SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,077
- Like
- 63,610
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 player 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 player in the most recent game and their averages per 40 minutes of play for the season, (exhibitions games not included):
Tyler Ennis………….. 16NP in 40 minutes season: 252NP in 605 minutes per 40: 16.6
Rakeem Christmas 15NP in 29 minutes season: 129NP in 375 minutes per 40: 13.8
Jerami Grant……….. 12NP in 40 minutes season: 213NP in 509 minutes per 40: 16.7
C. J. Fair………………. 9NP in 40 minutes season: 222NP in 655 minutes per 40: 13.6
Baye Moussa Keita 2NP in 11 minutes season: 57NP in 295 minutes per 40: 7.7
Trevor Cooney…… 2NP in 32 minutes season: 206NP in 554 minutes per 40: 14.9
Michael Gbinije …. 1NP in 8 minutes season: 77NP in 236 minutes per 40: 13.1
DaJuan Coleman…. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 61NP in 169 minutes per 40: 14.4
Ron Patterson…….. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 13NP in 49 minutes per 40: 10.6
Tyler Roberson……. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 18NP in 96 minutes per 40: 7.5
B. J. Johnson……….. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 1NP in 50 minutes per 40: 0.8
Comment: Trevor Cooney’s numbers are fading a big but still strong. Tyler Ennis’ numbers are excellent for a point guard but not on the level of a Pearl Washington or Sherman Douglas who reached 20.9 and 21.1 for full seasons. Of course with Tyler it’s not what he does but when he does it that counts. Still, the overall statistical picture of this team is of a team with a lot of good but no great players. Out national championship team had Carmmelo Anthony at 22.9 and Hakim Warrick at 19.5NP/40. The 1986-87 team that should have won the title had Rony Seikaly at 22.4, Douglas at 21.1 and Derrick Coleman at 19.5. The 1988-89 team, which may have been our best ever, had Coleman at an incredible 28.5, Douglas at 20.3, Stevie Thompson at 19.9 and Billy Owens at 18.3. Our 1995-96 that took Kentucky to the limit in the title game was mediocre overall but had John Wallace at 22.6, carrying us on our back. There’s nobody like that on this team. This is a solid team that finds a way to win but not a powerhouse team that gives the opponent no chance to win.
Tyler Ennis has led in net points 9 times, no mean feat for a guard, (but also a comment on what we’ve got up front, where our leaders would normally come from). Trevor Cooney has led 4 times and CJ Fair led 3 times. Rakeem Christmas has led twice and DaJuan Coleman and Jerami Grant once.
Possession:
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 4 offensive and 20 defensive rebounds. They had 16 offensive and 19 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball only 4 of 23 times, (17.3%). When they missed, they got the ball 16 of 36 times (44.4%). It wasn’t just their offensive rebounding. It was our lack of it. We’ve averaged getting 39.6% of our misses and our opposition has gotten 31.5% of theirs. We have won the rebounding battle by this measure 13 times in 18 games. It was the first time we’d lost the rebound battle since the St. John’s game and by far the worst we’d lost it all year.
Of our 9 turnovers, 2 were their steals and 7 were our own miscues. Of their 11 turnovers, 7 were Syracuse steals and 4 were their fault. Syracuse has had fewer turnovers in all but one game, (175-280) and are also ahead in unforced errors, (93-109). That’s very impressive for a team with a young backcourt. But this was the first game where we were unable to make up for a rebounding deficit with steals and turnovers.
If you add our 24 rebounds to their 11 turnovers, we had 35 “manufactured possessions”. They had 35 + 9 = 44, so we were -9. We’ve won that battle every time this season, except this and the St. John’s game, with an average margin of +10.5. We’ve won by double figures 11 times. It’s the main reason we wee 17-0 but we had to find another way to win to go 18-0.
Shooting:
It’s still what the game is all about. And it won this game for us- but not on outside jump shots. We were 17 for 26, (.654) inside the arc- an incredible percentage against a great defensive team like Pitt, (would we have been able to do that under last year’s rules?), 4 for 15, (.267), outside it and 13 for 18 (.722) from the line. They were 13/33, (.394)- a great defensive effort against a team known for its inside passing, 5/14 (.357) and 13/23 (.565). On the season, Syracuse is shooting .507/.346/.697, the opposition .476/.329/.662. We complain about our free throw shooting but we are now out-shooting the opposition on the year by 35 points. Here are our two point percentages for every year of this decade: 2009-10: .571-.462 (+109), 2010-11: .562-.444 (+118), 2011-12: .519-.425 (+94), 2012-13: .485-.425 (+60). So far this year: .507-.476 = +31.
We had 59 points, 32 in the paint, 12 from the arc and 13 from the line so we scored only 2 points 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 54-24-15-13 =2 points in the Twilight Zone. Overall, we had only 14 POP: Points Outside the Paint to only 17 for them. It wasn’t a shooter’s game- it was a drivers game. So far this year Syracuse is averaging 24 POP, 8 from the TZ, the opposition 26/5. Pitt had 19 “second chance” points to 2 for us. I there had been no offensive rounds, we’d have won 57-35.
