SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,545
- Like
- 64,578
This is an update of a post I did a couple of year ago, examining the SU-Pitt rivalry in the Howland-Dixon era:
Syracuse has now lost 13 of the last 16 games they’ve played against Pittsburgh. The heyday of the “Hoya Saxa” was 1979-1989 when we won 8 games and lost 20. In the 1990’s, we were 10-14 against Connecticut and 9-11 in the 2000’s and won last year. So we’ve never been dominated like this:
3/09/01 (BET) Pittsburgh 55 Syracuse 54 (OT)
1/22/02 (Dome) Pittsburgh 72 Syracuse 57
2/10/02 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 75 Syracuse 62
1/18/03 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 73 Syracuse 60
2/01/03 (Dome) Syracuse 67 Pittsburgh 65
1/24/04 (Dome) Pittsburgh 66 Syracuse 45
2/29/04 (Pitt) Syracuse 49 Pittsburgh 46 (OT)
1/29/05 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 76 Syracuse 69
2/14/05 (Dome) Pittsburgh 68 Syracuse 64
1/23/06 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 80 Syracuse 67
3/11/06 (BET) Syracuse 65 Pittsburgh 61
1/04/07 (Dome) Pittsburgh 74 Syracuse 66
3/01/08 (Dome) Pittsburgh 82 Syracuse 77
1/19/09 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 78 Syracuse 60
1/02/10 (Dome) Pittsburgh 82 Syracuse 72
1/17/11 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 74 Syracuse 66
1/16/12 (Dome) Syracuse 71 Pittsburgh 63
2/02/13 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 65 Syracuse 55
Total record over the period: Pittsburgh 14 wins Syracuse 2 wins. Total points: 1253-1128. Average score: 70-63. SU’s wins have been by 2,3,4 and 8 points, (average of 4). Pittsburgh’s wins have been by 1,15,13,13,21,7,4,13,8,5,18,10,8 and 10 points, (average of 10). Pitt is 7-1 there, 6-2 here and 1-1 in New York. I decided to do a statistical breakdown of each game to try to search for common denominators, if any.
Efficiency
3/09/01 Pitt: 55/63 = 0.873 SU: 54/62 = 0.871
1/22/02 Pitt: 72/61 = 1.180 SU: 57/62 = 0.919
2/10/02 Pitt: 75/70 = 1.071 SU: 62/71 = 0.873
1/18/03 Pitt: 73/66 = 1.106 SU: 60/67 = 0.896
2/01/03 Pitt: 65/69 = 0.942 SU: 67/68 = 0.985 (win)
1/24/04 Pitt: 66/59 = 1.119 SU: 45/59 = 0.763
2/29/04 Pitt: 46/60 = 0.767 SU: 49/60 = 0.817 (win)
1/29/05 Pitt: 76/65 = 1.169 SU: 69/66 = 1.045
2/14/05 Pitt: 68/65 = 1.046 SU: 64/66 = 0.970
1/23/06 Pitt: 80/72 = 1.111 SU: 67/72 = 0.931
3/11/06 Pitt: 61/63 = 0.968 SU: 65/62 = 1.048 (win)
1/04/07 Pitt: 74/65 = 1.138 SU: 66/64 = 1.031
3/01/08 Pitt: 82/71 = 1.155 SU: 77/72 = 1.069
1/19/09 Pitt: 78/67 = 1.164 SU: 60/68 = 0.882
1/02/10 Pitt: 82/76 = 1.079 SU: 72/77 = 0.935
1/17/11 Pitt: 74/68 = 1.088 SU: 66/68 = 0.971
1/16/12 Pitt: 63/62 = 1.016 SU: 71/63 = 1.127 (win)
2/02/13 Pitt: 65/66 = 0.985 SU: 55/65 = 0.846
Totals: Pitt 1255 points in 1188 possessions= 1.056 points per minute
Syracuse: 1126 points in 1192 possessions = 0.945 points per minute
Obviously, the winning team will be the most efficient scoring team as the possession are no more than one off. In 2 of our 4 wins, our offense wasn’t that more efficient than usual against Pitt but in all three we held them down as well as they were holding us down. The other two we found ways to score. But normally, you’re not going to score a lot against Pitt. You need to pull them down to your level.
