Crazy observation......

[Greene Rice FIG]

I have switched over to http://www.barttorvik.com/team.php?team=Rutgers

Looking at adjusted offense and defense statistics.

The past 6 games adjusted offensive efficiency numbers ranked highest to lowest (points per 100 possessions)
1. 118.7
2. 116.5
3. 112.7
4. 110.2
5. 101.3
6. 99.7

We won 3 of those 6 games. Guess which games we won?

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

In our 16 real games we are 5-11.

Adjusted offensive efficiency in wins 102.6
Adjusted offensive efficiency in losses 107.1

That is totally counter to anything that you would logically expect. Our success is negatively correlated with how we perform on the offensive end of the floor.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

In 5 wins adjusted defensive efficiency is 85.3
In 11 losses adjusted defensive efficiency is 105.2

 

[kcg88]

In 5 wins adjusted defensive efficiency is 85.3
In 11 losses adjusted defensive efficiency is 105.2

This tells me that we can only win when the opponent has an off night.

 

[RUBigFrank]

If I understand correctly - are you saying when our offense efficiency is lower we tend to win. Does/That mean that if we are in a "rock fight" low scoring game we have a better chance to win?

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

This tells me that we can only win when the opponent has an off night.

Hopefully you are making an incorrect assumption that we don't have something to do with it!

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

If I understand correctly - are you saying when our offense efficiency is lower we tend to win. Does/That mean that if we are in a "rock fight" low scoring game we have a better chance to win?

Not really...these numbers take tempo in to consideration. It means, at least I think it means, how we perform on the defensive end is the only thing that matters.

In reality we may play better defensively when tempo is lower

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Average tempo in 5 wins
73+69+69+62+68=341/5 =68.2
Average tempo in 11 losses
72+63+64+70+72+71+67+67+60+66+86=758/11.125 =68.1

 

[RU-ROCS]

I have switched over to http://www.barttorvik.com/team.php?team=Rutgers

Looking at adjusted offense and defense statistics.

The past 6 games adjusted offensive efficiency numbers ranked highest to lowest (points per 100 possessions)
1. 118.7
2. 116.5
3. 112.7
4. 110.2
5. 101.3
6. 99.7

We won 3 of those 6 games. Guess which games we won?

Interesting stuff. I'd love to see what impact, if any, our FT shooting % has on Ws and Ls.

 

[DHajekRC84]

In 5 wins adjusted defensive efficiency is 85.3
In 11 losses adjusted defensive efficiency is 105.2

As another stats guy..would be interesting to. List them game by game with the gap between O & D numbers and margin of score.

Just a question, why do you relate low D number with other team shooting "night" vs. Our defensive effort?

 

[bwrlaw]

Interesting stuff. I'd love to see what impact, if any, our FT shooting % has on Ws and Ls.

There is, and has been, a real correlation between our Ft's, both attempts and made, to our win record. We leave so many points on the table, it is hard to believe. Even if we don't make them, getting to the FT line can and does change the flow of the game.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

As another stats guy..would be interesting to. List them game by game with the gap between O & D numbers and margin of score.

Just a question, why do you relate low D number with other team shooting "night" vs. Our defensive effort?

No! I think our defensive effort is a HUGE part of the defensive numbers.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

There is, and has been, a real correlation between our Ft's, both attempts and made, to our win record. We leave so many points on the table, it is hard to believe. Even if we don't make them, getting to the FT line can and does change the flow of the game.

That is all on the offensive side.

 

[RUsojo]

What’s the opponents offensive efficiency in our wins and losses?

 

[DHajekRC84]

There is, and has been, a real correlation between our Ft's, both attempts and made, to our win record. We leave so many points on the table, it is hard to believe. Even if we don't make them, getting to the FT line can and does change the flow of the game.

You can't always shoot great. But if you defend the paint, rebound, value the ball and don't turn it over, drive the ball,get fouled, and make 70 to 75% of your FREE throws you'll always be right there.

Yeah, I know captain obvious (me not you lol) . But those are controlables vs. Sometimes the ball just not going in.

 

[dkostus]

What’s the opponents offensive efficiency in our wins and losses?

Isn't that directly correlated to the defensive efficiency numbers he provided?

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

just guessing.. but think turnovers are the key to easy baskets on the other end. Aggressive Ds that foul a lot but don't get called a lot will generate points off turnovers where D cannot get into position. Our D is solid.. well coached. But TOs hurt that tremendously.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

Not enough data ..but the point is well taken

I love data and stats ...but the simple is the most obvious

1.) 11-2 when holding teams under 70

0-10 when teams score more than 70

2.) big ten play defense
38% three point defense
45% defense field goal shooting percentages

I’m getting to the point that it’s might be a complete reverse for next year for us to make that step up from how well we put the ball in the basket to how well we prevent the opponents from scoring ....

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

That is pretty much it in a nutshell.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

I’m getting to the point that it’s might be a complete reverse for next year for us to make that step up from how well we put the ball in the basket to how well we prevent the opponents from scoring ....

We had the 2 game stretch at Minnesota at Purdue where our D was terrible. The next game was Northwestern and defense was emphasized and we defended well, but couldn't score. Ironically the player he moved in to rotation for defense was the player at the end hurt us on the defensive end down the stretch.

I think tonight Pikiell will give minutes to the players that defend. Don't be surprised if the rotation is different.

 

[Big East Beast]

Not enough data ..but the point is well taken

I love data and stats ...but the simple is the most obvious

1.) 11-2 when holding teams under 70

0-10 when teams score more than 70

2.) big ten play defense
38% three point defense
45% defense field goal shooting percentages

I’m getting to the point that it’s might be a complete reverse for next year for us to make that step up from how well we put the ball in the basket to how well we prevent the opponents from scoring ....

I think this team can be a tough matchup because we’re pretty long and do a good job rebounding from all positions. Eugene is a warrior. It will be very interesting to see next year when Jacob and Mulcahy come if we’re better at fast tempo. Mathis and Geo are well suited for faster pace but others may struggle. I can see two units playing different styles.

 

[RU MAN]

This tells me that we can only win when the opponent has an off night.

Really? That's what it tell you? LOL! How about we play suffocating defense. And even though our offense is a constant struggle, we play a messy in your face defense. Tonight was a perfect example. Northwester averages 70.6 points per game. They lost the other night to Iowa on their floor by one point, 80-79. We held them to 56 points and 36% shooting. Your logic is deeply flawed.

 

[RUfromSoCal?]

 

[RutgHoops]

Our defense on FTs is outstanding. As bad as we shoot them, our opponents shoot them equally awful against us.

 

[RUsince52]

This tells me that we can only win when the opponent has an off night.

I think Vegas has that figured out too.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

The craziness continues....terrible game offensively means a big fat W.

offense raw and adjusted 87.9....97.7. Our worst game over the past 7 games...since the last NW game

defense raw and adjusted 83.4 82.8...GREAT!!!!

5 OREB for NW really helps make up for the lack of TOs