All Sorts Of B10 Stats Here

Donate To GopherHole
F

Friend Of Tubby

Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
7,841
Reaction score
0
Points
36
http://statsheet.com/mcb/conferences/big-ten teams, players, coaches, etc. Season long stats, not just B10 games.

Gophers led B10 in rebounds and blocks & steals (combined). Surprising to read Gophers tied for best ATO ratio (1.6) if I read that correctly.

Gopher FG and FT shooting % are (well below average, let's say).
 

Outscored by 240 pts from 3pt range. That's 13.3 pts per game.
 

this proves that defense doesnt actually win games. unless maybe its because we didnt protect the threeball
 

station19 said:
Outscored by 240 pts from 3pt range. That's 13.3 pts per game.
Click to expand...

That's a stat that's just beyond amazing. As a result of our poor defense, we not only gave up a ton of threes, but we encourage opponents to have low risk possessions - in terms of turnovers. They didn't have to force it inside as the outside shots were so wide open. Furthermore despite our huge front line our percentage of defensive turnovers won is among the lowest in conference. Just from watching the games it appeared that most of the lost rebounds were long rebounds off of threes. This is a case where Tubby refused to ever adjust until the very last game when-even though Penn State shot great we at least limited their attempts by shadowing Battle more.
 

bga1 said:
That's a stat that's just beyond amazing. As a result of our poor defense, we not only gave up a ton of threes, but we encourage opponents to have low risk possessions - in terms of turnovers. They didn't have to force it inside as the outside shots were so wide open. Furthermore despite our huge front line our percentage of defensive turnovers won is among the lowest in conference. Just from watching the games it appeared that most of the lost rebounds were long rebounds off of threes. This is a case where Tubby refused to ever adjust until the very last game when-even though Penn State shot great we at least limited their attempts by shadowing Battle more.
Click to expand...

Tough to really make this conclusion without looking at 3 point attempts per game versus our opponents 3 pt attempts per game versus other big ten schools. In other words, did our opponents make a high percentage of their 3s...suggesting poor defense or did they take a higher number against us...because maybe they couldn't get to the hoop against the longest interior defense in the league that lead the big ten in blocks?

I suspect it is a little of both...we lost our best perimeter defender and our 2 gaurd isn't a top defender out on the edge...so I suspect their percentage was a little higher against us than the other 11 teams...but I bet a buck that % alone wont account for the 13 points per game difference...they shot more threes against us because they couldn't score inside. Plus they had 5-7 more possessions against us becuase we have been turning the ball over 17 times per game lately.

Everyone wants to point to the AHA stat that shows why we suck and its so and so's fault...the simple fact it took a number of issues to compound to make us the crappy team we are today...loss of starter and back up pg, loss of 3rd string pg before season, loss of back up center, loss of top 25 recruit before season, failure of our starting wing to learn a jump shot over the summer, rigidity in coaching style after everything started to break down, some bad luck and calls down the stretch and poor execution at the end of some games...add it up and we are 1-9 in our last 10.
 


GopherinPhilly said:
Tough to really make this conclusion without looking at 3 point attempts per game versus our opponents 3 pt attempts per game versus other big ten schools. In other words, did our opponents make a high percentage of their 3s...suggesting poor defense or did they take a higher number against us...because maybe they couldn't get to the hoop against the longest interior defense in the league that lead the big ten in blocks?

I suspect it is a little of both...we lost our best perimeter defender and our 2 gaurd isn't a top defender out on the edge...so I suspect their percentage was a little higher against us than the other 11 teams...but I bet a buck that % alone wont account for the 13 points per game difference...they shot more threes against us because they couldn't score inside. Plus they had 5-7 more possessions against us becuase we have been turning the ball over 17 times per game lately.

Everyone wants to point to the AHA stat that shows why we suck and its so and so's fault...the simple fact it took a number of issues to compound to make us the crappy team we are today...loss of starter and back up pg, loss of 3rd string pg before season, loss of back up center, loss of top 25 recruit before season, failure of our starting wing to learn a jump shot over the summer, rigidity in coaching style after everything started to break down, some bad luck and calls down the stretch and poor execution at the end of some games...add it up and we are 1-9 in our last 10.
Click to expand...

