MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: PaintTouchesSays on January 23, 2012, 02:00:05 AM
-
Breaking down Marquette’s advanced statistics
Written by: Mark Strotman
Ken Pomeroy (KenPom.com) is a website that looks at advanced statistics in college basketball and can be a solid indicator of efficiency, both by team and individually. Pomeroy predicts Marquette will win each of its next six contests, with South … Continue reading → (http://painttouches.com/2012/01/23/breaking-down-marquettes-advanced-statistics-2/)
(http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=painttouches.com&blog=28348875&post=1444&subd=painttouches&ref=&feed=1)
http://painttouches.com/2012/01/23/breaking-down-marquettes-advanced-statistics-2/
-
This is fascinating. So for all the worry about the offense, it is still the most effective offense in the Big East. Clearly fueled by turnovers and defense, but those points count just as much.
Rebounding is still a problem though, and I don't think that will be getting better until next year.
-
This is fascinating. So for all the worry about the offense, it is still the most effective offense in the Big East. Clearly fueled by turnovers and defense, but those points count just as much.
Rebounding is still a problem though, and I don't think that will be getting better until next year.
The ranking was MU's effective field goal percentage during conference play only. One aspect of the offense only including conference play.
When you look at overall points per possession, which is the measure of effective offense, MU was tied for third as of last Tuesday. That doesn't include MU going for 1.2 ppp and 62% at Providence, but I'm not going to go ahead and re-run all the conference numbers.
http://basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2003
I did find it curious that all other stats were based on the entire season and that one alone was pulled out as conference play. Otherwise, enjoyable article.
-
Thanks Henry. But that still is pretty good considering the issues that people seemed to be worrying about earlier this year. Sometimes it looks ragged, and sometimes people take bad shots, but MU is still a very effective offensive team.
-
When you look at overall points per possession, which is the measure of effective offense, MU was tied for third as of last Tuesday. That doesn't include MU going for 1.2 ppp and 62% at Providence, but I'm not going to go ahead and re-run all the conference numbers.
After the Providence game, MU's adjusted offensive efficiency is #2 in conference play, at 107.5 according to kenpom.com, ahead of South Florida at #3 at 106.5 and behind Syracuse at 111.7. Not sure where the raw #'s put us.
-
The general trends on our offense are favorable. However, Marquette has had way too many stinker games for me to say our offense is good.
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee41/roblowe14/EffTrends-12312.png)
-
Stinker game or stinker stretches within games? First half of Syracuse v second half. Last 12 minutes of G-town v the first 28. LSU and Vandy were both significantly larger teams that shaded Jae and DJO, didn't let their guys help, and stayed in front of the rest of our guys, taking away the drive. Those 2 are the only full-game stinkers.
-
Stinker game or stinker stretches within games? First half of Syracuse v second half. Last 12 minutes of G-town v the first 28. LSU and Vandy were both significantly larger teams that shaded Jae and DJO, didn't let their guys help, and stayed in front of the rest of our guys, taking away the drive. Those 2 are the only full-game stinkers.
NFSU #2 - 0.92 ppp
UW - 0.96 ppp
LSU - 0.90 ppp
UWM - 0.98 ppp
Vandy - 0.82 ppp
Cuse - 0.89 ppp
Six games below 1.00 ppp, which is what I consider the threshold. And that's not including games where the offense doesn't exactly burn it up like UWGB (1.03), Pitt (1.05), or UL (1.03).
MU went through a ten game stretch where they never averaged better than 1.01 ppp. That is a long stretch of mediocre games for a "good offense".
Again, the general trends are favorable, which seems to indicate that MU's offense really is good and will be at the end of the year. I just personally think it's early to say the offense is back to being good.
-
NFSU #2 - 0.92 ppp
UW - 0.96 ppp
LSU - 0.90 ppp
UWM - 0.98 ppp
Vandy - 0.82 ppp
Cuse - 0.89 ppp
Six games below 1.00 ppp, which is what I consider the threshold. And that's not including games where the offense doesn't exactly burn it up like UWGB (1.03), Pitt (1.05), or UL (1.03).
MU went through a ten game stretch where they never averaged better than 1.01 ppp. That is a long stretch of mediocre games for a "good offense".
Again, the general trends are favorable, which seems to indicate that MU's offense really is good and will be at the end of the year. I just personally think it's early to say the offense is back to being good.
It seems to me that you and tower912 could both be right; the two of you are just looking at different sample sizes. You look at whole games only, while tower 913 is saying that MU would have been easily over the 1.00 ppp in many of their poor offensive performances, if some sizable stretches of poor offensive efficiency hadn't happened. I guess that the lesson is if you want to avoid poor ppp for a game, a team needs to play consistently and avoid bad stretches of poor ppp.
-
NFSU #2 - 0.92 ppp
UW - 0.96 ppp
LSU - 0.90 ppp
UWM - 0.98 ppp
Vandy - 0.82 ppp
Cuse - 0.89 ppp
Six games below 1.00 ppp, which is what I consider the threshold. And that's not including games where the offense doesn't exactly burn it up like UWGB (1.03), Pitt (1.05), or UL (1.03).
MU went through a ten game stretch where they never averaged better than 1.01 ppp. That is a long stretch of mediocre games for a "good offense".
Again, the general trends are favorable, which seems to indicate that MU's offense really is good and will be at the end of the year. I just personally think it's early to say the offense is back to being good.
So what you are saying is that the team misses Otule. ;D
-
So what you are saying is that Buzz needs to fix the damn defense the team misses Otule. ;D
well played, but now with some Sugar ;)
-
So Buzz needs an active 6'11 body back there for the occasional deflection, defensive rebound and blocked shot that nobody else on the team can do is what you are really saying. ;D