Feb 22, 2008

Pac 10 Statistical Variation Snapsot

Well, a bunch of numbers were sitting in front of me, so I felt it was time to do some miscellaneous analysis. Below is just a brief snapshot of each team's best and worst stat based on their variation from the average of the conference.

Pac-10 games through 2/18

Hits the 3, but they don't pull in their misses. Probably due to their high percentage of shots that are 3's (35%)

Best - 3-pt%. Shooting 40.4%, above the 34.7% average
Worst - Offensive rebounding. Pulling in only 23.9% of their misses vs. 30.7% average.

Arizona St.
Not much variance from the means, but a few telling signs for the Sun Devils.

Best - Forces their opponents to turnover the ball on 20.3% of their possessions vs. the avg of 18.7%
Worst - Offensive rebounding. 25.3% VS. 30.7% average.

Not much to look at this club. Had to dig for the "best" stat. There were plenty of "worst" stats to look at

Best - 1.09 PPP vs. 1.046 conference average. Yeah, like I said, nothing eye-popping
Worst - Only forcing turnovers on 15.8% of their opponent's possessions vs. conference average of 18.7%. Hence a 1.13 PPP average for their opponents.

A snapshot of a team that has significantly dropped from last year.

Best - Shooting 54.3% efg vs. 49.8% average. (better than last year)
Worst - Not forcing turnovers. 15.3% of opponents possessions end in turnovers. Forced 19.7% last year.

Oregon St.
Not much to be proud of this season. Had to really scrape to find a "best"

Best - 17.3% turnover average is at least below the conference average of 18.7%
Worst - Well, the most off-the-mean stat posted, was that of the Beavers' .9 PPP average, vs. the 1.046 average, which during an average 64 possession game works out to 10 points below the average.

Defense is the name of the game for this squad in 2008, making up for their sub-par shooting.

Best - 42% efg average allowed, vs. the conference 49.8% average.
Worst - 45.9% efg shooting on the offensive end, vs. the conference average of 49.8%.

Beast of the Pac10, balance is what drives the Bruins as their variance on both ends isn't as large as Stanford's.

Best - They grab over 78% of their opponents' misses vs. the average of 69.3%. Second chances, beware!
Worst - As has been documented over at Kenpom.com, opponent 3-pt shooting tends more towards the mean, but their average of 36.5% given up vs. the 34.7% conference avg. is the largest "bad" difference from any average.

If they get a shot off, it goes in more than often. Highlight that "if"

Best - They shoot 56.4% on their 2's, vs. the average of 48.8% conference-wide
Worst - 22.2% of their possessions result in turnovers. This versus the conference average of 18.7%

Even the Appleby shooting machine can't help their average, but they pull in their misses.

Best - Rebounds 38.1% of their misses vs. 30.7% average. They're helped by only lofting up 26.8% of their shots from beyond the arc
Worst - Only hitting 31.3% of their 3's vs. 34.7% average. Good thing they don't shoot as many.

Washington St.
Bennett has this team dialed into a protective offense and a swarming defense.

Best - Only 16% of their possessions end in turnovers.
Worst - They force their opponents into a turnover 21.8% of the time vs. the 18.7% average.

Feb 15, 2008

Don't Turn the Ball over and Look What Happens!

Rutgers 63     West Virginia 81

Just wanted to highlight this bubble game (for WVA) for an example of how a team can manage to shoot 8 percentage points worse than your opposition yet still come out ahead by 18 points.

This medium-paced (sorry for the Sandler reference) contest of 67 possessions saw The Mountaineers post a 1.205 PPP average vs. Rutgers' .937 average. How did they do that when WVA shot only 47% and The Scarlet Knights shot 55%?
West Virginia turned the ball over a paltry 4 times in the game compared to Rutgers' 17 times for a respective 6% to 25% turnover average! Heck, I'll gladly shoot 47% if I know that I'm getting a shot off on 94% of the possessions.
Couple that with Rutgers only grabbing 17% of their misses and you have yourself a rout.

Bonus note: Rutgers shot 44% on 16 three-point attempts

Feb 7, 2008

Thursday Night Beast Action

UCLA 67     Washington St. 59

The Bruins continued their march as the definitive beast of the Pac10 with a big win in Pullman tonight while the Cougs continued their downward spiral in the table thanks to a balanced and efficient night from Kevin Love and to an offensive rebounding clinic put on by the entire UCLA team.
This 62 possession game saw UCLA post a 1.09 PPP average vs. Wazzu's sub-par .96. UCLA made up for a poor 25% 3pt shooting night by grabbing over 52% of their total misses and by holding Wazzu to a measly 20% offensive rebounding average.
The game was essentially a draw for 35 minutes until UCLA broke out and climbed to a 9 point lead with just over 3 to go thanks to a two minute span of 3 turnovers and only one attempted (and missed) shot over the course of those 2 minutes for Wazzu.

This game essentially was a snapshot of what UCLA has done all season. Rebound the heck out of you, lock down on D and shoot just well enough to finish off a game.

