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
No comments:
Post a Comment