|
Recap: Kansas at Texas A&M |
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2008 |
Kansas 72 - Texas A&M 55
cPSAN
"Total Impact" RatingsPSAN ratings adjusted for quality of opponent | cPSAN70
"Efficiency" RatingscPSAN ratings expressed as "per 70 possessions" | Ratings on the CourtHighest: Sherron Collins
Lowest: Josh Carter
| PLAYER | cPSAN | | Sherron Collins | 10.22 | | Mario Chalmers | 8.66 | | Darrell Arthur | 7.48 | | Russell Robinson | 7.04 | | Brandon Rush | 2.01 | | Darnell Jackson | 1.22 | | Cole Aldrich | 0.35 | | Chase Buford | 0.00 | | Rodrick Stewart* | -0.42 | | Sasha Kaun | -0.85 | | PLAYER | cPSAN | | D. Kirk | 6.08 | | D. Sloan | 3.04 | | D. Jordan | 2.23 | | D. Roland | 0.72 | | B. Muhlbach* | 0.69 | | B. Graham* | 0.00 | | B.J. Holmes* | 0.00 | | S. Schepel* | 0.00 | | C. Elonu* | 0.00 | | N. Walkup* | 0.00 | | J. Jones | -0.50 | | B. Davis | -2.63 | | J. Carter | -5.94 | *Rating not based on enough data. | Ratings on the CourtHighest: Sherron Collins
Lowest: Josh Carter | PLAYER | cPSAN70 | | Sherron Collins | 13.40 | | Mario Chalmers | 11.72 | | Darrell Arthur | 11.21 | | Russell Robinson | 10.18 | | Darnell Jackson | 2.84 | | Brandon Rush | 2.64 | | Cole Aldrich | 1.05 | | Chase Buford | 0.00 | | Sasha Kaun | -2.37 | | Rodrick Stewart* | -17.46 | | PLAYER | cPSAN70 | | B. Muhlbach* | 9.66 | | D. Kirk | 8.49 | | D. Jordan | 3.59 | | D. Sloan | 3.54 | | D. Roland | 1.77 | | B. Graham* | 0.00 | | B.J. Holmes* | 0.00 | | S. Schepel* | 0.00 | | C. Elonu* | 0.00 | | N. Walkup* | 0.00 | | J. Jones | -0.81 | | B. Davis | -4.41 | | J. Carter | -7.79 | *Rating not based on enough data. |
| Comments and ObservationsIt was great to see the Jayhawks play like the conference title was on the line against a good team. Too many times this season, the other teams played with more energy when the chips were down, but this time Kansas was the aggressor. If Sherron Collins can keep playing well, the sky is the limit in March/April for KU. 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 | Tex A&M
| Offensive Performance
| 125.6 | 102.5 | | Defensive Performance | 74.4
| 88.2
| Comments When KU had the ball, both teams played essentially to their season averages, which is quite good for both. But when TAM had possession, it was mostly a suffocating KU defense that caused a lower-than-average performance for the Aggies. | 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
(not necessarily supposed to add up to final margin) | | Statistic Measured | Kansas | Texas A&M | | eFG% | 13.7 | | | TO Rate | 2.9
|
| | O-Reb% | 1.9
| | | Freethrows | FT Pct | | 0.9 | | FT Attempts | | 2.1
|
Game Projections | | Projection | Actual | Comments | OVERALL RESULTS | | Final Score | KU 72-65 | KU 72-55
| Would anyone believe me if I said it was just a typo? :) | Tempo (# poss)
| 67 | 67 | | FOUR FACTORS ADVANTAGES
| | eFG% | KU 50-46% | KU 52-38%
| Biggest surprise was how poorly TAM shot. | | TO Rate (lo better) | KU 21-16% | KU 22-18%
| | | O-Reb% | Tie at 31%
| KU 29-23%
| Both teams strong on the defensive glass. | | FT Rate | TAM 28-22% | TAM 40-30%
| | Four Factors Overall
| KU's modest edge in eFG% and OREB% won't be offset by a similar edge in FT attempts, since TAM struggles at the line. | It all came down to KU shooting better from the field ... by a lot.
|
| PLAYER PROJECTIONS (10+ min played) | | Leading Scorers | KU - Chalmers, Collins/Rush Opp - Carter, Jones/Sloan | KU - Arthur/Chalmers Opp - Kirk/Sloan | Collins was right up there, too (#3) | Highest cPSAN
(game impact)
| KU - Chalmers Opp - Carter | KU - Collins (Chalmers #2)
Opp - Kirk (Carter last)
| | Highest cPSAN70
(efficiency)
| KU - Jackson Opp - Carter | KU - Collins (Jackson #5)
Opp - Kirk (Carter last) | | | Highest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Collins, Jackson Opp - Carter, Sloan | KU - Collins, Arthur
Opp - Kirk, Roland | Arthur was projected to struggle, so kudos to him. | | Lowest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Arthur, Rush Opp - Jones, Kirk
| KU - Kaun, Aldrich
Opp - Carter, Davis
| Carter was biggest disappointment. Numbers don't give justice to Davis defense. |
Pre-Game Keys to Watch For | Keys to Watch For | Metric | Result | Edge (Comments) | | The only one of the four factors that is significantly correlated mutually for offense and defense for each team is eFG%. Simply put, this game could well be decided by which team just shoots a better eFG%. Shot selection and easy opportunities (fast breaks) would help. | Either team to have a 5% edge in eFG% | KU had 14% edge!
| KANSAS - Game. Set. Match.
| | A peculiar stat: TAM's offense is highly correlated to its opponents' offensive rebounding percentage. In ten road games, KU has had OREB% of at least 35% eight times. Of the two games it didn't, it still had a higher OREB% than the opponent in one of them. This may not bode well for TAM's offensive efficiency. | TAM to limit KU OREB% to 32% or lower | KU got only 29% of OREB | TEXAS A&M - Kept things from being ridiculous. | | Sherron Collins has re-emerged as a powerful weapon for the Jayhawks. When he is active on offense and limits his turnovers, things seem to go KU's way. | Collins to play at least 25 MIN, shoot at least 55 eFG% and have no more than 2 TO.
| Collins - 32 MIN, 57 eFG%, 0 TO
| KANSAS - He was player of the game.
|
|
|