Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
update on BBall stats for those interested (very long)...
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 3
| visibility 1,022

update on BBall stats for those interested (very long)...


Feb 22, 2016, 7:30 PM

To follow up on a post a couple of weeks back, here’s some updated stats for the basketball team against Power 5 competition (sans UGA, add UMass). The scope is only 20 games which is a small sample stats-wise, but for a college basketball team you’re talking about basically a full season. So these should be about as descriptive as they come.

A couple of key points:
a) in the 20 games noted, the Tigers are 10-10, so any deviation from a .500 result should be meaningful one way or the other.
b) the noted stats are only the ones that stand out – I have pre-judged them in any way – any other stats I ran came up as basically 50/50.
c) I love my Tigers basketball team and their coach. This is not to denigrate in any way, simply to describe.
d) make of it what you will…. they’re just stats.


1 – When the Tigers lost to State the other day it was the first time all season they had lost when Jordan Roper took less than 6 shots. We’re now 3-1 in those games. Roper’s a streaky shooter, and typically his role looks better distributing the ball.

2 – It’s foreshadowing to note that overall in the 10 games won by the Tigers, the “effective 2-pt FG%” (e2FG%) was higher than the “effective 3-pt FG%” (e3FG%). In the 10 games lost of the sample, the team’s e3FG% was higher than the e2FG% overall.

3 – The team’s “e3FG%” has been higher than the “e2FG%”. We are 6-7 in those games. Basically meaningless. Likewise, when the “e2FG%” is higher than the “e3FG%”, the team is 4-3. Not much difference.

So what gives? Is the team an effective 3-point shooting team or not?

4 – Well, the two highest “e3FG%” games of the year showed that the team shot “effectively” 75% n 3’s against both Notre Dame and Minnesota. Yep – lost both those games too, but…

5 – The next three highest “e3FG%” games were against FSU (game 1), Miami, and Pitt. Yep – won all of those games…

So it’s not just % that we should be looking at it appears, and it’s important to note that we took 28 and 20 three’s against Minnesota and Notre Dame, but only 18 and 16b three’s against Pitt and Miami. So…

6 – What happens when you look at the number of three’s and % made? Well, in the 4 games that the team’s “e2FG%” was better than the “e3FG%” AND we shot < 20 three’s, the team is 4 and 0.

7 – Further, in the 6 games that the “e2FG%” > 50% AND we shot < 20 three’s, the team is 6 and 0.

8 – In fact in games where we just shot < 20 three’s the team is 7 and 2.

Ready to stop shooting three’s yet?

9 – Well here’s an added bonus, and this is about committing to getting to the line: When the team shoots more Free Throws than 3 pointers, the team is 6 and 1.

And remember, this is from a sample of games where the team is 10-10 - .500 ball.

So whoa! How in the heck can you say that a decent 3-pt. shooting team is worse off by shooting a shot worth 3-points than it is in shooting a 1-pointer?!

Easy. Style of play.

You might hate Brownell’s style of play, but the stats show that the team is better off with it’s current players when it plays at a more methodical pace EVEN though it shoots a decent % on its 3-pointers!

One more to think about then:

10 – There have been 6 games where the team shot better “e3FG%” than it did “e2FG%”, AND shot > 20 three’s. That’s right – they had a high 3 point % and started chucking ‘em up because of it. Unfortunately they’re 2 and 4 in those games.

That’s right – when they’re hitting the three’s effectively, and shooting more of them, they still have a better chance of losing than winning.

Ultimately the key stat here is “number of 3-point shots”. When they shoot a lot of them they have a tendency to lose. When they stick to the inside game and try to get to the line, they have a much better chance of winning.

The really ugly part? Against State our “e2FG%” was 59% and our “e3FG%” was only 39%”, and yet we chucked up 27 three’s!

And 4 of our first 6 shots against State were 3-pointers, one even being heaved up by Josh Smith.

It’s called offensive immaturity (not knowing what is a good shot), and IMHO it’s why this team is so inconsistent….

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That hurt my brain.***


Feb 22, 2016, 7:35 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Dabo crushed my soul." --- Classof09


Re: update on BBall stats for those interested (very long)...


Feb 22, 2016, 8:58 PM

Loved the first one. Love this one. Thanks. Will be looking for the next analysis. Need to work the ball inside. Need more drive to the lane and pass off to the big man or the cutter. Blossomgame is very good at making his own shot. Well done again.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: update on BBall stats for those interested (very long)...


Feb 22, 2016, 10:12 PM

I will Speculate here and say that a lot of 3 point shooting is happening because the team wants to bury the other team and they feel that the three point shot is the way to do it. On another note I bet you'll find that while we're shooting all these 3. Shots we're playing lousy defense.

So I agree with your premise of immaturity and throw in lack of patience to play a methodical game all the way through.

Was that redundant?

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 3
| visibility 1,022
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic