PDA

View Full Version : We're 6th in the nation in scoring



thespywhozaggedme
12-13-2017, 11:27 AM
And that should improve after Saturdays game

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/statistics/team/_/stat/scoring-per-game

JoeZagFan
12-13-2017, 12:12 PM
Interesting that we have the same FG% as Duke, but better 3pt% and better FT%.
Looking at KenPom SOS, ours is much better than Duke. (ranked 47 to their 97)

Fun to play with the numbers...

thebigsmoove
12-13-2017, 01:33 PM
This team reminds me of the offensive efficiency that was shared by the 2015 team. I could see a similar cieling of Elite 8, possibly final four if we get a favorable bracket and seeding.

sheps001
12-13-2017, 01:55 PM
This team reminds me of the offensive efficiency that was shared by the 2015 team. I could see a similar cieling of Elite 8, possibly final four if we get a favorable bracket and seeding.

We need more beef under the boards if we want to get past the round of 32. I was at the Villanova game and it was self evident that this was the case. They played smash mouth East Coast BB like we came across when we played Duke, UNC Syracuse. ETC and went right down our throats. But for Larsen we had no answer. He did make a difference clogging up the lane and he is surprisingly quick but there are no horses beyond him. Expect the same thing if we somehow get to the round of 32 and past. Collins going pro really hurt. He and Larsen in rotation would have been hard to deal with in the lane. It was very tough watching our team in NYC. I couldn't wait for the game to end and it wasn't cheap. Worst defeat since Duke, Etc and now you know why.

Zagdawg
12-13-2017, 02:59 PM
We lost to the #1 team in the country -- our best big had a bad night/foul trouble and we shot 27% from 3-- to go with 19 turnovers and didn't have Kispert -- not too worried about the dance in March as the team has a lot of time to mature and will be ready to go by then. Larsen/Kispert/Rui and even Tillie will have a better handle on college basketball overall by March.

MDABE80
12-13-2017, 08:36 PM
Points Per Game

91.2

6th


Rebounds Per Game

40.8

Tied-30th


Assists Per Game

17.7

26th


Points Allowed

74.5

Tied-225th
Defense is porous...........holy crap!!

Zagdawg
12-13-2017, 08:46 PM
Defense affected by 3 OT including the 2OT Florida game (78 pts at regulation end)-- but 2OTs and 33 pts later adds 3.3 points per game average increase.

willandi
12-13-2017, 08:52 PM
Defense affected by 3 OT including the 2OT Florida game (78 pts at regulation end)-- but 2OTs and 33 pts later adds 3.3 points per game average increase.

Defense is also affected by putting in the reserves when up large in the closing minutes. Few is more concerned with getting them game experience than trying to compete on stats.

Francis The Goat Brother
12-13-2017, 08:57 PM
Points Per Game

91.2

6th


Rebounds Per Game

40.8

Tied-30th


Assists Per Game

17.7

26th


Points Allowed

74.5

Tied-225th
Defense is porous...........holy crap!!

A more accurate description of the defense is by looking on Ken Pom where we are rated 26th. We have played Florida, Creighton two of the top 15 or so scoring teams.... we are fine defensively

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 12:10 AM
26th! vs 225! Neither gorgeous figures........nothing like last year. Last year's numbers are what we need for a deep excusion in the NCAA. If we wipe out the WCC, the figures will improve....but ...........it's the WCC. We played a harder schedule last year and the year before.......! 10 games in and our defense needs major attention. Only my humble opinion of course......

Francis The Goat Brother
12-14-2017, 12:13 AM
26th! vs 225! Neither gorgeous figures........nothing like last year. Last year's numbers are what we need for a deep excusion in the NCAA. If we wipe out the WCC, the figures will improve....but ...........it's the WCC.

Our defensive numbers were just as good last year at this time.

