Brief Statistical Review Of The Non-Conference Basketball Schedule

Submitted by LSAClassOf2000 on January 14th, 2014 at 8:59 AM

With the non-conference schedule now in the rear view mirror, now might be a good time to take one more look at the numbers and see how we fared in that stretch. We were dealt a blow with Mitch McGary’s situation, but overall, we did well as a team in this stretch and have, as you know, begun conference play with a spark and hopefully some excellent momentum. As for those first 12 games, here are some of the summary averages:

 

MICHIGAN

OPPONENT

Field Goal %

47.09%

41.97%

Three Point %

37.92%

35.20%

Effective FG%

54.90%

46.96%

Free Throw %

73.33%

71.86%

Off. Rebound %

31.62%

25.64%

Def. Rebound %

74.36%

68.38%

Assist / Turnover Ratio

1.90

1.06

True Shooting %

58.96%

50.50%

Free Throw Rate

35.84%

25.93%

Possessions

65.03

65.12

Points / Possession

1.22

0.97

Turnover %

11.99%

16.18%

 

One statistic that is not on the table but is interesting is that our average point margin was 15.58, so we typically won by a decent margin. Indeed, we did not lose by more than 10 in that stretch either, so nothing that would likely fall in blowout range was experienced by this team in the four losses. If we break it up, in wins we averaged a 26-point margin, and in losses, we lost by an average of about five points.

One thing I will say about rankings is that the sheer number of teams in Division I means that a 0.1 difference in something can mean several dozen positions in the rankings, so sometimes it’s difficult sometimes gauge things fairly just using them. Several of the numbers above, in my own study here, would place our offense in the around the top 30 to 40 in the division, and place our defense in the upper third of defenses in Division I basketball.

Interesting disparities are always the case when looking at performance differences between wins and losses, and we were certainly no exception to that. For example, in non-conference wins, the team assist-to-turnover ratio was 2.40 on average. In losses, it was actually less than 1.00 – 0.90, to be precise. We averaged about 64 possessions in wins, compared to about 67 possessions in losses, which I find rather intriguing. There is about an 11% difference in effective field goal percentage between wins and losses too, and this is in part because of the nearly 12% difference in three point percentages between wins and losses. These are just a few noteworthy items, of course. 

Let’s turn back to the game stats now. What did it look like on a game-to-game basis? In the graphs below, some of these are laid out. In each case, the blue line is Michigan and the red line is the opponent.

 photo NCR-EffectiveFG_zpsa7326688.png  photo NCR-FreeThrowRate_zps8ef8f9eb.png  photo NCR-TurnoverPct_zps42e7b5b8.png  photo NCR-OffReb_zps6c40618f.png  photo NCR-DefReb_zps0d32088b.png  photo NCR-ATRatio_zps90edbc05.png  photo NCR-TrueShooting_zps0f66aac7.png  photo NCR-PointsPoss_zps911741d1.png

Minor sidebar alert - I would like to point out some of these in particular because StatSheet uses them in their Four Factors analysis of each game. Turnover Percentage, Offensive Rebound Percentage and Effective Field Goal Percentage are three of those factors, and some interesting things can be taken from them. Free Throw Rate is the fourth factor and is included above as well. Look at the Arizona game, for example, where we had a greater effective field goal percentage, but far fewer offensive rebounds and more turnovers. There is also the Charlotte game, where we turned it over less but had somewhat worse shooting and fewer offensive rebounds.

Here is how the numbers for those factors stack up in table form:

 

MICHIGAN

OPPONENT

TEAM

eFG%

OREB%

FTr

TOV%

eFG%

OREB%

FTr

TOV%

Mass-Lowell

42.45%

37.84%

60.38%

9.45%

32.65%

28.57%

24.49%

21.65%

South Carolina State

63.11%

29.03%

31.15%

11.49%

40.68%

19.05%

32.20%

11.79%

Iowa State

47.83%

28.57%

13.04%

14.12%

52.46%

21.21%

31.15%

14.75%

Long Beach State

65.52%

22.58%

25.86%

13.40%

52.94%

18.18%

25.49%

22.00%

Florida State

50.00%

35.71%

41.54%

8.35%

57.63%

22.58%

27.12%

16.45%

Charlotte

35.25%

31.11%

39.34%

15.37%

43.94%

38.10%

12.12%

19.65%

Coppin State

59.68%

54.84%

22.58%

9.31%

36.96%

15.63%

36.96%

17.06%

Duke

47.32%

24.24%

33.93%

15.72%

57.14%

23.33%

32.14%

9.87%

Houston Baptist

78.57%

36.36%

44.64%

9.46%

42.37%

32.43%

6.78%

20.84%

Arizona

58.33%

23.08%

35.42%

16.55%

47.54%

48.57%

24.59%

11.75%

Stanford

48.08%

25.00%

50.00%

11.20%

50.00%

17.86%

41.67%

17.44%

Holy Cross

62.71%

31.03%

32.20%

9.41%

49.18%

22.22%

16.39%

10.90%

As for the numbers in general, in-game performance is obviously quite variable, but overall, the numbers weren’t bad in my opinion.  

OBLIGATORY CAT /SILLY PHOTO:

Comments

LSAClassOf2000

January 14th, 2014 at 9:19 AM ^

Here's how wins-losses broke down for us...

  WINS LOSSES
Field Goal % 49.66% 41.95%
Three Point % 41.95% 29.87%
Effective FG% 58.77% 47.18%
Free Throw % 74.24% 71.50%
Off. Rebound % 34.05% 26.75%
Def. Rebound % 77.94% 67.20%
Assist / Turnover Ratio 2.40 0.90
True Shooting % 62.52% 51.82%
Free Throw Rate 38.54% 30.43%
Possessions 63.85 67.40
Points / Possession 1.33 1.01
Turnover % 10.26% 15.44%
POINTS 84.875 67.5

 

jmblue

January 14th, 2014 at 11:16 AM ^

Good stuff, but I'll be more interested to see our Big Ten numbers as the season goes on.  We played several extremely low RPI teams in the non-conference, and all resulted in huge blowout wins, which skews our stats positively.

 

LSAClassOf2000

January 14th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^

I set this up for the whole season, but there's not enough of the conference schedule completed to really talk about stats just yet, at least in my opinion, although I probably could have done this as a "season to date" thing as well. You're right though, I think this probably gets more interesting as the season wears on. 

HAIL 2 VICTORS

January 14th, 2014 at 11:58 AM ^

My concerns going into B1G play are these numbers less McGary.  

Morgan and Horford (Horfords health over an entire season also of great concern with this many minutes) must average a double double combined in B1G play to make the tournament (looking at the remaining schedule not a given by any means).  If at any time we lose Morgan or Horford making the tourney will be a challenge.  

Even with the opponents being Northwestern, Minnesotta and Nebraska and the two headed center averaging 15 points and 10.6 rebounds it has not been easy by any means.

Morgan and Horford combined in B1G:

MN-Points: 17 Rebounds: 11

NW: Points: 11 Rebounds 16

NE: Points: 17 Rebounds 5

Play form the center position will make or break tourney hopes this year.