Saturday, January 30, 2010

Recap: Georgetown 89, Duke 77

Well, that was fun.

In a defense-optional affair, the Hoyas beat the Duke Blue Devils this afternoon at the Verizon Center in a game that wasn't nearly as close as the final score indicates.

And you know your blog has made the big time when the only comments you get are simply links to other blogs (that I've never heard of) from an anonymous fellow and a very recently deceased reclusive author.

Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Home                            Visitor   
.            Georgetown                      Duke         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            33        38        71
 
Effic.        139.8     114.0     125.8       100.3     116.7     108.9  
 
eFG%           88.6      68.8      78.3        40.7      47.1      44.4  
TO%            27.4      18.6      22.6        27.4      15.9      21.2  
OR%            20.0       8.3      11.8        50.0      42.9      45.9  
FT Rate        31.8      66.7      50.0        48.1      37.1      41.9  

Assist Rate    70.6      50.0      60.6        44.4      50.0      47.8  
Block Rate     29.4      25.0      27.3        20.0       0.0       9.1  
Steal Rate     15.2      10.6      12.7        15.2      15.9      15.6  
 
2FG%           80.0      83.3      81.8        29.4      56.2      42.4  
3FG%           71.4      16.7      46.2        40.0      26.3      31.0  
FT%           100.0      62.5      73.9        84.6      84.6      84.6

The most important line on the tempo-free box score is third from the bottom - when a team shoots better than 80% from 2FG (and take more than twice as many 2FG as 3FG in the game), the game is effectively over.

This was not a case of a team getting white-hot on their jump shots, as they shot 27 of their 33 attempts inside the arc as either dunks, layups or tip-ins (and made 23 of those).  Of course, Chris Wright's consecutive made leaning 2FG jumpers in the 1st half were probably a sign that the Hoyas weren't going to miss too many of any type.

This was the third time this season that Georgetown has passed the 70% eFG threshold for a game this season, and in fact the third straight home game where they've done it (also vs. Seton Hall and Rutgers).  Obviously, today's opponent had a slightly better ranked defense (13th) than the other two (120th and 150th, respectively) coming into the game.

A couple of the other green-highlighted numbers to note:  the Hoyas consistently contested shots today, which helped to hold down Duke's inside shooting percentage; the Blue Devils averaged less than 17% TO Rate coming into the game, so that 1st half turnover rate must have been a real shock to them.

And since I can't pass on an opportunity to spread some clouds amongst all this sunshine, Georgetown was absolutely obliterated on the glass today.  They didn't miss many shots today so it didn't matter, but that's the second consecutive game where the Hoyas gathered less than 20% of their own missed shots.


INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS

Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
Wright, Chris          67   15.9  151.1   16.1      69   100.8   13.9      +3.8  
Monroe, Greg           68   24.7  137.4   23.1      71   102.3   14.5      +7.2  
Freeman, Austin        68   22.1  132.5   19.9      69   105.1   14.5      +4.8  
Clark, Jason           50   11.3  142.3    8.1      52   120.2   12.5      -1.6  
Vaughn, Julian         36   21.6   98.9    7.7      36    99.0    7.1      +0.3  
Thompson, Hollis       25   14.0  128.6    4.5      25    83.3    4.2      +1.0  
Sanford, Vee            0     -     -      0.0       1     0.0    0.0      +0.0  
Benimon, Jerrelle      36   22.8   81.9    6.7      37   105.9    7.8      -1.5  
TOTALS                 70         127.3   86.0      72   103.6   74.6     +14.3  

Duke                  Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
Nolan Smith            64   22.1  124.2   17.6      63   130.4   16.4      +0.1  
Kyle Singler           66   23.8  106.5   16.7      65   127.2   16.5      -1.5  
Miles Plumlee          39   17.0   80.6    5.3      40   123.1    9.8      -3.7  
Jon Scheyer            70   19.8  117.3   16.2      68   115.3   15.7      +0.4  
Lance Thomas           56   14.8  107.9    9.0      53   127.1   13.5      -3.0  
Mason Plumlee          21   13.1  127.4    3.5      20    80.0    3.2      +0.8  
Andre Dawkins          22   19.8   75.8    3.3      21   154.1    6.5      -3.3  
Ryan Kelly             17   11.8    0.0    0.0      16   129.3    4.1      -3.4  
Brian Zoubek            5   20.0    0.0    0.0       4   225.0    1.8      -2.0  
TOTALS                 72         104.2   71.6      70   125.1   87.6     -15.3

Today we saw what it looks like when all three of Georgetown's stars are playing well together.   

Chris Wright and Austin Freeman carried the brunt of the load in the Lift-off half, with a combined 8/8 2FG, 3/4 3FG, 3/3 FT shooting performance, along with 4 assists).

Greg Monroe was the star of the Vesper half, with 13 points on 4/5 2FG, 5/8 FT shooting and 3 assists, and he got a lot of help from Julian Vaughn, who shot 4/4 2FG in the second half.

Jason Clark had an efficient, low-usage offensive game while stuck with the unenviable task of chasing around Duke's best offensive player (Scheyer).  He did a fine job of limiting Scheyer;s best weapon - Duke's most productive FT shooter only had 4 attempts in the game.

If Hollis Thompson can play most games at today's level, Georgetown will become an awfully tough out.


HD BOX SCORE

Duke vs Georgetown
01/30/10 1:00 at Verizon Center
Final score: Georgetown 89, Duke 77

Duke                    Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Nolan Smith            35:34  -17  19/64  4- 9  2- 7  5- 8 16/55  1/14  1/63  1/64  0/31  4/36  0/15   2
Kyle Singler           37:50  -17  18/68  1- 5  3- 9  7- 7 14/56  4/15  2/65  2/66  0/31  2/38  4/15   5
Miles Plumlee          21:30  - 8   6/43  2- 5  0- 0  2- 2  5/33  0/ 9  1/40  2/39  2/17  1/23  1/ 6   4
Jon Scheyer            38:19  -11  17/74  2- 5  3- 8  4- 4 13/61  5/17  5/68  3/70  0/31  2/40  2/17   3
Lance Thomas           32:09  - 1   8/62  3- 6  0- 0  2- 3  6/49  1/17  0/53  2/56  0/27  3/30  2/14   4
Mason Plumlee          12:25  +11   4/31  2- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/20  0/10  2/20  1/21  1/ 9  0/ 8  3/ 8   4
Andre Dawkins          13:16  - 6   5/26  0- 0  1- 4  2- 2  4/21  0/ 5  0/21  1/22  0/11  0/15  1/ 7   2
Ryan Kelly             07:08  - 4   0/15  0- 0  0- 1  0- 0  1/14  0/ 5  0/16  1/17  0/ 5  0/ 9  1/ 3   3
Brian Zoubek           01:49  - 7   0/ 2  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 4  1/ 5  0/ 3  0/ 1  0/ 0   2
TOTALS                 40:00       77    14-33  9-29 22-26    62 11/23 11/70 15/72  3/33 17/37 15/17  29
.                                        0.424 0.310 0.846       0.478 0.157 0.208 0.091 0.459 0.882    

Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Wright, Chris          38:57  + 8  21/83  7- 7  1- 2  4- 5  9/43  2/22  3/69  3/67  2/33  0/17  4/40   3
Monroe, Greg           39:45  +12  21/89  7- 9  0- 2  7-10 11/46  5/26  2/71  1/68  1/33  0/17  5/40   3
Freeman, Austin        38:28  +12  20/85  6- 8  2- 3  2- 2 11/45  5/24  1/69  3/68  1/33  0/17  3/39   3
Clark, Jason           27:19  +10   9/68  3- 3  1- 2  0- 0  5/35  3/22  0/52  1/50  0/25  0/13  0/29   4
Vaughn, Julian         19:25  +10   8/45  4- 4  0- 0  0- 2  4/23  2/14  0/36  3/36  3/21  1/ 8  2/23   3
Thompson, Hollis       14:39  + 6   6/31  0- 0  2- 3  0- 0  3/15  0/ 9  2/25  1/25  1/ 8  0/ 4  2/11   3
Sanford, Vee           00:37  + 0   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 1   0
Benimon, Jerrelle      20:50  + 2   4/44  0- 2  0- 1  4- 4  3/23  3/15  1/37  3/36  1/12  0/ 9  2/17   4
TOTALS                 40:00       89    27-33  6-13 17-23    46 20/33  9/72 16/70  9/33  2/17 20/37  23
.                                        0.818 0.462 0.739       0.606 0.125 0.229 0.273 0.118 0.541    

Efficiency: Georgetown 1.271, Duke 1.069
eFG%: Georgetown 0.783, Duke 0.444
Substitutions: Georgetown 17, Duke 24

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Georgetown 5-5, Duke 2-2
Layups/Tips: Georgetown 18-22, Duke 10-18
Jumpers: Georgetown 4-6, Duke 2-13

Fast break pts (% FG pts): Georgetown 20 (27.8), Duke 6 (10.9)
Pts (eff.) after steal: Georgetown 16 (177.8), Duke 15 (136.4)
Seconds per poss: Georgetown 18.2, Duke 15.9




--------

Stats pages will be updated tomorrow.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Recap: Syracuse 73, Georgetown 56

Sometimes this team can take apart a zone, and sometimes they look completely clueless.

Credit the Orange for forcing the latter, though the Hoyas played their own role. After getting out to a quick 14-0 start, Jim Boeheim made the simple adjustment of extending the zone on the shooters (and specifically Austin Freeman), forcing the Hoyas to either take deeper threes or to try and attack the seams in their 2-3 zone.

The Hoyas were tricky. They did neither.

Instead, the Hoyas committed turnovers on 7 of their next 13 possessions and watched their lead shrink to two points.  In fact, that was the start of a 48 possession stretch (from 16:36 in the 1st half to 6:27 in the 2nd half) where Georgetown committed 19 turnovers - that's a TO rate = 39.6%.  Which generally makes folks think of Bill Paxton in "Aliens": Game over.

However, it was worse than that. On most possessions, the Hoyas refused to attack the zone, often tossing the ball back and forth across the top. In the early going, this often led to a poor shot or a lazy turnover as they became predictable.

The few times the ball did go to the holes in the zone, the result was often a turnover. Much credit should go to Syracuse's length. They kept the Hoya guards from attempting many passes -- even skip passes across the zone rarely occurred, presumably because of worries about Syracuse's height and quickness.

When the team didn't turn it over, generally good things happened, though Syracuse's size often posed an additional problem in terms of converting down low.

It was ugly, and there's really no getting around it.

The good news is that the Hoyas really aren't this bad, and I'm not sure this game even says that much about the Hoyas-Orange rematch at Verizon later this year. Hopefully it turns into a learning experience and motivates the team. Because there's not much else good there.

Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE 

.            Visitor                         Home      
.            Georgetown                      Syracuse         

.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total

Pace            31        38        68
Effic.         94.2      71.9      82.1       110.4     103.8     107.0   

eFG%           60.4      42.0      51.0        60.4      54.8      57.8  
TO%            32.5      24.0      27.8        16.2      26.6      22.0  
OR%            25.0      10.0      15.6         9.1      35.7      24.0  
FTA/FGA         0.0      44.0      22.4        25.0     104.8      62.2   

Assist Rate    66.7      66.7      66.7        76.9      72.7      75.0  
Block Rate     11.1       0.0       5.9        14.3      42.9      28.6  
Steal Rate      3.2      21.3      13.2        22.7      16.0      19.1   

2FG%           50.0      42.9      46.4        55.6      62.5      58.8  
3FG%           50.0      27.3      38.1        50.0      20.0      36.4  
FT%             0.0      54.5      54.5        83.3      72.7      75.0


The only thing to note here is that no one had a good game. Oh, Austin Freeman and Jason Clark shot relatively well, but no one played well.

The guards refused to test the zone with any consistency, despite better results when they did. The bigs barely saw the ball, but turned it over often when they did and failed to grab any offensive boards to make it easier on them.

Defensively, the team wasn't strong but became an absolute sieve when the bench came in. And the offense got worse.

There's nothing much to see here.

On the other side, it doesn't help when you hit a game where Rautins is on fire and somehow Scoop Jardine is making shots all over the place. I wasn't impressed with the defense watching it, but the results actually weren't all that poor, considering how good Syracuse has been and the fact that the game was at the Dome.

INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS

Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
Vaughn, Julian         38   13.9   73.7    3.9      40    85.2    6.8      -1.8  
Monroe, Greg           48   25.4   52.2    6.4      47   103.5    9.7      -4.8  
Wright, Chris          66   18.5   83.2   10.2      67   105.6   14.2      -3.4  
Freeman, Austin        68   29.0   99.8   19.7      67   101.1   13.5      +2.9  
Clark, Jason           58   21.8  104.5   13.2      56    96.3   10.8      +1.7  
Thompson, Hollis       26    8.6   23.5    0.5      24   108.3    5.2      -3.3  
Sanford, Vee            5   26.2   59.5    0.8       5    96.0    1.0      -0.3  
Benimon, Jerrelle      36    8.9   13.8    0.4      34   114.5    7.8      -5.3  
Sims, Henry             5   20.0    0.0    0.0       5   140.0    1.4      -1.4  
TOTALS                 70          78.9   55.1      69   102.0   70.4     -15.6  

Syracuse              Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
JACKSON, Rick          36   22.4  100.7    8.1      38    78.8    6.0      +1.9  
JOHNSON, Wes           66   25.7   80.9   13.7      66    70.8    9.4      +3.0  
ONUAKU, Arinze         42   18.5   85.9    6.7      43    88.9    7.6      -0.6  
RAUTINS, Andy          66   19.6  128.4   16.6      67    64.9    8.7      +8.0  
TRICHE, Brandon        43   16.4   73.8    5.2      45    98.8    8.9      -2.7  
JARDINE, Scoop         34   16.4  144.7    8.1      31    80.9    5.0      +3.3  
REESE, Brandon          0    0.0    -      0.0       1   300.0    0.6      -0.6  
JOSEPH, Kris           58   14.5  142.9   12.0      59    72.4    8.5      +4.7  
TOTALS                 69         105.5   70.4      70    78.2   54.7     +17.4