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 01:07 AM
How do you prove that??? Is there something to look at?? I don't remember last years defense being anything like the present on.

rennis
12-14-2017, 05:39 AM
We need more beef under the boards if we want to get past the round of 32. I was at the Villanova game and it was self evident that this was the case. They played smash mouth East Coast BB like we came across when we played Duke, UNC Syracuse. ETC and went right down our throats. But for Larsen we had no answer. He did make a difference clogging up the lane and he is surprisingly quick but there are no horses beyond him. Expect the same thing if we somehow get to the round of 32 and past. Collins going pro really hurt. He and Larsen in rotation would have been hard to deal with in the lane. It was very tough watching our team in NYC. I couldn't wait for the game to end and it wasn't cheap. Worst defeat since Duke, Etc and now you know why.

I agree with a lot of this but doubt we're going to see a team as good as Nova until the Sweet Sixteen. We match-up very poorly against them this year, especially with JWIII riding pine. There aren't many teams that would make GU look that bad again, and I'm hoping we wouldn't see one until the 2nd weekend. :beer:

thespywhozaggedme
12-14-2017, 05:55 AM
We need more beef under the boards if we want to get past the round of 32. I was at the Villanova game and it was self evident that this was the case. They played smash mouth East Coast BB like we came across when we played Duke, UNC Syracuse. ETC and went right down our throats. But for Larsen we had no answer. He did make a difference clogging up the lane and he is surprisingly quick but there are no horses beyond him. Expect the same thing if we somehow get to the round of 32 and past. Collins going pro really hurt. He and Larsen in rotation would have been hard to deal with in the lane. It was very tough watching our team in NYC. I couldn't wait for the game to end and it wasn't cheap. Worst defeat since Duke, Etc and now you know why.

No one in the round of 32 is remotely close to as good as Nova is. I don't think you're giving them enough credit.

Zagdawg
12-14-2017, 05:58 AM
Most understand that we are a different team than last year -- come March we will see where we are at.

raise the zag
12-14-2017, 06:12 AM
No one in the round of 32 is remotely close to as good as Nova is. I don't think you're giving them enough credit.

Nova is head and shoulders better than any team this season.

Duke could be close with their trio of 6'11" atheltic bigs yet still young.

Villanova has just the right amt of experience, NBA prospscts (2), shooters with athleticism, and bball IQ

Their team last year was #1 for much of the season, yet this team is better, more versatile, harder to defend, better shot selection as a team.

I've seen every Top 10 team play, including the Top 5 teams multiple times.

The best team is Villanova, followed by Arizona St. At least right now.

Duke would give their 4 guard lineup fits, but if they are eliminated early due to foul issues and youth, & Grayson being relied on far too much, Nova will be headed to their 2nd Championship in 3 yrs.

Not just saying that because they beat us, I was saying that before we played them.

Now, a lot can happen between now and then, including freak things in NCAA tourney, like NWG rolling his ankle vs USC. Sh!t happens.

But as we sit right now, Villanova is 8 to 10 pts better than any team I've personally watched play.

And FWIW, coach Jay Wright said Gonzaga is, BY FAR, the best team they've played this season. And they still beat us by 20.

TheGonzagaFactor
12-14-2017, 06:30 AM
We need more beef under the boards if we want to get past the round of 32. I was at the Villanova game and it was self evident that this was the case. They played smash mouth East Coast BB like we came across when we played Duke, UNC Syracuse. ETC and went right down our throats. But for Larsen we had no answer. He did make a difference clogging up the lane and he is surprisingly quick but there are no horses beyond him. Expect the same thing if we somehow get to the round of 32 and past. Collins going pro really hurt. He and Larsen in rotation would have been hard to deal with in the lane. It was very tough watching our team in NYC. I couldn't wait for the game to end and it wasn't cheap. Worst defeat since Duke, Etc and now you know why.

Different game with Kispert, a good rebounder. With him on the court there's no way Nova would have been able to just back us down for so many easy baskets or get offensive rebounds at the rate they did. A thin, young team traveling across the country without a crucial starter - of course they got beaten by the best team in the land (also worth noting that that was Villanova's biggest game in a 24 month span, they were AMPED).

willandi
12-14-2017, 06:32 AM
No one in the round of 32 is remotely close to as good as Nova is. I don't think you're giving them enough credit.

