SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,998
- Like
- 65,600
I’ll continue doing a statistical analysis of games this year with some of the off-beat numbers I like to look at.
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 Florida State and Boston College games. Second note: we are the point in the season where we have had the same number of conference games as non-conference games- 13)
Michael Gbinije had 45 net points in 74 minutes, has 384 NP in 986 minutes for the season = 15.6 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 226 NP in 486 minutes =18.6 NP/40. Conference: 158 NP in 500 minutes = 14.9 per 40.
Tyler Lydon had 36 net points in 65 minutes, has 323 NP in 789 minutes for the season = 16.4 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 198 NP in 421 minutes =18.8 NP/40. Conference: 125 NP in 368 minutes = 13.6 NP/40.
Mal Richardson had 34 net points in 70 minutes, has 243 NP in 877 minutes for the season = 11.1 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 96 NP in 410 minutes = 9.4 NP/40. Conference: 147 NP in 467 minutes = 12.6 NP/40.
Tyler Roberson had 22 net points in 72 minutes, has 307 NP in 826 minutes for the season = 14.9 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 388 minutes = 12.9 NP/40. Conference: 182 NP in 438 minutes = 16.6 NP/40.
Trevor Cooney had 16 net points in 74 minutes, has 224 NP in 970 minutes for the season = 9.2 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 480 minutes = 10.4 NP/40 Conference: 99 NP in 490 minutes = 8.1 NP/40.
DaJuan Coleman had 6 net points in 33 minutes, has 129 NP in 437 minutes for the season = -11.8 NP/40
Pre-Conference: 84 NP in 200 minutes = 16.8 NP/40. Conference: 45 NP in 237 minutes = 7.6 NP per 40.
Franklin Howard had 2 net points in 15 minutes, has 23 NP in 201 minutes for the season = 4.6 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 19 NP in 93 minutes = 8.2 NP/40. Conference: 4 NP in 108 minutes = 1.5 NP/40.
Chinoso Obokoh had -2 net points in 3 minutes, has 7 NP in 67 minutes for the season = 4.2 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 8 NP in 39 minutes = 8.2 NP/40. Conference: -1 NP in 28 minutes = -1.4 NP/40.
(Chinoso only played in the FSU game)
DNP-CD
Kaleb Joseph had 0 net points in 0 minutes, has 8 NP in 114 minutes for the season = 2.8NP/40
Pre-Conference: 14 in 96 minutes = 5.8NP/40. Conference: -6 NP in 18 minutes = -13.3 per 40.
INJURED
None
SUSPENDED
None
Comments: Everybody’s talking about the two freshmen, Richardson and Lydon and so they should. But it was Gbinije who led the team in NP in both games with 26 and 19, respectively. Coleman had a great- and important- five minutes at the beginning of the second half of the Florida State game but otherwise….Franklin Howard looks good at times but isn’t really producing good numbers- yet. Cooney was 6 for 20 overall and 4 for 11 from the arc. That’s a decent three point percentage but we need more than 2 a game from him and 2 for 9 on his drives inside is not close to adequate. At least he was 6 for 6 from the line. Roberson had only 9 rebounds total in the two games. He’s bene averaging that for one game.
Michael Gbinije has led us in net points 12 times, Tyler Roberson 6 times, Tyler Lydon 5 times, Mal Richardson 3 times and DaJuan Coleman and Trevor Cooney 1 time each.
The Other Stats:
POSSESSION
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 20 offensive and 46 defensive rebounds. They had 23 offensive and 30 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball 20 of 50 times, (40.0%). When they missed, they got the ball 23 out of 69 times, (33.3%).
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 36.3% of our misses to 33.3% for the opposition and have done better in 10 of 13 games with one even. Despite our fears rebounding in this conference hasn’t been a big problem.
Total: We’ve rebounded 34.7% of our misses to 34.8% for the opposition and did better in 16 of 26 games with one even. We’ve only been badly outrebounded by Wisconsin and North Carolina and we lost in overtime and had a late lead in those games. We’ve competed by having everybody go to the boards.
Effective offensive rebounding: We got 27 second chance points off our 20 offensive rebounds, 1.350 points per rebound. They got 27 for their 23 = 1.187.
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 0.953 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.967. We’ve led in this stat 9 times in 13 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 0.954 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.946. We’ve led in this stat 18 times in 26 games. Again an expected big problem hasn’t really materialized.
Of our 28 turnovers, 14 were their steals and 14 were our own miscues. Of their 28 turnovers, 16 were Syracuse steals and 12 were their fault. 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 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 13 turnovers and 6 unforced for the opposition. We’ve had fewer turnovers in 7 games with 2 even and fewer unforced turnovers in 6 games with one even of 13 games.
Total: We averaged 12 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 13.5 turnovers and 5 unforced for the opposition. We had fewer turnovers in 15 games with two even but fewer unforced turnovers in only 9 games with 2 even of 26 games. We could clean up our act on those unforced turnovers.
I’m adding another stat: Points per Turnover, which is “Points Off Turnovers” divided by the number of turnovers the other team had. Syracuse got 42 points from 28 turnovers, an average of 1.500. They had 38 points from 28 turnovers, an average of 1.357, so we did a better job of getting back on defense after a turnover, (which is why we gave up no fast break points for the fourth game in a row.)
Pre-Conference: We averaged 1.124 points per turnover. They averaged 0.974. We won this battle 10 times, including the last 9 in a row of 13.
Conference: We’ve averaged 1.230 points per turnover. They’ve averaged 1.076. They won the first four games, when we were 0-4, 0.760-1.591. We’ve won 8 of the last 9 games and the same with this stat by 1.431-0.925. So this seems to be an important stat.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.174 points per turnover. They’ve averaged 1.026. We’ve won this battle 18 times in 26 games.
If you add our 66 rebounds to their 28 turnovers, we had 94 “manufactured possessions”. They had 53 + 28 = 81. We are normally well ahead of our early opponents in this stat. Then it levels off in the conference season. This year, it’s been pretty level all year.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 52 MP to 50. We won this battle 7 times with 1 even in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 49 MP to 46. We’ve won this battle 7 times in 13 games
Total: We’ve averaged 50 MP to 48. We’ve won this battle 14 times with 1 even in 26 games
SHOOTING
It’s still what the game is all about. We were 36 for 62, (.581) inside the arc, a tremendous improvement over our season average, primarily because we were 23 for 33 against Florida State’s tall timbers. We were a strong 19 for 40 (.475) outside the arc and an excellent 31 for 39, (.795) from the line. They were 31 for 66 (.470) inside the arc, 17 for 45 (.378) and 20/31 (.645) from the foul line.
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 .471/.378/.686. Our opposition is .514/.290/.682. We’ve led in two point field goal percentage in 4 games, in three point field goal percentage in 10 games, and in free throw percentage in 5 games out of 13 games.
Total: We are .477/.366/.683. Our opposition was .477/.306/.661. We led in two point field goal percentage in 12 games with one even, in three point field goals percentage in 18 games, and in free throw percentage in 12 games with 2 even in 26 games
We had 62 points in the paint (PIP), 42 off turnovers (POTO), 27 “second chance” points (SCP), 18 fast break points (FBP) and 41 from the bench (BP). Our opposition had 62 points in the paint, 38 off turnovers, 27 “second chance” points, just 4 fast break points and 55 from the bench. (Tyler Lydon is helping to even out the “bench points”. I’ve decided to keep track of “starter points” (SP) as a counter-weight to bench points. 119 of those to 78. So there! We also had 84 of Pat’s “first chance points” (FCP) (total points minus second chance points, fast break points and made free throws) to 68, although that differed in the two games, (44-28 vs. FSU and 22-26 vs. BC).
Pre-Conference: We averaged 26-28 PIP, 16-11 POTO, 39-35 FCP, 12-13 SCP, 7-6 FBP, 59-46 SP 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, SP 11 times and BP 5 times with 1 even in 13 games .
Conference: We’ve averaged 26-30 PIP, 16-13 POTO, 38-36 FCP, 12-11 SCP, 6-4 FBP, 60-46 SP and 10-19 BP. We led in PIP 5 times with 1 even, POTO 8 times, FCP 6 times with one even, SCP 9 times, FBP 8 times with 1 even, SP 10 tiems with one even, and BP 2 times in 13 games.
Total: We averaged 26-29 PIP, 16-12 POTO, 38-36 FCP, 12-11 SCP, 7-5 FBP and 12-18 BP. We’ve led in PIP 12 times with 1 even, POTO 18 times, FCP 12 times with 3 even, SCP 14 times with 2 even, FBP 16 times with 1 even, SP 23 times with one even and BP 7 times with 1 even in 26 games.
We had 160 points, 62 in the paint, 57 from the arc and 31 from the line so we had 67 ”POP”, (points outside the paint: 160-62-31) and scored 10 points, (67 POP-57 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 133/62/51/20 = 51 POP with 0 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 4 TZ, our opposition 22/3. We’ve led in POP 10 times and in TZ points 6 times with 3 even in 13 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 31 POP and 5 TZ, our opposition 23/3. We’ve led in POP 16 times and in TZ points 13 times with 4 even in 26 games.
33 of our 55 baskets were assisted (.560) and 31 of their 48 (.646). 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 56.0% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 68.4% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 11 games out of 13 games.
Total: We assisted 57.6% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 69.9% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 20 games with 1 even in 26 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 102 FGA -20 OREBs + 28 TOs + (.475 x 41) = 129.475 possessions. They were 111 -23+ 28+ (.475 x 31) = 130.725 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one per game off, I’ll count that as 129 possessions for us and 131 for them. There were 260 combined possessions in these games, 130 per game.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 132 combined possessions per game.
Conference: We’ve averaged 125 combined possessions per game.
Total: We’ve averaged 129 combined possessions per game.
(I’ve excluded overtime periods as we are trying to measure the pace of game sand overtimes would all the possession from an extra 5 minutes and thus be misleading.)
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” by dividing the points scored by the number of possessions. We scored 160 points in 129 possessions (1.240). They scored 133 points in 131 possessions (1.015). We were great on offense, mediocre on defense.
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 1.086 points per possession to 1.011 for the opposition. We’ve won the stat in 8 of 13 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.088 points per possession to 0.984 for the opposition and have won the stat in 18 of 26 games.
(These figures include the overtime periods as we are now determining the points per possession and the OT periods are as relevant as regulation.)
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: 44-28, 33-43, 51-27, 32-35. JB's halftime speeches were darn good!
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 17-14, 16-16, 17-15, 18-19 OT: 12-8.5. We’ve won 26 of 52 quarters with 5 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 34 quarters and held the opposition under that 22 times.
Total: We’ve averaged 17-14, 16-15, 18-16, 19-18 OT: 10-10. We’ve won 57 of 104 quarters with 8 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 72 quarters and held the opposition under that 45 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. Florida State Michael Gbinije 22 + 3 = 25
Vs. Boston College Michael Gbinije 17 + 4 = 21
Michael Gbinije has been the O-Dog 21 times, Mal Richardson and Trevor Cooney 2 times each and Tyler Roberson once. Mike’s our O-Dog, that’s for sure.
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. Florida State Michael Gbinije 26 – 8 – 6 = +8
Vs. Boston College Michael Gbinije 17 – 8 – 4 = +5
Michael Gbinije have led in this stat 10 times, Tyler Roberson 6 times, Trevor Cooney and Mal Richardson 4 times, DaJuan Coleman and Tyler Lydon 3 times, and Kaleb Joseph once. 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 totally different types of players can compete for it.
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. Florida State Mal Richardson jumper after 33 seconds and DaJuan Coleman dunk after 36 seconds
Vs. Boston College Mal Richardson trey after 3:47 and Tyler Roberson lay-up after 1:03
The average time we’ve had to wait is 1 minute 9 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. But we haven’t had to wait long very often. Mali Richardson have sat us down 15 times, Michael Gbinije 13 times, Trevor Cooney 9 times, Tyler Roberson 8 times and DaJuan Coleman times. We’ve been sat down by 20 treys, 13 lay-ups, 9 two point jumpers and 4 dunks. It’s interesting that the lost art of the two point jump shot has set us down as many as 9 times.
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. WE got tacos in both these games:
Vs. Florida State Tyler Lydon lay-up with 10:22 left (2)
Vs. Boston College Trevor Cooney trey with 4:06 left (6)
Total: 4186 seconds /14 games=299 seconds = 4:59 left. (counting the OT as negative time)
Trevor Cooney has gotten us tacos 6 times, Michael Gbinije and Tyler Lydon twice, DaJuan Coleman, Franklin Howard, Mal Richardson and Tyler Roberson once each. The average amount of time left in the game- when we’ve made it to tacos- has been 4:59 left.
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 62 two point shots to 66, scored 76 points in the paint to 48 and got fouled 38 times to 30, attempting 39 foul shots to 31. The ratio of two point attempts to times fouled was 1.6 for us and 2.2 for them, meaning we were much more likely to get a call than they on two pointers. The ratio of points in the paint to times fouled was 1.4 for us to 1.7 for them, meaning we were more likely to get the call when we were scoring in the paint. The ratio of free throw attempts to fouls called on the other team was 1.0 for us and 1.0 for them. The refereeing may have incompetent, or at least confusing but it wasn’t biased against us.
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’ve averaged 1.9 two point shots per foul, 1.4 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They’ve averaged 1.8 two point shots per foul, 1.7 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 8 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 9 games. We’ve gotten more foul shots per foul in 6 games out of 13 games with one even.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.8 two point shots per foul, 1.3 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.0 two point shots per foul, 1.7 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 19 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 20 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 15 games out of 26 games with one even. We can’t very well claim we haven’t gotten a fair shake from the refs.
“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. Florida State Trevor Cooney 37 minutes
Vs. Boston College Tyler Roberson and Michael Gbinije both 38 minutes
Trevor Cooney has played the most minutes 14 times and Michael Gbinije 12 times, Mal Richardson twice and Tyler Roberson once (there have been three ties). Gbinije and Cooney, of course, are our two seniors. It was interesting that in the Boston College game that Tyler Roberson tied for the lead in minutes played for the first time in the season. He’s become one of Boeheim’s “men”.
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 Florida State and Boston College games. Second note: we are the point in the season where we have had the same number of conference games as non-conference games- 13)
Michael Gbinije had 45 net points in 74 minutes, has 384 NP in 986 minutes for the season = 15.6 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 226 NP in 486 minutes =18.6 NP/40. Conference: 158 NP in 500 minutes = 14.9 per 40.
Tyler Lydon had 36 net points in 65 minutes, has 323 NP in 789 minutes for the season = 16.4 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 198 NP in 421 minutes =18.8 NP/40. Conference: 125 NP in 368 minutes = 13.6 NP/40.
Mal Richardson had 34 net points in 70 minutes, has 243 NP in 877 minutes for the season = 11.1 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 96 NP in 410 minutes = 9.4 NP/40. Conference: 147 NP in 467 minutes = 12.6 NP/40.
Tyler Roberson had 22 net points in 72 minutes, has 307 NP in 826 minutes for the season = 14.9 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 388 minutes = 12.9 NP/40. Conference: 182 NP in 438 minutes = 16.6 NP/40.
Trevor Cooney had 16 net points in 74 minutes, has 224 NP in 970 minutes for the season = 9.2 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 125 NP in 480 minutes = 10.4 NP/40 Conference: 99 NP in 490 minutes = 8.1 NP/40.
DaJuan Coleman had 6 net points in 33 minutes, has 129 NP in 437 minutes for the season = -11.8 NP/40
Pre-Conference: 84 NP in 200 minutes = 16.8 NP/40. Conference: 45 NP in 237 minutes = 7.6 NP per 40.
Franklin Howard had 2 net points in 15 minutes, has 23 NP in 201 minutes for the season = 4.6 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 19 NP in 93 minutes = 8.2 NP/40. Conference: 4 NP in 108 minutes = 1.5 NP/40.
Chinoso Obokoh had -2 net points in 3 minutes, has 7 NP in 67 minutes for the season = 4.2 NP/40.
Pre-Conference: 8 NP in 39 minutes = 8.2 NP/40. Conference: -1 NP in 28 minutes = -1.4 NP/40.
(Chinoso only played in the FSU game)
DNP-CD
Kaleb Joseph had 0 net points in 0 minutes, has 8 NP in 114 minutes for the season = 2.8NP/40
Pre-Conference: 14 in 96 minutes = 5.8NP/40. Conference: -6 NP in 18 minutes = -13.3 per 40.
INJURED
None
SUSPENDED
None
Comments: Everybody’s talking about the two freshmen, Richardson and Lydon and so they should. But it was Gbinije who led the team in NP in both games with 26 and 19, respectively. Coleman had a great- and important- five minutes at the beginning of the second half of the Florida State game but otherwise….Franklin Howard looks good at times but isn’t really producing good numbers- yet. Cooney was 6 for 20 overall and 4 for 11 from the arc. That’s a decent three point percentage but we need more than 2 a game from him and 2 for 9 on his drives inside is not close to adequate. At least he was 6 for 6 from the line. Roberson had only 9 rebounds total in the two games. He’s bene averaging that for one game.
Michael Gbinije has led us in net points 12 times, Tyler Roberson 6 times, Tyler Lydon 5 times, Mal Richardson 3 times and DaJuan Coleman and Trevor Cooney 1 time each.
The Other Stats:
POSSESSION
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 20 offensive and 46 defensive rebounds. They had 23 offensive and 30 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball 20 of 50 times, (40.0%). When they missed, they got the ball 23 out of 69 times, (33.3%).
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 36.3% of our misses to 33.3% for the opposition and have done better in 10 of 13 games with one even. Despite our fears rebounding in this conference hasn’t been a big problem.
Total: We’ve rebounded 34.7% of our misses to 34.8% for the opposition and did better in 16 of 26 games with one even. We’ve only been badly outrebounded by Wisconsin and North Carolina and we lost in overtime and had a late lead in those games. We’ve competed by having everybody go to the boards.
Effective offensive rebounding: We got 27 second chance points off our 20 offensive rebounds, 1.350 points per rebound. They got 27 for their 23 = 1.187.
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 0.953 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.967. We’ve led in this stat 9 times in 13 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 0.954 points per offensive rebound: they averaged 0.946. We’ve led in this stat 18 times in 26 games. Again an expected big problem hasn’t really materialized.
Of our 28 turnovers, 14 were their steals and 14 were our own miscues. Of their 28 turnovers, 16 were Syracuse steals and 12 were their fault. 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 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 13 turnovers and 6 unforced for the opposition. We’ve had fewer turnovers in 7 games with 2 even and fewer unforced turnovers in 6 games with one even of 13 games.
Total: We averaged 12 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 13.5 turnovers and 5 unforced for the opposition. We had fewer turnovers in 15 games with two even but fewer unforced turnovers in only 9 games with 2 even of 26 games. We could clean up our act on those unforced turnovers.
I’m adding another stat: Points per Turnover, which is “Points Off Turnovers” divided by the number of turnovers the other team had. Syracuse got 42 points from 28 turnovers, an average of 1.500. They had 38 points from 28 turnovers, an average of 1.357, so we did a better job of getting back on defense after a turnover, (which is why we gave up no fast break points for the fourth game in a row.)
Pre-Conference: We averaged 1.124 points per turnover. They averaged 0.974. We won this battle 10 times, including the last 9 in a row of 13.
Conference: We’ve averaged 1.230 points per turnover. They’ve averaged 1.076. They won the first four games, when we were 0-4, 0.760-1.591. We’ve won 8 of the last 9 games and the same with this stat by 1.431-0.925. So this seems to be an important stat.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.174 points per turnover. They’ve averaged 1.026. We’ve won this battle 18 times in 26 games.
If you add our 66 rebounds to their 28 turnovers, we had 94 “manufactured possessions”. They had 53 + 28 = 81. We are normally well ahead of our early opponents in this stat. Then it levels off in the conference season. This year, it’s been pretty level all year.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 52 MP to 50. We won this battle 7 times with 1 even in 13 games.
Conference: We’ve averaged 49 MP to 46. We’ve won this battle 7 times in 13 games
Total: We’ve averaged 50 MP to 48. We’ve won this battle 14 times with 1 even in 26 games
SHOOTING
It’s still what the game is all about. We were 36 for 62, (.581) inside the arc, a tremendous improvement over our season average, primarily because we were 23 for 33 against Florida State’s tall timbers. We were a strong 19 for 40 (.475) outside the arc and an excellent 31 for 39, (.795) from the line. They were 31 for 66 (.470) inside the arc, 17 for 45 (.378) and 20/31 (.645) from the foul line.
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 .471/.378/.686. Our opposition is .514/.290/.682. We’ve led in two point field goal percentage in 4 games, in three point field goal percentage in 10 games, and in free throw percentage in 5 games out of 13 games.
Total: We are .477/.366/.683. Our opposition was .477/.306/.661. We led in two point field goal percentage in 12 games with one even, in three point field goals percentage in 18 games, and in free throw percentage in 12 games with 2 even in 26 games
We had 62 points in the paint (PIP), 42 off turnovers (POTO), 27 “second chance” points (SCP), 18 fast break points (FBP) and 41 from the bench (BP). Our opposition had 62 points in the paint, 38 off turnovers, 27 “second chance” points, just 4 fast break points and 55 from the bench. (Tyler Lydon is helping to even out the “bench points”. I’ve decided to keep track of “starter points” (SP) as a counter-weight to bench points. 119 of those to 78. So there! We also had 84 of Pat’s “first chance points” (FCP) (total points minus second chance points, fast break points and made free throws) to 68, although that differed in the two games, (44-28 vs. FSU and 22-26 vs. BC).
Pre-Conference: We averaged 26-28 PIP, 16-11 POTO, 39-35 FCP, 12-13 SCP, 7-6 FBP, 59-46 SP 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, SP 11 times and BP 5 times with 1 even in 13 games .
Conference: We’ve averaged 26-30 PIP, 16-13 POTO, 38-36 FCP, 12-11 SCP, 6-4 FBP, 60-46 SP and 10-19 BP. We led in PIP 5 times with 1 even, POTO 8 times, FCP 6 times with one even, SCP 9 times, FBP 8 times with 1 even, SP 10 tiems with one even, and BP 2 times in 13 games.
Total: We averaged 26-29 PIP, 16-12 POTO, 38-36 FCP, 12-11 SCP, 7-5 FBP and 12-18 BP. We’ve led in PIP 12 times with 1 even, POTO 18 times, FCP 12 times with 3 even, SCP 14 times with 2 even, FBP 16 times with 1 even, SP 23 times with one even and BP 7 times with 1 even in 26 games.
We had 160 points, 62 in the paint, 57 from the arc and 31 from the line so we had 67 ”POP”, (points outside the paint: 160-62-31) and scored 10 points, (67 POP-57 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 133/62/51/20 = 51 POP with 0 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 4 TZ, our opposition 22/3. We’ve led in POP 10 times and in TZ points 6 times with 3 even in 13 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 31 POP and 5 TZ, our opposition 23/3. We’ve led in POP 16 times and in TZ points 13 times with 4 even in 26 games.
33 of our 55 baskets were assisted (.560) and 31 of their 48 (.646). 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 56.0% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 68.4% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 11 games out of 13 games.
Total: We assisted 57.6% of our baskets. Our opposition assisted 69.9% of their baskets. They had a higher percentage in 20 games with 1 even in 26 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 102 FGA -20 OREBs + 28 TOs + (.475 x 41) = 129.475 possessions. They were 111 -23+ 28+ (.475 x 31) = 130.725 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one per game off, I’ll count that as 129 possessions for us and 131 for them. There were 260 combined possessions in these games, 130 per game.
Pre-Conference: We averaged 132 combined possessions per game.
Conference: We’ve averaged 125 combined possessions per game.
Total: We’ve averaged 129 combined possessions per game.
(I’ve excluded overtime periods as we are trying to measure the pace of game sand overtimes would all the possession from an extra 5 minutes and thus be misleading.)
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” by dividing the points scored by the number of possessions. We scored 160 points in 129 possessions (1.240). They scored 133 points in 131 possessions (1.015). We were great on offense, mediocre on defense.
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 1.086 points per possession to 1.011 for the opposition. We’ve won the stat in 8 of 13 games.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.088 points per possession to 0.984 for the opposition and have won the stat in 18 of 26 games.