Shooting
(The first column is the percentage of two point field goal attempts made ; the second three point field goals; the third free throw shooting; the fourth the percentage of field goal attempts that were three pointers and the fifth the percentage of made field goals that were assisted. I‘ve put the best figure for that game in italics.)
3/09/01 Pitt: 41 25 60 41 85 SU: 47 31 62 27 38
1/22/02 Pitt: 57 38 61 51 82 SU: 47 31 86 30 17
2/10/02 Pitt: 56 35 72 30 68 SU: 50 15 68 23 75
1/18/03 Pitt: 59 29 62 39 76 SU: 55 25 71 27 43
2/01/03 Pitt: 64 14 48 53 46 SU: 49 25 62 29 43 (win)
1/24/04 Pitt: 49 31 64 26 67 SU: 28 25 44 29 60
2/29/04 Pitt: 36 19 53 29 59 SU: 43 10 75 20 50 (win)
1/29/05 Pitt: 45 38 78 44 78 SU: 55 27 70 43 68
2/14/05 Pitt: 42 41 75 48 79 SU: 46 23 72 36 65
1/23/06 Pitt: 58 47 66 27 76 SU: 50 22 60 37 41
3/11/06 Pitt: 34 32 72 42 85 SU: 43 50 65 31 57 (win)
1/04/07 Pitt: 53 41 53 38 68 SU: 51 26 90 23 50
3/01/08 Pitt: 57 35 88 43 59 SU: 65 47 60 33 67
1/19/09 Pitt: 60 33 53 25 56 SU: 44 35 44 36 57
1/02/10 Pitt: 46 42 72 46 83 SU: 51 08 65 20 43
1/17/11 Pitt: 51 40 70 27 67 SU: 39 40 53 31 52
1/16/12 Pitt: 46 30 52 41 59 SU: 56 28 87 36 70 (win)
2/02/13 Pitt: 60 20 67 30 79 SU: 43 21 80 29 28
Averages: Pitt: 51 33 65 38 71 SU: 48 27 68 30 54
Pittsburgh has made 51% of their two point shots, 33% of their three point shots and 65% of their free throws. 38% of their shots are three point attempts. 71% of their successful field goal attempts were assisted.
Syracuse has made 48% of their two point shots, 27% of their three point shots and 68% of their free throws. 30% of their shots are three point attempts. 54% of their successful field goal attempts were assisted.
Pittsburgh has led in two point field goal percentage 10 of 18 times. They’ve led in three point field goal percentage 11 of 18 times. They’ve led in free throw percentage 10 of 18 times. They’ve had the fewest % of their shots that were treys 4 of 18 times. They’ve had
The higher percentage of their baskets being assisted 14 of 18 times.
Syracuse has led in two point field goal percentage 8 of 18 times. They’ve led in three point field goal percentage 7 of 18 times. They’ve led in free throw percentage 8 of 18 times. They’ve had the fewest % of their shots that were treys 14 of 18 times. They’ve had the higher percentage of their baskets being assisted 4 of 18 times.
SU’s four wins were 2/1/03, 2/29/04, 3/11/06 and 1/16/12. In those the averages were:
Pitt- 45 26 56 41 62 SU- 48 28 72 29 55
Both teams shot about the same inside the arc. Both teams shot poorly from outside the arc. Our foul shooting was average, theirs poor. They took a lot more three pointers and still had a lot more assists per basket. We won these games by an average of four points per game so we were not dominant. Pitt’s poor outside and foul shooting kept us in it. Defense has most to do with two point field goal percentage and the number of three pointers taken and they made fewer two pointers, (45% vs. 48%) and attempted more three pointers (41% vs. 29%). But hitting 26% of your treys and 56% of your foul shots is likely to get you beat.
Rebounding
(The figures below are the offensive and defensive rebounds for each team, the percentage of their own misses they rebounded and the number of rebounds their starting frontcourt and backcourt got. After a game where our backcourt got zero rebounds, I thought maybe rebounding from the back court was a big factor. Again, the best numbers in each game are in italics.)