Nova gets a bye to the Elite Eight? I thought they had to play in the round of 32 as well!

GrizZAG
12-14-2017, 06:36 AM
More than size issue I thought it was more a matter of our shots not dropping and perhaps rushing our shots at times. Had we hit our 3 at even 40% we were in that game. Tillie, Larson and J3 at times hold their own on rebounding. It seems our weakness is stopping aggressive talented guard play in those big time crunch games at the end.

sheps001
12-14-2017, 06:56 AM
No one in the round of 32 is remotely close to as good as Nova is. I don't think you're giving them enough credit.

I was at the game and I do give them credit. I've been waiting for this game for years as my friend is a big Nova alum. They took it to us and we did not have an answer. If you think our future opponents won't see this when they do film studies then you are sadly mistaken. This has happened to us before. The tourney in many ways is a crap shoot. You take who comes and who knows what will come our way. The likelihood of a Nova team increases substantially as the tourney goes on. I somewhat arbitrarily picked the round of 32 at this juncture but it could be later or even earlier depending on who we meet. We are not a good match up for a physical team like Nova and seeing them live, they were very physical in the way they looked and in the way they played. TV really doesn't do a game justice. Being there is a different story. Positives. Larsen is for real (Yeah) and he has co-ordination and plays hard. You have to play hard especially in Tourney time as there is no tomorrow. Norvelle Jr. A budding star. Plays hard like I see in the NBA (Season Bulls ticketholder here) and this is oh so important. Lets hope for the best. We certainly have to recruit another Larsen, Collins or Karnowski or Sabonis and soon.

TexasZagFan
12-14-2017, 07:29 AM
I was at the game and I do give them credit. I've been waiting for this game for years as my friend is a big Nova alum. They took it to us and we did not have an answer. If you think our future opponents won't see this when they do film studies then you are sadly mistaken. This has happened to us before. The tourney in many ways is a crap shoot. You take who comes and who knows what will come our way. The likelihood of a Nova team increases substantially as the tourney goes on. I somewhat arbitrarily picked the round of 32 at this juncture but it could be later or even earlier depending on who we meet. We are not a good match up for a physical team like Nova and seeing them live, they were very physical in the way they looked and in the way they played. TV really doesn't do a game justice. Being there is a different story. Positives. Larsen is for real (Yeah) and he has co-ordination and plays hard. You have to play hard especially in Tourney time as there is no tomorrow. Norvelle Jr. A budding star. Plays hard like I see in the NBA (Season Bulls ticketholder here) and this is oh so important. Lets hope for the best. We certainly have to recruit another Larsen, Collins or Karnowski or Sabonis and soon.

Brandon Clarke will be eligible next year, joined by Filip Petrusiv. We'll be fine.

sheps001
12-14-2017, 07:56 AM
Brandon Clarke will be eligible next year, joined by Filip Petrusiv. We'll be fine.thanks

MileHigh
12-14-2017, 08:11 AM
total points is never a great gauge of how well you are playing defense because the pace of play often dictates how high scoring a game will be. More possessions for both teams naturally means more points will be given up, regardless of how well you are defending.
Better gauge is opponents fg%, and rebound margin
If a team is at the top in those categories then they are a very good defensive team.

Gonzaga is top 30 in both the categories

Zagdawg
12-14-2017, 08:30 AM
We are not a good match up for a physical team like Nova and seeing them live, they were very physical in the way they looked and in the way they played.

We hear this about tournament teams from the east every year -- "how can we possibly play with them" -- "they are so physical" --- Seton Hall, St Johns, West Virginia, South Carolina recently said the same thing (right before we beat them).

kitzbuel
12-14-2017, 08:45 AM
Brandon Clarke will be eligible next year, joined by Filip Petrusiv. We'll be fine.Kispert would have helped a lot, and he will in the future.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 09:19 AM
total points is never a great gauge of how well you are playing defense because the pace of play often dictates how high scoring a game will be. More possessions for both teams naturally means more points will be given up, regardless of how well you are defending.
Better gauge is opponents fg%, and rebound margin
If a team is at the top in those categories then they are a very good defensive team.

Gonzaga is top 30 in both the categories

This is like "leading from behind". Bottom line is PPG. No escaping it. Why? Because you lose if the other team beats your defense and scores more. My God this is such inaccurate logic, it's hard to figure it out.

TexasZagFan
12-14-2017, 09:19 AM
We hear this about tournament teams from the east every year -- "how can we possibly play with them" -- "they are so physical" --- Seton Hall, St Johns, West Virginia, South Carolina recently said the same thing (right before we beat them).

With the rule changes limiting physical play, colleges seem to be following the NBA with the emphasis on 3 point baskets.

Despite the complaints about the officiating in the championship game, I read where both Few and Williams complimented the referees, saying they were doing their job, trying to control the physical play of both teams.

gu03alum
12-14-2017, 09:32 AM
This is like "leading from behind". Bottom line is PPG. No escaping it. Why? Because you lose if the other team beats your defense and scores more. My God this is such inaccurate logic, it's hard to figure it out.

How about point differential?

MileHigh
12-14-2017, 09:40 AM
This is like "leading from behind". Bottom line is PPG. No escaping it. Why? Because you lose if the other team beats your defense and scores more. My God this is such inaccurate logic, it's hard to figure it out.

....if you cant figure this out I am not sure what else can be said. I'll try typing slower.....some teams play faster than others, thus there are more possessions for both teams in a game Example: Virginia plays a slow down game and averages 62 possessions a game while Oklahoma gets the ball up to the rim quick and averages 82 possessions a game. Even if OU defends better and stops their opponent more frequently than Virginia, they will still give up more points........defense is about getting stops and getting the rebound. Period.
If you average 90 pts and you are giving up 70 you are potentially playing better defense than one that is averaging 60 and giving up 65

webspinnre
12-14-2017, 09:43 AM
....if you cant figure this out I am not sure what else can be said. I'll try typing slower.....some teams play faster than others, thus there are more possessions for both teams in a game Example: Virginia plays a slow down game and averages 62 possessions a game while Oklahoma gets the ball up to the rim quick and averages 82 possessions a game. Even if OU defends better and stops their opponent more frequently than Virginia, they will still give up more points........defense is about getting stops and getting the rebound. Period.
If you average 90 pts and you are giving up 70 you are potentially playing better defense than one that is averaging 60 and giving up 65

Exactly - pace is crucial, which is why efficiency is a much better gauge.

Markburn1
12-14-2017, 09:43 AM
This is like "leading from behind". Bottom line is PPG. No escaping it. Why? Because you lose if the other team beats your defense and scores more. My God this is such inaccurate logic, it's hard to figure it out.

This is so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

If a team wins 70-60 and another team wins 80-70, it's absurd to say that the team giving up 70 points is worse defensively than the team that gives up 60. There are so many more factors that go into how effective a defense is than mere points per game. As MileHigh says, one of the most important factors to consider is pace of play. Playing a deliberate pace of play using most of the shot clock limits defensive possesions simply by taking time off the clock. It doesn't make you a better defensive team because you give up fewer points by limiting the other teams possessions. What translates to better defense is limiting the amount of scoring per defensive possession. That is what effective field goal percentage stats measure.

Golden State is ranked 17th out of thirty NBA teams in points allowed. Yet, every year for the last several years they have a larger margin of victory than anyone in the league. Now, why is that? Because they are first in opponents FG%. They are more effective defensively on a per possession basis than any team in the league. Their pace of play allows for more possessions per game. It would be absurd to call them a bad defensive team. In point of fact, it would be absurd to call them anything but the best defensive team in the league.

cbbfanatic
12-14-2017, 09:57 AM
that was Villanova's biggest game in a 24 month span, they were AMPED).

absolutely false. 24 months?

villanova beat 4 top 10 teams en route to a title inside of 24 months... non conf games last year of purdue, notre dame & virginia on the same general tier... every in conference game against Xavier is as big or bigger (or whoever is in 2nd in the BE)...

come on man, this wasnt a gonzaga with a target on its back situation. villanova finds itself in big enough spots with regularity, not a play 4-5 challenging games in nov/dec then duck and hide situation. gonzaga had every reason to be more amped... this was a resume making opportunity where they are inherently scarce for the zags, while villanova has plenty more on the schedule that can act as big wins

i'd grant you that it turned into the biggest OOC game this year due to zona & purdue disappointing in early tournaments, but 24 months? crazy talk indicative of a myopic outlook.

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 11:22 AM
....if you cant figure this out I am not sure what else can be said. I'll try typing slower.....some teams play faster than others, thus there are more possessions for both teams in a game Example: Virginia plays a slow down game and averages 62 possessions a game while Oklahoma gets the ball up to the rim quick and averages 82 possessions a game. Even if OU defends better and stops their opponent more frequently than Virginia, they will still give up more points........defense is about getting stops and getting the rebound. Period.
If you average 90 pts and you are giving up 70 you are potentially playing better defense than one that is averaging 60 and giving up 65

Try to follow bright boy. In any. and I mean ANY outcome there are always multiple variables that influence the measure of interest. I'm certain you've never done a multivariate ANALYSIS AND LIKELY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT this means. I'll take some time just for you:)
Whether it's point differential, pace, pts allowed per possession, or anything else ( TO's, rebounding etc) the bottom line is points against. Not points against per minute or per possession and so on.
A spread may be important to the W-L record ( the ultimate bottom line) but has little to do with the other bottom line ppg against.

PPG is an outcome and many things account for it. ESPN rates GU very low. It's a measureable bottom line outcome skin to the W-L record. If we added ALL variables ( Kenpom does that) I'm sure we'd look better ( we do) but that's a statistical argument. While nice to see and interesting, it adjusts for all the variables . Their bottom line isn't a bottom line at all. The only real bottom line ( with or without variables) is the points against. Usually that's an immutable solid number after 10 games in our case. We could outpace a team by 50, 30, or whatever but the bottom line is that we allow way too many points . Ranking 220 (compared to the other 351 teams) or worse is an eye catcher.

Same occurs with W-L records. Tons of statisitical variables can be talked about (as to how we lost or won) but in the end we either win or we lose. BOTTOM line. And this is what ESPN's outcome went with as an indicator of our defensive proficiency. No "yeah buts" allowed. Best wishes.

Zagnificent
12-14-2017, 11:28 AM
Brandon Clarke will be eligible next year, joined by Filip Petrusiv. We'll be fine.

And Jordan Brown :pray:

Markburn1
12-14-2017, 11:58 AM
Try to follow bright boy. In any. and I mean ANY outcome there are always multiple variables that influence the measure of interest. I'm certain you've never done a multivariate ANALYSIS AND LIKELY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT this means. I'll take some time just for you:)
Whether it's point differential, pace, pts allowed per possession, or anything else ( TO's, rebounding etc) the bottom line is points against. Not points against per minute or per possession and so on.
A spread may be important to the W-L record ( the ultimate bottom line) but has little to do with the other bottom line ppg against.

PPG is an outcome and many things account for it. ESPN rates GU very low. It's a measureable bottom line outcome skin to the W-L record. If we added ALL variables ( Kenpom does that) I'm sure we'd look better ( we do) but that's a statistical argument. While nice to see and interesting, it adjusts for all the variables . Their bottom line isn't a bottom line at all. The only real bottom line ( with or without variables) is the points against. Usually that's an immutable solid number after 10 games in our case. We could outpace a team by 50, 30, or whatever but the bottom line is that we allow way too many points . Ranking 220 (compared to the other 351 teams) or worse is an eye catcher.

Same occurs with W-L records. Tons of statisitical variables can be talked about (as to how we lost or won) but in the end we either win or we lose. BOTTOM line. And this is what ESPN's outcome went with as an indicator of our defensive proficiency. No "yeah buts" allowed. Best wishes.

Doesn't have to be any "yeah, buts"

You are just wrong.

Coach Crazy
12-14-2017, 12:05 PM
Points against only matters when comparing like variables.

FG% is going to determine defensive efficiency, more so than points against. A team that holds a team to 30% from the field would inevitably give up more points as possessions increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MileHigh
12-14-2017, 12:29 PM
Try to follow bright boy. In any. and I mean ANY outcome there are always multiple variables that influence the measure of interest. I'm certain you've never done a multivariate ANALYSIS AND LIKELY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT this means. I'll take some time just for you:)
Whether it's point differential, pace, pts allowed per possession, or anything else ( TO's, rebounding etc) the bottom line is points against. Not points against per minute or per possession and so on.
A spread may be important to the W-L record ( the ultimate bottom line) but has little to do with the other bottom line ppg against.

PPG is an outcome and many things account for it. ESPN rates GU very low. It's a measureable bottom line outcome skin to the W-L record. If we added ALL variables ( Kenpom does that) I'm sure we'd look better ( we do) but that's a statistical argument. While nice to see and interesting, it adjusts for all the variables . Their bottom line isn't a bottom line at all. The only real bottom line ( with or without variables) is the points against. Usually that's an immutable solid number after 10 games in our case. We could outpace a team by 50, 30, or whatever but the bottom line is that we allow way too many points . Ranking 220 (compared to the other 351 teams) or worse is an eye catcher.

Same occurs with W-L records. Tons of statisitical variables can be talked about (as to how we lost or won) but in the end we either win or we lose. BOTTOM line. And this is what ESPN's outcome went with as an indicator of our defensive proficiency. No "yeah buts" allowed. Best wishes.

I didn't even bother to read your post because if you are seriously arguing that PPG is a more accurate reflection of how you are playing defense than Fg%, rebound %, etc, then you are truly a lost cause. Every single coach in the NBA and college is much more concerned with the efficiency stats than total points against. The fact that everyone in this thread is screaming at you that you are wrong would normally cause one to pause, but apparently not you.

lastly, "Bright Boy"?...lol...never heard that one before!

sittingon50
12-14-2017, 12:38 PM
:fingergun:

soccerdud
12-14-2017, 12:40 PM
Try to follow bright boy. In any. and I mean ANY outcome there are always multiple variables that influence the measure of interest. I'm certain you've never done a multivariate ANALYSIS AND LIKELY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT this means. I'll take some time just for you:)
Whether it's point differential, pace, pts allowed per possession, or anything else ( TO's, rebounding etc) the bottom line is points against. Not points against per minute or per possession and so on.
A spread may be important to the W-L record ( the ultimate bottom line) but has little to do with the other bottom line ppg against.

PPG is an outcome and many things account for it. ESPN rates GU very low. It's a measureable bottom line outcome skin to the W-L record. If we added ALL variables ( Kenpom does that) I'm sure we'd look better ( we do) but that's a statistical argument. While nice to see and interesting, it adjusts for all the variables . Their bottom line isn't a bottom line at all. The only real bottom line ( with or without variables) is the points against. Usually that's an immutable solid number after 10 games in our case. We could outpace a team by 50, 30, or whatever but the bottom line is that we allow way too many points . Ranking 220 (compared to the other 351 teams) or worse is an eye catcher.

Same occurs with W-L records. Tons of statisitical variables can be talked about (as to how we lost or won) but in the end we either win or we lose. BOTTOM line. And this is what ESPN's outcome went with as an indicator of our defensive proficiency. No "yeah buts" allowed. Best wishes.

so, have you just hit that point in your life where you no longer even make a token effort at understanding any argument or claim that doesn't support the position you had when you entered a conversation?

TexasZagFan
12-14-2017, 12:54 PM
And Jordan Brown :pray:

I go to war with the soldiers I have. lol

amaronizag
12-14-2017, 01:46 PM
I'm not picking sides, just saying the two sides are taking about different things. One way to compare the efficiency of teams is to use tempo free statistics, as KenPom does. That eliminates pace from the equation. As of last year, KenPom ranks teams by efficiency margin (EM). EM is the difference between the average number of points GU scores per possession minus the average number of points GU opponents score against GU per possession. Abe is right that we are allowing our opponents to score too many points per possession. I think that number will come down as this team improves over the course of the year and once we hit conference play. By March I think our defensive efficiency will be under 90 (0.90 points per possession) and GU will be in the top 15 in both offensive and defensive efficiency. That should keep us in the top 7-10 in KenPom rankings. With one more loss, I think we're still a 2 seed in March for sure. With two more losses, I think we're a 2 or 3 seed.

Markburn1
12-14-2017, 01:58 PM
I'm not picking sides, just saying the two sides are taking about different things. One way to compare the efficiency of teams is to use tempo free statistics, as KenPom does. That eliminates pace from the equation. As of last year, KenPom ranks teams by efficiency margin (EM). EM is the difference between the average number of points GU scores per possession minus the average number of points GU opponents score against GU per possession. Abe is right that we are allowing our opponents to score too many points per possession. I think that number will come down as this team improves over the course of the year and once we hit conference play. By March I think our defensive efficiency will be under 90 (0.90 points per possession) and GU will be in the top 15 in both offensive and defensive efficiency. That should keep us in the top 7-10 in KenPom rankings. With one more loss, I think we're still a 2 seed in March for sure. With two more losses, I think we're a 2 or 3 seed.

Except Abe is not arguing points per possession. Points per game is his mantra.

MileHigh
12-14-2017, 02:08 PM
I'm not picking sides, just saying the two sides are taking about different things. One way to compare the efficiency of teams is to use tempo free statistics, as KenPom does. That eliminates pace from the equation. As of last year, KenPom ranks teams by efficiency margin (EM). EM is the difference between the average number of points GU scores per possession minus the average number of points GU opponents score against GU per possession. Abe is right that we are allowing our opponents to score too many points per possession. I think that number will come down as this team improves over the course of the year and once we hit conference play. By March I think our defensive efficiency will be under 90 (0.90 points per possession) and GU will be in the top 15 in both offensive and defensive efficiency. That should keep us in the top 7-10 in KenPom rankings. With one more loss, I think we're still a 2 seed in March for sure. With two more losses, I think we're a 2 or 3 seed.

Points per possession is a great metric, and probably better than adjusted fg% against, because it factors in foul shots, turnovers, and the added value of the 3 pointer. I am not sure how offensive rebounds factor in (part of original possession or a new possession?)

I any event, these are the type of advanced metrics that are a much better gauge of how you are playing defense than the simplistic ppg that is being advocated above.

Bogozags
12-14-2017, 02:13 PM
We should all be aware that this is the Holiday Season...the season of giving not taking...

Let's be nice to each other, at least through the season...

GO ZAGS!

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 02:13 PM
:fingergun:

But a very correct one 50. Thanks for chiming in. If it's above you, so be it. Seems to be with Mile High. (emphasis on High)

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 02:17 PM
so, have you just hit that point in your life where you no longer even make a token effort at understanding any argument or claim that doesn't support the position you had when you entered a conversation?

No I got it. I was just commenting on the ESPN measure. Nothing more or less. The number is the number. Why Mile began his nasty immature comments is what I don't get. Mine was simple. Zags are simply and objectively allowing too many points. Usually that translates into a weaker defense. That's why we got the number we were given. It's just a number.

I have yet to hear from the goat who said we're at the same level we were at this time last year. Right..

webspinnre
12-14-2017, 02:24 PM
No I got it. I was just commenting on the ESPN measure. Nothing more or less. The number is the number. Why Mile began his nasty immature comments is what I don't get. Mine was simple. Zags are simply and objectively allowing too many points. Usually that translates into a weaker defense. That's why we got the number we were given. It's just a number.

