PDA

View Full Version : A Statistical Review of Xavier's 2014 season



XU_Lou
03-19-2014, 02:44 PM
Long time reader, first time poster. Like most posters on this board, I was quite upset with last night's outcome. So I sat down today and compiled some stats to see where our problems were. Specifically, I wanted to see where this year's team compared to previous XU teams. The following are a few key stats that highlight some of our problem areas. Most of this data came from http://statsheet.com/ .

First of all are some key offensive stats:



Year

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014



Tourny Results

E-8


1st

2nd

E-8

S-16

S-16

1st

S-16


1st



Points Per Game

71.2

70.1

71.6

76.3

75.1

71.7

79.8

72.1

70.6

65.2

71.8



Scoring possessions / Total possessions

53.5

53.2

53.3

54.9

54.9

53.8

55.4

53.3

52.9

53

55



Points per 100 posessions

107.6

108.8

109

114.7

114.4

106.7

111

108.7

103.8

102.4

108.5



Free Throw Attempts

777

604

713

847

836

851

873

756

819

655

770



Free Throw Pct

68.9

73.2

72.4

74.1

74.9

67.6

71.1

74.7

69.5

66.7

68.8




My takeaway from this data is that we have performed about as well most of the previous teams in the past decade (on offense). The only downside from 2014 was that we got to the free throw line less than average, and our FT% was down. Probably cost us 2 or 3 points per game.

Surprisingly, even our assists and turnovers looked pretty could comparatively:



Year

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014



% Field goals made that were assisted

54.5

63.8

64.5

59.8

60.3

54.8

51.4

54.1

52.4

48.2

57.2



Assists Per Game

13.4

15.2

15.7

14.9

15.2

13.3

14.1

13.2

13.1

11.2

14.6



Turnover Pct (turnovers per possession)

18.8

21.3

19.5

19

19.8

21.7

18

18.2

18.5

20.4

18.7



Turnovers Per Game

12.4

13.7

12.8

12.7

13

14.6

12.9

12.1

12.6

13

12.4




So where did we go wrong this year? To me it was all on the defensive end. Namely, defensive shooting percentage:



Year

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014



Points

63

65

63

65

63

61

69

64

67

62

68



FG%

41.4

43.3

39.6

43.1

41

38.6

41

40.6

40.2

40.5

43.1



3-Pt %

30.3

37.6

31.6

31.5

33.6

32.6

29.8

33.9

30.5

32.1

35.2




We also had a bit of a spike in fouls committed this year as well:



Year

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014



Fouls Per Game

16.6

17.8

17.7

17.7

17.3

18.6

18.9

17.2

18.5

17.5

19.9




However, fans should keep in mind that we arguably played the 2nd most difficult schedule in our history, as shown by our SOS:



Year

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014



RPI

35

139

80

33

9

17

19

22

41

87

47



SOS

43

149

106

82

24

47

42

56

36

60

26




I think teams were able to exploit our deficiencies this year. Namely, Philmore and Stainbrook aren't the quickest guys on the court, and Dee is not the tallest. This may explain why teams were able to score on us this year, given that we were playing much better than normal competition.

Finally, I wanted to point out some stats on Dee Davis. Ask my wife, I've been extremely frustrated with him at times this year. It seemed to me that he was very careless with his passing this year, and thought that he was contributing to some of our losses. However, his stats may not bear that out. Maybe I was too hard on him. I compared his 2014 stats to Tu Holloway's stats as a Junior:

Dee had 4.66 assists / game
Tu had 5.44 assists / game

Dee 1.94 turnovers / game
Tu 3.44 turnovers / game

Dee 2.4 A/T ratio
Tu 1.6 A/T ratio

Also, Dee had 1.19 steals per game while Tu had 1.44 in his Jr year.

My take on the above data is that, if I recall correctly, Tu had his turnovers mostly on his dribble penetration, while Dee seems to cough up the ball on bad passes, thus they are more noticeable to us as fans.

Thoughts???

Masterofreality
03-19-2014, 02:59 PM
What was our overall Offensive Field Goal Shooting % and our 3 point Field Goal Shooting %?

Those are pertinent to me.

Plus, when Dee turned the ball over on bad passes, that led immediately to run out baskets for the opponent. Not necessarily the case with Tu's.

