SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,990
- Like
- 65,565
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 both the Colgate and St. John’s games.
Michael Gbinije had 41 net points in 77 minutes, has 182 NP in 374 minutes for the season = 19.5NP/40
Tyler Lydon had 38 net points in 66 minutes, has 156 NP in 325 minutes for the season = 19.2NP/40
Trevor Cooney had 27 net points in 71 minutes, has 96 NP in 382 minutes for the season = 10.1NP/40
Malachi Richardson had 14 net points in 68 minutes, has 58 NP in 328 minutes for the season = 7.1 NP/40
Tyler Roberson had 13 net points in 54 minutes, has 87 NP in 308 minutes for the season = 11.3NP/40
DaJuan Coleman had 10 net points in 35 minutes, has 41 NP in 150 minutes for the season = -10.9NP/40
Kaleb Joseph had 3 net points in 8 minutes, has 6 NP in 76 minutes for the season = -3.2 NP/40
Franklin Howard had 2 net points in 16 minutes, has 5 NP in 61 minutes for the season = 3.3NP/40
DNP-CD
Chinoso Obokoh had 0 net points in 0 minutes, has 2 NP in 23 minutes for the season = 3.5NP/40
INJURED
None
SUSPENDED
None
Comments: Four guys played for 32+ minutes vs. Colgate and five vs. St. John's, so certain players are going to build up big numbers while others don't have the opportunity to. That's where the averages come in. We still have five guys I'd regard as legitimate Division 1 starters, (10NP/40). Richardson is productive but still below that level. Howard, Joseph and Obokoh are far from that level. 20MP/40 is my definition of an All-American level. Michael Gbinje is very close to that and so is Tyler Lydon, who is having a remarkable freshman year. Who knows who might have been on this year's team if the NCAA had imposed the 11 man scholarship limit instead of the initial ten limit, and what difference that extra player might have made.
The Stats:
POSSESSION
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 20 offensive and 48 defensive rebounds. They had 24 offensive and 58 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball 20 of 78 times, (25.6%), which is poor. When they missed, they got the ball 24 of 72 times (33.3%), so the opposition wasn’t great. We were just terrible and made them look great by comparison.. We’ve won the rebounding battle by this measure 3 times. For the year we’ve averaged getting 29.8% of our misses and our opposition has gotten 38.1% of theirs, a wide discrepancy.
Effective offensive rebounding: We got 23 second chance points off our 20 offensive rebounds, 1.150 points per rebound. They got 23 for their 24 = 0.958, so at least we took greater advantage of our second chances. For the year we’ve averaged 0.929 points per offensive rebound: they’ve averaged 0.979. We’ve also led in this stat 5 times.
Of our 16 turnovers, 10 were their steals and 6 were our own miscues. Of their 34 turnovers, 24 were Syracuse steals and 10 were their fault. We’ve had fewer turnovers in 6 games but fewer unforced turnovers in 2 games with 1 even. We’ve averaged 13 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 15 turnovers and 6 unforced for the opposition. 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. Off these numbers we need to get within two rebounds of the other team to break even.
If you add our 68 rebounds to their 34 turnovers, we had 102 “manufactured possessions”. They had 82 + 16 = 98. We have won that battle 4 times with 1 even. But for the season we’ve averaged 50.6 MP to 52.4. We are normally well ahead of our early opponents in this stat.
SHOOTING
It’s still what the game is all about. It’s what this game was all about, for sure. We were 30 for 62, (.484) inside the arc, 19 for 56, (.339) outside it and 33 for 49, (.673) from the line. They were 25 for 59 (.424), 22/52 (.423) and 51/70 (.729). We’ve led in two point field goal percentage in 5 games, in three point field goals percentage in 7 games, and in free throw percentage in 4 games with 1 even. For the season we are .456/.369/.694. Our opposition is .440/.326/.679.
We had 56 points in the paint (PIP), 36 off turnovers (POTO), 23 “second chance” points (SCP), 14 fast break points (FBP) and 27 from the bench (BP). Our opposition had 38 points in the paint, 18 off turnovers, 23 “second chance” points, 12 fast break points and 40 from the bench. We also had 80 of Pat’s “first chance points” (FCP) (total points minus second chance points, fast break points and made free throws) to 81.