HD BOX SCORE

Georgetown vs Syracuse
1/25/10 7:03 p.m. at Carrier Dome, Syracuse, NY
Final score: Syracuse 73, Georgetown 56
Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Vaughn, Julian         24:37  + 1   3/36  1- 2  0- 0  1- 2  2/25  1/12  1/40  2/38  0/24  1/15  2/21   3
Monroe, Greg           28:34  -15   8/38  4- 7  0- 0  0- 0  7/33  0/10  1/47  7/48  1/26  0/22  4/16   5
Wright, Chris          37:33  -22   7/48  3- 4  0- 6  1- 3 10/46  7/15  1/67  1/66  1/33  0/32  2/23   4
Freeman, Austin        38:37  -17  23/54  5-11  4- 7  1- 2 18/47  0/11  2/67  3/68  0/32  3/31  3/24   1
Clark, Jason           33:05  - 6  15/52  0- 3  4- 7  3- 4 10/42  3/15  2/56  2/58  0/26  1/27  2/22   3
Thompson, Hollis       14:45  - 8   0/20  0- 0  0- 1  0- 0  1/19  1/ 8  1/24  1/26  0/13  0/11  1/ 7   1
Sanford, Vee           01:19  - 1   0/ 5  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 4  1/ 2  1/ 5  1/ 5  0/ 0  0/ 2  0/ 0   0
Benimon, Jerrelle      18:52  -15   0/22  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/25  1/ 9  0/34  2/36  0/13  0/18  2/10   2
Sims, Henry            02:38  - 2   0/ 5  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 4  0/ 2  0/ 5  1/ 5  0/ 3  0/ 2  1/ 2   1
TOTALS                 40:00       56    13-28  8-21  6-11    49 14/21  9/69 20/70  2/34  5/32 19/25  20
.                                        0.464 0.381 0.545       0.667 0.130 0.286 0.059 0.156 0.760    

Syracuse                Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
JACKSON, Rick          20:29  + 7   8/38  4- 8  0- 0  0- 2  8/22  1/ 9  1/38  1/36  3/15  2/12  2/19   2
JOHNSON, Wes           38:51  +20  14/71  4- 7  1- 2  3- 3  9/45  2/19  3/66  7/66  4/27  1/25  8/30   0
ONUAKU, Arinze         25:42  + 6   7/42  3- 7  0- 0  1- 3  7/31  1/13  0/43  1/42  0/15  1/17  6/18   3
RAUTINS, Andy          38:10  +22  15/73  0- 2  2- 6  9-10  8/43  6/22  6/67  1/66  0/27  0/23  1/32   2
TRICHE, Brandon        24:42  + 3   5/44  1- 1  0- 1  3- 4  2/25  2/12  0/45  3/43  0/17  0/15  3/22   2
JARDINE, Scoop         18:23  +13   9/35  3- 3  1- 1  0- 0  4/22  4/ 7  0/31  2/34  0/13  0/12  2/12   0
REESE, Brandon         00:20  - 3   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0   0
JOSEPH, Kris           33:23  +17  15/62  5- 6  0- 1  5- 6  7/37  2/14  3/59  0/58  1/26  0/21  2/27   0
TOTALS                 40:00       73    20-34  4-11 21-28    45 18/24 13/70 15/69  8/28  6/25 27/32   9
.                                        0.588 0.364 0.750       0.750 0.186 0.217 0.286 0.240 0.844    

Efficiency: Syracuse 1.058, Georgetown 0.800
eFG%: Syracuse 0.578, Georgetown 0.510
Substitutions: Syracuse 20, Georgetown 27

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Syracuse 4-5, Georgetown 1-1
Layups/Tips: Syracuse 11-13, Georgetown 9-16
Jumpers: Syracuse 5-16, Georgetown 3-11

Fast break pts (% FG pts): Syracuse 10 (19.2), Georgetown 11 (22.0)
Pts (eff.) after steal: Syracuse 13 (100.0), Georgetown 13 (144.4)
Seconds per poss: Syracuse 15.8, Georgetown 19.0



------------

Stats pages will be updated tonight.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Another shot selection and lineup efficiency update

Georgetown continues its death march this week with consecutive games against top-7 teams - whether by vote, RPI or statistical model.

As was discussed in comments here, the most likely outcome for this stretch was for the Hoyas to go 2-3 in these five games; since Georgetown has already won two of three, I suspect most fans have one of two positions for this week:
  1. Georgetown's playing with house money, so even if they don't win either game this week, they're still likely to make some noise come March
  2. The Hoyas have to win at least one of these games to prove that they are among the elite teams in the country.
I really didn't expect the Hoyas to be better than a top 20 team this year, but thanks to some obscene outside shooting and a much better job protecting the basketball, they've been a bit of a revelation these last few weeks. I'm still not convinced that the current level of performance is sustainable, but this week should tell us a lot.

As a means of getting ready for this week, here's another update of a couple of the stats I track:  shot selection and lineup efficiencies.

I've changed the range of games I'm posting this time.  I'm now starting with the game vs. Washington, and including all games forward from there.  This is because of the natural break in the schedule between easy opponents (excluding the Temple game) and better competition.  I'm not able to include the Butler game since no play-by-play was available.

This has eliminated all of the cupcakes (unless one considers DePaul and Rutgers to be cupcakes), and led to some significant changes in what these stats are showing.

First up, shot selection:
Player               Dunks   Layups   2pt J's   3FGA      FTA  
Wright, Chris        0 /0     41/65    9 /21    13/35    32/41
                              0.631    0.429    0.371    0.780

Freeman, Austin      4 /5     36/48    7 /29    20/43    32/38
                              0.750    0.241    0.465    0.842

Monroe, Greg         7 /7     32/60    11/35    4 /9     40/64           
                              0.533    0.314    0.444    0.625                 
    
Vaughn, Julian       11/11    23/40    7 /16    0 /3     18/27
                              0.575    0.438    0.000    0.667
    
Clark, Jason         1 /1     6 /15    4 /10    21/48    15/21           
                              0.400    0.400    0.438    0.714                 
    
Thompson, Hollis     0 /0     3 /7     4 /12    2 /12    6 /10            
                              0.429    0.333    0.167    0.600                 
    
Sims, Henry          1 /2     1 /4     0 /1     0 /1     5 /10     
                              0.250    0.000    0.000    0.500                 
    
Benimon, Jerrelle    0 /0     1 /3     1 /1     1 /3     5 /7           
                              0.333    1.000    0.333    0.714    

Sanford, Vee         0 /0     1 /1     0 /1     0 /3     1 /2      
                              1.000    0.000    0.000    0.500

