|
Recap: Kansas at Colorado |
|
|
|
Feb 3, 2008 |
Kansas 72 - Colorado 59
cPSAN
"Total Impact" RatingsPSAN ratings adjusted for quality of opponent | cPSAN70
"Efficiency" RatingscPSAN ratings expressed as "per 70 possessions" | Ratings on the CourtHighest: Richard Roby
Lowest: Levi Knutson | PLAYER | cPSAN | | Darnell Jackson | 5.85 | | Mario Chalmers | 5.33 | | Sasha Kaun | 3.50 | | Brandon Rush | 1.95 | | Darrell Arthur | 0.95 | | Russell Robinson | 0.87 | | Sherron Collins | 0.74 | | Rodrick Stewart | 0.51 | | Cole Aldrich* | 0.00 | | Jeremy Case* | -0.10 | | PLAYER | cPSAN | | R. Roby | 6.87 | | M. Hall | 4.88 | | C. Higgins | 1.58 | | M. King-Stockton | 1.40 | | D. Thorne II | 0.14 | | J. Jackson-Wilson | -0.72 | | C. Patterson* | -0.84 | | J. Coney* | -1.46 | | L. Knutson | -4.52 | *Rating not based on enough data. | Ratings on the CourtHighest: Darnell Jackson
Lowest: Levi Knutson | PLAYER | cPSAN70 | | Darnell Jackson | 8.71 | | Mario Chalmers | 8.20 | | Sasha Kaun | 7.44 | | Brandon Rush | 2.72 | | Rodrick Stewart | 2.29 | | Sherron Collins | 1.95 | | Darrell Arthur | 1.69 | | Russell Robinson | 1.18 | | Cole Aldrich* | 0.00 | | Jeremy Case* | -2.31 | | PLAYER | cPSAN70 | | R. Roby | 8.07 | | M. Hall | 5.45 | | M. King-Stockton | 2.32 | | C. Higgins | 1.81 | | D. Thorne II | 0.26 | | J. Jackson-Wilson | -3.23 | | C. Patterson* | -7.47 | | L. Knutson | -14.43 | | J. Coney* | -32.68 | *Rating not based on enough data. |
| Comments and Observations One would have hoped Kansas would come out more fired up and energetic after the big loss Wednesday. Instead, the Jayhawks looked slow and unfocused. Comments made by Russell Robinson were misinterpreted by many as an insult to Richard Roby, which may well have fired Roby up. In the end, during the brief stretches where the referees weren't blowing their whistles, KU's talent eventually won out. 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 | Colorado | Offensive Performance
| 118.2 | 117.2 | | Defensive Performance | 91.5
| 94.8
| Comments If the game had finished the way it was played for the first 30 minutes, these numbers would have skewed in CU's favor. Instead, we see that KU's performance on both sides of the ball was slightly better than CU's. Compared to season averages, KU underperformed slightly on the offensive side and more significantly on defense. CU performed significantly better than usual on both ends. | 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 | Colorado | | eFG% | 3.5
| | | TO Rate | | 4.2
| | O-Reb% | 3.1 | | | Freethrows | FT Pct | 4.2
| | | FT Attempts | 10.8
| |
Player Performance Analysis
Sorry, no time for this analysis.
Game Projections | | Projection | Actual | Comments | OVERALL RESULTS | | Final Score | KU 82-56 | KSU 84-75 | | Tempo (# poss)
| 68 | 72 | Probably mostly a result of KSU not losing the ball as often as projected.
| FOUR FACTORS ADVANTAGES
| | eFG% | KU 57-44% | KU 57-53%
| Disturbing that KU has now yielded at least 52 eFG% shooting in two straight games. | | TO Rate (lo better) | KU 24-18% | CU 26-19%
| Another shock is that KU again turns the ball over more than the opp. | | O-Reb% | KU 38-25%
| KU 35-22%
| | | FT Rate | CU 24-23% | KU 47-12%
| This bailed the Jayhawks out. | Four Factors Overall
| Shooting will give a huge boost to KU, and the other three factors provide small cushions to add up to a projected blowout. | Biggest reason for victory was KU's FT attempt discrepancy, followed closely by its ability to shoot better at the FT line. | Biggest differences between projected advantage and actual came in eFG% and FT attempts. The first worked out better for CU. Surprising TO advantage for CU made final result not as convincing for KU. | PLAYER PROJECTIONS (10+ min played) | | Leading Scorers | KU - Arthur/Chalmers/Jackson Opp - Roby, Hall | KU - Jackson, Rush Opp - Roby, Hall | | Highest cPSAN
(game impact)
| KU - Jackson Opp - King-Stockton | KU - Jackson Opp - Roby (King-Stockton #4) | | Highest cPSAN70
(efficiency)
| KU - Jackson Opp - King-Stockton | KU - Jackson Opp - Roby (King-Stockton #3) | | | Highest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Kaun, Jackson Opp - King-Stockton | KU - Kaun, Jackson Opp - Roby, Hall | | | Lowest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Stewart Opp - Roby, Knutson | KU - Robinson, Rush Opp - Knutson, Jackson-Wilson | |
|
|