1st Half (MU vs UW)
Possessions: 32
Efficiency: 0.96 vs 0.71
eFG%: 41% v 28%
TO%: 24% vs 26%
OR%: 47% vs 32%
FTR: Irrelevant
2nd Half (MU vs UW)
Possessions: 32
Efficiency: 0.91 vs 1.01
eFG%: 39% vs 44%
TO%: 16% vs 13%
OR%: 38% vs 18%
FTR: Irrelevant
Full Game (MU vs UW)
Possessions: 64
Efficiency: 0.94 vs 0.86
eFG%: 40% vs 37%
TO%: 20% vs 19%
OR%: 42% vs 25%
FTR: Irrelevant
Already started moving on to the Washington on twitter, but had these sitting around and thought the stats were interesting. First, the 1H defense was outstanding, with the defensive eFG% in particular. Also, although it didn't get mentioned as much, MU really did a great job in both halves on the offensive rebounding percentage.
Marquette has held four opponents this year under 40% eFG%, including Ole Miss and UW. That's already better than last year. One more team under 40% eFG% and it's the best record under Buzz.
Net positive contributions
Mayo +4.0
Gardner +3.9
DJO +3.2
Juan +1.4
Jamil +1.4
Jamail +0.6
Net negative contributions
Vander -1.0
Jae -1.3
DWil -2.7
Otule -4.3
This is where the contributions of guys like DWil and Otule get under appreciated, because they are not collecting stats in the box score.
Did you know... DJO is the only player on MU to have net positive contributions in every game this year. Todd Mayo is the only player to be net positive in every game but one.
Which leads to a question I asked Saturday and still don't have a satisfactory answer to. Has our scheme changed, or do we finally have players who can play it?
Did someone find out how many TURKEYS MU got versus the rafter of red-and-white-jerseyed turkeys?
And how does that compare to previous teams?
Quote from: tower912 on December 05, 2011, 02:44:52 PM
Which leads to a question I asked Saturday and still don't have a satisfactory answer to. Has our scheme changed, or do we finally have players who can play it?
I don't know, honestly. However, since this is a message board and I'm able to give my opinion, I think it's two things.
#1 - Improved overall depth and roster composition. MU is more talented and deeper.
#2 - I think the coaching staff is emphasizing stops more this year. Maybe "Turkeys" has always been a thing for Buzz, but it sure seems like they only appeared this year.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 05, 2011, 03:47:22 PM
I don't know, honestly. However, since this is a message board and I'm able to give my opinion, I think it's two things.
#1 - Improved overall depth and roster composition. MU is more talented and deeper.
#2 - I think the coaching staff is emphasizing stops more this year. Maybe "Turkeys" has always been a thing for Buzz, but it sure seems like they only appeared this year.
The turkey concept has been in Buzz lingo since the 2009-2010 season - at least that is when I first recall hearing the term - which I thought was funny as it really is a bowling reference pertaining to 3 straight strikes..
As for why better D - Like you point out in point #1 - much better depth and roster complexion. And to tack on to that - it is the first time in Buzz's tenure he has returned more players, than had new ones coming in.
To me, it looks like a number of things have come together.
1. Returning more players. Experience in this system apparently helps.
2. CO and DG are a year older, better, smarter. Chris is very good on defense and DG has improved. Not what I would call good yet and will never be a shot blocker, but better able to position himself.
3. The freshmen are complete ballplayers. DW, TM and JA appear to have a solid understanding of how to play defense.
4. EWilliams, and Fulce, for different reasons, weren't that great of defenders.
I see fewer confused double teams of the post, and then erratic rotations when the ball is passed back out. I see fewer really bad help/recoveries.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on December 05, 2011, 02:49:11 PM
Did someone find out how many TURKEYS MU got versus the rafter of red-and-white-jerseyed turkeys?
And how does that compare to previous teams?
Broeker says six turkeys and a Badger. I proposed that a "Dead Badger" is the term for ten consecutive stops.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 05, 2011, 03:47:22 PM
I don't know, honestly. However, since this is a message board and I'm able to give my opinion, I think it's two things.
#1 - Improved overall depth and roster composition. MU is more talented and deeper.
#2 - I think the coaching staff is emphasizing stops more this year. Maybe "Turkeys" has always been a thing for Buzz, but it sure seems like they only appeared this year.
I would add "Experience" as well. The upper classmen know exactly how the rotations work and I'm sure they were able to hit the ground running in practice.
(here is where everybody is going to make fun of me)
This is why I think you have to give a coach a few years before you can say "He's great!" or "He sucks!". It takes a few years for a coach to get his players in and get them experience in his system.
