has 16 NP in 103 minutes for the season = 6.2NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 19 NP in 93 minutes = 8.2NP/40. Conference: -3 NP in 10 minutes =-12.0NP/40.
Kaleb Joseph had -1 net points in 7 minutes, has 9 NP in 109 minutes for the season = 3.3NP/40
Pre-Conference: 14 in 96 minutes = 5.8NP/40. Conference: -5 NP in 13 minutes = -15.4 per 40.
DNP-CD
None
INJURED
None
SUSPENDED
None
Comments: I decided to break out pre-conference net points and conference net points. Then I decided to look at the difference after four games:
Richardson 9.4 then 14.3 difference: +4.9
Roberson 12.9 then 15.4 = +2.5
Cooney 10.4 then 10.4 = Even
Obokoh 8.2 then 3.3 = -4.9
Lydon 18.8 then 8.6 = -10.2
Coleman 16.8 then 4.4 =-12.4
Gbinije 18.6 then 3.1 = -15.5
Howard 8.2 then -12.0 = -20.2
Joseph 5.8 then -15.4 = -21.2
The “two R’s” have upped their game for conference play but no one else has. Cooney was gre4at vs. UNC but sub-par in the prior games. Lydon, Coleman and especially Gbini9je have struggled. Howard and Joseph aren’t making an impact and Obokoh has hardly played.
Michael Gbinije has led us in net points 8 times, Mal Richardson 4 times, Tyler Lydon 3 times, Tyler Roberson 2 times, DaJuan Coleman 1 time. Tyler Roberson had the highest score with 29 net points.
The Other Stats:
POSSESSION
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 28 offensive and 50 defensive rebounds. They had 16 offensive and 39 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball 28 of 78 times, (35.9%). When they missed, they got the ball 16 out of 55 times, (29.1%).
Pre-conference: We rebounded 33.3% of our misses to 36.3% for the opposition and did better in 6 of 13 games.
Conference: We’ve rebounded 31.8% of our misses to 35.6% for the opposition and have done better in 2 of 4 games with one even.
Total: We’ve rebounded 32.9% of our misses to 36.1% for the opposition and did better in 8 of 17 games with one even. .
Effective offensive rebounding: We got 26 second chance points off our 28 offensive rebounds ,0.929 points per rebound. They got 25 for their 16= 1.5625.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 0.956 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.928. We led in this stat 9 times in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 0.812 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 1.106. We’ve led in this stat 3 times in 4 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 0.923 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.965. We’ve led in this stat 12 times in 17 games.
Of our 21 turnovers, 12 were their steals and 99 were our own miscues. Of their 23 turnovers, 16 were Syracuse steals and 7 were their fault. In the pre-conference schedule It’s an important area as one of the ideas behind the zone is that we will make up for a rebounding deficit with a favorable turnover margin.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 12 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 14 turnovers and 5 unforced for the opposition. We had fewer turnovers in 8 games but fewer unforced turnovers in only 3 games with 1 even of 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 12.5 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 11 turnovers and 4 unforced for the opposition. We’ve had fewer turnovers in 1 games and fewer unforced turnovers in 0 games of 4 games.
Total: We averaged 12 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 14 turnovers and 5 unforced for the opposition. We had fewer turnovers in 9 games but fewer unforced turnovers in only 3 games with 1 even of 17 games.
If you add our 67 rebounds to their 23 turnovers, we had 100 “manufactured possessions”. They had 66 + 21 = 87. In the pre-conference season We are normally well ahead of our early opponents in this stat.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 52 MP to 50. We won this battle 7 times with 1 even in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 44 MP to 50. We’ve won this battle 1 times in 4 games
Total: We’ve averaged 50 MP to 50. We’ve won this battle 8 times with 1 even in 17 games
SHOOTING
It’s still what the game is all about. We were 29 for 60, (.483) inside the arc, 22 for 65, (.338) outside it and 22 for 31, (.710) from the line. They were 49 for 80 (.625), 11 for 33 (.333) and 27/31 (.871).
Pre-Conference: We were .482/.355/.681. Our opposition was .444/.333/.636. We led in two point field goal percentage in 8 games, in three point field goals percentage in 8 games, and in free throw percentage in 7 games with 1 even out of 13 games.