We’ve led in PIP 5 times, POTO 7 times,(and the last 6 in a row), FCP 6 times with 1 even, SCP 2 times with 2 even, FBP 6 times, and BP 4 times. For the season we are averaging 24-28 PIP, 16-13 POTO, 43-38 FCP, 10-15 SCP, 6.5-6 FBP and 13-17 BP.
We had 150 points, 56 in the paint, 57 from the arc and 33 from the line so we had 61 ”POP”, (points outside the paint: 150-56-33) and scored 4 points, (61 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 135/38/66/19 = 78 POP with 12 from the Twilight Zone. We’ve led in POP 6 times. We’ve led in TZ points 5 times with 1 tie. For the year we are averaging 32 POP and 4 TZ, our opposition 23.5/4. The game is so much easier when you don’t have to go to the basket for all your points. The problem is not that we “didn’t recruit any shooters”. It’s that we aren’t doing a very good job of covering them. Also, on nights where one shooter is 1 for 8 and another 0 for 11, I think we should make the basket bigger by looking for more two-pointer jumps. A two pointer that goes in counts for more than a three pointer that doesn’t.
29 of our 49 baskets were assisted (.592) and 34 of their 47 (.723). For the year we are assisting on 59.9% of our baskets to 64.1% for the opposition, who have had a higher percentage 6 games with 1 even. 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.
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 118 FGA - 20 OREBs + 16 TOs + (.475 x 49) = 137.275 possessions. They were 112 -24+ 34+ (.475 x 29) = 135.775 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one off, I’ll count that as 137 possessions for us and 136 for them. There were 273 combined possessions in these games, 136.5 per game. We’ve averaged 136 combined possessions per game this year.
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” by dividing the points scored by the number of possessions. We scored 130 points in 137 possessions (0.949). They scored 135 points in 135 possessions (1.000). We have, of course, led 7 games in offensive efficiency since the winning team always leads in that stat. For the year we are averaging 1.059 points per possession to 0.979 for the opposition.
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: 36-24, 28-38, 46-38, 40-35 OT 5-13. For the season we have an average of 16-15, 16-14, 19-19, 21-17. We’ve won 20 of 40 quarters with 3 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 27 quarters and held the opposition under that 20 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. Michael Gbinije was our ODOG in both games with a total of 38 points and 8 assists for 46 “hockey points. Michael Gbinije has been the O-Dog 9 times, Tyler Roberson 1 time.
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 this tournament, these are the players who sat us down:
Vs. Colgate Michael Gbinije trey at 18:16 and Michael Gbinije trey at 19:48
Vs. St. John’s DaJuan Coleman tip-in at 17:50 and Mal Richardson lay-up at 19:41
The average time we’ve had to wait is 1 minute 15 seconds. The longest time is 4:51 in the second half against Georgetown. Mali Richardson has sat us down 7 times, Michael Gbinije 6 times, Trevor Cooney 3 times and Tyler Roberson 2 times and DaJuan Coleman 2 times. We’ve been sat down by 10 treys 3 lay-ups and three 2 point jumper.
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. In this tournament:
Vs. Colgate DaJuan Coleman lay-up with 4:58 left (1)
Vs. St. John’s Trevor Cooney lay-up with 3:50 left (3)
Cooney has gotten us tacos three times, Gbinije twice and Cokeman once. The average amount of time left in the game has been 4:19.
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 60, scored 56 points in the paint to 38 and got fouled 37 times to 28, attempting 49 foul shots to 29. The ratio of two point attempts to times fouled was 1.7 for us and 2.1 for them. The ratio of points in the paint to times fouled was 1.5 for us to 1.4 for them. The ratio of free throw attempts to fouls called on the other team was 1.3 for us and 1.0 for them.
We are averaging 1.5 two point shots per foul, 1.1 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.2 foul shots per foul. They are averaging 1.2 two point shots per foul, 1.8 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.0 foul shots per foul. We’ve been fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 9 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 9 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 7 games. So, numerically, the calls have seemed to favor us.
“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. For the third and fourth straight times it was Michael Gbinije and not Trevor Cooney, who had led in the first 6 games, with 39 and then 38 minutes. Trevor Cooney has led in minutes 6 times, Michael Gbinije 4 times.
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 both the Colgate and St. John’s games.