Right on with the slow rotation of the bigs and shooting over Dee. I didn't like our hedging with this group this year.

xu82
03-19-2014, 03:17 PM
Nice work. I am also curious about our shooting %, especially from three. Maybe it wasn't as bad as it seemed(yet maybe it was), but a couple reliable shooters would make it harder to double Stain every time and would prevent them from having five guys waiting for Semaj when he gets to the rim. That would be a real game changer, I'd think. Also, I watched Arizona play recently and I miss that tenacious defense. They are a #1 seed and we are in the off season.

Masterofreality
03-19-2014, 03:18 PM
Nice work. I am also curious about our shooting %, especially from three. Maybe it wasn't as bad as it seemed(yet maybe it was), but a couple reliable shooters would make it harder to double Stain every time and would prevent them from having five guys waiting for Semaj when he gets to the rim. That would be a real game changer, I'd think. Also, I watched Arizona play recently and I miss that tenacious defense. They are a #1 seed and we are in the off season.

Arizona is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay quicker.

XU_Lou
03-19-2014, 03:44 PM
Here's the FG shooting % stats. The data for points margin (XU points - Opponent points) is going to be a little off. Our points were measured to the tenth of a point, while the opponent data I pulled was rounded up. So all margin data should be within 0.4 of point:



Year
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014


Field Goal Pct
44.1
45.4
46.2
47.6
47.4
45.9
46.2
46.1
45.3
45.6
47


3-pt Field Goal Pct
37.6
35.2
37.1
39
39.1
39.4
37.7
32.9
35.1
35
34.8


Point Margin (XU - Opponents)
8.2
5.1
8.6
11.3
12.1
10.7
10.8
8.1
3.6
3.2
3.8

waggy
03-19-2014, 03:48 PM
Remember Mack complaining about the new hand checking rules in the off season. Did the new rules result in greater offensive production across the NCAA in general? Did they result in greater offensive production for X?

XUFan09
03-19-2014, 04:08 PM
Remember Mack complaining about the new hand checking rules in the off season. Did the new rules result in greater offensive production across the NCAA in general? Did they result in greater offensive production for X?

Yep. The D1 average points per possession this year was 1.044. Last season it was 1.004, which was actually the lowest mark in all years covered by Kenpom (since 2003), which is why the new rules were implemented in the first place. This season's mark is still higher than all other seasons, as the average was usually around 1.01 points per possession.

Also, the D1 average ratio of free throw attempts to field goal attempts was 40.6%, versus 35.9% last year. That was also a Kenpom low, but the highest was 37.7% and it was usually a little above or below 37%, still well below this season.

The turnover rate was also lower, at 18.3%. No other year in the range fell below 20.0% and it sometimes went over 21.0%. The charge/block rule changes probably played in to this, and I'm guessing the hand check rules cut down on turnovers here and there (if you can't beat up the ball-handler, he's less likely to cough it up).

Average two-point percentage (48.5%) was above average for the 2003-2014 period but not outside the range.

xu82
03-19-2014, 04:14 PM
Arizona is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay quicker.

No argument from me on that. I'm not saying it's effort or scheme, it just jumped out at me. As I recall we used to look more like that back when we were advancing farther. Hmmm. Let's hope some of the new faces next year have lighter feet. (Though almost ALL freshman have serious work to do on defense.)

West is Best
03-19-2014, 06:01 PM
Finally, I wanted to point out some stats on Dee Davis. Ask my wife, I've been extremely frustrated with him at times this year. It seemed to me that he was very careless with his passing this year, and thought that he was contributing to some of our losses. However, his stats may not bear that out. Maybe I was too hard on him. I compared his 2014 stats to Tu Holloway's stats as a Junior:

Dee had 4.66 assists / game
Tu had 5.44 assists / game

Dee 1.94 turnovers / game
Tu 3.44 turnovers / game

Dee 2.4 A/T ratio
Tu 1.6 A/T ratio

Also, Dee had 1.19 steals per game while Tu had 1.44 in his Jr year.

My take on the above data is that, if I recall correctly, Tu had his turnovers mostly on his dribble penetration, while Dee seems to cough up the ball on bad passes, thus they are more noticeable to us as fans.

Thoughts???

Dee's stats are interesting. I think the biggest difference lies in shooting percentage, specifically 2pt%. Dee really struggles to finish around the basket, shooting under 43% from close in. As a junior Holloway shot closer to 49% on 2 pointers.

When Dee leads a break in transition too often it leads to his shot being blocked or a bad pass. A lot of times, these attempts turned into easy buckets going the other way. If there was a "points allowed off an individual's turnovers" stat, that might show where the difference lies.