11 of our 21 baskets were assisted (.524) and 10 of their 18 (.556). For the year we are assisting on 51.6% of our baskets to 64.1% for the opposition, who have had more assists or a higher percentage in 15 of 18 games, all of which we’ve won.
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” 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 41 FGA -4 OREBs + 9 TOs + (.475 x 18) = 54.55 possessions. They were 47 –16 + 11 + (.475 x 23) = 52.925 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one off, I’ll count that as 54 possessions in which we scored 59 points, (1.093) and 53 possessions in which they scored 54 points, (1.019. For the year we are 1.158 vs. 0.939. We’ve been more efficient than our opposition in every game so far, which is also why we are 18-0. We’ve averaged 124 total possessions per game this year but have been below that in every ACC game, (107 in this one), suggesting that our hopes of more wide-open, fast paced games in this conference may not come to pass.
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 this game: 15-12, 10-9, 16-17, 18-16. The average for the season is: 17-14, 19-15, 17-15, 18-14. We’ve won 48 quarters, lost 18 and tied 6. We’ve scored at least 15 in 56 of 72 quarters and held the opposition under that 39 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 this game Tyler Ennis had 16 points and 3 assists for 19 “hockey points” to lead the team. So far Tyler Ennis has led 8 times and CJ Fair have done it 7 times, Trevor Cooney 4 times and Jerami Grant has done it twice, including ties.
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 than those later in the game, (although sometimes we don’t score until later in the game). Jerami Grant sat us down in both halves with jumpers at 2.13 of the first half 1:38 into the second half. CJ Fair has now sat us down 11 times, Tyler 8 times, Trevor Cooney 6 times, DaJuan Coleman 5 times, and Rakeem Christmas 4 times and Grant those two times, (remember he didn’t start until Coleman got hurt).
Longest: 8:50, second half vs. Miami. We were 4:51 vs. St. Francis, (second half), 3:12 vs. Villanova (first half) and 2:29 vs. Eastern Michigan (second half), 2:13 vs. Pittsburgh (first half), 2:05 vs. North Carolina (second half), 1:45 vs. Boston College (first half), 1:38 vs. Pittsburgh (second half), and 1:18 vs. North Carolina (first half)
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 player 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 player in the most recent game and their averages per 40 minutes of play for the season, (exhibitions games not included):
Tyler Ennis………….. 16NP in 40 minutes season: 252NP in 605 minutes per 40: 16.6
Rakeem Christmas 15NP in 29 minutes season: 129NP in 375 minutes per 40: 13.8
Jerami Grant……….. 12NP in 40 minutes season: 213NP in 509 minutes per 40: 16.7
C. J. Fair………………. 9NP in 40 minutes season: 222NP in 655 minutes per 40: 13.6
Baye Moussa Keita 2NP in 11 minutes season: 57NP in 295 minutes per 40: 7.7
Trevor Cooney…… 2NP in 32 minutes season: 206NP in 554 minutes per 40: 14.9
Michael Gbinije …. 1NP in 8 minutes season: 77NP in 236 minutes per 40: 13.1
DaJuan Coleman…. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 61NP in 169 minutes per 40: 14.4
Ron Patterson…….. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 13NP in 49 minutes per 40: 10.6
Tyler Roberson……. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 18NP in 96 minutes per 40: 7.5
B. J. Johnson……….. 0NP in 0 minutes season: 1NP in 50 minutes per 40: 0.8
Comment: Trevor Cooney’s numbers are fading a big but still strong. Tyler Ennis’ numbers are excellent for a point guard but not on the level of a Pearl Washington or Sherman Douglas who reached 20.9 and 21.1 for full seasons. Of course with Tyler it’s not what he does but when he does it that counts. Still, the overall statistical picture of this team is of a team with a lot of good but no great players. Out national championship team had Carmmelo Anthony at 22.9 and Hakim Warrick at 19.5NP/40. The 1986-87 team that should have won the title had Rony Seikaly at 22.4, Douglas at 21.1 and Derrick Coleman at 19.5. The 1988-89 team, which may have been our best ever, had Coleman at an incredible 28.5, Douglas at 20.3, Stevie Thompson at 19.9 and Billy Owens at 18.3. Our 1995-96 that took Kentucky to the limit in the title game was mediocre overall but had John Wallace at 22.6, carrying us on our back. There’s nobody like that on this team. This is a solid team that finds a way to win but not a powerhouse team that gives the opponent no chance to win.
Tyler Ennis has led in net points 9 times, no mean feat for a guard, (but also a comment on what we’ve got up front, where our leaders would normally come from). Trevor Cooney has led 4 times and CJ Fair led 3 times. Rakeem Christmas has led twice and DaJuan Coleman and Jerami Grant once.
