Why slow it down????

#376
#376
CAVol said:
Can you provide the efficiency ratings for those games? I'm just curious what they are.
Click to expand...

Sorry. Don't have that data right now but its a very safe bet that efficiency goes up list like scoring , FG%, winning, and possessions


They ALL are connected
 
#377
#377
BruinVol said:
Sorry. Don't have that data right now but its a very safe bet that efficiency goes up list like scoring , FG%, winning, and possessions


They ALL are connected
Click to expand...

If the efficiency numbers didn't go up with higher possessions would you change your mind?
 
#378
#378
CAVol said:
If the efficiency numbers didn't go up with higher possessions would you change your mind?
Click to expand...

Not unless you included all 4 categories.

Again only one category at a time has skewed data due mainly to outliers.

Memphis shot 56% against us last year. That's an outlier and skews that category
 
#379
#379
BruinVol said:
Not unless you included all 4 categories.

Again only one category at a time has skewed data due mainly to outliers.

Memphis shot 56% against us last year. That's an outlier and skews that category
Click to expand...

I understand. To me offensive efficiency is directly affected by possessions and how many points we score, unless I'm completely misunderstanding what the efficiency rating represents. Which would seem to be the premise of your argument. Seems like efficiency would be the best way to measure the data for your claim.
 
#380
#380
BruinVol said:
Canes

Here is the other one
Click to expand...

More made shots equals more possessions per game though, as a general rule (possessions aren't drawn out by fouls and offensive rebounds).

That could be why those numbers are showing that way.
 
Last edited:
#381
#381
CAVol said:
If the efficiency numbers didn't go up with higher possessions would you change your mind?
Click to expand...

If you show a lower efficiency rate when we score over 70 or the total score is over 130 you will have proved a big point.
 
#383
#383
CAVol said:
I understand. To me offensive efficiency is directly affected by possessions and how many points we score, unless I'm completely misunderstanding what the efficiency rating represents. Which would seem to be the premise of your argument. Seems like efficiency would be the best way to measure the data for your claim.
Click to expand...

I think there a two huge key numbers

130 and scoring over 70 for us(which both have increase in FG% and possessions)

IMO efficiency ratings will be higher on average in those type games but I don't have that data
 
Last edited:
#385
#385
BruinVol said:
Statsheet is were I got all my info. Not sure if its there or not
Click to expand...

the kenpom.com blog


here you go.

When I get home tonight I can start running the numbers. Shouldn't be too hard to make an excel spreadsheet and plug in the data.

I haven't kept up with the whole conversation. I'm assuming you used all the games from the last 2 years?
 
Last edited:
#386
#386
Using the formula above, we had 63.025 possessions vs Xavier and scored 63 points. Giving our efficiency rating a .999603. Or basically, we scored 1 point for every 1 possession.
 
#387
#387
BruinVol said:
I think there a two huge key numbers

130 and scoring over 70 for us(which both have increase in FG% and possessions)
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone really disagree that we win when those numbers are achieved, there's no arguing our record when we score 70 points or more.

However, where this started was the talk about upping the tempo and increasing more possessions each game to get to those numbers. In those games we scored 70 plus iirc you said our possessions number was around 66, only slightly higher than our 2 year average. What the big increase seemingly was, was actually our offensive efficiency in those games. Therefore our points per possession increased, this giving us more points while truly not pushing the pace very much if at all.

So the conclusion I've drawn, is like MC said, we appear best when we play close to our game. Our game is around 65-67 possession games, that is right in our wheel house. When the possessions go much higher or lower than that our W/L record shows that it's not a winning formula.

What it boils down to is this....is 2-3 possessions a game in our offense the difference in what most consider a grind it out style, to now make it uptempo? My opinion is uptempo would be considered 70+ possessions per game, that would show a significant style change, 2-3 possessions per game is nothing from a style standpoint IMO. That can simply be achieved by a tie up on a loose ball, and going 2-1 at the end of the half, neither solely makes us all of a sudden an uptempo team.
 
#390
#390
CAVol said:
Using the formula above, we had 63.025 possessions vs Xavier and scored 63 points. Giving our efficiency rating a .999603. Or basically, we scored 1 point for every 1 possession.
Click to expand...

Is points per possession the offensive efficiency you're referring to?
 
#391
#391
bleedingTNorange said:
Is points per possession the offensive efficiency you're referring to?
Click to expand...

Offensive efficiency is the number of points scored per 100 possessions. I divided it by 100 to make it easy to interpret around the number 1.

I will do the exhibition games too if I can find the data. I'm giving my students a test today so I'll do it during my next class.
 
#392
#392
CAVol said:
Offensive efficiency is the number of points scored per 100 possessions. I divided it by 100 to make it easy to interpret around the number 1.

I will do the exhibition games too if I can find the data. I'm giving my students a test today so I'll do it during my next class.
Click to expand...

So it basically points per possession x 100?
 
#393
#393
BruinVol said:
If you show a lower efficiency rate when we score over 70 or the total score is over 130 you will have proved a big point.
Click to expand...

He's saying possessions, because that's what dictates tempo. If the efficiency ratings don't go up with possessions per game that would disprove you thinking the offense is better running faster right?
 
#394
#394
bleedingTNorange said:
So it basically points per possession x 100?
Click to expand...

Correct.

Against Southern Indiana we had 69 possessions and an efficiency of 1.12.

However, it should be more efficient against subpar competition. Still working on finding a Florida southern box score.
 
#396
#396
Here's what I've got, did the 2011-2012 season:

Offensive Efficiency in games 66 possessions and over: 1.01


Offensive Efficiency in games 65 possessions and under: 1.08



So in 2011-2012 our offense was most efficient when we kept the possessions to 65 or under, interesting. I'm about to start 2012-2013...
 
#397
#397
So for our 3 games this year...

Xavier
63 possessions, .999 efficiency

Florida Southern
82 possesions, 1.279 efficiency

Southern Indiana
69 possessions, 1.12 efficiency.


Hard to make a claim without a larger set of data. I'm gonna start doing last year's box scores now.
 
#398
#398
I may start doing a thread on these stats after every game. I have the spreadsheet created.
 
#399
#399
2012-2013 season:

Offensive Efficiency in games 66 possessions and over: 1.03


Offensive Efficiency in games 65 possessions and under: 1.05



So in 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 our offense was most efficient when we kept the possessions to 65 or under, interesting.
 
#400
#400
CAVol said:
So for our 3 games this year...

Xavier
63 possessions, .999 efficiency

Florida Southern
82 possesions, 1.279 efficiency

Southern Indiana
69 possessions, 1.12 efficiency.


Hard to make a claim without a larger set of data. I'm gonna start doing last year's box scores now.
Click to expand...

Yea obviously efficiency should be much higher against weaker opponents...I already did the last 2 years.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top