[Cracked Sidewalks] Gardner-ing Tips

[CrackedSidewalksSays]

Gardner-ing Tips

Written by: noreply@blogger.com (Alan Bykowski)

After Davante Gardner's dominant performance against St. John's, I began to wonder if it was an outlier, or the start of a very nice trend. Granted, his career highs in points and rebounds both came along with a career high in minutes, but it seemed to me like had THAT Davante shown up against LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse, Marquette might have a much better record.

One thing that stood out was St. John's lack of size and depth. That God's Gift Achiuwa is averaging 36.6 minutes per game in St. John's last 10 indicates they don't have any depth in the middle. I decided to analyze Gardner's numbers using Pomeroy's Effective Height ranking. Marquette has played 10 games against top-100 EFR teams and 6 games against sub-100 EFR teams First, the raw data:

table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Verdana, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 10px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
FGMFGAFTMFTAPTSREBASTSTLTOMIN[/tr]

Top-100	35	61	23	30	93	53	7	17	16	211
Sub-100	22	35	24	31	68	41	3	2	4	121

Because of the disparate minutes Gardner played early on and recently, it only seemed fair to compare his numbers on a per-40 minutes basis rather than a per game basis. Here's a the per-40 breakdown:


table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Verdana, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 10px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
FGMFGAFG%FTMFTAFT%PP40RP40AP40SP40TP40[/tr]

Top-100	6.6	11.6	57.3	4.4	5.7	76.7	17.6	10.0	1.3	3.2	3.0
Sub-100	7.3	11.6	62.9	7.9	10.2	77.4	22.5	13.6	0.7	0.7	1.3

Looking at this, the stat that jumped out was free throw attempts. Against bigger teams, Gardner is averaging 4.5 fewer FTAs per 40 minutes. His free throw percentage stays constant, so the attempts also explain much of why he averages more points against smaller teams. And while his field goal percentage and rebounds are down a bit, 57.3% and 10.0/40 are still great numbers. In everything else, he actually seems to perform a bit better overall against big opposition.

The 4 top-100 teams that interested me most were Ole Miss, LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse. Against Ole Miss, Gardner got to the line 9 times on 6 fouls in 40 minutes. Had he played 40 minutes, that projects out to 25.7 free throws in that one game alone. But against LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse, the three games Marquette lost in which Gardner played enough minutes to have an impact, he shot only 6 free throws in 83 minutes, an average of just 2.9 FTA per 40 minutes. For Marquette to have success against the big, talented teams, they need to have Gardner getting to the line and putting the opposition in foul trouble.

Marquette's next 3 games are all against sub-100 EHR teams, so it wouldn't be surprising to see Gardner continue to put up big numbers. But it will be important for him to be aggressive and draw contact after this stretch, because games against big teams like Villanova, Connecticut, West Virginia, Seton Hall, and Georgetown could be the ones that separate Marquette from being top-four or middle-of-the-pack in the Big East. If Gardner can get to the line early and often, Marquette stands a good chance of having success against the types of teams that usually give them trouble. But if he's unable to be effectively aggressive down low, it's possible this team will be carrying the Team Bubble Watch moniker once again come March.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/01/gardner-ing-tips.html

[brewcity77]

As expected, those tables are nearly impossible to read on this site. I'll try to add them here and make them a bit more legible. First, the raw data:

Code: [Select]

FGM FGA FTM FTA PTS REB AST STL TO MIN
Top-100 35 61 23 30 93 53 7 17 16 211
Sub-100 22 35 24 31 68 41 3 2 4 121
Now, the per-40 minute breakdown:

Code: [Select]

FGM FGA FG% FTM FTA FT% PP40 RP40 AP40 SP40 TP40
Top-100 6.6 11.6 57.3 4.4 5.7 76.7 17.6 10.0 1.3 3.2 3.0
Sub-100 7.3 11.6 62.9 7.9 10.2 77.4 22.5 13.6 0.7 0.7 1.3
If a mod could copy those code boxes into the original post, that'd be even better

[MUMountin]

Thanks for the breakdown--provides some interesting numbers.

One thing that I find interesting is that he averages the same number of shots/minute against both sets of competition, yet has a disparity in both his FG% and FTA%.  This makes me wonder what is happening to explain that difference--is DG more timid against bigger Ds, perhaps settling for more jump-shots?  Do taller defenders have more success in blocking/altering his shots, their height effectively negating his width/positioning? 