Possession:
Before you can score you’ve got to get the rock. Syracuse had 4 offensive and 20 defensive rebounds. They had 16 offensive and 19 defensive rebounds. When we missed we got the ball only 4 of 23 times, (17.3%). When they missed, they got the ball 16 of 36 times (44.4%). It wasn’t just their offensive rebounding. It was our lack of it. We’ve averaged getting 39.6% of our misses and our opposition has gotten 31.5% of theirs. We have won the rebounding battle by this measure 13 times in 18 games. It was the first time we’d lost the rebound battle since the St. John’s game and by far the worst we’d lost it all year.
Of our 9 turnovers, 2 were their steals and 7 were our own miscues. Of their 11 turnovers, 7 were Syracuse steals and 4 were their fault. Syracuse has had fewer turnovers in all but one game, (175-280) and are also ahead in unforced errors, (93-109). That’s very impressive for a team with a young backcourt. But this was the first game where we were unable to make up for a rebounding deficit with steals and turnovers.
If you add our 24 rebounds to their 11 turnovers, we had 35 “manufactured possessions”. They had 35 + 9 = 44, so we were -9. We’ve won that battle every time this season, except this and the St. John’s game, with an average margin of +10.5. We’ve won by double figures 11 times. It’s the main reason we wee 17-0 but we had to find another way to win to go 18-0.
Shooting:
It’s still what the game is all about. And it won this game for us- but not on outside jump shots. We were 17 for 26, (.654) inside the arc- an incredible percentage against a great defensive team like Pitt, (would we have been able to do that under last year’s rules?), 4 for 15, (.267), outside it and 13 for 18 (.722) from the line. They were 13/33, (.394)- a great defensive effort against a team known for its inside passing, 5/14 (.357) and 13/23 (.565). On the season, Syracuse is shooting .507/.346/.697, the opposition .476/.329/.662. We complain about our free throw shooting but we are now out-shooting the opposition on the year by 35 points. Here are our two point percentages for every year of this decade: 2009-10: .571-.462 (+109), 2010-11: .562-.444 (+118), 2011-12: .519-.425 (+94), 2012-13: .485-.425 (+60). So far this year: .507-.476 = +31.
We had 59 points, 32 in the paint, 12 from the arc and 13 from the line so we scored only 2 points 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 54-24-15-13 =2 points in the Twilight Zone. Overall, we had only 14 POP: Points Outside the Paint to only 17 for them. It wasn’t a shooter’s game- it was a drivers game. So far this year Syracuse is averaging 24 POP, 8 from the TZ, the opposition 26/5. Pitt had 19 “second chance” points to 2 for us. I there had been no offensive rounds, we’d have won 57-35.
11 of our 21 baskets were assisted (.524) and 10 of their 18 (.556). For the year we are assisting on 51.6% of our baskets to 64.1% for the opposition, who have had more assists or a higher percentage in 15 of 18 games, all of which we’ve won.
You compute “Offensive Efficiency” 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 41 FGA -4 OREBs + 9 TOs + (.475 x 18) = 54.55 possessions. They were 47 –16 + 11 + (.475 x 23) = 52.925 possessions. Since possessions shouldn’t be more than one off, I’ll count that as 54 possessions in which we scored 59 points, (1.093) and 53 possessions in which they scored 54 points, (1.019. For the year we are 1.158 vs. 0.939. We’ve been more efficient than our opposition in every game so far, which is also why we are 18-0. We’ve averaged 124 total possessions per game this year but have been below that in every ACC game, (107 in this one), suggesting that our hopes of more wide-open, fast paced games in this conference may not come to pass.
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 this game: 15-12, 10-9, 16-17, 18-16. The average for the season is: 17-14, 19-15, 17-15, 18-14. We’ve won 48 quarters, lost 18 and tied 6. We’ve scored at least 15 in 56 of 72 quarters and held the opposition under that 39 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 this game Tyler Ennis had 16 points and 3 assists for 19 “hockey points” to lead the team. So far Tyler Ennis has led 8 times and CJ Fair have done it 7 times, Trevor Cooney 4 times and Jerami Grant has done it twice, including ties.
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 than those later in the game, (although sometimes we don’t score until later in the game). Jerami Grant sat us down in both halves with jumpers at 2.13 of the first half 1:38 into the second half. CJ Fair has now sat us down 11 times, Tyler 8 times, Trevor Cooney 6 times, DaJuan Coleman 5 times, and Rakeem Christmas 4 times and Grant those two times, (remember he didn’t start until Coleman got hurt).
Longest: 8:50, second half vs. Miami. We were 4:51 vs. St. Francis, (second half), 3:12 vs. Villanova (first half) and 2:29 vs. Eastern Michigan (second half), 2:13 vs. Pittsburgh (first half), 2:05 vs. North Carolina (second half), 1:45 vs. Boston College (first half), 1:38 vs. Pittsburgh (second half), and 1:18 vs. North Carolina (first half)
