Comments and ObservationsDon't watch close KU games in a Las Vegas sportsbook ... it's annoying. 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 | Missouri | Offensive Performance
| 109.0 | 111.7 | | Defensive Performance | 78.9 | 79.4
| Comments Missouri was slightly better offensively, while KU had a miniscule edge on defense. In essence, this analysis argues that MU performed slightly better than KU. However, KU still gets the victory because they are that much better of a team. | 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 | Missouri | | eFG% | 2.6 | | | TO Rate | | 4.6
| | O-Reb% | 3.7
| | | Freethrows | FT Pct | 4.1
| | | FT Attempts | 12.9
| |
Player Performance Analysis
Mario Chalmers proved to be a Tiger Tamer yet again. Mario finished with 18 PTS on 71 eFG% shooting (2-of-4 behind the arc), with 5 REB (2 OREB), 2 AST, 3 STL and only 1 TO. On a poor FT shooting night for Kansas, he nailed 8-of-11 to put away Missouri in the end. Darnell Jackson and Sherron Collins also had strong performances, though not in the same class as Chalmers. Jackson made only 3-of-7 FT but shot 71 eFG% to finish with 13 PTS and 9 REB. He struggled with 3 TO, but they weren't as costly this game since KU was scoring nearly as efficiently as usual. Collins shot well (58 eFG%) and scored 9 PTS with 3 AST, 1 STL and 2 TO. Russell Robinson was a step behind those two because of his 4 TO. But he did contribute 8 PTS on 50 eFG% shooting, 5 REB and 5 AST but zero STL.
Darrell Arthur and Sasha Kaun didn't play very well. Arthur did finish with 10 PTS and 9 REB, but he had only 1 OREB and shot 33 eFG%. Kaun played only 12 foul-plagued minutes and shot 33 eFG% to finish with 3 PTS, 3 REB and 2 TO. The most disappointing performance came from KU's strongest player the last two games, Brandon Rush. He definitely stayed aggressive and took plenty of shots. Unfortunately, he made only 14 eFG% (2-of-14 FG). The only reason his rating isn't extremely low is that he made lots of FT (9-of-14), grabbed 9 REB and had only 1 TO. This KU team is so good that it weathered about as bad a shooting night as the team's most aggressive player could have, on the road, against a huge rival. Missouri had several strong performers. Hannah, Brown and Lyons all had very efficient games, but head-and-shoulders above them was Volkus. In just 10 MIN, he shot 4-of-5 FG to contribute 8 PTS, 1 OREB, 2 AST and 1 TO. Strong work against a team like Kansas. Hannah contributed the most though, shooting only 43 eFG% but making 6-of-8 FT (team was 50%), 4 REB, 6 AST, 2 STL and 3 TO. The players who struggled most for MU compared to season averages were Carroll, Matt Lawrence and Butterfield. Carroll struggled the most, by far, as he basically had the same stats as Brandon Rush without making his FT's either. Matt Lawrence had a nightmare shooting performance from 3FG (1-of-9). . Game Projections | | Projection | Actual | Comments | OVERALL RESULTS | | Final Score | KU 82-69 | KU 76-70
| | Tempo (# poss)
| 77 | 79 | | FOUR FACTORS ADVANTAGES
| | eFG% | KU 54-46% | KU 44-42%
| With such a high tempo, this made for an ugly looking game. | | TO Rate (lo better) | KU 23-22% | MU 19-13%
| As expected, a tough test for KU, and they failed it. | | O-Reb% | KU 38-26%
| KU 31-212%
| | | FT Rate | KU 28-23% | KU 51-15%
| The rare advantage projected for KU played out very nicely for the Jayhawks. | Four Factors Overall
| eFG% projected to drive most of advantage for KU, with more modest gains in OREB% and FT attempts.. | Hard to believe, but the FT line saved the Jayhawks. Of course, they earned it by being the aggressor the entire game.
|
| PLAYER PROJECTIONS (10+ min played) | | Leading Scorers | KU - Arthur, Jackson Opp - Hannah / M. Lawrence
| KU - Chalmers, Jackson/Rush Opp - Hannah, Lyons | Rush scored but played very poorly. | Highest cPSAN
(game impact)
| KU - Jackson Opp - Carroll | KU - Chalmers (Jackson #2) Opp - Hannah (Carroll #6) | | Highest cPSAN70
(efficiency)
| KU - Jackson Opp - Carroll | KU - Chalmers (Jackson #2) Opp - Volkus (Carroll #7) | | | Highest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Kaun, Jackson Opp - Brown, M. Lawrence | KU - Chalmers, Collins Opp - Volkus, Brown | Chalmers really came to play, as he was projected to struggle. | | Lowest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Chalmers, Rush Opp - Tiller, Hannah | KU - Kaun, Rush Opp - Carroll, M. Lawrence | Kaun and M. Lawrence had terrible games despite strong projections.
|
Pre-Game Keys to Watch For | Keys to Watch For | Metric | Result | Edge (Comments) | | Not provided this game. |
| | |
|