It would be interesting to look back at DG's offensive possessions to see if there is a marked difference between how he attacks and how he is defended between the two groups, and if there is a noticeable difference between the two. 

I'd also be interested to see his offensive rebounding and second-chance points break out from these numbers--perhaps that is another difference as well.  From the highlights I saw from St. John's it looked like he had at least a few times where he got a rebound and put back, often getting fouled in the process because he had better position.  But, that might be harded against taller teams, who might be able to grab boards with their length.

[CrackedSidewalksSays]

Gardner-ing Tips

Written by: noreply@blogger.com (Alan Bykowski)

After Davante Gardner's dominant performance against St. John's, I began to wonder if it was an outlier, or the start of a very nice trend. Granted, his career highs in points and rebounds both came along with a career high in minutes, but it seemed to me like had THAT Davante shown up against LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse, Marquette might have a much better record.

One thing that stood out was St. John's lack of size and depth. That God's Gift Achiuwa is averaging 36.6 minutes per game in St. John's last 10 indicates they don't have any depth in the middle. I decided to analyze Gardner's numbers using Pomeroy's Effective Height ranking. Marquette has played 10 games against top-100 EFR teams and 6 games against sub-100 EFR teams First, the raw data:

table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Verdana, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 10px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
FGMFGAFTMFTAPTSREBASTSTLTOMIN[/tr]

Top-100	35	61	23	30	93	53	7	17	16	211
Sub-100	22	35	24	31	68	41	3	2	4	121

Because of the disparate minutes Gardner played early on and recently, it only seemed fair to compare his numbers on a per-40 minutes basis rather than a per game basis. Here's a the per-40 breakdown:


table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Verdana, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 10px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
FGMFGAFG%FTMFTAFT%PP40RP40AP40SP40TP40[/tr]

Top-100	6.6	11.6	57.3	4.4	5.7	76.7	17.6	10.0	1.3	3.2	3.0
Sub-100	7.3	11.6	62.9	7.9	10.2	77.4	22.5	13.6	0.7	0.7	1.3

Looking at this, the stat that jumped out was free throw attempts. Against bigger teams, Gardner is averaging 4.5 fewer FTAs per 40 minutes. His free throw percentage stays constant, so the attempts also explain much of why he averages more points against smaller teams. And while his field goal percentage and rebounds are down a bit, 57.3% and 10.0/40 are still great numbers. In everything else, he actually seems to perform a bit better overall against big opposition.

The 4 top-100 teams that interested me most were Ole Miss, LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse. Against Ole Miss, Gardner got to the line 9 times on 6 fouls in 40 minutes. Had he played 40 minutes, that projects out to 25.7 free throws in that one game alone. But against LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse, the three games Marquette lost in which Gardner played enough minutes to have an impact, he shot only 6 free throws in 83 minutes, an average of just 2.9 FTA per 40 minutes. For Marquette to have success against the big, talented teams, they need to have Gardner getting to the line and putting the opposition in foul trouble.

Recently, Marquette radio announcer Steve "The Homer" True mentioned that Gardner's goal is to always get the "and one". Looking at these numbers, it's easy to see why -- when he is getting to the line, he makes Marquette a much better team. When he isn't, they are far more likely to struggle.

Marquette's next 3 games are all against sub-100 EHR teams, so it wouldn't be surprising to see Gardner continue to put up big numbers. But it will be important for him to be aggressive and draw contact after this stretch, because games against big teams like Villanova, Connecticut, West Virginia, Seton Hall, and Georgetown could be the ones that separate Marquette from being top-four or middle-of-the-pack in the Big East. If Gardner can get to the line early and often, Marquette stands a good chance of having success against the types of teams that usually give them trouble. But if he's unable to be effectively aggressive down low, it's possible this team will be carrying the Team Bubble Watch moniker once again come March.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/01/gardner-ing-tips.html

[bilsu]

St. John's was not physically strong, but I felt Gardner benefited significantly by the style of game the refs allowed. He was able to contest shots and not get called for contact. That was not the case in Vanderbilt game.

[Stretchdeltsig]

Good point.  The refs really affect games by their calls.  It's amazing how inconsistent the calling is among different ref teams.  Some call charging fouls.  Some call more blocking fouls.  Most allow traveling - one extra step.  In the BE there is contact on just about every play in the paint.  The refs can make the call when they want to.