3/09/01 Pitt: 13 22 32 21 5 SU: 8 28 27 14 8
1/22/02 Pitt: 16 27 53 24 9 SU: 4 14 13 6 4
2/10/02 Pitt: 11 26 37 20 7 SU: 8 19 24 13 8
1/18/03 Pitt: 15 20 44 17 7 SU: 8 19 29 14 9
2/01/03 Pitt: 12 25 29 23 2 SU: 12 29 32 21 7
1/24/04 Pitt: 20 30 54 24 12 SU: 19 17 39 14 6
2/29/04 Pitt: 17 24 41 19 6 SU: 10 24 29 15 7
1/29/05 Pitt: 18 21 53 19 6 SU: 12 33 36 13 8
2/24/05 Pitt: 13 28 42 24 8 SU: 14 18 33 14 3
1/23/06 Pitt: 16 29 42 15 7 SU: 16 22 36 17 7
3/11/06 Pitt: 16 18 39 19 5 SU: 10 25 36 22 3
1/04/07 Pitt: 12 23 34 16 5 SU: 12 23 34 15 2
3/01/08 Pitt: 12 20 35 18 4 SU: 4 22 17 14 6
1/19/09 Pitt: 12 28 39 23 8 SU: 9 19 24 18 6
1/02/10 Pitt: 12 26 38 18 10 SU: 15 20 37 17 7
1/17/11 Pitt: 11 33 36 27 7 SU: 10 20 23 12 0
1/16/12 Pitt: 19 21 49 17 0 SU: 8 20 28 13 2
2/03/13 Pitt: 14 25 47 23 6 SU: 8 16 24 11 7
Averages: Pitt: 14 25 41 20 7 SU: 10 22 29 15 6
Pittsburgh has averaged 14 offensive rebounds, 25 defensive rebounds and gotten 41% of their own misses. Their frontcourt got 20 rebounds per game, their backcourt 7. Syracuse has averaged 10 offensive and 22 defensive rebounds per game and gotten 29% of our own misses. Our frontcourt got 15 rebounds per game, our backcourt 6.
Pitt has been the better rebounding team on both ends. Pitt getting 41% of their misses while we get 29% of ours is a huge difference in possessions during a game. The 1/22/02 game was particularly bad: we got out rebounded 18-43. We out-rebounded them over all only three times and tied once. They got more offensive rebounds 13 times in 18 games, more defensive rebounds 12 times and got more of their own misses 15 times. Their frontcourt out-rebounded ours 16 times in 18 games. Their backcourt out-rebounded ours 8 times. Ours won 9 times they even once so backcourt rebounding has not been a consistent factor at all.
In the games we won, we outrebounded them on 2/1/03, got outrebounded on 2/29/04 and had one more rebound but a lesser percentage of our misses on 3/11/06. No real pattern there, except we didn’t get killed on the boards. Pitt had its normal advantage on 1/16/12, even though we won.
Other Stats
(This records turnovers, what I call “manufactured possession”- one team’s rebounds + the other team’s turnovers, personal fouls and free throw attempted- how often they got to the line. Again, the best number is in italics.)
3/09/01 Pitt: 12 49 13 15 SU: 14 48 17 13
1/22/02 Pitt: 15 52 8 31 SU: 9 33 19 7
2/02/02 Pitt: 15 51 15 18 SU: 14 42 17 19
1/18/03 Pitt: 13 55 18 13 SU: 20 40 11 21
2/01/03 Pitt: 12 50 24 29 SU: 13 53 24 29
1/24/04 Pitt: 13 61 21 11 SU: 11 49 12 25
2/29/04 Pitt: 14 53 15 17 SU: 12 48 17 16
1/29/05 Pitt: 15 54 18 27 SU: 15 43 23 27
2/14/05 Pitt: 18 52 20 28 SU: 11 50 19 18
1/23/06 Pitt: 15 58 13 35 SU: 13 53 26 5
3/11/06 Pitt: 12 47 13 18 SU: 13 47 17 17
1/04/07 Pitt: 11 46 7 17 SU: 11 46 15 10
3/01/08 Pitt: 14 50 13 17 SU: 18 40 15 15
1/19/09 Pitt: 10 54 15 17 SU: 14 38 15 16
1/02/10 Pitt: 18 52 20 36 SU: 14 53 25 23
1/17/11 Pitt: 13 51 14 20 SU: 7 43 15 15
1/16/12 Pitt: 14 50 20 23 SU: 10 42 15 23
2/03/13 Pitt: 20 53 18 21 SU: 14 44 20 20
Averages: Pitt: 14 52 16 22 SU: 13 45 18 18
Pittsburgh averaged 14 turnovers per game. Their rebounds plus our turnovers per game totaled 52 “manufactured possessions”. They were called for 16 fouls a game and went to the line 22 times per game. Syracuse averaged 13 turnovers per game, had 45 manufactured possessions, committed 18 fouls per game and went to the line 18 times.
They had fewer turnovers 6 times. We have fewer turnovers 10 times, so turnovers haven’t been a problem. Their rebounding gave them 7 more possessions when you add the rebounds and turnovers. They led in that stats 14 times.
They had the advantages in fouls. We averaged 2 more fouls per game and they went to the line 4 more times per game. They had fewer fouls 12 times to 4 for us and two even. They got to the line more in 13 games, including11 of the last 12, with the other one even. This despite the fact that they are the more “physical” team. I have a theory that referees tend to call what they deem to be unusual. When a team hand checks, hip checks, pushes and shoves, they get called only when they really mug somebody. When a team plays traditional basketball and tries to stay in front of the opponent and keeps their hands and legs moving but tries to avoid actual contact, they get called for anything. When two teams play each other using those two approaches the normally more “physical” team gets away on its end with things their opponent isn’t allowed to respond in kind on their end.
In our four wins, (2/1/03, 2/29/04, 3/11/06 and 1/16/12), these statistics were usually close to equal: The turnovers were 12-13, 14-12, 12-13, 10-14. The manufactured possessions were 50-53, 53-48 and 47-47 and 50-42. The fouls were 24-24, 15-17, 13-17 and 15-20. The free throws were 29-29, 17-16, 18-17 and 23-23.
The key then, against Pitt is to hold their offensive production down to ours, hit the boards so that we can about break even in possessions and get an even break from the refs. There are no shocking revelations there but that’s what the stats suggest when you look at them.
Syracuse has now lost 13 of the last 16 games they’ve played against Pittsburgh. The heyday of the “Hoya Saxa” was 1979-1989 when we won 8 games and lost 20. In the 1990’s, we were 10-14 against Connecticut and 9-11 in the 2000’s and won last year. So we’ve never been dominated like this:
3/09/01 (BET) Pittsburgh 55 Syracuse 54 (OT)
1/22/02 (Dome) Pittsburgh 72 Syracuse 57
2/10/02 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 75 Syracuse 62
1/18/03 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 73 Syracuse 60
2/01/03 (Dome) Syracuse 67 Pittsburgh 65
1/24/04 (Dome) Pittsburgh 66 Syracuse 45
2/29/04 (Pitt) Syracuse 49 Pittsburgh 46 (OT)
1/29/05 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 76 Syracuse 69
2/14/05 (Dome) Pittsburgh 68 Syracuse 64
1/23/06 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 80 Syracuse 67
3/11/06 (BET) Syracuse 65 Pittsburgh 61
1/04/07 (Dome) Pittsburgh 74 Syracuse 66
3/01/08 (Dome) Pittsburgh 82 Syracuse 77
1/19/09 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 78 Syracuse 60
1/02/10 (Dome) Pittsburgh 82 Syracuse 72
1/17/11 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 74 Syracuse 66
1/16/12 (Dome) Syracuse 71 Pittsburgh 63
2/02/13 (Pitt) Pittsburgh 65 Syracuse 55
Total record over the period: Pittsburgh 14 wins Syracuse 2 wins. Total points: 1253-1128. Average score: 70-63. SU’s wins have been by 2,3,4 and 8 points, (average of 4). Pittsburgh’s wins have been by 1,15,13,13,21,7,4,13,8,5,18,10,8 and 10 points, (average of 10). Pitt is 7-1 there, 6-2 here and 1-1 in New York. I decided to do a statistical breakdown of each game to try to search for common denominators, if any.
