UNLV odds & McNeese St stats

First the important stuff, odds for today's game:


UNC 81.11508, UNLV 78.49534
Pace 80.86226
HomeWinP 0.5932798



Check out that pace! Could be a real barn burner, which I feel would only help Carolina. More possessions against a poorly set up defense can only be a good thing. It'll also be interesting to see who draws Bennett on the defensive end. McAdoo might be the most similar player but he typically reserves his effort for offense. Could it be a task for Bullock, who is a hair shorter but is frequently lauded for his defense? I don't know if Joel James is quick enough or experienced enough, time will certainly tell.


Now the results from McNeese St (my apologies, the laptop didn't make it home to Charlotte) arguably the Tar Heels' best performance of the season (at least measuring as compared to KenPom predictions). It also came in a home game, hopefully the shooters continue to see a big basket today. Most notably, and I can't emphasize this enough, the Carolina offense is more inextricably linked to Field Goal shooting than ever this year. The performance against McNeese State did nothing to dissuade me of that notion. Yes, all teams are beholden to their shooting percentage but with more 3 point attempts and less ability to rebound and play defense this Tar Heel team is particularly at the mercy of their shooters (much to Roy's chagrin "If you want to give me something, that means that you think it’s to your advantage. I want to take what I want.")


One of the most encouraging signatures from the graph is the location of the point guards. Both Strickland and Paige used fewer possessions and had higher ratings than their season averages. I didn't watch this one, but it would indicate to me that they didn't turn the ball over, or take too many shots, instead relying on McAdoo and thewing players to generate offense. Assuming I'm correct this would indicate that the offense was operating well with fewer broken plays and forced shots by those two players. To use a sports metaphor, imagine a QB like Cam Newton able to find many different receivers and less reliant on scrambling out of trouble.


Jackson Simmons and Joel James both broke the possession meter. Each had more offensive rebounds than shots attempted and thus created possessions for the Heels and had "negative" possession used numbers.Also, PJ Hairston's name is really really big, which can happen when a blowout limits his playing time. He used 39 percent of the team's possessions while on the floor, a comfortable first place over McAdoo at 29%. 

$`Four Factors`
        OPP      NAME ORTG perEFG perORB  FTR TORATE
1 McNeeseSt     Total 1.28   0.56   0.51 0.30   0.18
2 McNeeseSt oppTotals 0.83   0.38   0.31 0.26   0.13

$`Last Game`
           POSS  ORTG   USG perFTM perFGM perFGM.3 perORB perDRB perTS  FTR perEFG ARATE
Bullock      11  1.55  0.24    NaN   0.60     0.62   0.04   0.13  0.85 0.00   0.85  0.19
McAdoo       13  0.92  0.29   0.33   0.45      NaN   0.08   0.16  0.44 0.55   0.45  0.14
Hubert        3  0.67  0.16    NaN   1.00      NaN   0.18   0.23  1.00 0.00   1.00  0.00
Strickland    8  1.00  0.16    NaN   0.67     0.00   0.00   0.09  0.67 0.00   0.67  0.26
Paige         6  1.00  0.13    NaN   0.33     1.00   0.00   0.00  0.50 0.00   0.50  0.41
James         0  -Inf  0.00   1.00   1.00      NaN   0.18   0.23  1.06 2.00   1.00  0.00
Hairston     12  1.67  0.39   0.88   0.45     0.38   0.24   0.19  0.69 0.73   0.59  0.14
Johnson       7  1.43  0.26    NaN   0.50      NaN   0.20   0.22  0.50 0.00   0.50  0.00
McDonald     10  1.10  0.25   0.67   0.33     0.43   0.00   0.04  0.53 0.33   0.50  0.16
Tokoto        3  1.00  0.11   0.33   0.50      NaN   0.07   0.11  0.45 1.50   0.50  0.16
Davis         0   NaN  0.00    NaN    NaN      NaN   0.00   0.00   NaN  NaN    NaN  0.00
Simmons      -1 -4.00 -0.09    NaN   0.67      NaN   0.67   0.12  0.67 0.00   0.67  0.00
Total        76  1.28  1.00   0.64   0.47     0.46   0.51   0.67  0.58 0.30   0.56  0.83
oppTotals    76  0.83  1.00   0.42   0.36     0.18   0.31   0.49  0.39 0.26   0.38  0.46

$`Season Totals`
         NAME POSS ORTG  USG perFTM perFGM perFGM.3 perORB perDRB perTS  FTR perEFG ARATE
1     Bullock  114 1.38 0.19   0.82   0.49     0.48   0.07   0.13  0.64 0.15   0.62  0.15
2      McAdoo  183 0.98 0.28   0.62   0.47      NaN   0.10   0.17  0.50 0.38   0.47  0.06
3      Hubert   13 0.92 0.06   0.00   0.50      NaN   0.09   0.10  0.40 0.58   0.50  0.02
4  Strickland  117 0.91 0.20   0.59   0.46     0.24   0.02   0.08  0.51 0.38   0.48  0.23
5       Paige  112 0.69 0.21   0.80   0.36     0.32   0.01   0.06  0.45 0.06   0.43  0.22
6       James   31 1.39 0.09   0.64   0.53      NaN   0.10   0.16  0.56 0.44   0.53  0.04
7    Hairston  118 1.14 0.32   0.88   0.37     0.33   0.11   0.13  0.54 0.31   0.47  0.10
8     Johnson   79 1.32 0.25   0.60   0.62      NaN   0.08   0.26  0.62 0.13   0.62  0.03
9    McDonald  102 1.11 0.24   0.69   0.41     0.45   0.05   0.07  0.55 0.17   0.54  0.12
10     Tokoto   47 1.13 0.18   0.33   0.55     0.14   0.11   0.15  0.53 0.43   0.56  0.08
11      Davis    6 1.33 0.05   1.00   1.00     1.00   0.00   0.03  1.39 1.00   1.50  0.40
12    Simmons    7 2.29 0.07   1.00   0.43      NaN   0.18   0.18  0.51 0.29   0.43  0.05
13      Total  924 1.09 1.00   0.65   0.45     0.37   0.40   0.67  0.53 0.26   0.51  0.63
14   oppTotal  924 0.90 1.00   0.68   0.38     0.33   0.31   0.61  0.47 0.26   0.44  0.50

UNC @ Texas, Post Game Wrap

Well, no one can say KenPom didn't warn us. On one end the game was largely what I expected it to be given Texas' ratings. The Heels' offense has been hot and cold this year, centering largely around the 3 point shot without which it seems to flounder. And last night flounder it did, greatly. There was the all too familiar 4-6 point hump (similar to Butler, couldn't quite get close enough to lead), and if a few more 3's drop (team 3FG% was 16, normally it is 36) Carolina would have briefly seized the lead. As an exercise, just check out the game graph, every UNC player except Brice Johnson under-performed their season offense. Texas is a good defensive team, and those numbers are the evidence to back up Bullock no having open looks at 3 and McAdoo getting bullied out of the post.



The other end of the game was much more troubling. Texas isn't a good offensive team. Much like a teacher who knows which material is going to be on the test, I'm going to repeat that in case you missed it, TEXAS ISN'T A GOOD OFFENSIVE TEAM (98.7 adjusted, 174th after last night). Upcoming on the schedule is UNLV (45th), UVA (104th), Miami (25th), FSU (96th) and Maryland (72nd). These are all teams better than Texas, a bad offensive team that UNC refused to guard at times. To me this is as alarming a problem as the offense, defense is based on communication and effort and should "gel" a lot faster than the offense.



Now, if you've made it through the two doomsday paragraphs above I have some positive notes. In general these problems seem fixable. I wasn't super impressed with Texas' defense, they were good but the Heels gave the ball away multiple times, you remember the ball bouncing off McAdoo's hands, James' hands, through Bullock's leg, off Tokoto's hands out of bounds. Also, the issues overall are more of consistency than ability (which frequently makes it all the more frustrating). Take the 11 minutes spanning halftime, where UNC used a 30-15 run and closed a 39-20 deficit to 54-50, and did it only using 2 3-pointers (of 3 made in the game :-/).



Consistency problems have always plagued Roy Williams' teams, this isn't something that should come as a surprise to no one. Even in 2009 the team had ups and downs (Loss to Boston College anyone?), but no one notices when you're 15 to 20 points better than your opponents. When you're basically even to start with and you under-perform you lose basketball games. I don't think expecting 30-15 runs for 40 minutes is realistic, but somewhere in that 10 minute span exists the Carolina team that the media, coaches and fans went into the season expecting.