I have yet to hear from the goat who said we're at the same level we were at this time last year. Right..

One of the reasons we're allowing more points this year is because we're playing at a faster pace, which means the opposing team gets more possessions, which results in them scoring more points.

primal23
12-14-2017, 02:34 PM
The route this thread is going I sense a lock coming soon... :(


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 02:42 PM
Web...you may be right. I don't know how to quantify that.
This began as a simple post. Noting that ESPN equated the ppg against with a bad defense. It's a bottom line quantification. Number of pints scored against added and then divided by 10. Simple. Most look and say "yep".

There may be a problem with equating the value of a defense with the points scored against. Obviously other factors intervene. Lots of factors.....some noted in this thread by others. ie the KenPom approach. I know that and I know their variables. No argument here.

SO yes. I got it. I was just commenting on the simple number. Surely didn't expect the outburst. As for Mile? Just another emotional guy who doesn't like the comments on his Josh. Tough. Don't bother. Here, we shed light....not heat.

GonzagasaurusFlex
12-14-2017, 03:08 PM
Web...you may be right. I don't know how to quantify that.
This began as a simple post. Noting that ESPN equated the ppg against with a bad defense. It's a bottom line quantification. Number of pints scored against added and then divided by 10. Simple. Most look and say "yep".

There may be a problem with equating the value of a defense with the points scored against. Obviously other factors intervene. Lots of factors.....some noted in this thread by others. ie the KenPom approach. I know that and I know their variables. No argument here.

SO yes. I got it. I was just commenting on the simple number. Surely didn't expect the outburst. As for Mile? Just another emotional guy who doesn't like the comments on his Josh. Tough. Don't bother. Here, we shed light....not heat.

What’s your problem Abe? Ease up on the personal attacks and adolescent comments. So tiresome when unnecessary drama pollutes an otherwise enjoyable forum where we can all share our opinions about college basketball.

MileHigh
12-14-2017, 03:35 PM
Web...you may be right. I don't know how to quantify that.
This began as a simple post. Noting that ESPN equated the ppg against with a bad defense. It's a bottom line quantification. Number of pints scored against added and then divided by 10. Simple. Most look and say "yep".

There may be a problem with equating the value of a defense with the points scored against. Obviously other factors intervene. Lots of factors.....some noted in this thread by others. ie the KenPom approach. I know that and I know their variables. No argument here.

SO yes. I got it. I was just commenting on the simple number. Surely didn't expect the outburst. As for Mile? Just another emotional guy who doesn't like the comments on his Josh. Tough. Don't bother. Here, we shed light....not heat.

Let's see...in this thread alone you have called me "immature" "high" and "Bright Boy" (whatever the heck that means)......and you say I am prone to emotional outbursts? Lol!

And if you look back you started this cat fight by responding to my general post about what I thought the best measure of defense was....I didnt post to you directly until you called my theory "innaccurate logic"" so your holier than thou shtick is falling on deaf ears here.......and what the heck does Perkins have to do with this thread???

Zags11
12-14-2017, 10:02 PM
Cancerous thread.

ZagNation
12-14-2017, 10:17 PM
I think Abe opened up the happy juice again.

MDABE80
12-14-2017, 10:37 PM
Nope...the topic was explained well enough. Just no time for the other things that invariably come up when simple statements are made. No point in going further.

ZagNation
12-14-2017, 10:40 PM
Yep...Incoherent statement.

WallaWallaZag
12-15-2017, 12:10 AM
well, if it will make abe feel any better, duke is even worse than gonzaga in ppg allowed...and the zags ranking is skewed by the 2OT high scoring affair against florida (around 50 spots worth)...not to mention more games than normal against high scoring teams like creighton and nova. a couple games against smc and the ppg allowed will drop like a rock, just like dukes will drop when they face tony bennett.

zaguarxj
12-15-2017, 07:35 AM
Somebody needs to get the word out to Ken Pomeroy that the only meaningful defensive stat is PPG allowed. It would make his job much simpler.