Jump to content

GW over the Bills by 13


The Wiz

Recommended Posts

One more time (at least)...

Well we have beaten them before ...no reason we can't beat them again,.. right?...Hey, I didn't say it would be easy.

GW has a lot riding on this game.....They are an A-team that will be a B+ team with a loss to the Bills...ie a bubble team. For the Bills ...while they are still a D+ team, a win would propel them up to C-. Also a win here would qualify as an upset...not to mention we keep the poker game going.

So here is what we need to do to win................

GW

Stop the 3 musketeers....Cavanaugh, Larsen, Garino

Cavanaugh pts................13

...................reb..................6

Larsen........pts..................12

...................reb..................6

Garino........pts...................12

...................FG%...............under 50

...................3pt%...............under 40

Reb......................................35

Slash.................................39/33

Players w/10pts....................3

Pts.....................................under 70

Bills

Slash.............................44/36/72........last time we had great shooting from the arc and FT line (39% & 86%)

Players w/ 10pts..................3

Reb......................................32

TO........................................11

Pts/ half...............................33

Bottomline...Good shooting (particularly 3's ) + low TOs= no deadzones = win

For those keeping track of the A-10 poker tourney (Bills chances of winning it all) we now need a straight and a Royal Flush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more time (at least)...

Well we have beaten them before ...no reason we can't beat them again,.. right?...Hey, I didn't say it would be easy.

GW has a lot riding on this game.....They are an A-team that will be a B+ team with a loss to the Bills...ie a bubble team. For the Bills ...while they are still a D+ team, a win would propel them up to C-. Also a win here would qualify as an upset...not to mention we keep the poker game going.

So here is what we need to do to win................

GW

Stop the 3 musketeers....Cavanaugh, Larsen, Garino

Cavanaugh pts................13

...................reb..................6

Larsen........pts..................12

...................reb..................6

Garino........pts...................12

...................FG%...............under 50

...................3pt%...............under 40

Reb......................................35

Slash.................................39/33

Players w/10pts....................3

Pts.....................................under 70

Bills

Slash.............................44/36/72........last time we had great shooting from the arc and FT line (39% & 86%)

Players w/ 10pts..................3

Reb......................................32

TO........................................11

Pts/ half...............................33

Bottomline...Good shooting (particularly 3's ) + low TOs= no deadzones = win

For those keeping track of the A-10 poker tourney (Bills chances of winning it all) we now need a straight and a Royal Flush.

Last but not least...........

Another winable game that pretty much slipped away. We played good enough to win except for the TO's....Bottomline formula was good shooting + low TOs = win........6 extra TOs =12 pts...difference in the game...a familar story this season...won games "turned over" into losses.

Let's look at the numbers , one last time.....

GW...............................projected..............actual

Cavanugh pts.....................13......................13..........pass

..................reb......................6.......................8...........fail

Larsen.......pts......................12.....................10.........pass

.................reb.......................6........................4..........pass

Garino.......pts......................12......................10........pass

.................FG%..................under 50%...........30.......double pass

.................3pt %.................under 40%............33......pass

Stop the 3 musketeers...............................................pass....a sign we should have won but....

Reb......................................35........................30.........double pass

Slash....................................39/33.................44/ 39......fail/fail

Players w/ 10pts...................3............................4.........fail

pts........................................70..........................73.......fail

SLU

Slash................................44/36/ 72...............49/56//83.....pass/ double pass/ double pass

Players w/ 10pts...................3...............................3...........pass

Reb......................................32..............................29.........fail

TOs.......................................11..............................17.........fail........a killer

Pts/ half.................................33..............................27/ 38....fail/pass...hard to put 2 good halves together

Bottomline......Story of the season...almost ...in a lot of games. The good news is that I don't think we are that far away...A few less TOs and a few more rebounds + a little more consistent shooting...not so much better shooting but avoiding the horrible nights...20% or less from 3....less than 60% from FTline.

Tick ...tick...tick...and we are done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team could have kept the turnovers for the season at an average of 10 how many more games could they have won?

The turnovers just killed this team all season. Earl said on the radio broadcast in the second half that GW had 20 points on turnovers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team could have kept the turnovers for the season at an average of 10 how many more games could they have won?

The turnovers just killed this team all season. Earl said on the radio broadcast in the second half that GW had 20 points on turnovers.

What is the criteria for determining points off turnovers? Is it fast break points off turnovers or just that the opposing team scores on the possession following a turnover?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team could have kept the turnovers for the season at an average of 10 how many more games could they have won?

The turnovers just killed this team all season. Earl said on the radio broadcast in the second half that GW had 20 points on turnovers.