Conference: We are .478/.333/.657. Our opposition is .573/.247/.795. We’ve led in two point field goal percentage in 0 games, in three point field goals percentage in 3 games, and in free throw percentage in 0 games out of 4 games.
Total: We are .481/.350/.676. Our opposition was .475/.305/.685. We led in two point field goal percentage in 8 games, in three point field goals percentage in 11 games, and in free throw percentage in 7 games with 1 even in 17 games
We had 44 points in the paint (PIP), 19 off turnovers (POTO), 26 “second chance” points (SCP), 16 fast break points (FBP) and 6 from the bench (BP). Our opposition had 86 points in the paint, 36 off turnovers, 25 “second chance” points, 10 fast break points and 46 from the bench. We also had 82 of Pat’s “first chance points” (FCP) (total points minus second chance points, fast break points and made free throws) to 96.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 26-28 PIP, 16-11 POTO, 39-35 FCP, 12-13 SCP, 7-6 FBP and 14-17 BP. We led in PIP 7 times, POTO 10 times,(and the last 8 in a row), FCP 6 times with 2 even, SCP 5 times with 2 even, FBP 8 times, and BP 5 times with 1 even in 13 games .
Conference: We averaged 22-37.5 PIP, 9.5-17.5 POTO, 37.5-34 FCP, 9.75-13.0 SCP, 5.75-9 FBP and 4.5-23.75 BP. We led in PIP 0 times, POTO 0 times, FCP 2 times, SCP 2 times, FBP 1 times with 1 even, and BP 0 times in 4 games.
Total: We averaged 25-30 PIP, 18-13 POTO, 38-35 FCP, 11-13 SCP, 7-7 FBP and 12-19 BP. We led in PIP 7 times, POTO 10 times, FCP 8 times with 2 even, SCP 7 times with 2 even, FBP 9 times with 1 even, and BP 5 times with 1 even in 17 games.
We had 146 points, 44 in the paint, 66 from the arc and 22 from the line so we had 80 ”POP”, (points outside the paint: 146-44-22) and scored 8 points, (80 POP-66 from the arc), from what I’ll call the Twilight Zone”: that area between the paint and the arc that is the land of the pull-up jump shot, a lost art but a great weapon. They had 158/86/33/27 = 45 POP with 12 from the Twilight Zone.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 31 POP and 5 TZ, our opposition 24/4. We led in POP 8 times. We led in TZ points 7 times with 1 tie in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 31 POP and 5.5 TZ, our opposition 18.5/3. We’ve led in POP 3 times and in TZ points 3 times with 1 even in 4 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 31 POP and 5 TZ, our opposition 23/4. We’ve led in POP 11times and in TZ points 10 times with 2 even in 17 games.
32 of our 51 baskets were assisted (.627) and 46 of their 60 (.767). Assists tend to come more often from jump shots than lay-ups or dunks so the more assists you get, the more you are settling for jump shots to try to win the game which is often a bad strategy but, as JB says, is the way we have to play this year because of our personnel. In the pre-season we mostly played teams that had to do that even more than we did. In the conference we are playing some very good internal passing teams that are working the high-low game on us and getting assists that way.
Pre-Conference: We assisted 59.2% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 71.6% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 9 games with one even in 13 games.
Conference: We assisted 58.4% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 71.6% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 2 games out of 4 games.
Total: We assisted 59.1% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 71.6% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 11 games with 1 even in 17 games.
You compute possessions by taking field goal attempts – offensive rebounds + turnovers plus 47.5% of free throws attempted and dividing that into the number of points. We were 125 FGA - 28 OREBs + 21 TOs + (.475 x 31) = 132.725 possessions. They were 113 -16+ 23+ (.475 x 31) = 134.725 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one per game off, I’ll count that as 133 possessions for us and 134 for them. There were 267 combined possessions in these games, 133.5 per game.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 134 combined possessions per game.
Conference: We’ve averaged 130 combined possessions per game.
Total: We’ve averaged 133 combined possessions per game.
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” by dividing the points scored by the number of possessions. We scored 146 points in 133 possessions (1.098). They scored 158 points in 134 possessions (1.179).
Pre-Conference: We averaged 1.091 points per possession to 0.959 for the opposition. We won this stat in 10 of 13 games, (the winning team always wins this stat).