Pithy comments:
  • It seems like Chris Wright has one or two driving layups blocked a game, but he still has managed to lead the team in layups made during this stretch (and is second in layup %).  If he can keep his 3FG% above 35% and get his FT % above 80%, I'd say he's playing at about as high a level as I would have hoped for this season.
  • Austin Freeman's line surprised me, in that it seems to skewer the great myth that he has one of the best mid-range games in college basketball.  He's shooting only 24% on 2-pt jumpers, and he's taking too many relative to either layups or threes.  He does make about 75% of his layup attempts, which leads the team.  And his outside shooting is excellent.
  • Greg Monroe is also still struggling to make his 2-pt jumpers, although it's up a tick since the last time we looked.  He's also made 4/9 3FG during this stretch.  Very nice.
  • Since we've chucked out the start of the season, Julian Vaughn's 1/10 start shooting FTs is gone, and he suddenly looks like a competent shooter across the board.  Well, maybe not from outside - I'd like to think those three shots from 3FG were with the shot clock running down, but I doubt it.
  • Although he seemed to go through a bit of a shooting slump in December, Jason Clark has regained his outside stroke.  I'd love to see a higher percentage on layups, but otherwise no complaints.
  • Hollis Thompson, on the other hand, finally made a 3FG in the Rutgers game (he was 0/9 during this stretch of games before Rutgers).  He's got such a classic shooting form that I expect every one of his jump shots to drop.


Lineup stats (minimum of ten possession played on offense and defense):

.                                                Offense                    Defense
Lineup                                     # Poss  Eff. Secs/poss    # Poss  Eff. Secs/poss
Clark--Freeman--Monroe--Vaughn--Wright       251   119    17.2         249    99    18.9
Clark--Freeman--Monroe--Thompson--Wright      90    96    16.4          86   105    17.4
Freeman--Monroe--Thompson--Vaughn--Wright     45   129    18.4          47    94    18.1
Benimon--Freeman--Monroe--Thompson--Wright    41    98    14.7          39   123    11.6
Benimon--Clark--Freeman--Monroe--Wright       34    79    17.2          32    88    15.0
Clark--Monroe--Thompson--Vaughn--Wright       29   103    18.1          28    68    21.0
Clark--Freeman--Monroe--Sims--Wright          24   125    20.9          26   123    19.3
Freeman--Monroe--Sims--Thompson--Wright       16   156    18.4          14    79    25.6
Clark--Monroe--Sims--Thompson--Wright         16    69    15.8          15    80    16.1
Clark--Freeman--Monroe--Thompson--Vaughn      16    75    18.5          15    67    20.9
Benimon--Clark--Monroe--Thompson--Wright      15   120    16.3          13   123    23.5
Benimon--Clark--Freeman--Thompson--Vaughn     12   125    18.9          13    69    19.8
Benimon--Clark--Freeman--Monroe--Thomspon     12    75    22.2          14    93    17.2

More pithy comments:
  • The starting lineup is very good.
  • When the Hoyas go small (Thompson in for Vaughn), the team give up a bit of defense and really struggles on offense; when the team goes big (Thompson in for Clark) it kicks some ass.
  • One of the reasons we clamor for more playing time for Henry Sims around here is that the early season lineup stats showed that his primary lineup (Clark-Freeman-Monroe-Sims-Wright) was about the best the Hoyas could run out.  This isn't the case anymore, as it's been too porous defensively.  However, a lineup of Freeman-Monroe-Sims-Thompson-Wright has the best differential (Off Eff. - Def. Eff.), albeit in only ~15 possessions played.
  • Bringing in Benimon seems to cause a substantial drag on the offense, at least for the two highest usage lineups.  Defensively, its a mixed bag.
 -------------

That's all I've got.  No predictions for tonight's game against Syracuse, but it's worth noting that the performance stats are showing that the Hoyas are playing better on offense, but worse on defense these days. 

    Saturday, January 23, 2010

    Recap: Georgetown 88, Rutgers 63

    Georgetown used a 12-0 run in the first half and a 15-0 run in the second to easily defeat the Rutgers Scarlet Knights today at the Verizon Center.

    Let's run the numbers:

    TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
     
    .            Home                            Visitor   
    .            Georgetown                      Rutgers         
    .            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
    Pace            33        36        68
     
    Effic.        140.7     117.1     128.8        88.7      94.8      92.2  
     
    eFG%           70.0      72.9      71.3        52.1      50.0      50.9  
    TO%             9.2      27.9      19.0        30.6      13.9      22.0  
    OR%            16.7      50.0      31.8        31.2      20.0      25.0  
    FT Rate        13.3      62.5      35.2        29.2       6.1      15.8  
    
    Assist Rate    66.7      56.2      61.8        90.0      35.7      58.3  
    Block Rate     10.0      11.1      10.7         5.3      10.5       7.9  
    Steal Rate     15.3       8.4      11.7         6.1       8.4       7.3  
     
    2FG%           63.2      68.4      65.8        50.0      50.0      50.0  
    3FG%           54.5      60.0      56.2        35.7      33.3      34.5  
    FT%           100.0      46.7      57.9        57.1      50.0      55.6

    The Hoyas had a very strong offensive half to start the game, committing only 3 turnovers (to Rutgers' 10) on the way to a 17-point lead at the break.

    Georgetown had an excellent selective shooting performance in the Lift-off half [1/1 dunks, 10/13 layups and tip-ins, 1/5 2FG jumpers and 6/11 3FGs] while limiting the Scarlet Knights to only 10 2FGAs (5 made).  The Hoyas weren't rebounding particularly strongly in the half, but Rutgers could only turn their five offensive rebounds into 4 points.

    The Vesper half was another lopsided affair, as G'town pulled out to a 33-point lead before Coach Thompson emptied the bench after the final media timeout.  The Hoyas were more sloppy with the ball in the 2nd half - even ignoring their 3 turnovers in the final four possessions during garbage time, they had 7 turnovers in 30 possessions (23%).  However, they managed to do a much better job protecting the glass at both ends, gathering fully half of their own misses (5/10).  And they actually shot better in the Vesper half [2/3 dunks, 6/9 layups, 5/7 2FG jumpers, 3/5 3FGs].

    The Hoyas also shot better than 50% from behind the arc for the third time in four games (also vs. Pittsburgh and Seton Hall).

    In fact, Georgetown has improved their outside shooting from 35.8% (= 57/159) out-of-conference to 44.7% (= 55/123) during their first eight conference games.  Frankly this worries me, as I just don't think 45% shooting for 3FGA is sustainable for the rest of the season.

    Here's how the Hoyas have shot the ball in-conference play historically (courtesy of StatSheet.com):
    .                      Conf.      Best
    Season     GU 3FG%   Avg 3FG%   Team 3FG%
    2004-05     34.5       34.1       39.4
    2005-06     35.1       35.0       41.6
    2006-07     37.0       33.9       37.9
    2007-08     34.6       34.3       40.7
    2008-09     33.0       33.9       38.9
    2009-10     44.7       33.6       45.6
    Notre Dame has lead the Big East in 3FG% each of the past five seasons, but never shot 42% over the course of an entire conference season.  Right now, Marquette is the league leader, and the Hoyas and Warriors are the only teams shooting better than 41% for the year in-conference.


    INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS
    
    Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    Wright, Chris          55   26.3  110.5   16.0      51    83.8    8.6      +5.6  
    Monroe, Greg           55   29.5  148.9   24.2      55    85.8    9.4     +12.5  
    Freeman, Austin        46   22.5  124.6   12.9      45    99.3    8.9      +3.3  
    Clark, Jason           38   14.6  142.5    7.9      37    89.0    6.6      +2.2  
    Vaughn, Julian         34   25.3  163.1   14.0      31   102.6    6.4      +6.4  
    Thompson, Hollis       42    9.8  136.7    5.6      42    78.6    6.6      +0.7  
    Sanford, Vee           15   12.9   97.0    1.9      16   123.9    4.0      -1.3  
    Dougherty, Ryan         3   33.3    0.0    0.0       4   113.3    0.9      -1.0  
    Benimon, Jerrelle      30    9.0   97.1    2.6      30    69.0    4.1      -0.4  
    STEPKA, Stephen         2    0.0    -      0.0       3   137.8    0.8      -0.8  
    Sims, Henry            15   22.8  110.5    3.8      16    90.9    2.9      +0.8  
    TOTALS                 67         130.0   88.9      66    89.7   59.2     +28.1  
    
    Rutgers               Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    ROSARIO, Mike          43   43.8   76.8   14.5      45   146.7   13.2      -5.9  
    NDIAYE, Hamady         57   18.4  112.8   11.9      59   139.4   16.4      -3.7  
    BEATTY, James          59   13.2   75.8    5.9      61   116.5   14.2      -5.7  
    MILLER, Dane           47   18.2   42.7    3.7      48   143.6   13.8      -9.4  
    MITCHELL, Jonathan     53   17.6  148.2   13.8      53   112.0   11.9      +2.6  
    JOHNSON, Austin        13    1.1  300.0    0.4      14   165.2    4.6      -2.0  
    JACKSON, Patrick       15   20.0    0.0    0.0      16    69.4    2.2      -2.2  
    COBURN, Mike           34   16.1  163.5    9.0      31   124.3    7.7      +1.7  
    OKAM, Brian             9   17.9   76.1    1.2       8    30.0    0.5      +0.7  
    TOTALS                 66          92.4   60.3      67   126.2   84.6     -23.4

    This was the Greg Monroe show, as he used nearly 30% of available possessions while posting an offensive rating just shy of 150.  Monroe was a model of high-usage efficiency, making 9/11 2FG, 1/1 3FG and co-leading the team with 6 assists and 3 off. rebounds.  And he put up that high ORating while still committing 4 turnovers in the game - there's still room for improvement, gosh darn it.  A quick look at the historical record indicates that he's only had one better performance, his second-ever college game last season against Drexel (I have no recollection of that game, but that's why I write these things down).

    His front-court partner in crime - Julian Vaughn - also had a solid game against the apparently overwhelmed Rutgers' big men.  Vaughn also missed only 1 shot, and made 4/4 FTs in the game, bringing him over 50% shooting for the season (21/39) after starting out the year 1/10 from the line.  More importantly, he's been able to improve his assist rate (13.5 to 16.2) while decreasing his turnover rate (23.9 to 17.3) from out-of-conference to in-conference.  Julian had a 30% turnover rate last season, so this is a huge leap for him.

    Chris Wright had a couple of issues out there today (4 turnovers, 2 shot attempts blocked) but still managed to look good by shooting a scintillating 4/5 from deep while dropping six dimes.

    Austin Freeman and Jason Clark struggled just a bit from outside (2/7 3FG combined) but were otherwise solid.  Well, actually Freeman missed two more FTs today, dropping him down to 88.5% for the season and jeopardizing his standing in the 180-shooter club - he's currently 52.6% FG, 46.3% 3FG, 88.5% FT (= 187.4%).  Yeah, I'm now tracking this.

    The bench contributed 16 points to the cause, with Thompson and Benimon (today's defensive star) seeing significant time in the first half while the outcome was still in doubt.  Vee Sanford saw his most playing time (16 possessions) since the early season.  Henry Sims didn't get into the game until well into the 2nd half, and may have officially fallen out of the rotation.  However, he comported himself quite well when he did get in, with two sweet drives on consecutive plays (with assists from Monroe on each) and a just-missed alley-oop.


    HD BOX SCORE
    
    Rutgers vs Georgetown
    01/23/10 12:00 at Verizon Center
    Final score: Georgetown 88, Rutgers 63
    
    Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    ROSARIO, Mike          26:30  -27  15/39  3- 8  3-10  0- 0 18/37  2/ 9  0/45  2/43  0/26  1/24  0/14   1
    NDIAYE, Hamady         35:18  -27  10/57  4- 7  0- 0  2- 3  7/48  3/17  0/59  2/57  3/35  3/29  4/18   3
    BEATTY, James          35:31  -17   7/60  0- 0  2- 3  1- 3  3/51  3/21  3/61  4/59  0/35  1/31  1/19   0
    MILLER, Dane           28:04  -30   0/42  0- 1  0- 5  0- 0  6/40  5/16  0/48  4/47  0/29  1/25  3/16   3
    MITCHELL, Jonathan     31:33  - 7  21/55  3- 7  5- 8  0- 0 15/48  0/14  1/53  0/53  0/30  1/29  3/18   0
    JOHNSON, Austin        08:27  -18   0/ 8  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 9  1/ 2  0/14  0/13  0/ 8  0/ 7  1/ 4   3
    JACKSON, Patrick       09:42  +11   0/21  0- 0  0- 3  0- 0  3/14  0/ 8  0/16  1/15  0/ 6  0/ 8  2/ 6   1
    COBURN, Mike           20:13  -12  10/27  4- 4  0- 0  2- 3  4/29  0/ 6  1/31  1/34  0/18  0/20  0/11   3
    OKAM, Brian            04:42  + 2   0/ 6  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 9  0/ 3  0/ 8  0/ 9  0/ 3  2/ 7  1/ 4   1
    TOTALS                 40:00       63    14-28 10-29  5- 9    57 14/24  5/67 15/66  3/38  9/36 15/22  15
    .                                        0.500 0.345 0.556       0.583 0.075 0.227 0.079 0.250 0.682    
    
    Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    Wright, Chris          31:31  +35  16/81  1- 5  4- 5  2- 3 10/47  6/27  1/51  4/55  0/21  0/15  4/27   2
    Monroe, Greg           32:54  +20  21/74  9-11  1- 1  0- 0 12/47  6/21  1/55  4/55  1/24  3/17 11/30   1
    Freeman, Austin        27:03  +21  14/65  5- 7  1- 4  1- 3 11/41  3/20  0/45  0/46  0/17  0/15  2/23   1
    Clark, Jason           22:11  +19   9/54  2- 3  1- 3  2- 2  6/35  2/18  1/37  1/38  0/17  0/14  2/19   2
    Vaughn, Julian         20:19  +20  12/52  4- 5  0- 0  4- 4  5/31  3/15  0/31  1/34  0/11  3/11  2/14   1
    Thompson, Hollis       26:17  +19   8/55  1- 2  2- 3  0- 2  5/29  0/17  2/42  0/42  0/16  0/12  1/25   1
    Sanford, Vee           09:58  -11   2/ 9  1- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 8  0/ 2  0/16  1/15  0/ 9  0/ 7  0/10   2
    Dougherty, Ryan        01:48  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 4  1/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 2   1
    Benimon, Jerrelle      17:29  +11   1/35  0- 0  0- 0  1- 2  0/21  1/12  2/30  1/30  1/11  1/11  2/18   1
    STEPKA, Stephen        01:12  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 2   0
    Sims, Henry            09:18  - 1   5/15  2- 4  0- 0  1- 4  4/ 9  0/ 4  1/16  0/15  1/10  0/ 5  0/10   0
    TOTALS                 40:00       88    25-38  9-16 11-20    54 21/34  8/66 13/67  3/28  7/22 27/36  12
    .                                        0.658 0.562 0.550       0.618 0.121 0.194 0.107 0.318 0.750    
    