Efficiency
3/09/01 Pitt: 55/63 = 0.873 SU: 54/62 = 0.871
1/22/02 Pitt: 72/61 = 1.180 SU: 57/62 = 0.919
2/10/02 Pitt: 75/70 = 1.071 SU: 62/71 = 0.873
1/18/03 Pitt: 73/66 = 1.106 SU: 60/67 = 0.896
2/01/03 Pitt: 65/69 = 0.942 SU: 67/68 = 0.985 (win)
1/24/04 Pitt: 66/59 = 1.119 SU: 45/59 = 0.763
2/29/04 Pitt: 46/60 = 0.767 SU: 49/60 = 0.817 (win)
1/29/05 Pitt: 76/65 = 1.169 SU: 69/66 = 1.045
2/14/05 Pitt: 68/65 = 1.046 SU: 64/66 = 0.970
1/23/06 Pitt: 80/72 = 1.111 SU: 67/72 = 0.931
3/11/06 Pitt: 61/63 = 0.968 SU: 65/62 = 1.048 (win)
1/04/07 Pitt: 74/65 = 1.138 SU: 66/64 = 1.031
3/01/08 Pitt: 82/71 = 1.155 SU: 77/72 = 1.069
1/19/09 Pitt: 78/67 = 1.164 SU: 60/68 = 0.882
1/02/10 Pitt: 82/76 = 1.079 SU: 72/77 = 0.935
1/17/11 Pitt: 74/68 = 1.088 SU: 66/68 = 0.971
1/16/12 Pitt: 63/62 = 1.016 SU: 71/63 = 1.127 (win)
2/02/13 Pitt: 65/66 = 0.985 SU: 55/65 = 0.846
Totals: Pitt 1255 points in 1188 possessions= 1.056 points per minute
Syracuse: 1126 points in 1192 possessions = 0.945 points per minute
Obviously, the winning team will be the most efficient scoring team as the possession are no more than one off. In 2 of our 4 wins, our offense wasn’t that more efficient than usual against Pitt but in all three we held them down as well as they were holding us down. The other two we found ways to score. But normally, you’re not going to score a lot against Pitt. You need to pull them down to your level.
Shooting
(The first column is the percentage of two point field goal attempts made ; the second three point field goals; the third free throw shooting; the fourth the percentage of field goal attempts that were three pointers and the fifth the percentage of made field goals that were assisted. I‘ve put the best figure for that game in italics.)
3/09/01 Pitt: 41 25 60 41 85 SU: 47 31 62 27 38
1/22/02 Pitt: 57 38 61 51 82 SU: 47 31 86 30 17
2/10/02 Pitt: 56 35 72 30 68 SU: 50 15 68 23 75
1/18/03 Pitt: 59 29 62 39 76 SU: 55 25 71 27 43
2/01/03 Pitt: 64 14 48 53 46 SU: 49 25 62 29 43 (win)
1/24/04 Pitt: 49 31 64 26 67 SU: 28 25 44 29 60
2/29/04 Pitt: 36 19 53 29 59 SU: 43 10 75 20 50 (win)
1/29/05 Pitt: 45 38 78 44 78 SU: 55 27 70 43 68
2/14/05 Pitt: 42 41 75 48 79 SU: 46 23 72 36 65
1/23/06 Pitt: 58 47 66 27 76 SU: 50 22 60 37 41
3/11/06 Pitt: 34 32 72 42 85 SU: 43 50 65 31 57 (win)
1/04/07 Pitt: 53 41 53 38 68 SU: 51 26 90 23 50
3/01/08 Pitt: 57 35 88 43 59 SU: 65 47 60 33 67
1/19/09 Pitt: 60 33 53 25 56 SU: 44 35 44 36 57
1/02/10 Pitt: 46 42 72 46 83 SU: 51 08 65 20 43
1/17/11 Pitt: 51 40 70 27 67 SU: 39 40 53 31 52
1/16/12 Pitt: 46 30 52 41 59 SU: 56 28 87 36 70 (win)
2/02/13 Pitt: 60 20 67 30 79 SU: 43 21 80 29 28
Averages: Pitt: 51 33 65 38 71 SU: 48 27 68 30 54
Pittsburgh has made 51% of their two point shots, 33% of their three point shots and 65% of their free throws. 38% of their shots are three point attempts. 71% of their successful field goal attempts were assisted.