Lots of issues all added up that's exactly right.

As to the threes- it is obvious from looking at how many threes teams shot against us- almost without exception, game after game, that opposing coaches were making a calculation that shooting threes was a great strategy against us. The question I have had is why we didn't adapt and attempt to sag less. We have a height and shot blocking advantage against everybody. I would have perferred to see our big men play theirs more straight up and take the three away. I think our inside defenders would have still made it difficult to score. This is not THE reason we lost all of those games but it's one area where one can at least argue we should have changed.
 

Friend Of Tubby said:
http://statsheet.com/mcb/conferences/big-ten teams, players, coaches, etc. Season long stats, not just B10 games.

Gophers led B10 in rebounds and blocks & steals (combined). Surprising to read Gophers tied for best ATO ratio (1.6) if I read that correctly.
Gopher FG and FT shooting % are (well below average, let's say).
Click to expand...


You are definitely not reading it correctly. The Gophers gave up a 1.6 a/to ratio, tied for worst in the conference. The Gophers had only a 1.2 ratio of their own, in the bottom half of the conference. Wisconsin had the best at 1.9, Indiana the worst at 0.9.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/conferences/big-ten/team_stats?season=2010-2011#assiststurnovers
 


bga1 said:
Lots of issues all added up that's exactly right.

As to the threes- it is obvious from looking at how many threes teams shot against us- almost without exception, game after game, that opposing coaches were making a calculation that shooting threes was a great strategy against us. The question I have had is why we didn't adapt and attempt to sag less. We have a height and shot blocking advantage against everybody. I would have perferred to see our big men play theirs more straight up and take the three away. I think our inside defenders would have still made it difficult to score. This is not THE reason we lost all of those games but it's one area where one can at least argue we should have changed.
Click to expand...

I'm curious if that strategy was used when the Gophers went 16-4 in their first 20 games or just when the Gophers went 1-9 in their last 10 games.
 



bga1 said:
Lots of issues all added up that's exactly right.

As to the threes- it is obvious from looking at how many threes teams shot against us- almost without exception, game after game, that opposing coaches were making a calculation that shooting threes was a great strategy against us. The question I have had is why we didn't adapt and attempt to sag less. We have a height and shot blocking advantage against everybody. I would have perferred to see our big men play theirs more straight up and take the three away. I think our inside defenders would have still made it difficult to score. This is not THE reason we lost all of those games but it's one area where one can at least argue we should have changed.
Click to expand...

The problem is...we didn't see these kids in practice every day...I can say using your strategy would have left us wide open to dribble penetration and the likely result is more fouls on our bigs and the same number of open threes...after our bigs get in foul trouble, we now can't stop inside or out...we simply didn't match up well defensively after we lost our two quickest perimeter gaurds.

I always felt the bigger issue was us not taking advantage of the foul trouble we caused on our opponents' bigs. In so many games this year we got the second or third foul on a big and didn't go back after that player...I always felt we lacked a killer instinct inside.
 

Friend Of Tubby said:
I'm curious if that strategy was used when the Gophers went 16-4 in their first 20 games or just when the Gophers went 1-9 in their last 10 games.
Click to expand...

We were horrible against the threes all year- even when we were 16-4. We had just enough offense to cover it up before we lost Nolen and Joseph. So essentially, losing the offensive firepower led to the defensive weakness causing losses instead of games just being closer than they should have been. Remember we had lots of fairly close games against some pretty underwhelming squads who pumped in a lot of threes.
 

Opponents shot 33.6% from 3-point land against us, the 2nd lowest in the conference. As a result, we had the 4th fewest free throws shot against us. Two of the three teams ahead of us (Purdue, Ohio St.) didn't lose a whole lot so they were not fouling at the end of games like we were. Unfortunately, we had the highest opponent free throw percentage of anyone.
 




GopherinPhilly said:
The problem is...we didn't see these kids in practice every day...I can say using your strategy would have left us wide open to dribble penetration and the likely result is more fouls on our bigs and the same number of open threes...after our bigs get in foul trouble, we now can't stop inside or out...we simply didn't match up well defensively after we lost our two quickest perimeter gaurds.

I always felt the bigger issue was us not taking advantage of the foul trouble we caused on our opponents' bigs. In so many games this year we got the second or third foul on a big and didn't go back after that player...I always felt we lacked a killer instinct inside.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. The hand was forced when our roster got down to 8/9 guys and zero guard depth. This team wasn't capable of matching up one on one with many teams, this last Penn State game was a great example. The reality is they had one of the best 2pt% against in the country and one of the worst 3ptm against. In the end it balanced out to an average defense.

Games were lost when the offense stalled.
 

For the last 10 games, the opponents made 84 treys out of 244 attempts against us, which is about 33.2% (vs. 33.6% for the 18 conference games).

Our conference opponents have made the grand total of 450 attempts from behind the arc this season, which translates into 25 attempts per game. Absolutely the highest in the conference. For the last 10 games, they made 24.4 attempts per game.

Our 3pt defense, both in philosophy and in execution, may not explain the 1-9 skid.
 

Gold Vision said:
Couldn't agree more. The hand was forced when our roster got down to 8/9 guys and zero guard depth. This team wasn't capable of matching up one on one with many teams, this last Penn State game was a great example. The reality is they had one of the best 2pt% against in the country and one of the worst 3ptm against. In the end it balanced out to an average defense.

Games were lost when the offense stalled.
Click to expand...

Cumulatively, Nolen - Joseph - Walker scored 20+ ppg (on the way to 16-4 in first 20 games).

They were replaced by Ahanmisi - Armelin - Dawson who scored < 10 ppg.

The loss of 10 ppg (more or less) resulted in 1-9 in last 10 games.
 

Friend Of Tubby said:
Cumulatively, Nolen - Joseph - Walker scored 20+ ppg (on the way to 16-4 in first 20 games).

They were replaced by Ahanmisi - Armelin - Dawson who scored < 10 ppg.

The loss of 10 ppg (more or less) resulted in 1-9 in last 10 games.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily so.

Al, Devoe, and Mo collectively logged 63.8 minutes per game scoring 23.3 points per game while Chip, Mav, and Dawson 23.5 scoring 6.4. One approach to account for the difference in point contribution would be to calculate their point contribution per minute. Even such would not be so meaningful -- some basketball analysts wrongly do so -- because we really need to figure out who have gotten the differential in playing time per game (63.8-23.3=40.5) and how much they have contributed scoring-wise for the extra minutes they got.

(To be more precise, we have to be able to "project" how the playing time for all the players mentioned here would have changed if the roster had been intact and after the change, which is a near impossibility.)

In other words, this type of analysis is rather meaningless.
 

3 point shooting

Maybe putting Colton Iverson in the baseline corner of the 2-3 zone wasn't such a great idea - over and over again.
 

GoFerit said:
Not necessarily so.

Al, Devoe, and Mo collectively logged 63.8 minutes per game scoring 23.3 points per game while Chip, Mav, and Dawson 23.5 scoring 6.4. One approach to account for the difference in point contribution would be to calculate their point contribution per minute. Even such would not be so meaningful -- some basketball analysts wrongly do so -- because we really need to figure out who have gotten the differential in playing time per game (63.8-23.3=40.5) and how much they have contributed scoring-wise for the extra minutes they got.

(To be more precise, we have to be able to "project" how the playing time for all the players mentioned here would have changed if the roster had been intact and after the change, which is a near impossibility.)

In other words, this type of analysis is rather meaningless.
Click to expand...

Let's play 3-on-3 basketball. I'll take Nolen, Joseph, and Walker. You take Armelin, Ahanmisi, and Dawson. I bet I win rather easily.

Add up Gopher scoring first 20 games (73.35 ppg) then last 10 games (60.5 ppg).
 

Friend Of Tubby said:
Let's play 3-on-3 basketball. I'll take Nolen, Joseph, and Walker. You take Armelin, Ahanmisi, and Dawson. I bet I win rather easily.

Add up Gopher scoring first 20 games (73.35 ppg) then last 10 games (60.5 ppg).
Click to expand...

If your point were about some being better offensively or overall than the others, yeah, I would agree. If your point were that given the roster, the loss of both Al and Devoe -- Mo is a different case -- could not be properly dealt with, yeah, I would agree. That is why Tubby went with the big line-up slowing down the tempo.

But, you were not arguing those. Rather, you were trying to explain the melt-down by comparing the scoring of Al, Devoe, and Mo with that of Chip, Mav, and Dawson who played incomparably far less minutes. And, I argued it did not make any sense statistically.

Intuitively speaking, we were still competitive without Devoe and Mo. I can also argue that what might have mattered is not Al’s scoring but his overall contribution and our having to make adjustments in many facets of the game late in the season due to the lack of a pg.

My apology if you really meant to argue something else.
 

GoFerit said:
If your point were about some being better offensively or overall than the others, yeah, I would agree. If your point were that given the roster, the loss of both Al and Devoe -- Mo is a different case -- could not be properly dealt with, yeah, I would agree. That is why Tubby went with the big line-up slowing down the tempo.

But, you were not arguing those. Rather, you were trying to explain the melt-down by comparing the scoring of Al, Devoe, and Mo with that of Chip, Mav, and Dawson who played incomparably far less minutes. And, I argued it did not make any sense statistically.

Intuitively speaking, we were still competitive without Devoe and Mo. I can also argue that what might have mattered is not Al’s scoring but his overall contribution and our having to make adjustments in many facets of the game late in the season due to the lack of a pg.

My apology if you really meant to argue something else.
Click to expand...

Debate is a better word. When the 3 players went down (or quit), the next 3 on the bench were Ahanmisi, Armelin, and Dawson. That's who took their place (if not all of their minutes).

Gophers should have had at least 3 more W even with the lost players. With Nolen healthy, 4 or 5 more W. The lack of offense in the last 10 games is a primary (not the only) reason for 9 (of 10) L.
 

Realistically, when Mo when down, Dawson was not his replacement, it meant that Trevor, Colt and Ralph would play more minutes. Correct? If Ralph or Colt would not have played horrible, the Mo injury would not have matter at all. When you have Trevor, Colt and Ralph, you shouldn't be worried about how the 5th person in line contributes to the game.
 

gall0249 said:
Realistically, when Mo when down, Dawson was not his replacement, it meant that Trevor, Colt and Ralph would play more minutes. Correct? If Ralph or Colt would not have played horrible, the Mo injury would not have matter at all. When you have Trevor, Colt and Ralph, you shouldn't be worried about how the 5th person in line contributes to the game.
Click to expand...

I'll try this again. Dawson is the 9th player on the team. When 3 left / got injured, the bottom 3 moved up to the rotation.
 

GoFerit said:
For the last 10 games, the opponents made 84 treys out of 244 attempts against us, which is about 33.2% (vs. 33.6% for the 18 conference games).

Our conference opponents have made the grand total of 450 attempts from behind the arc this season, which translates into 25 attempts per game. Absolutely the highest in the conference. For the last 10 games, they made 24.4 attempts per game.

Our 3pt defense, both in philosophy and in execution, may not explain the 1-9 skid.
Click to expand...

This. Look at how many points we gave up total?
While our defense was definitely not clutch. It was not close to being the problem with the team.


The problems with the team were 2 in my opinion

1) Couldn't score in the half court well
2) Didn't have anyone who wanted the ball in the last 4 minutes of a game

Both of these were minor issues for a top 15 team before Joseph left and Nolen got hurt.
Once we lost both PGs both of them became such huge issues the team went 1-9.

I see late game defensive rebounding as a bigger issue for this team than 3 point defense. When teams can't score 2's against you, they are going to take (and make) more 3s.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom