Comments and ObservationsFor a while there it didn't look like KU would end up blowing out the Cyclones quite as much as expected, but things worked out in the end. If there is a more unselfish team in the country, I haven't seen it. These guys love doing the things that set up their teammates. Every player has the ability to make something good happen at any moment. Kaun can post up inside or make the hi-lo pass. Brandon Rush can be deadly from behind the arc or dribble and make a no-look pass to an open teammate. Defense, offense, above the rim, under the rim ... you name it, the Jayhawks have a weapon. You never have a greater than 50% chance of winning the title at the start of the Tournament, but if the Jayhawks play like this, they should be the favorites. Offensive and Defensive Performance
Using the outcome of the game and the adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies for each team, performance indicates (in PTS per 100 Possessions) how each team would have fared against an average team. That is, KU's offensive performance is how many points per 100 possessions KU would have scored against an average defense. This provides a standard performance we can compare across teams. | (pts per 100 poss) | Kansas | Iowa State
| Offensive Performance
| 117.9 | 101.3 | | Defensive Performance | 77.1 | 93.4
| Comments KU was dominant on both ends of the floor. Mind you, ISU's defensive performance was quite admirable, but it was still not as strong as KU's offense. This was a complete game by Kansas, as has become the norm this season. | Four Factor Analysis(Actual statistics moved to Game Projections table below) What did the difference in this
statistic mean to each team? | Scoring Margin Advantage Gained
(does not add up to game margin because teams may capitalize better or worse than average on TO's and OREB) | | Statistic Measured | Kansas | Iowa State
| | eFG% | 22.3 | | | TO Rate | 1.0
|
| | O-Reb% | 1.3
| | | Freethrows | FT Pct | | 0.2 | | FT Attempts | | 0.8
|
Player Performance Analysis
"A man among boys" probably best describes Darnell Jackson on this night. He finished with 21 PTS, 11 REB (4 OREB), 2 AST, 1 BLK and 0 TO in 28 MIN while shooting 64 eFG%. Pre-game projections showed this game to have favorable conditions for his performance, and I guess those were right. Rush, Chalmers and Robinson were the other highly efficient players for KU. Rush finally came through with a high rating that depended on something other than scoring. He had 6 AST against only 1 TO to go with his 5 REB while shooting 64 eFG%. Chalmers also had 6 AST and 1 TO on 67 eFG% shooting. Robinson shot lights out (80 eFG%) but did have 4 TO. This was one of Sherron Collins' worst performances ever, mostly because of horrendous shooting. In 25 MIN he shot 1-of-8 (12 eFG%) with 2 AST, 2 STL and 1 TO.
For ISU, Wesley Johnson and Brackins had semi-decent games, but Hubalek didn't bring his best game. Sorry for the abbreviated analysis, but I'm late for "real" work! . Game Projections | | Projection | Actual | Comments | OVERALL RESULTS | | Final Score | KU 82-54 | KU 83-59
| | Tempo (# poss)
| 67 | 74 | Surprisingly fast-paced game, especially in light of how few turnovers there were!
| FOUR FACTORS ADVANTAGES
| | eFG% | KU 55-44% | KU 54-36%
| | | TO Rate (lo better) | KU 25-16% | KU 15-14%
| | | O-Reb% | KU 39-25%
| KU 24-20%
| | | FT Rate | ISU 26-19% | ISU 25-22%
| | Four Factors Overall
| KU's significant shooting edge will be reinforced with decent gains in TO and OREB% to produce a blowout. | Every factor was virtually even except for the huge eFG% advantage for KU. This game was all about which team put itself in position to shoot well. |
| PLAYER PROJECTIONS (10+ min played) | | Leading Scorers | KU - Arthur/Chalmers/Jackson Opp - W. Johnson, Brackins
| KU - Jackson, Arthur Opp - W. Johnson, Brackins | Chalmers did finish with 10 PTS. | Highest cPSAN
(game impact)
| KU - Chalmers Opp - Clark | KU - Jackson (Chalmers #3) Opp - W. Johnson (Clark #4) | | Highest cPSAN70
(efficiency)
| KU - Jackson Opp - Clark | KU - Jackson Opp - W. Johnson (Clark #4) | | | Highest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Kaun, Jackson Opp - Petersen, Clark | KU - Jackson, Rush Opp - W. Johnson, Garrett | Kaun was below his average. Petersen and Clark really struggled. | | Lowest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Arthur, Stewart Opp - Haluska, Hubalek | KU - Collins, Arthur Opp - Hubalek, Clark | |
Pre-Game Keys to Watch For | Keys to Watch For | Metric | Result | Edge (Comments) | | Hubalek and Wesley Johnson take the most shots for ISU. They have to be hitting their shots to keep the Cyclons within striking distance. | Hubalek and Wesley Johnson to combine for at least 55 eFG% shooting.
| They shot 42.6 eFG% | KANSAS - Shooting by everyone was the biggest key to this game. | | ISU is projected to have a significant edge in FT Rate, but that only translates to an advantage at the FT line if they take enough field goals (FT Rate = FTM/FGA). ISU is projected to take a much lower number of FG's in part because of the TO discrepancy. | ISU to limit TO Rate to 18% or lower. | ISU had a 15% TO Rate
| IOWA STATE - If not for this, it would easily have been a 30-35 victory. | | KU is projected to have a nice advantage in OREB%, which is one reason they should take many more shots than ISU. Whether this advantage materializes could be the difference between a bona fide blowout and just a double-digit victory. | Margin of OREB% to be at least 8% in favor of KU.
| KU won the battle by only 4%
| IOWA STATE - Another reason ISU didn't look like a high school team out there. Other than shooting, ISU really held its own in this game. |
|