Feb 4, 2008


Fixed. 2/6/08

Feb 1, 2008

2008 ACC Tempo-Free Stats

**UPDATE*** Thank you Struttin' Wolf for the notices. I found that the macro running the ACC was only sorting and pulling in 10 teams, not the 12. That has been fixed and updated. As I said previously, any tips on data that looks fishy is appreciated as I simply run the macros off of the data from the conference sites, but there's always the possibility that a number gets mis-sorted

Through 2/27/08
2007 Stats

Offensive Stats

Tempo (possession per 40 minutes)

1. Duke76.1
2. North Carolina75.6
3. Georgia Tech72.7
4. Maryland72.3
5. Wake Forest72.2
6. Virginia Tech72.1
7. Miami69.8
8. Virginia69.6
9. Boston College69.6
10. Clemson68.8
11. Florida State68.3
12. NC State67.9

Offensive Efficiency (points per possession)

1. Duke1.13
2. North Carolina1.12
3. Clemson1.08
4. Maryland1.05
5. Georgia Tech1.05
6. Miami1.05
7. Boston College1.03
8. Wake Forest1.03
9. Virginia0.99
10. NC State0.99
11. Virginia Tech0.97
12. Florida State0.97

Effective FG %

1. Duke54%
2. Georgia Tech53.1%
3. Maryland52.5%
4. Boston College51.2%
5. Clemson51.2%
6. NC State51.1%
7. Wake Forest50.9%
8. North Carolina50.7%
9. Miami48.2%
10. Florida State48%
11. Virginia46.6%
12. Virginia Tech45.6%

2-pt Shooting %

1. Georgia Tech53.4%
2. Duke52.7%
3. Maryland51.4%
4. Wake Forest50.1%
5. North Carolina49.6%
6. Clemson48.6%
7. Boston College48.1%
8. NC State48%
9. Virginia Tech47%
10. Florida State46.9%
11. Miami46.6%
12. Virginia45.1%

3-pt Shooting %

1. Boston College39%
2. NC State38.4%
3. Clemson37.7%
4. Duke37.2%
5. Maryland37.1%
6. North Carolina36.4%
7. Georgia Tech35%
8. Wake Forest35%
9. Miami34.6%
10. Florida State33.2%
11. Virginia32.8%
12. Virginia Tech27.9%

Turnover %

1. Virginia17.7%
2. Duke18.1%
3. Clemson18.8%
4. North Carolina20%
5. Wake Forest20%
6. Miami20.3%
7. Boston College20.6%
8. Maryland21.3%
9. Virginia Tech21.6%
10. Georgia Tech21.9%
11. Florida State22.3%
12. NC State24%

Offensive Rebounding %

1. North Carolina39.7%
2. Clemson36.7%
3. Miami34.2%
4. Virginia Tech31%
5. Wake Forest30.6%
6. Georgia Tech30.5%
7. Duke30.4%
8. Florida State29.2%
9. Maryland29.2%
10. Boston College28.4%
11. Virginia28.3%
12. NC State27.8%

Efficiency Margin

1. North Carolina0.15
2. Duke0.14
3. Clemson0.08
4. Maryland0.01
5. Georgia Tech-0.01
6. Virginia Tech-0.02
7. Miami-0.02
8. Wake Forest-0.02
9. Boston College-0.05
10. Virginia-0.07
11. Florida State-0.07
12. NC State-0.14

Defensive Stats

Points per possession Allowed

1. North Carolina0.97
2. Virginia Tech0.99
3. Duke0.99
4. Clemson1
5. Florida State1.04
6. Maryland1.04
7. Wake Forest1.04
8. Virginia1.06
9. Georgia Tech1.07
10. Miami1.07
11. Boston College1.08
12. NC State1.12

Effective Shooting % Allowed

1. Maryland47.5%
2. Clemson48.2%
3. North Carolina48.4%
4. Boston College49.1%
5. Virginia Tech49.4%
6. Duke50.6%
7. Miami50.6%
8. Florida State51.1%
9. Georgia Tech51.1%
10. Wake Forest51.6%
11. NC State52.9%
12. Virginia53%

2-pt Shooting % Allowed

1. Maryland45.1%
2. Miami46.2%
3. Virginia Tech46.8%
4. Florida State47.9%
5. North Carolina48.1%
6. Clemson49%
7. Boston College49.7%
8. NC State50.3%
9. Wake Forest50.4%
10. Virginia51%
11. Duke51.2%
12. Georgia Tech52.1%

3-pt Shooting % Allowed

1. Clemson30.7%
2. Boston College31.9%
3. Duke32.2%
4. North Carolina32.6%
5. Georgia Tech32.7%
6. Maryland35.3%
7. Wake Forest36.1%
8. Virginia Tech36.5%
9. Virginia37.4%
10. Florida State37.9%
11. Miami39.1%
12. NC State40.6%

Turnover % Forced

1. NC State24%
2. Florida State22.3%
3. Georgia Tech21.9%
4. Virginia Tech21.6%
5. Maryland21.3%
6. Boston College20.6%
7. Miami20.3%
8. North Carolina20%
9. Wake Forest20%
10. Clemson18.8%
11. Duke18.1%
12. Virginia17.7%

Defensive Rebounding %

1. Virginia Tech78%
2. Virginia77.7%
3. North Carolina76.8%
4. Duke73.7%
5. Maryland73.4%
6. Wake Forest72.8%
7. Miami70.7%
8. Florida State70.2%
9. Georgia Tech69.2%
10. NC State68.4%
11. Boston College68%
12. Clemson66.2%