    Efficiency: Georgetown 1.313, Rutgers 0.955
    eFG%: Georgetown 0.713, Rutgers 0.509
    Substitutions: Georgetown 22, Rutgers 20
    
    2-pt Shot Selection:
    Dunks: Georgetown 3-4, Rutgers 2-2
    Layups/Tips: Georgetown 16-22, Rutgers 6-12
    Jumpers: Georgetown 6-12, Rutgers 6-14
    
    Fast break pts (% FG pts): Georgetown 10 (13.0), Rutgers 4 (6.9)
    Pts (eff.) after steal: Georgetown 6 (75.0), Rutgers 5 (100.0)
    Seconds per poss: Georgetown 18.6, Rutgers 17.5

    -------





    Stats pages will be updated tomorrow morning (hopefully).

    Wednesday, January 20, 2010

    Recap: Georgetown 74, Pittsburgh 66

    How about I leave the predictions to Brian from here on out?

    On the most obvious level, this game did come down to three-point shooting. The Hoyas shot seven for ten and Pitt shot just four for 18. Even though the Hoyas' shots were generally more open, the shooting easily could have gone five or so threes the other way.

    On another level, it's interesting to note the team that couldn't buy a three took 18 of them while the Hoyas only took what was given.

    But to center on the three-point shooting alone would ignore the other things the Hoyas did well tonight.

    The Hoyas rebounded about even with a team that ranked 56th in the nation in Offensive Rebounding % and 22nd in Defensive Rebounding %. The Hoyas had their best game of the year in terms of holding onto the ball, and while Pitt hardly plays an in-your-face style of defense this year, a 13% turnover will almost always translate to a highly effective offense.

    There were still some issues. The exceptional three-point shooting was partially offset by some poor shooting inside the arc and specifically inside the paint.

    On defense, Pitt had several stretches where they took advantage of slow or over-rotations, especially when the Hoyas were in their switching man to man and with the bench on the floor. Pitt has always been an excellent interior passing team, so this isn't unexpected. Still, these breakdowns are a potential point of improvement.

    So, yes, it was about three-point shooting. But there's more there. The three-point difference was just so big, it's hard to see past it.

    Still, an eight point win at the Pete? This team is getting better, game by game.

    Let's run the numbers:

    TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE 

    Visitor Home
    Georgetown PITT

    1st Half 2nd Half Total 1st Half 2nd Half Total
    Pace 32 32 63

    Effic. 97.6 134.9 116.9 97.6 109.8 104.2

    eFG% 51.9 53.3 52.7 46.4 51.7 49.1
    TO% 18.9 6.3 12.6 9.4 18.8 14.2
    OR% 13.3 47.1 31.2 17.6 50.0 34.3
    FTA/FGA 15.4 56.7 37.5 28.6 31.0 29.8

    Assist Rate 54.5 53.3 53.8 91.7 42.9 65.4
    Block Rate 15.0 10.5 12.8 10.5 11.1 10.9
    Steal Rate 0.0 6.3 3.2 6.3 6.3 6.3

    2FG% 31.6 48.1 41.3 50.0 63.2 56.4
    3FG% 71.4 66.7 70.0 25.0 20.0 22.2
    FT% 100.0 64.7 71.4 62.5 55.6 58.8


    Are we seeing the start of a little bit of "different night, different hero?" It's all about match-ups, and while in previous years an argument could be made that the Hoyas didn't exploit the obvious mismatches enough, these Hoyas don't seem to have that problem.

    Greg Monroe's troubles finishing in the post are well-documented at this point, and today was really no exception. I worried before the game about the potential that Nasir Robinson or Gilbert Brown might shut down Monroe simply because he wouldn't be able to take advantage enough of a smaller, quicker player.

    This wasn't entirely true; McGee gave him as much trouble as the smaller guys. But the real down low mismatch was Julian Vaughn. Vaughn schooled freshman Dante Taylor and the other Panthers quite a few times on the blocks. He also dished what is likely to be a career-high six assists. Fantastic game from Julian.

    The other star was Chris Wright. With the Panthers applying very little on-ball pressure, Wright played much more like an off guard today and responded by both drilling threes and driving repeatedly to the hoop. His assists were low, but that's mostly because Wright had an easier shot than a pass as he laid in basket after basket.

    Austin Freeman had his usually efficient game, but he both sat a bit because of foul trouble and didn't press for a shot while in. I wasn't focusing on it, but I wonder if Dixon schemed at all to take him away. Or perhaps it was just too easy for Wright to drive.

    Lastly, there's actually a bit of good news from the bench. It was only a total of thirty to forty possessions or so, but the defense was actually at its best when Hollis Thompson and Jerelle Benimon were on the floor. It's most likely just indicative of a Pitt cold spot, but perhaps the freshmen are starting to improve on defense.

    INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS

    Georgetown Off % Pts Def Pts
    Player Poss Poss O.Rtg Prod Poss D.Rtg Allow Net Pts

    Vaughn, Julian 48 26.2 117.7 14.8 49 101.1 9.9 +3.5
    Monroe, Greg 61 21.2 101.8 13.2 59 92.7 10.9 +1.7
    Wright, Chris 59 29.1 132.1 22.7 58 104.3 12.1 +7.7
    Freeman, Austin 47 19.8 121.1 11.3 45 113.9 10.3 +0.8
    Clark, Jason 59 11.9 94.4 6.6 58 109.9 12.7 -3.6
    Thompson, Hollis 27 14.8 0.0 0.0 26 73.5 3.8 -3.4
    Sanford, Vee 1 0.0 - 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 +0.0
    Benimon, Jerrelle 19 5.8 295.7 3.2 19 75.4 2.9 +1.4
    Sims, Henry 4 0.0 - 0.0 5 180.0 1.8 -1.8
    TOTALS 65 112.0 71.8 64 100.7 64.4 +7.3