They couldnt keep turnovers down because Crews recruited an inbalanced roster loaded with stiffs and spot up shooters. We could have historic-level shooting and still lose or struggle. 53 rebounds for mason on 5 turnovers and bartley 80+% shooting.

Gw beat us despite more historically good shooting.

The fundamentals on this team were just beyond horrible all season. The new coach is gonna have to reteach the game and they have to start playing as a team. Our shooters could really be something if we fixed the fundamentals. Ball distribution. Rebounding. Ball handling. Protect the rock. Hopefully the defense will improve with this also, but i fear our guards lack real quickness.

The numbers you saw were just what to expect with this team.

Im just glad we managed to find out we do have a redeeming quality, a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team could have kept the turnovers for the season at an average of 10 how many more games could they have won?

The turnovers just killed this team all season. Earl said on the radio broadcast in the second half that GW had 20 points on turnovers.

We could have won a lot more games at 10 TO/ game... And even though we only turned it over 10 times in the earlier season GW win, I don't think that is a reasonable expectation on a regular basis throughout the season. There were only 11 teams ( A+ on TOs ) out of 351 that had 10 TOs or less for this year. (btw St. J was one of them). However if we could have brought those games that had 17-22 TO down to 12 TOs we would have won most of those games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the criteria for determining points off turnovers? Is it fast break points off turnovers or just that the opposing team scores on the possession following a turnover?

I believe it is the opposing team scoring on a TO...In forecasting, I usually assign 2pt / TO...8/10 of a pt to the losing team ...8/10 of a pt to the receiving team....The actually spread is 1.6-2.4 pts / TO...depending on whether they are shooting 2's or 3 s ...and the FG% shooting of each team...So I think 2 is a good average when everything is considered (including FT shooting))

In the GW tourney game, we actually shot better than we did in the reg season win over GW....49/56/ 83 vs 40/ 39/ 86. ...However(and there is always a however this season) we had 17 TOs in the tourney game vs 10 last time. ...17-10=7 x 2pts=14pts...and that is the difference between flying home today and playing St. J this afternoon.

As I said in the Season Report Card thread...It's not that we have to become better ...we have to become more consistent.We don't have to do something we have never done before...we just have to do what we have done more often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good goal for most games is to keep your turnover percentage under 20% of possessions. So in previous years when we were averaging about 65 possessions a game, 12 or less was an acceptable number. With the shorter shotclock, and us seeming to hold the ball fewer seconds before shooting than in previous years, we were usually in the 73-75 possessions per game area. In games with that number of possessions then up to 14 turnovers for the games is acceptable.

One of the unusual things about this season was the number of games where we had less than 10 turnovers total vs. the number where we exceeded 20% of possessions. The fluctuation in the turnover numbers was surprising.

Wiz, do these numbers sound right to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good goal for most games is to keep your turnover percentage under 20% of possessions. So in previous years when we were averaging about 65 possessions a game, 12 or less was an acceptable number. With the shorter shotclock, and us seeming to hold the ball fewer seconds before shooting than in previous years, we were usually in the 73-75 possessions per game area. In games with that number of possessions then up to 14 turnovers for the games is acceptable.

One of the unusual things about this season was the number of games where we had less than 10 turnovers total vs. the number where we exceeded 20% of possessions. The fluctuation in the turnover numbers was surprising.

Wiz, do these numbers sound right to you?

Actually the numbers don't sound right to me. One of the reasons I put a grade on everything is to try and give some meaning to the numbers. My categories are always graded on the curve. So when the Bills come in at 13.5 reb / gm that is a D...well below the average of all teams. A grade of C is 12.7. In your example to drop back to 14 would be an F....The 12 TOs I usually project for the Bills comes in at B-...a minimum for a good team....Those 11 teams that have 10 or less TOs include St. J , Duke, Wich St, Mich, & Notre Dame.. Not bad company. Grading on the curve is important because regardless of the 30 sec clock everyone is using the same clock...some just use it better. In the Season Report Card thread I don't just grade the TOs. That anaylsis shows we are short in many offensive categories. not just TOs....Even with more possessions and more shots we still don't have enough FGA, FGM, 3ptA, 3ptM Reb.etc etc

As far as the differences in the numbers...13.5 to 12 may seem like a small difference but as Bernie Sanders says...."It is HUUUGE" The difference between us and a "12" team is the 12 team has very few bad games . When they have an off night ...maybe 14 or 15 TOs. When we have a bad night ...20+ and they are not outliers...they come in bunches of games. When you have 20+ TOs you are going to lose no matter what any of the other stats are. In the Report Card thread, I tried to show what a difference moving from D- to C would make. In reality we should be shooting for nothing lower than a B-. ...with many A's sprinkled in there.

Here is hoping the new guy thinks the same way. Let's get back on the Honor Roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...