Michael Gbinije had 41 net points in 77 minutes, has 182 NP in 374 minutes for the season = 19.5NP/40
Tyler Lydon had 38 net points in 66 minutes, has 156 NP in 325 minutes for the season = 19.2NP/40
Trevor Cooney had 27 net points in 71 minutes, has 96 NP in 382 minutes for the season = 10.1NP/40
Malachi Richardson had 14 net points in 68 minutes, has 58 NP in 328 minutes for the season = 7.1 NP/40
Tyler Roberson had 13 net points in 54 minutes, has 87 NP in 308 minutes for the season = 11.3NP/40
DaJuan Coleman had 10 net points in 35 minutes, has 41 NP in 150 minutes for the season = -10.9NP/40
Kaleb Joseph had 3 net points in 8 minutes, has 6 NP in 76 minutes for the season = -3.2 NP/40
Franklin Howard had 2 net points in 16 minutes, has 5 NP in 61 minutes for the season = 3.3NP/40
DNP-CD
Chinoso Obokoh had 0 net points in 0 minutes, has 2 NP in 23 minutes for the season = 3.5NP/40
INJURED
None
SUSPENDED
None
Comments: Four guys played for 32+ minutes vs. Colgate and five vs. St. John's, so certain players are going to build up big numbers while others don't have the opportunity to. That's where the averages come in. We still have five guys I'd regard as legitimate Division 1 starters, (10NP/40). Richardson is productive but still below that level. Howard, Joseph and Obokoh are far from that level. 20MP/40 is my definition of an All-American level. Michael Gbinje is very close to that and so is Tyler Lydon, who is having a remarkable freshman year. Who knows who might have been on this year's team if the NCAA had imposed the 11 man scholarship limit instead of the initial ten limit, and what difference that extra player might have made.
The Stats:
POSSESSION
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 20 offensive and 48 defensive rebounds. They had 24 offensive and 58 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball 20 of 78 times, (25.6%), which is poor. When they missed, they got the ball 24 of 72 times (33.3%), so the opposition wasn’t great. We were just terrible and made them look great by comparison.. We’ve won the rebounding battle by this measure 3 times. For the year we’ve averaged getting 29.8% of our misses and our opposition has gotten 38.1% of theirs, a wide discrepancy.
Effective offensive rebounding: We got 23 second chance points off our 20 offensive rebounds, 1.150 points per rebound. They got 23 for their 24 = 0.958, so at least we took greater advantage of our second chances. For the year we’ve averaged 0.929 points per offensive rebound: they’ve averaged 0.979. We’ve also led in this stat 5 times.
Of our 16 turnovers, 10 were their steals and 6 were our own miscues. Of their 34 turnovers, 24 were Syracuse steals and 10 were their fault. We’ve had fewer turnovers in 6 games but fewer unforced turnovers in 2 games with 1 even. We’ve averaged 13 turnovers, 6 of which were unforced compared to 15 turnovers and 6 unforced for the opposition. 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. Off these numbers we need to get within two rebounds of the other team to break even.
If you add our 68 rebounds to their 34 turnovers, we had 102 “manufactured possessions”. They had 82 + 16 = 98. We have won that battle 4 times with 1 even. But for the season we’ve averaged 50.6 MP to 52.4. We are normally well ahead of our early opponents in this stat.
SHOOTING
It’s still what the game is all about. It’s what this game was all about, for sure. We were 30 for 62, (.484) inside the arc, 19 for 56, (.339) outside it and 33 for 49, (.673) from the line. They were 25 for 59 (.424), 22/52 (.423) and 51/70 (.729). We’ve led in two point field goal percentage in 5 games, in three point field goals percentage in 7 games, and in free throw percentage in 4 games with 1 even. For the season we are .456/.369/.694. Our opposition is .440/.326/.679.
We had 56 points in the paint (PIP), 36 off turnovers (POTO), 23 “second chance” points (SCP), 14 fast break points (FBP) and 27 from the bench (BP). Our opposition had 38 points in the paint, 18 off turnovers, 23 “second chance” points, 12 fast break points and 40 from the bench. We also had 80 of Pat’s “first chance points” (FCP) (total points minus second chance points, fast break points and made free throws) to 81.
We’ve led in PIP 5 times, POTO 7 times,(and the last 6 in a row), FCP 6 times with 1 even, SCP 2 times with 2 even, FBP 6 times, and BP 4 times. For the season we are averaging 24-28 PIP, 16-13 POTO, 43-38 FCP, 10-15 SCP, 6.5-6 FBP and 13-17 BP.
We had 150 points, 56 in the paint, 57 from the arc and 33 from the line so we had 61 ”POP”, (points outside the paint: 150-56-33) and scored 4 points, (61 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 135/38/66/19 = 78 POP with 12 from the Twilight Zone. We’ve led in POP 6 times. We’ve led in TZ points 5 times with 1 tie. For the year we are averaging 32 POP and 4 TZ, our opposition 23.5/4. The game is so much easier when you don’t have to go to the basket for all your points. The problem is not that we “didn’t recruit any shooters”. It’s that we aren’t doing a very good job of covering them. Also, on nights where one shooter is 1 for 8 and another 0 for 11, I think we should make the basket bigger by looking for more two-pointer jumps. A two pointer that goes in counts for more than a three pointer that doesn’t.
29 of our 49 baskets were assisted (.592) and 34 of their 47 (.723). For the year we are assisting on 59.9% of our baskets to 64.1% for the opposition, who have had a higher percentage 6 games with 1 even. 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.
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 118 FGA - 20 OREBs + 16 TOs + (.475 x 49) = 137.275 possessions. They were 112 -24+ 34+ (.475 x 29) = 135.775 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one off, I’ll count that as 137 possessions for us and 136 for them. There were 273 combined possessions in these games, 136.5 per game. We’ve averaged 136 combined possessions per game this year.
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” by dividing the points scored by the number of possessions. We scored 130 points in 137 possessions (0.949). They scored 135 points in 135 possessions (1.000). We have, of course, led 7 games in offensive efficiency since the winning team always leads in that stat. For the year we are averaging 1.059 points per possession to 0.979 for the opposition.
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: 36-24, 28-38, 46-38, 40-35 OT 5-13. For the season we have an average of 16-15, 16-14, 19-19, 21-17. We’ve won 20 of 40 quarters with 3 even. We’ve scored 15 or more in 27 quarters and held the opposition under that 20 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. Michael Gbinije was our ODOG in both games with a total of 38 points and 8 assists for 46 “hockey points. Michael Gbinije has been the O-Dog 9 times, Tyler Roberson 1 time.
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 this tournament, these are the players who sat us down:
Vs. Colgate Michael Gbinije trey at 18:16 and Michael Gbinije trey at 19:48
Vs. St. John’s DaJuan Coleman tip-in at 17:50 and Mal Richardson lay-up at 19:41
The average time we’ve had to wait is 1 minute 15 seconds. The longest time is 4:51 in the second half against Georgetown. Mali Richardson has sat us down 7 times, Michael Gbinije 6 times, Trevor Cooney 3 times and Tyler Roberson 2 times and DaJuan Coleman 2 times. We’ve been sat down by 10 treys 3 lay-ups and three 2 point jumper.
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. In this tournament:
Vs. Colgate DaJuan Coleman lay-up with 4:58 left (1)
Vs. St. John’s Trevor Cooney lay-up with 3:50 left (3)
Cooney has gotten us tacos three times, Gbinije twice and Cokeman once. The average amount of time left in the game has been 4:19.
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 60, scored 56 points in the paint to 38 and got fouled 37 times to 28, attempting 49 foul shots to 29. The ratio of two point attempts to times fouled was 1.7 for us and 2.1 for them. The ratio of points in the paint to times fouled was 1.5 for us to 1.4 for them. The ratio of free throw attempts to fouls called on the other team was 1.3 for us and 1.0 for them.
We are averaging 1.5 two point shots per foul, 1.1 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.2 foul shots per foul. They are averaging 1.2 two point shots per foul, 1.8 points in the paint per foul and attempted 1.0 foul shots per foul. We’ve been fouled more often compared to our two point shots in 9 games and more often compared to our points in the paint in 9 games. We’ve gotten more fouls shots per foul in 7 games. So, numerically, the calls have seemed to favor us.
“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. For the third and fourth straight times it was Michael Gbinije and not Trevor Cooney, who had led in the first 6 games, with 39 and then 38 minutes. Trevor Cooney has led in minutes 6 times, Michael Gbinije 4 times.