    PITT Off % Pts Def Pts
    Player Poss Poss O.Rtg Prod Poss D.Rtg Allow Net Pts

    ROBINSON, Nasir 29 8.6 127.9 3.2 29 103.3 6.0 -1.1
    McGHEE, Gary 40 5.0 250.6 5.0 39 119.5 9.3 -0.8
    GIBBS, Ashton 58 22.0 55.2 7.0 60 103.0 12.4 -5.7
    WANAMAKER, Brad 58 23.7 108.2 14.9 59 114.9 13.6 +0.2
    DIXON, Jermaine 54 21.5 111.2 12.9 55 129.9 14.3 -1.8
    WOODALL, Travon 12 16.2 97.3 1.9 12 100.5 2.4 -0.3
    ADAMS, Chase 2 0.0 - 0.0 1 200.0 0.4 -0.4
    BROWN, Gilbert 47 19.2 151.9 13.7 48 104.3 10.0 +4.0
    TAYLOR, Dante 20 27.5 51.5 2.8 22 78.6 3.5 -1.1
    TOTALS 64 104.1 61.4 65 110.5 71.8 -7.3



    HD BOX SCORE

    Georgetown vs PITT
    01/20/10 7:00 PM at Petersen Events Center, Pittsburgh, PA
    Final score: Georgetown 74, PITT 66

    Georgetown Min +/- Pts 2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A FGA A Stl TO Blk OR DR PF
    Vaughn, Julian 31:08 +16 11/65 4- 9 0- 1 3- 5 10/44 6/19 0/49 1/48 2/29 2/23 3/31 0
    Monroe, Greg 36:41 + 6 13/68 4-13 0- 1 5- 7 14/53 1/20 1/59 1/61 1/37 2/31 9/32 3
    Wright, Chris 35:31 + 8 27/68 8-14 3- 3 2- 2 17/49 2/13 1/58 4/59 1/35 2/27 1/33 2
    Freeman, Austin 27:21 + 7 13/57 2- 4 2- 2 3- 4 6/41 3/16 0/45 2/47 1/30 1/22 3/24 4
    Clark, Jason 35:43 + 3 7/67 0- 4 2- 2 1- 2 6/51 2/21 0/58 0/59 0/36 1/30 1/30 2
    Thompson, Hollis 17:30 +13 0/32 0- 1 0- 1 0- 0 2/22 0/11 0/26 2/27 0/16 0/12 2/17 2
    Sanford, Vee 00:48 + 0 0/ 0 0- 0 0- 0 0- 0 0/ 1 0/ 0 0/ 1 0/ 1 0/ 1 0/ 1 0/ 1 0
    Benimon, Jerrelle 11:38 - 6 3/11 1- 1 0- 0 1- 1 1/16 0/ 3 0/19 0/19 0/13 1/12 4/11 2
    Sims, Henry 02:50 - 7 0/ 2 0- 0 0- 0 0- 0 0/ 3 0/ 1 0/ 5 0/ 4 0/ 3 0/ 2 0/ 1 0
    TOTALS 39:50 74 19-46 7-10 15-21 56 14/26 2/64 10/65 5/40 10/32 24/36 15
    . 0.413 0.700 0.714 0.538 0.031 0.154 0.125 0.312 0.667

    PITT Min +/- Pts 2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A FGA A Stl TO Blk OR DR PF

    ROBINSON, Nasir 16:37 - 3 4/29 2- 2 0- 0 0- 0 2/25 3/ 9 0/29 1/29 0/15 0/14 2/12 5
    McGHEE, Gary 26:08 - 4 7/48 3- 3 0- 0 1- 1 3/35 1/15 1/39 0/40 1/31 1/20 4/22 4
    GIBBS, Ashton 35:51 -10 8/58 1- 8 2- 8 0- 0 16/52 2/19 2/60 1/58 0/42 0/34 3/28 2
    WANAMAKER, Brad 36:22 -10 9/59 4- 9 0- 3 1- 2 12/54 7/19 0/59 2/58 1/43 5/35 8/31 3
    DIXON, Jermaine 32:50 -10 14/58 3- 8 1- 4 5- 7 12/47 2/18 0/55 0/54 2/38 1/28 1/27 2
    WOODALL, Travon 08:15 + 3 2/13 1- 1 0- 1 0- 0 2/11 1/ 5 0/12 0/12 0/ 9 0/ 6 0/ 7 0
    ADAMS, Chase 00:21 + 2 0/ 4 0- 0 0- 0 0- 0 0/ 3 0/ 2 0/ 1 0/ 2 0/ 0 0/ 1 0/ 0 0
    BROWN, Gilbert 29:53 - 6 20/47 7- 7 1- 2 3- 5 9/46 1/12 1/48 2/47 0/37 2/30 2/23 3
    TAYLOR, Dante 12:53 - 2 2/14 1- 2 0- 0 0- 2 2/17 0/ 5 0/22 2/20 1/15 2/12 0/10 1
    TOTALS 39:50 66 22-40 4-18 10-17 58 17/26 4/65 10/64 5/46 12/36 22/32 20.
    0.550 0.222 0.588 0.654 0.062 0.156 0.109 0.333 0.688


    Efficiency: Georgetown 1.138, PITT 1.031
    eFG%: Georgetown 0.527, PITT 0.483
    Substitutions: Georgetown 27, PITT 25

    2-pt Shot Selection:
    Dunks: Georgetown 2-2, PITT 6-6
    Layups/Tips: Georgetown 13-23, PITT 10-16
    Jumpers: Georgetown 4-21, PITT 6-18

    Fast break pts (% FG pts): Georgetown 6 (10.2), PITT 8 (14.3)
    Pts (eff.) after steal: Georgetown 2 (100.0), PITT 2 (50.0)
    Seconds per poss: Georgetown 18.0, PITT 19.1




    ---------

    Stats pages will be updated tomorrow

    Monday, January 18, 2010

    Housekeeping note

    I never did write up a full recap for the Villanova game, but I think that ship has sailed.  You can check the usual suspects (link, link, link) for write-ups, as well as a new Hoya blog I stumbled upon here.


    But that's not why I'm here.

    I've just updated the Big East HD box scores, and appended a plus/minus and Roland rate table to each.  Keep in mind that plus/minus stats don't work well for players who get extreme amounts of playing time - either very little or very much (see this discussion for more on why unadjusted plus/minus and Roland rates aren't the greatest stats).  I'll try to update these tables every two weeks or so.

    As mentioned previously, I'm only working up box scores for eight other teams besides the Hoyas, as they have useful play-by-play data available for most or all games.

    A pearl of wisdom (or two) for each of those teams, while the season is young and I can be made to look foolish in 6 weeks:
    • UConnAlex Oriakhi doesn't seem to be helping the cause as much as another shooter (e.g. Coombs-McDaniel)
    • LouisvilleEdgar Sosa and Samardo Samuels appear irreplaceable for the Cardinals, and Pitino seems to know it; I thought T. Jennings would have a break-out year - perhaps not.
    • MarquetteButler and Hayward, and a cast of thousands.  But since you already knew that, how about getting Maurice Acker some more playing time?
    • Notre Dame:  here's a team where the plus/minus stats just don't work well - 'Gody, Jackson and Hansbrough rarely come out of the game.  Nash is more valuable than Scott and maybe Peoples so far.
    • PittAshton Gibbs has missed only 11 minutes of possible court-time in conference play, but Roland rate loves him.  I thought Dante Taylor would rate higher, but he's only five games into his Big East conference career, so I'll let it slide.
    • St. John's:  There are 12 players with at least 20 minutes of playing time so far:  Sean Evans and Paris Horne are the leaders among the rotation guys, Omari Lawrence gets some love for those with less game action so far.
    • Seton Hall:  Roland rate is not a fan of Herb Pope, which surprises me.  It loves Jordan Theodore, which doesn't surprise me at all.
    • Villanova:  In a season-preview I contributed towards in September, I predicted that Corey Stokes would be one of the break-out players this year . . . not so much.  Maalik Wayns also has a lousy rate, but you'd never know it from that game on Sunday.