Conference: We’ve averaged 0.985 points per possession to 1.122 for the opposition. We’ve lost the stat in all 4 games, (the winning team always wins this stat).
Total: We’ve averaged 1.066 points per possession to 0.996 for the opposition and have won the stat in
10 of 17 games.
Every other level of basketball plays quarters. To check the consistency of our performance, I look at what the score was at the 10 minute mark of each half to see what the quarterly scores would be. At a minimum, I think we want to score at least 15 points in each quarter and try to hold the opposition to less than that. The quarterly breakdown for these games: 35-37, 23-29, 37-34, 39-45 OT: 12-13
Pre-Conference: We averaged 16-14, 16-14, 20-18, 20-17 OT: 5-13 We won 31 of 52 quarters with 3 even. We scored 15 or more in 38 quarters and held the opposition under that 23 times.
Conference: We’ve averaged 15-16, 13-12, 16-19, 17-24.5 OT: 12-13. We’ve won 7 of 16 quarters . We’ve scored 15 or more in 10 quarters and held the opposition under that 5 times.
Total: We’ve averaged 16-14, 15-14, 19-18, 20-19 OT: 8.5-13. We’ve won 38 of 68 quarters with 3 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 48 quarters and held the opposition under that 28 times.
Hubert Davis once told us to “Get an offensive dude”. I decided to name an “Offensive Dude Of the Game, or an O-Dog, and use the hockey concept of points + assists. In these games our ODOG was:
Vs. Clemson Michael Gbinije 22 + 4 = 26
Vs. North Carolina Trevor Cooney 27 + 1 = 28
Michael Gbinije has been the O-Dog 14 times, Mal Richardson, Tyler Roberson and Trevor Cooney 1 time each.
I’ve thought of another stat to keep track of that also relates to individual offensive efficiency, although I’m sure there nothing all that new about it. I heard that Steph Curry had an amazing game in terms of the number of points he scored compared to the number of field goal attempts he had. I decided to compare the number of points scored to the number of shots taken, except I’ll include free throw attempts as they are shots, too. I originally thought of doing it on a percentage basis but a reserve who hit his only shot would out-rank a starter who scored 15 points on 10 shots. Instead I’ll keep track of the most points scored more than the number of shots- or the fewest points scored less than the number of shots if nobody has a positive number. I’ll call it “scoring efficiency”. In these games, the following players led us in scoring efficiency:
Vs. Clemson Tyler Roberson 14-12 -0 = +2
Vs. North Carolina Tyler Roberson 13 -5 – 4 = +4 and Trevor Cooney 27 – 21 – 2 = + 4
Michael Gbinije and Tyler Roberson have led in this stat 5 times, Tyler Lydon 3 times, Trevor Cooney twice and DaJuan Coleman, Kaleb Joseph and Mal Richardson once each. Gbinije had the best game a +13 Charlotte on 26 points vs. 9 for 11 from the field including 6 treys and 2 for 2 from the foul line. What I like about this stat is that two totally different players like Roberson and Cooney can tie for it. Against UNC Roberson scored 13 points on 5 for 5 shooting from the field, (with no three point attempts, thank good ness) and 3 for 4 from the foul line. Cooney was 10 for 21 from the field, (including 5 for 12 from the arc) and 2 for 2 from the foul line. Two very different lines but both are +4.
I also like to keep track who sits us down in each half. Besides being fun it gives an indication of who Coach B likes to design plays for since opening possessions are more likely to be scripted. In these games, these are the players who sat us down:
Vs. Clemson Tyler Roberson jumper after 41 seconds and Mal Richardson trey after 1:22
Vs. North Carolina Tyler Roberson jumper after 37 seconds and Trevor Cooney trey after 1:13
The average time we’ve had to wait is 1 minute 11 seconds. The shortest time has been 7 seconds in the second half of the Texas Southern game. The longest time is 4:51 in the second half against Georgetown. Mali Richardson has sat us down 11 times, Michael Gbinije 8 times, DaJuan Coleman 6 times, Trevor Cooney 5 times and Tyler Roberson 4 times. We’ve been sat down by 13 treys 5 lay-ups, 8 two point jumpers and two dunks. It’s interesting that Tyler Roberson has sat us down with those jump shots he used to miss in both of the last two games.