Syracuse has made 48% of their two point shots, 27% of their three point shots and 68% of their free throws. 30% of their shots are three point attempts. 54% of their successful field goal attempts were assisted.
Pittsburgh has led in two point field goal percentage 10 of 18 times. They’ve led in three point field goal percentage 11 of 18 times. They’ve led in free throw percentage 10 of 18 times. They’ve had the fewest % of their shots that were treys 4 of 18 times. They’ve had
The higher percentage of their baskets being assisted 14 of 18 times.
Syracuse has led in two point field goal percentage 8 of 18 times. They’ve led in three point field goal percentage 7 of 18 times. They’ve led in free throw percentage 8 of 18 times. They’ve had the fewest % of their shots that were treys 14 of 18 times. They’ve had the higher percentage of their baskets being assisted 4 of 18 times.
SU’s four wins were 2/1/03, 2/29/04, 3/11/06 and 1/16/12. In those the averages were:
Pitt- 45 26 56 41 62 SU- 48 28 72 29 55
Both teams shot about the same inside the arc. Both teams shot poorly from outside the arc. Our foul shooting was average, theirs poor. They took a lot more three pointers and still had a lot more assists per basket. We won these games by an average of four points per game so we were not dominant. Pitt’s poor outside and foul shooting kept us in it. Defense has most to do with two point field goal percentage and the number of three pointers taken and they made fewer two pointers, (45% vs. 48%) and attempted more three pointers (41% vs. 29%). But hitting 26% of your treys and 56% of your foul shots is likely to get you beat.
Rebounding
(The figures below are the offensive and defensive rebounds for each team, the percentage of their own misses they rebounded and the number of rebounds their starting frontcourt and backcourt got. After a game where our backcourt got zero rebounds, I thought maybe rebounding from the back court was a big factor. Again, the best numbers in each game are in italics.)
3/09/01 Pitt: 13 22 32 21 5 SU: 8 28 27 14 8
1/22/02 Pitt: 16 27 53 24 9 SU: 4 14 13 6 4
2/10/02 Pitt: 11 26 37 20 7 SU: 8 19 24 13 8
1/18/03 Pitt: 15 20 44 17 7 SU: 8 19 29 14 9
2/01/03 Pitt: 12 25 29 23 2 SU: 12 29 32 21 7
1/24/04 Pitt: 20 30 54 24 12 SU: 19 17 39 14 6
2/29/04 Pitt: 17 24 41 19 6 SU: 10 24 29 15 7
1/29/05 Pitt: 18 21 53 19 6 SU: 12 33 36 13 8
2/24/05 Pitt: 13 28 42 24 8 SU: 14 18 33 14 3
1/23/06 Pitt: 16 29 42 15 7 SU: 16 22 36 17 7
3/11/06 Pitt: 16 18 39 19 5 SU: 10 25 36 22 3
1/04/07 Pitt: 12 23 34 16 5 SU: 12 23 34 15 2
3/01/08 Pitt: 12 20 35 18 4 SU: 4 22 17 14 6
1/19/09 Pitt: 12 28 39 23 8 SU: 9 19 24 18 6
1/02/10 Pitt: 12 26 38 18 10 SU: 15 20 37 17 7
1/17/11 Pitt: 11 33 36 27 7 SU: 10 20 23 12 0
1/16/12 Pitt: 19 21 49 17 0 SU: 8 20 28 13 2
2/03/13 Pitt: 14 25 47 23 6 SU: 8 16 24 11 7
Averages: Pitt: 14 25 41 20 7 SU: 10 22 29 15 6
Pittsburgh has averaged 14 offensive rebounds, 25 defensive rebounds and gotten 41% of their own misses. Their frontcourt got 20 rebounds per game, their backcourt 7. Syracuse has averaged 10 offensive and 22 defensive rebounds per game and gotten 29% of our own misses. Our frontcourt got 15 rebounds per game, our backcourt 6.