(These figures include the overtime periods as we are now determining the points per possession and the OT periods are as relevant as regulation.)
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: 44-28, 33-43, 51-27, 32-35. JB's halftime speeches were darn good!
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 17-14, 16-16, 17-15, 18-19 OT: 12-8.5. We’ve won 26 of 52 quarters with 5 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 34 quarters and held the opposition under that 22 times.
Total: We’ve averaged 17-14, 16-15, 18-16, 19-18 OT: 10-10. We’ve won 57 of 104 quarters with 8 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 72 quarters and held the opposition under that 45 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. Florida State Michael Gbinije 22 + 3 = 25
Vs. Boston College Michael Gbinije 17 + 4 = 21
Michael Gbinije has been the O-Dog 21 times, Mal Richardson and Trevor Cooney 2 times each and Tyler Roberson once. Mike’s our O-Dog, that’s for sure.
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. Florida State Michael Gbinije 26 – 8 – 6 = +8
Vs. Boston College Michael Gbinije 17 – 8 – 4 = +5
Michael Gbinije have led in this stat 10 times, Tyler Roberson 6 times, Trevor Cooney and Mal Richardson 4 times, DaJuan Coleman and Tyler Lydon 3 times, and Kaleb Joseph once. 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 totally different types of players can compete for it.
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. Florida State Mal Richardson jumper after 33 seconds and DaJuan Coleman dunk after 36 seconds
Vs. Boston College Mal Richardson trey after 3:47 and Tyler Roberson lay-up after 1:03
The average time we’ve had to wait is 1 minute 9 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. But we haven’t had to wait long very often. Mali Richardson have sat us down 15 times, Michael Gbinije 13 times, Trevor Cooney 9 times, Tyler Roberson 8 times and DaJuan Coleman times. We’ve been sat down by 20 treys, 13 lay-ups, 9 two point jumpers and 4 dunks. It’s interesting that the lost art of the two point jump shot has set us down as many as 9 times.
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. WE got tacos in both these games:
Vs. Florida State Tyler Lydon lay-up with 10:22 left (2)
Vs. Boston College Trevor Cooney trey with 4:06 left (6)
Total: 4186 seconds /14 games=299 seconds = 4:59 left. (counting the OT as negative time)
Trevor Cooney has gotten us tacos 6 times, Michael Gbinije and Tyler Lydon twice, DaJuan Coleman, Franklin Howard, Mal Richardson and Tyler Roberson once each. The average amount of time left in the game- when we’ve made it to tacos- has been 4:59 left.
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 62 two point shots to 66, scored 76 points in the paint to 48 and got fouled 38 times to 30, attempting 39 foul shots to 31. The ratio of two point attempts to times fouled was 1.6 for us and 2.2 for them, meaning we were much more likely to get a call than they on two pointers. The ratio of points in the paint to times fouled was 1.4 for us to 1.7 for them, meaning we were more likely to get the call when we were scoring in the paint. The ratio of free throw attempts to fouls called on the other team was 1.0 for us and 1.0 for them. The refereeing may have incompetent, or at least confusing but it wasn’t biased against us.
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’ve averaged 1.9 two point shots per foul, 1.4 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They’ve averaged 1.8 two point shots per foul, 1.7 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 8 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 9 games. We’ve gotten more foul shots per foul in 6 games out of 13 games with one even.
Total: We’ve averaged 1.8 two point shots per foul, 1.3 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. They averaged 2.0 two point shots per foul, 1.7 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.1 foul shots per foul. We were fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 19 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 20 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 15 games out of 26 games with one even. We can’t very well claim we haven’t gotten a fair shake from the refs.
“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. Florida State Trevor Cooney 37 minutes
Vs. Boston College Tyler Roberson and Michael Gbinije both 38 minutes
Trevor Cooney has played the most minutes 14 times and Michael Gbinije 12 times, Mal Richardson twice and Tyler Roberson once (there have been three ties). Gbinije and Cooney, of course, are our two seniors. It was interesting that in the Boston College game that Tyler Roberson tied for the lead in minutes played for the first time in the season. He’s become one of Boeheim’s “men”.