Another fun fact is the “Taco Bell MVP”: the guy who gets us to 70 points, (it used to be 75), so people can get free, (or is it discounted?) tacos at Taco Bell. These players got us tacos in these two games:
Vs. Clemson Trevor Cooney trey 24 seconds into overtime
Vs. North Carolina Tyler Roberson free throw with 1:03 left
Trevor Cooney has gotten us tacos 5 times, Michael Gbinije twice and DaJuan Coleman, Tyler Lydon and Tyler Roberson once. The average amount of time left in the game has been 3:49.
FOULS
My theory about fouls is that the team that attempts the most two point shots and scores the most in the paint will tend to get fouled the most. If the numbers are as predicted or close, there’s nothing to be read into them but if there’s a big disparity, it makes you wonder about how the game was called.
In these games, we attempted 60 two point shots to 80, scored 44 points in the paint to 86 and got fouled 32 times to 31, attempting 31 foul shots to 31. The ratio of two point attempts to times fouled was 1.9 for us and 2.6 for them. The ratio of points in the paint to times fouled was 1.4 for us to 2.8 for them. The ratio of free throw attempts to fouls called on the other team was 1.0 (actually 0.96875) for us and 1.0 for them.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 1.7 two point shots per foul, 1.3 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.2 two point shots per foul, 1.8 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.0 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 11 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 10 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 9 games out of 13 games. So numerically, the calls favored us.
Conference: We averaged 2.0 two point shots per foul, 1.4 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.3 two point shots per foul, 2.0 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.2 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 3 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 3 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 2 games out of 4 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.7 two point shots per foul, 1.3 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.1 two point shots per foul, 1.8 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.0 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 14 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 14 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 11 games out of 17 games.
“MY MAN”
A reporter once asked Casey Stengel how come he won so many games with the Yankees. He said “Because I never play a game without “my man”. The reporter wondered who his man was. Casey suggested “You could look it up.” The reporter did look it up and found that Yogi Berra had played in every game that season at some positon: catcher, left field, pinch-hitting, something. He was the player Stengel had the highest regard for and the most trust in, so he didn’t want to do without him.
Who is Jim Boeheim’s “man” this season? The only way to tell is to see who plays the most minutes each game. In these games the following players played the most minutes:
Vs. Clemson Trevor Cooney (8) and Mal Richardson 43 minutes (1)
Vs. North Carolina Trevor Cooney 39 minutes (9)
A senior has been “the man” in every game, (although Mal Richardson tied Cooney in one). Michael Gbinije and Trevor Cooney have played the most minutes 9 times, and Mal Richardson once (with two ties.)
The first thing I’ll look at is “NET POINTS”. The idea is that each statistic in the box score is arguably worth a point, (that is, somewhere between 0.5 and 1.5 points). A point is a point. Teams score an average of a point per possession so anything that gets you possession is a point. A missed shot will more often than not wind up in the possession of the other team. Most baskets are for two points so if the passer who set up the shot is given half credit, that’s worth a point. One half of the blocked shots will likely have gone in and they are almost always two pointers, so that’s a point. If you add up the “positives”, (points, + rebounds + assists + steals + blocks) and subtract the “negatives”, (missed field goals, missed free throws, turnovers and fouls), you have a number that summarizes a player’s statistical contributions to a game. Then, by averaging the net points per 40 minutes of play, you factor out differences in playing time and have a look at the player’s rate of production. Both are important. The game is won based on what you actually did, not the rate at which you did it. But the rate is a better measure of the skills you can bring to the game.
Of course, there are things players do both on and off the court that contribute to victory. Leadership, hard work, keeping the team loose, scrambling for loose balls, (that could be a statistic: when neither team is in control of the ball, who winds up with it?), sneaker-sneaker defense, keeping the ball moving on offense, etc. etc. My experience is that with rare exceptions, the players who are the most statistically productive are the ones who grade highest in the things not measured by statistics, as well.
Here are the NET POINTS of our scholarship players in the most recent game and their averages per 40 minutes of play for the season, (exhibitions games not included):
(Note: This covers the Clemson and North Carolina games.)