Pitt has been the better rebounding team on both ends. Pitt getting 41% of their misses while we get 29% of ours is a huge difference in possessions during a game. The 1/22/02 game was particularly bad: we got out rebounded 18-43. We out-rebounded them over all only three times and tied once. They got more offensive rebounds 13 times in 18 games, more defensive rebounds 12 times and got more of their own misses 15 times. Their frontcourt out-rebounded ours 16 times in 18 games. Their backcourt out-rebounded ours 8 times. Ours won 9 times they even once so backcourt rebounding has not been a consistent factor at all.
In the games we won, we outrebounded them on 2/1/03, got outrebounded on 2/29/04 and had one more rebound but a lesser percentage of our misses on 3/11/06. No real pattern there, except we didn’t get killed on the boards. Pitt had its normal advantage on 1/16/12, even though we won.
Other Stats
(This records turnovers, what I call “manufactured possession”- one team’s rebounds + the other team’s turnovers, personal fouls and free throw attempted- how often they got to the line. Again, the best number is in italics.)
3/09/01 Pitt: 12 49 13 15 SU: 14 48 17 13
1/22/02 Pitt: 15 52 8 31 SU: 9 33 19 7
2/02/02 Pitt: 15 51 15 18 SU: 14 42 17 19
1/18/03 Pitt: 13 55 18 13 SU: 20 40 11 21
2/01/03 Pitt: 12 50 24 29 SU: 13 53 24 29
1/24/04 Pitt: 13 61 21 11 SU: 11 49 12 25
2/29/04 Pitt: 14 53 15 17 SU: 12 48 17 16
1/29/05 Pitt: 15 54 18 27 SU: 15 43 23 27
2/14/05 Pitt: 18 52 20 28 SU: 11 50 19 18
1/23/06 Pitt: 15 58 13 35 SU: 13 53 26 5
3/11/06 Pitt: 12 47 13 18 SU: 13 47 17 17
1/04/07 Pitt: 11 46 7 17 SU: 11 46 15 10
3/01/08 Pitt: 14 50 13 17 SU: 18 40 15 15
1/19/09 Pitt: 10 54 15 17 SU: 14 38 15 16
1/02/10 Pitt: 18 52 20 36 SU: 14 53 25 23
1/17/11 Pitt: 13 51 14 20 SU: 7 43 15 15
1/16/12 Pitt: 14 50 20 23 SU: 10 42 15 23
2/03/13 Pitt: 20 53 18 21 SU: 14 44 20 20
Averages: Pitt: 14 52 16 22 SU: 13 45 18 18
Pittsburgh averaged 14 turnovers per game. Their rebounds plus our turnovers per game totaled 52 “manufactured possessions”. They were called for 16 fouls a game and went to the line 22 times per game. Syracuse averaged 13 turnovers per game, had 45 manufactured possessions, committed 18 fouls per game and went to the line 18 times.
They had fewer turnovers 6 times. We have fewer turnovers 10 times, so turnovers haven’t been a problem. Their rebounding gave them 7 more possessions when you add the rebounds and turnovers. They led in that stats 14 times.
They had the advantages in fouls. We averaged 2 more fouls per game and they went to the line 4 more times per game. They had fewer fouls 12 times to 4 for us and two even. They got to the line more in 13 games, including11 of the last 12, with the other one even. This despite the fact that they are the more “physical” team. I have a theory that referees tend to call what they deem to be unusual. When a team hand checks, hip checks, pushes and shoves, they get called only when they really mug somebody. When a team plays traditional basketball and tries to stay in front of the opponent and keeps their hands and legs moving but tries to avoid actual contact, they get called for anything. When two teams play each other using those two approaches the normally more “physical” team gets away on its end with things their opponent isn’t allowed to respond in kind on their end.
In our four wins, (2/1/03, 2/29/04, 3/11/06 and 1/16/12), these statistics were usually close to equal: The turnovers were 12-13, 14-12, 12-13, 10-14. The manufactured possessions were 50-53, 53-48 and 47-47 and 50-42. The fouls were 24-24, 15-17, 13-17 and 15-20. The free throws were 29-29, 17-16, 18-17 and 23-23.
The key then, against Pitt is to hold their offensive production down to ours, hit the boards so that we can about break even in possessions and get an even break from the refs. There are no shocking revelations there but that’s what the stats suggest when you look at them.