The defensive rotations on Saturday looked much better than last season. Looked like a similar approach, but the reactions were quicker and crisper.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 05, 2011, 04:25:41 PM
Broeker says six turkeys and a Badger. I proposed that a "Dead Badger" is the term for ten consecutive stops.
I'm for it. However, I propose just "Badger", as "Dead Badger" is likely redundant. ::)
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 05, 2011, 02:30:34 PM
Net positive contributions
Mayo +4.0
Gardner +3.9
DJO +3.2
Juan +1.4
Jamil +1.4
Jamail +0.6
Net negative contributions
Vander -1.0
Jae -1.3
DWil -2.7
Otule -4.3
This is where the contributions of guys like DWil and Otule get under appreciated, because they are not collecting stats in the box score.
Did you know... DJO is the only player on MU to have net positive contributions in every game this year. Todd Mayo is the only player to be net positive in every game but one.
DWil at -2.7 is reason enough for me to care about these cute little stats. There is no way that guy wasn't a positive contributor in that game, he is the best on-ball defender I've seen in a MU uniform....better than James.
Quote from: esotericmindguy on December 05, 2011, 08:42:28 PM
DWil at -2.7 is reason enough for me to care about these cute little stats. There is no way that guy wasn't a positive contributor in that game, he is the best on-ball defender I've seen in a MU uniform....better than James.
I initially thought the same thing, but further investigation shows that DWil's +/- was -7 for the game, including -13 in the second half. He was in there for a couple Wisco runs. His lack of offense (0 points, 0 assists) played a part in negating his solid impact on D. Honestly, he reminds of Junior early last season - no confidence in his scoring ability. Fortunately, DWil is a better defender than Junior. He's going to be a very good PG for MU.
BTW, Gardner +28 in just 14 minutes!
Every stat line should have one stat with an IRRELEVANT after it, rather than a number. That's brilliant.
Henry,
How are those pos/neg contributions computed? Is it just the scoring while they were on the floor?
What's most impressive to me isn't just holding a team to 0.86 ppp, but doing it to a team that coming in had a top-10 in the nation defense. I'm not sure what UW's rating was, but I know I've seen it in the top-5 on Pomeroy most of the season. If we can shut down one of the best teams in the nation on their own court with their own ball, I like our odds against pretty much anyone.
Quote from: mileskishnish72 on December 06, 2011, 04:29:43 AM
Henry,
How are those pos/neg contributions computed? Is it just the scoring while they were on the floor?
It's always been a problem in basketball stats that most of the statistics kept for games are offensive statistics.
These are similar statistics (correct me if I'm wrong, Sugar) but compiled for an entire season, along with full descriptions of how they're calculated: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27441.0
Quote from: mileskishnish72 on December 06, 2011, 04:29:43 AM
Henry,
How are those pos/neg contributions computed? Is it just the scoring while they were on the floor?
From another post, with a few other clarifying comments.
Two calculations which are averaged
#1 - Subtracts the DRtg from the ORtg and multiplies it by the # of possessions. Inefficient offensive players get penalized.
#2 - Calcs the number of points the player produces (FT, offensive rebounds, assists, points) and subtracts the DRtg adjusted by how long the player is on the court. High minute, low usage players get penalized.
Then the calcs are averaged. It's two different ways of looking at if a player contributes more offensively than defensively based on how long the player is on the court and how many possessions they use.Calculation one rewards players that score their points in as few possessions as possible. It penalizes the guy that goes 4-15 or has a bunch of turnovers. Calculation two rewards players that are on the court collecting stats or producing points (through FTs, offensive rebounds). It penalizes players that spend long stretches on the court but don't do anything in the box score.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on December 06, 2011, 07:21:29 AM
It's always been a problem in basketball stats that most of the statistics kept for games are offensive statistics.
These are similar statistics (correct me if I'm wrong, Sugar) but compiled for an entire season, along with full descriptions of how they're calculated: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27441.0
Agreed. I do not regard these stats as the ultimate view, but more a tool in the box of analysis. The defensive stats are particularly limited to things like blocks, steals, and defensive rebounds. To be better, the box score should show things like "guarded player - missed shot" or "guarded player - made shot". For instance, the defensive stats really under-rated Dominic James, who would spend an entire game not even letting his man touch the ball. What's the stat for that?
Having said all that, part of the reason I like the stats is because of the full season analysis that Skat linked. Objectively, I believe that the full season retrospective passes the red-faced test. Perfect? no. Helpful? Yes.
Also with DWill, the stats are a bit unfair as Buzz was subbing him in and out based upon defense vs. offense. Hard to score or get assists when you are just playing defensive sets ~30+% of your PT, although the box score stats won't reflect that.