Back to Post
| Username | Post: Vermont |
|---|---|
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
01-05-17 12:55 PM - Post#217352
Any reports from the game? From the Box Zena played only 16 minutes and Tommy McCarthy had more rebounds than Z? VT outrebounded the Crimson by 13? |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-05-17 04:40 PM - Post#217367
It was a luck fest. Not much you can take from it. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
01-05-17 06:11 PM - Post#217382
Well that's not very helpful. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
01-05-17 07:20 PM - Post#217389
I mean, here were the confounding factors in breaking the game down: 1) Harvard turnovers. This game looks to be another exhibit in the mounting evidence that this offense will never reduce its gaudy turnover rate. 14 turnovers on 62 possessions (23%) is right about at Harvard's terrible season average. That being said, six of the turnovers were on (very questionable) offensive fouls. In a normal game, you might expect a couple, maybe three max. Reduce the offensive fouls to that number and the TO Rate looks reasonable or even good at 16-18%. 2) Harvard's defensive rebounding. Also, not an area the Crimson has excelled this season, so it wasn't surprising to see them struggle here. But a 48% offensive rebound rate allowed is pretty abnormal, and if you watched the game, so many OREBs were weird bounces that could have easily bounced the other way. 3) 2 PT jumper % allowed: I had Vermont at 10-for-17 on two-point jumpers (59%). They actually shot worse around the rim (16-for-33). And Harvard getting UVM to take ~30% of shots as 2 PT Js is better than UVM's season average, as was Harvard getting Vermont only to take 8-of-58 shots (14%) from three. If Vermont shot about average on jumpers, it would have ceded 9 points right there. 4) Harvard itself outperformed on a luck basis. It shot 5-for-10 on 2pt Js (a great, low rate of 2pt Js!!!, but better than it should shoot). It also shot 7-for-14 from three. So Harvard also outperformed on jumpers by about 9 pts. 5) Harvard's offensive shot selection was great. Roughly 20% 2pt Js, 30% threes and 50% at rim (where it shot 16-for-25). For the season, roughly 60% of Harvard's baskets at the rim are assisted and 86% of its threes are as well. Vermont is decent at stopping assisted baskets, but not amazing at it. There's no reason Harvard's assist rate should have been 32%. There were still really concerning things that probably weren't luck: Harvard got lost a LOT on defense and gave up easy buckets. It failed to win a lot of one-on-one battles defensively in the post. Corey Johnson is now 1-for-12 in his past four games from three and worse seems reticent to shoot out of the slump. Z continues to struggle to be a force offensively, and when he doesn't rebound in droves defensively, his value is limited. Harvard is still struggling to find any consistent contributions from non-freshmen other than Siyani. |
|
SRP Postdoc Posts 4919 |
01-06-17 06:11 PM - Post#217504
I can see Tommy McCarthy raising his hand and saying "ooh, ooh, call on me!" after reading mrjames's last sentence. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
 01-06-17 06:36 PM - Post#217507
Thanks Mr J for the color. |
|
|
 |
|
| Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved. Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution. |
|