Sports and Numbers

Newsletter

 

Bulletin

See updated cumulative player ratings and MVP analysis on the Dashboard page.  You can navigate there using NCAA Basketball --> Kansas Basketball --> Special Analyses.
 
Recap: Kansas vs Texas (Big 12 Tournament) Print E-mail
Mar 17, 2008

Kansas 84 - Texas 74

 cPSAN
"Total Impact" Ratings

PSAN ratings adjusted for quality of opponent

cPSAN70
"Efficiency" Ratings

cPSAN ratings expressed as "per 70 possessions"

Ratings on the Court

Highest: Mario Chalmers
Lowest: Darnell Jackson

 

 

PLAYER cPSAN
Mario Chalmers 12.31
Brandon Rush 7.17
Darrell Arthur 6.93
Sasha Kaun 1.70
Sherron Collins 0.73
Cole Aldrich* -0.47
Russell Robinson -0.85
Darnell Jackson -2.42

 

 

 

PLAYER cPSAN
  J. Mason 10.40
  D. Pittman 1.87
  C. Atchley 1.71
  D.J. Augustin 1.68
  A.J. Abrams 1.64
  D. James 0.95
  C. Chapman* 0.00
  A. Wangmene -1.79

  

*Rating not based on enough data.

 

 Ratings on the Court

Highest: Mario Chalmers
Lowest: Alexis Wangmene

   

 

PLAYER cPSAN70
Mario Chalmers 14.94
Darrell Arthur 8.18
Brandon Rush 7.81
Sasha Kaun 3.14
Sherron Collins 1.28
Russell Robinson -1.57
Darnell Jackson -6.04
Cole Aldrich* -6.72

  

  

 

PLAYER cPSAN70
  J. Mason 11.63
  D. Pittman 6.11
  C. Atchley 3.03
  A.J. Abrams 1.93
  D.J. Augustin 1.79
  D. James 1.12
  C. Chapman* 0.00
  A. Wangmene -7.60

 

*Rating not based on enough data.

 

 


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 Texas
Offensive Performance
142.7 136.7
Defensive Performance 92.6
102.5

 Comments

KU outperformed Texas on both sides of the ball.  While both teams had superb offensive performances, only KU brought a strong defensive effort to go with it.

 

 

 

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 MeasuredKansasTexas
eFG%15.5
 
TO Rate 8.4
O-Reb%3.5
 
FreethrowsFT Pct 2.3
FT Attempts9.3
 

 

 

Game Projections

 

 
Projection
 Actual
Comments

 OVERALL RESULTS

 Final Score  KU 77-71  KU 84-74
 
 Tempo (# poss)
 67 66 

 FOUR FACTORS ADVANTAGES

 eFG%  KU 51-47%  KU 63-50% 
 TO Rate (lo better)  UT 18-16%  UT 19-4%
 Four percent?  Are you kidding?
 O-Reb% KU 40-35%
 KU 29-19%
 It's not the 29% that did it for KU ... it's the 19%.
 FT Rate KU 27-25% KU 32-16%
 
 Four Factors Overall
 Projected shooting advantage is barely padded by slight OREB% advantage for KU.  None of these "feel" like shoe-ins for the Jayhawks.
 An incredible shooting edge for KU in an a mostly offensive struggle.  UT did all it could by never losing the ball, but the other factors just helped KU even more.  
 

PLAYER PROJECTIONS (10+ min played)

 Leading Scorers

 KU - Collins, Arthur/Chalmers/Rush

 Opp - Augustin, Abrams

 KU - Chalmers, Rush

Opp - Augustin, Mason

 
 Highest cPSAN
(game impact)

 KU - Jackson

 Opp - James

KU - Chalmers (Jackson last)

Opp - Mason (James #6)

 
 Highest cPSAN70
(efficiency)

 KU - Jackson

 Opp - Atchley

 KU - Chalmers (Jackson last)

Opp - Mason (James #6)

 
 Highest efficiency vs season-to-date

 KU - Collins, Kaun

 Opp - Johnson, Augustin

 KU - Chalmers, Arthur

Opp - Mason

 
 Lowest efficiency vs season-to-date

 KU - Robinson, Arthur/Rush

 Opp - Atchley, James

 KU - Jackson, Robinson

Opp - Wangmene, James