Tyler Roberson had 32 net points in 72 minutes, has 178 NP in 526 minutes for the season = 13.5NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 388 minutes = 12.9NP/40. Conference: 53NP in 138 minutes = 15.4NP/40.
Trevor Cooney had 32 net points in 82 minutes, has 166 NP in 637 minutes for the season = 10.4NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 480 minutes = 10.4NP/40 Conference: 41 NP in 157 minutes = 10.4NP/40.
Mal Richardson had 29 net points in 78 minutes, has 148 NP in 555 minutes for the season = 10.7NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 96 NP in 410 minutes = 9.4NP/40. Conference: 52NP in 145 minutes = 14.3NP/40.
Michael Gbinije had 14 net points in 79 minutes, has 238 NP in 643 minutes for the season = 14.8NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 226 NP in 486 minutes =18.6NP/40. Conference: 12 NP in 157 minutes = 3.1 per 40.
DaJuan Coleman had 12 net points in 40 minutes, has 92 NP in 272 minutes for the season = -13.5NP/40
Pre-Conference: 84 NP in 200 minutes = 16.8NP/40. Conference: 8 NP in 72 minutes = 4.4 per 40.
Tyler Lydon had 7 net points in 61 minutes, has 224 NP in 542 minutes for the season = 16.5NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 198 NP in 421 minutes =18.8NP/40. Conference: 26 NP in 121 minutes = 8.6NP/40.
Chinoso Obokoh had 1 net points in 1 minutes, has 9 NP in 51 minutes for the season = 7.1NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 8 NP in 39 minutes = 8.2 NP/40. Conference: 1 NP in 12 minutes = 3.3NP/40.
Franklin Howard had -1 net points in 5 minutes, has 16 NP in 103 minutes for the season = 6.2NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 19 NP in 93 minutes = 8.2NP/40. Conference: -3 NP in 10 minutes =-12.0NP/40.
Kaleb Joseph had -1 net points in 7 minutes, has 9 NP in 109 minutes for the season = 3.3NP/40
Pre-Conference: 14 in 96 minutes = 5.8NP/40. Conference: -5 NP in 13 minutes = -15.4 per 40.
DNP-CD
None
INJURED
None
SUSPENDED
None
Comments: I decided to break out pre-conference net points and conference net points. Then I decided to look at the difference after four games:
Richardson 9.4 then 14.3 difference: +4.9
Roberson 12.9 then 15.4 = +2.5
Cooney 10.4 then 10.4 = Even
Obokoh 8.2 then 3.3 = -4.9
Lydon 18.8 then 8.6 = -10.2
Coleman 16.8 then 4.4 =-12.4
Gbinije 18.6 then 3.1 = -15.5
Howard 8.2 then -12.0 = -20.2
Joseph 5.8 then -15.4 = -21.2
The “two R’s” have upped their game for conference play but no one else has. Cooney was gre4at vs. UNC but sub-par in the prior games. Lydon, Coleman and especially Gbini9je have struggled. Howard and Joseph aren’t making an impact and Obokoh has hardly played.
Michael Gbinije has led us in net points 8 times, Mal Richardson 4 times, Tyler Lydon 3 times, Tyler Roberson 2 times, DaJuan Coleman 1 time. Tyler Roberson had the highest score with 29 net points.
The Other Stats:
POSSESSION
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 28 offensive and 50 defensive rebounds. They had 16 offensive and 39 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball 28 of 78 times, (35.9%). When they missed, they got the ball 16 out of 55 times, (29.1%).
Pre-conference: We rebounded 33.3% of our misses to 36.3% for the opposition and did better in 6 of 13 games.
Conference: We’ve rebounded 31.8% of our misses to 35.6% for the opposition and have done better in 2 of 4 games with one even.
Total: We’ve rebounded 32.9% of our misses to 36.1% for the opposition and did better in 8 of 17 games with one even. .
Effective offensive rebounding: We got 26 second chance points off our 28 offensive rebounds ,0.929 points per rebound. They got 25 for their 16= 1.5625.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 0.956 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.928. We led in this stat 9 times in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 0.812 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 1.106. We’ve led in this stat 3 times in 4 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 0.923 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.965. We’ve led in this stat 12 times in 17 games.