-Ryan





Cason, here's some +/- stats for you, that 30-15 run consisted of 10m51s here is the breakdown:




Bullock 10:51

McAdoo 9:01

Strickland 9:01

Paige 7:30


Tokoto 6:53

Hairston 5:19


McDonald 3:46

James 3:15





The name that jumps out to me is Tokoto, the others are all in proportion to their minutes played across the whole game, while Tokoto's minutes are elevated. Roy made the choice to start Tokoto in the second half and it payed off as the run continued.

$`Four Factors`
    OPP      NAME ORTG perEFG perORB  FTR TORATE
1 Texas     Total 0.84   0.34   0.39 0.48   0.22
2 Texas oppTotals 1.06   0.45   0.38 0.35   0.16

$`Last Game`
           POSS ORTG  USG perFTM perFGM perFGM.3 perORB perDRB perTS  FTR perEFG ARATE
Bullock      14 1.29 0.23   0.83   0.35     0.25   0.16   0.20  0.46 0.35   0.38  0.13
McAdoo       18 0.78 0.28   0.60   0.36      NaN   0.07   0.16  0.45 0.91   0.36  0.12
Hubert        1 0.00 0.06    NaN   0.00      NaN   0.10   0.00  0.00 0.00   0.00  0.00
Strickland   11 0.82 0.18   0.75   0.43     0.00   0.00   0.06  0.51 0.57   0.43  0.06
Paige        12 0.58 0.21   1.00   0.25     0.17   0.00   0.00  0.39 0.25   0.31  0.34
James         3 0.00 0.21    NaN    NaN      NaN   0.11   0.00   NaN  NaN    NaN  0.00
Hairston     12 0.75 0.27   1.00   0.17     0.14   0.14   0.08  0.33 0.33   0.21  0.09
Johnson       3 1.33 0.25    NaN   0.67      NaN   0.00   0.29  0.67 0.00   0.67  0.00
McDonald      6 0.33 0.17    NaN   0.14     0.00   0.04   0.10  0.14 0.00   0.14  0.00
Tokoto        4 1.00 0.11   0.33   1.00      NaN   0.04   0.23  0.55 6.00   1.00  0.00
Davis        NA   NA   NA     NA     NA       NA     NA     NA    NA   NA     NA    NA
Simmons      NA   NA   NA     NA     NA       NA     NA     NA    NA   NA     NA    NA
Total        80 0.84 1.00   0.69   0.31     0.16   0.39   0.57  0.41 0.48   0.34  0.52
oppTotals    80 1.06 1.00   0.73   0.41     0.35   0.38   0.55  0.50 0.35   0.45  0.40

$`Season Totals`
         NAME POSS ORTG  USG perFTM perFGM perFGM.3 perORB perDRB perTS  FTR perEFG ARATE
1     Bullock  103 1.36 0.18   0.82   0.48     0.45   0.07   0.13  0.62 0.16   0.59  0.15
2      McAdoo  170 0.99 0.28   0.65   0.47      NaN   0.10   0.18  0.51 0.37   0.47  0.05
3      Hubert   10 1.00 0.05   0.00   0.45      NaN   0.08   0.09  0.36 0.64   0.45  0.02
4  Strickland  109 0.90 0.20   0.59   0.45     0.25   0.03   0.08  0.50 0.41   0.47  0.22
5       Paige  106 0.67 0.22   0.80   0.36     0.28   0.01   0.07  0.44 0.06   0.43  0.20
6       James   31 1.26 0.10   0.58   0.52      NaN   0.10   0.16  0.54 0.39   0.52  0.04
7    Hairston  106 1.08 0.31   0.88   0.36     0.33   0.10   0.13  0.52 0.26   0.46  0.10
8     Johnson   72 1.31 0.25   0.60   0.64      NaN   0.07   0.27  0.64 0.14   0.64  0.03
9    McDonald   91 1.12 0.24   0.69   0.42     0.46   0.06   0.07  0.56 0.15   0.54  0.12
10     Tokoto   43 1.16 0.19   0.33   0.55     0.14   0.11   0.15  0.54 0.38   0.56  0.07
11      Davis    6 1.33 0.05   1.00   1.00     1.00   0.00   0.03  1.39 1.00   1.50  0.41
12    Simmons    8 1.50 0.08   1.00   0.36      NaN   0.12   0.19  0.47 0.36   0.36  0.05
13      Total  848 1.07 1.00   0.65   0.45     0.36   0.39   0.67  0.53 0.25   0.51  0.61
14   oppTotal  848 0.91 1.00   0.70   0.38     0.34   0.31   0.62  0.48 0.26   0.45  0.51

McNeese St prediction(107.4,90.2,75.7,97.5,104.2,65.3)
$HomePts
[1] 85.78433
$AwayPts
[1] 63.7419
$Pace
[1] 73.45037
$HomeWinP
[1] 0.9681834

ECU @ UNC 121215

$`Four Factors`
  OPP     NAME ORTG perEFG perORB  FTR TORATE
1 ECU    Total 1.16   0.55   0.29 0.36   0.15
2 ECU oppTotal 1.09   0.49   0.24 0.40   0.12

$`Last Game`
           POSS ORTG  USG perFTM perFGM perFGM.3 perORB perDRB perTS  FTR perEFG ARATE
Bullock       7 2.00 0.13    NaN   0.67     0.67   0.17   0.11  0.78 0.00   0.78  0.18
McAdoo       20 0.95 0.31   0.90   0.36      NaN   0.00   0.21  0.52 0.71   0.36  0.00
Hubert        0  NaN 0.00    NaN    NaN      NaN   0.00   0.00   NaN  NaN    NaN  0.00
Strickland   11 1.09 0.17   0.75   0.67     0.50   0.00   0.12  0.77 0.67   0.75  0.37
Paige         9 0.67 0.18   0.50   0.33     0.50   0.00   0.08  0.44 0.33   0.42  0.19
James         4 0.50 0.25    NaN   0.25      NaN   0.00   0.12  0.25 0.00   0.25  0.00
Hairston     11 1.64 0.28   1.00   0.60     0.50   0.17   0.14  0.77 0.40   0.70  0.00
Johnson       5 1.00 0.17   0.50   0.50      NaN   0.00   0.25  0.51 0.50   0.50  0.00
McDonald     10 0.70 0.23   1.00   0.33     0.00   0.00   0.09  0.37 0.11   0.33  0.05
Tokoto        4 2.50 0.20   0.00   1.00      NaN   0.22   0.30  0.92 0.20   1.00  0.12
Davis         0  NaN 0.00    NaN    NaN      NaN   0.00   0.00   NaN  NaN    NaN  0.00
Simmons       0  NaN  NaN    NaN    NaN      NaN    NaN    NaN   NaN  NaN    NaN   NaN
Total        80 1.16 1.00   0.79   0.51     0.43   0.29   0.71  0.60 0.36   0.55  0.59
oppTotal     80 1.09 1.00   0.78   0.42     0.37   0.24   0.74  0.55 0.40   0.49  0.54

$`Season Totals`
         NAME POSS ORTG  USG perFTM perFGM perFGM.3 perORB perDRB perTS  FTR perEFG ARATE
1     Bullock   89 1.37 0.17   0.82   0.51     0.47   0.06   0.12  0.65 0.12   0.63  0.15
2      McAdoo  152 1.01 0.28   0.67   0.48      NaN   0.10   0.18  0.52 0.32   0.48  0.05
3      Hubert    9 1.11 0.05   0.00   0.50      NaN   0.08   0.10  0.38 0.70   0.50  0.02
4  Strickland   98 0.91 0.20   0.57   0.45     0.27   0.03   0.08  0.50 0.39   0.47  0.24
5       Paige   94 0.68 0.22   0.67   0.37     0.30   0.01   0.08  0.45 0.04   0.44  0.19
6       James   28 1.39 0.09   0.58   0.52      NaN   0.10   0.16  0.54 0.39   0.52  0.04
7    Hairston   94 1.12 0.31   0.86   0.39     0.35   0.09   0.13  0.54 0.25   0.49  0.10
8     Johnson   69 1.30 0.25   0.60   0.64      NaN   0.07   0.27  0.64 0.15   0.64  0.03
9    McDonald   85 1.18 0.25   0.69   0.44     0.47   0.06   0.07  0.59 0.16   0.58  0.12
10     Tokoto   39 1.18 0.20   0.33   0.54     0.14   0.13   0.13  0.54 0.23   0.55  0.09
11      Davis    6 1.33 0.05   1.00   1.00     1.00   0.00   0.03  1.39 1.00   1.50  0.40
12    Simmons    8 1.50 0.09   1.00   0.36      NaN   0.12   0.20  0.47 0.36   0.36  0.05
13      Total  767 1.10 1.00   0.64   0.47     0.38   0.39   0.68  0.54 0.23   0.52  0.61
14   oppTotal  767 0.90 1.00   0.70   0.38     0.34   0.30   0.63  0.48 0.25   0.45  0.52