Of our 21 turnovers, 12 were their steals and 99 were our own miscues. Of their 23 turnovers, 16 were Syracuse steals and 7 were their fault. In the pre-conference schedule It’s an important area as one of the ideas behind the zone is that we will make up for a rebounding deficit with a favorable turnover margin.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 12 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 14 turnovers and 5 unforced for the opposition. We had fewer turnovers in 8 games but fewer unforced turnovers in only 3 games with 1 even of 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 12.5 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 11 turnovers and 4 unforced for the opposition. We’ve had fewer turnovers in 1 games and fewer unforced turnovers in 0 games of 4 games.
Total: We averaged 12 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 14 turnovers and 5 unforced for the opposition. We had fewer turnovers in 9 games but fewer unforced turnovers in only 3 games with 1 even of 17 games.
If you add our 67 rebounds to their 23 turnovers, we had 100 “manufactured possessions”. They had 66 + 21 = 87. In the pre-conference season We are normally well ahead of our early opponents in this stat.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 52 MP to 50. We won this battle 7 times with 1 even in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 44 MP to 50. We’ve won this battle 1 times in 4 games
Total: We’ve averaged 50 MP to 50. We’ve won this battle 8 times with 1 even in 17 games
SHOOTING
It’s still what the game is all about. We were 29 for 60, (.483) inside the arc, 22 for 65, (.338) outside it and 22 for 31, (.710) from the line. They were 49 for 80 (.625), 11 for 33 (.333) and 27/31 (.871).
Pre-Conference: We were .482/.355/.681. Our opposition was .444/.333/.636. We led in two point field goal percentage in 8 games, in three point field goals percentage in 8 games, and in free throw percentage in 7 games with 1 even out of 13 games.
Conference: We are .478/.333/.657. Our opposition is .573/.247/.795. We’ve led in two point field goal percentage in 0 games, in three point field goals percentage in 3 games, and in free throw percentage in 0 games out of 4 games.
Total: We are .481/.350/.676. Our opposition was .475/.305/.685. We led in two point field goal percentage in 8 games, in three point field goals percentage in 11 games, and in free throw percentage in 7 games with 1 even in 17 games
We had 44 points in the paint (PIP), 19 off turnovers (POTO), 26 “second chance” points (SCP), 16 fast break points (FBP) and 6 from the bench (BP). Our opposition had 86 points in the paint, 36 off turnovers, 25 “second chance” points, 10 fast break points and 46 from the bench. We also had 82 of Pat’s “first chance points” (FCP) (total points minus second chance points, fast break points and made free throws) to 96.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 26-28 PIP, 16-11 POTO, 39-35 FCP, 12-13 SCP, 7-6 FBP and 14-17 BP. We led in PIP 7 times, POTO 10 times,(and the last 8 in a row), FCP 6 times with 2 even, SCP 5 times with 2 even, FBP 8 times, and BP 5 times with 1 even in 13 games .
Conference: We averaged 22-37.5 PIP, 9.5-17.5 POTO, 37.5-34 FCP, 9.75-13.0 SCP, 5.75-9 FBP and 4.5-23.75 BP. We led in PIP 0 times, POTO 0 times, FCP 2 times, SCP 2 times, FBP 1 times with 1 even, and BP 0 times in 4 games.
Total: We averaged 25-30 PIP, 18-13 POTO, 38-35 FCP, 11-13 SCP, 7-7 FBP and 12-19 BP. We led in PIP 7 times, POTO 10 times, FCP 8 times with 2 even, SCP 7 times with 2 even, FBP 9 times with 1 even, and BP 5 times with 1 even in 17 games.
We had 146 points, 44 in the paint, 66 from the arc and 22 from the line so we had 80 ”POP”, (points outside the paint: 146-44-22) and scored 8 points, (80 POP-66 from the arc), from what I’ll call the Twilight Zone”: that area between the paint and the arc that is the land of the pull-up jump shot, a lost art but a great weapon. They had 158/86/33/27 = 45 POP with 12 from the Twilight Zone.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 31 POP and 5 TZ, our opposition 24/4. We led in POP 8 times. We led in TZ points 7 times with 1 tie in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 31 POP and 5.5 TZ, our opposition 18.5/3. We’ve led in POP 3 times and in TZ points 3 times with 1 even in 4 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 31 POP and 5 TZ, our opposition 23/4. We’ve led in POP 11times and in TZ points 10 times with 2 even in 17 games.
32 of our 51 baskets were assisted (.627) and 46 of their 60 (.767). Assists tend to come more often from jump shots than lay-ups or dunks so the more assists you get, the more you are settling for jump shots to try to win the game which is often a bad strategy but, as JB says, is the way we have to play this year because of our personnel. In the pre-season we mostly played teams that had to do that even more than we did. In the conference we are playing some very good internal passing teams that are working the high-low game on us and getting assists that way.
Pre-Conference: We assisted 59.2% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 71.6% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 9 games with one even in 13 games.
Conference: We assisted 58.4% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 71.6% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 2 games out of 4 games.
Total: We assisted 59.1% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 71.6% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 11 games with 1 even in 17 games.
You compute possessions by taking field goal attempts – offensive rebounds + turnovers plus 47.5% of free throws attempted and dividing that into the number of points. We were 125 FGA - 28 OREBs + 21 TOs + (.475 x 31) = 132.725 possessions. They were 113 -16+ 23+ (.475 x 31) = 134.725 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one per game off, I’ll count that as 133 possessions for us and 134 for them. There were 267 combined possessions in these games, 133.5 per game.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 134 combined possessions per game.
Conference: We’ve averaged 130 combined possessions per game.
Total: We’ve averaged 133 combined possessions per game.
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” by dividing the points scored by the number of possessions. We scored 146 points in 133 possessions (1.098). They scored 158 points in 134 possessions (1.179).
Pre-Conference: We averaged 1.091 points per possession to 0.959 for the opposition. We won this stat in 10 of 13 games, (the winning team always wins this stat).
Conference: We’ve averaged 0.985 points per possession to 1.122 for the opposition. We’ve lost the stat in all 4 games, (the winning team always wins this stat).
Total: We’ve averaged 1.066 points per possession to 0.996 for the opposition and have won the stat in
10 of 17 games.
Every other level of basketball plays quarters. To check the consistency of our performance, I look at what the score was at the 10 minute mark of each half to see what the quarterly scores would be. At a minimum, I think we want to score at least 15 points in each quarter and try to hold the opposition to less than that. The quarterly breakdown for these games: 35-37, 23-29, 37-34, 39-45 OT: 12-13
Pre-Conference: We averaged 16-14, 16-14, 20-18, 20-17 OT: 5-13 We won 31 of 52 quarters with 3 even. We scored 15 or more in 38 quarters and held the opposition under that 23 times.
Conference: We’ve averaged 15-16, 13-12, 16-19, 17-24.5 OT: 12-13. We’ve won 7 of 16 quarters . We’ve scored 15 or more in 10 quarters and held the opposition under that 5 times.
Total: We’ve averaged 16-14, 15-14, 19-18, 20-19 OT: 8.5-13. We’ve won 38 of 68 quarters with 3 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 48 quarters and held the opposition under that 28 times.
Hubert Davis once told us to “Get an offensive dude”. I decided to name an “Offensive Dude Of the Game, or an O-Dog, and use the hockey concept of points + assists. In these games our ODOG was:
Vs. Clemson Michael Gbinije 22 + 4 = 26
Vs. North Carolina Trevor Cooney 27 + 1 = 28
Michael Gbinije has been the O-Dog 14 times, Mal Richardson, Tyler Roberson and Trevor Cooney 1 time each.
I’ve thought of another stat to keep track of that also relates to individual offensive efficiency, although I’m sure there nothing all that new about it. I heard that Steph Curry had an amazing game in terms of the number of points he scored compared to the number of field goal attempts he had. I decided to compare the number of points scored to the number of shots taken, except I’ll include free throw attempts as they are shots, too. I originally thought of doing it on a percentage basis but a reserve who hit his only shot would out-rank a starter who scored 15 points on 10 shots. Instead I’ll keep track of the most points scored more than the number of shots- or the fewest points scored less than the number of shots if nobody has a positive number. I’ll call it “scoring efficiency”. In these games, the following players led us in scoring efficiency:
Vs. Clemson Tyler Roberson 14-12 -0 = +2
Vs. North Carolina Tyler Roberson 13 -5 – 4 = +4 and Trevor Cooney 27 – 21 – 2 = + 4
Michael Gbinije and Tyler Roberson have led in this stat 5 times, Tyler Lydon 3 times, Trevor Cooney twice and DaJuan Coleman, Kaleb Joseph and Mal Richardson once each. Gbinije had the best game a +13 Charlotte on 26 points vs. 9 for 11 from the field including 6 treys and 2 for 2 from the foul line. What I like about this stat is that two totally different players like Roberson and Cooney can tie for it. Against UNC Roberson scored 13 points on 5 for 5 shooting from the field, (with no three point attempts, thank good ness) and 3 for 4 from the foul line. Cooney was 10 for 21 from the field, (including 5 for 12 from the arc) and 2 for 2 from the foul line. Two very different lines but both are +4.
I also like to keep track who sits us down in each half. Besides being fun it gives an indication of who Coach B likes to design plays for since opening possessions are more likely to be scripted. In these games, these are the players who sat us down:
Vs. Clemson Tyler Roberson jumper after 41 seconds and Mal Richardson trey after 1:22
Vs. North Carolina Tyler Roberson jumper after 37 seconds and Trevor Cooney trey after 1:13
The average time we’ve had to wait is 1 minute 11 seconds. The shortest time has been 7 seconds in the second half of the Texas Southern game. The longest time is 4:51 in the second half against Georgetown. Mali Richardson has sat us down 11 times, Michael Gbinije 8 times, DaJuan Coleman 6 times, Trevor Cooney 5 times and Tyler Roberson 4 times. We’ve been sat down by 13 treys 5 lay-ups, 8 two point jumpers and two dunks. It’s interesting that Tyler Roberson has sat us down with those jump shots he used to miss in both of the last two games.
Another fun fact is the “Taco Bell MVP”: the guy who gets us to 70 points, (it used to be 75), so people can get free, (or is it discounted?) tacos at Taco Bell. These players got us tacos in these two games:
Vs. Clemson Trevor Cooney trey 24 seconds into overtime
Vs. North Carolina Tyler Roberson free throw with 1:03 left
Trevor Cooney has gotten us tacos 5 times, Michael Gbinije twice and DaJuan Coleman, Tyler Lydon and Tyler Roberson once. The average amount of time left in the game has been 3:49.
FOULS
My theory about fouls is that the team that attempts the most two point shots and scores the most in the paint will tend to get fouled the most. If the numbers are as predicted or close, there’s nothing to be read into them but if there’s a big disparity, it makes you wonder about how the game was called.
In these games, we attempted 60 two point shots to 80, scored 44 points in the paint to 86 and got fouled 32 times to 31, attempting 31 foul shots to 31. The ratio of two point attempts to times fouled was 1.9 for us and 2.6 for them. The ratio of points in the paint to times fouled was 1.4 for us to 2.8 for them. The ratio of free throw attempts to fouls called on the other team was 1.0 (actually 0.96875) for us and 1.0 for them.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 1.7 two point shots per foul, 1.3 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.2 two point shots per foul, 1.8 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.0 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 11 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 10 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 9 games out of 13 games. So numerically, the calls favored us.
Conference: We averaged 2.0 two point shots per foul, 1.4 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.3 two point shots per foul, 2.0 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.2 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 3 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 3 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 2 games out of 4 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.7 two point shots per foul, 1.3 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.1 two point shots per foul, 1.8 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.0 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 14 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 14 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 11 games out of 17 games.
“MY MAN”
A reporter once asked Casey Stengel how come he won so many games with the Yankees. He said “Because I never play a game without “my man”. The reporter wondered who his man was. Casey suggested “You could look it up.” The reporter did look it up and found that Yogi Berra had played in every game that season at some positon: catcher, left field, pinch-hitting, something. He was the player Stengel had the highest regard for and the most trust in, so he didn’t want to do without him.
Who is Jim Boeheim’s “man” this season? The only way to tell is to see who plays the most minutes each game. In these games the following players played the most minutes:
Vs. Clemson Trevor Cooney (8) and Mal Richardson 43 minutes (1)
Vs. North Carolina Trevor Cooney 39 minutes (9)
A senior has been “the man” in every game, (although Mal Richardson tied Cooney in one). Michael Gbinije and Trevor Cooney have played the most minutes 9 times, and Mal Richardson once (with two ties.)