    Sunday, January 17, 2010

    Recap: Villanova 82, Georgetown 77

    Well, the play-by-play for the game provided by the Villanova athletic department is a disaster - I've spent the better part of the last hour fixing as much as I can, but a lot of the substitution corrections I made were best guesses. I eventually gave up late in the second half, especially for the Wildcat subs.

    Also, the official box score definitely has mistakes. For instance, Greg Monroe received credit for 3 blocks on only 2 Villanova shot attempts in one sequence.

    It's very strange, because other 'Nova play-by-play data I've run this year have been fine.

    Take all numbers here with an enormous grain of salt.  For now, stats will have to do - I've get a recap up late tonight.

    Let's run the numbers:

    TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
     
    .            Visitor                         Home      
    .            Georgetown                      Villanova             
    .            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
    Pace            36        39        75
    
    Effic.         85.0     118.5     102.2       126.2      92.7     108.9  
     
    eFG%           41.1      51.5      46.7        60.9      32.3      46.8  
    TO%            24.7      15.5      19.9        19.2      10.3      14.6  
    OR%            36.4      36.8      36.6        35.3      26.9      30.2  
    FTA/FGA        42.9      45.5      44.3        28.1      67.7      47.6  
     
    Assist Rate    88.9      66.7      75.0        70.6      44.4      61.5  
    Block Rate      9.1      30.0      19.0        20.0       5.3      11.8  
    Steal Rate     19.2       7.7      13.3        13.7      12.9      13.3  
     
    2FG%           26.7      57.9      44.1        54.5      35.0      45.2  
    3FG%           38.5      28.6      33.3        50.0      18.2      33.3  
    FT%            66.7      80.0      74.1        77.8      76.2      76.7


    INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS
    
    Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    VAUGHN, Julian         32   11.5   43.5    1.6      31   106.3    6.6      -3.7  
    MONROE, Greg           72   26.5  121.4   23.2      72    90.9   13.1      +8.0  
    WRIGHT, Chris          51   17.3   92.4    8.1      47   109.5   10.3      -1.8  
    FREEMAN, Austin        72   22.0  121.2   19.2      73   103.8   15.2      +3.4  
    CLARK, Jason           70   13.9  124.6   12.1      71    97.0   13.8      +0.5  
    THOMPSON, Hollis       32   23.4   42.4    3.2      32   112.5    7.2      -4.6  
    SANFORD, Vee           10   20.0    0.0    0.0      12   141.0    3.4      -3.1  
    BENIMON, Jerrelle      39   11.5   61.6    2.8      39    94.4    7.4      -3.0  
    SIMS, Henry             2   50.0    0.0    0.0       3   133.3    0.8      -1.1  
    TOTALS                 76          97.3   70.2      76   102.2   77.7      -5.6  
    
    Villanova             Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    Pena, Antonio          57    9.5   89.9    4.9      55   103.0   11.3      -3.6  
    Reynolds, Scottie      58   23.9  159.9   22.1      58   102.2   11.9      +9.1  
    Fisher, Corey          50   26.5   78.4   10.4      50   103.0   10.3      -1.6  
    Redding, Reggie        50   25.8  101.4   13.1      49   108.8   10.7      +0.7  
    Stokes, Corey          38   15.4   80.7    4.7      36   108.9    7.8      -2.4  
    Wayns, Maalik          26   26.0  142.5    9.6      25    79.6    4.0      +4.9  
    Yarou, Mouphtaou       19   10.4  100.7    2.0      21    81.5    3.4      -0.5  
    Cheek, Dominic         25    7.3  134.6    2.5      25    67.6    3.4      +0.2  
    Sutton, Maurice         2    0.0    -      0.0       4   125.0    1.0      -1.0  
    King, Taylor           36   20.9   92.0    6.9      37    89.3    6.6      +0.3  
    Armwood, Isaiah        19   15.8   30.2    0.9      20    80.2    3.2      -1.9  
    TOTALS                 76         106.5   77.1      76    96.8   73.6      +5.4


    HD BOX SCORE
    
    Georgetown vs Villanova
    01/17/10 Noon at Wachovia Center (Philadelphia, Pa.)
    Final score: Villanova 82, Georgetown 77
    
    Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    VAUGHN, Julian         17:21  +10   0/39  0- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/27  1/13  0/31  2/32  2/19  1/17  1/17   5
    MONROE, Greg           37:44  - 4  29/74  8-12  1- 1 10-15 13/57  2/14  3/72  4/72  3/39  3/39 13/42   3
    WRIGHT, Chris          25:38  + 8   6/59  1- 2  0- 5  4- 4  7/41  5/18  1/47  2/51  0/27  0/25  0/28   4
    FREEMAN, Austin        37:33  - 7  22/72  5-10  3- 5  3- 4 15/55  6/14  2/73  3/72  0/42  1/38  3/41   3
    CLARK, Jason           38:06  - 3  16/71  1- 3  4- 8  2- 2 11/56  2/17  2/71  1/70  1/42  1/38  3/42   4
    THOMPSON, Hollis       17:48  -10   0/29  0- 2  0- 5  0- 0  7/31  2/ 9  2/32  2/32  1/15  3/23  1/15   1
    SANFORD, Vee           05:13  - 8   0/ 8  0- 1  0- 1  0- 0  2/ 7  0/ 2  0/12  0/10  0/ 5  0/ 7  0/ 4   1
    BENIMON, Jerrelle      19:52  - 7   4/33  0- 1  1- 2  1- 2  3/31  0/ 9  0/39  1/39  0/19  0/22  6/24   4
    SIMS, Henry            00:45  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 3  1/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 2   0
    TOTALS                 40:00       77    15-34  9-27 20-27    61 18/24 10/76 16/76  7/42 15/41 30/43  25
    .                                        0.441 0.333 0.741       0.750 0.132 0.211 0.167 0.366 0.698    
    
    Villanova               Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    Pena, Antonio          29:02  + 0   6/61  3- 4  0- 0  0- 0  4/42  0/14  2/55  3/57  0/23  1/30  3/27   5
    Reynolds, Scottie      29:29  - 6  27/56  4- 8  4- 7  7- 8 15/48  2/ 9  2/58  1/58  0/25  1/36  2/29   4
    Fisher, Corey          28:30  + 2  10/58  2- 6  0- 1  6- 7  7/45  3/18  2/50  3/50  1/25  1/29  2/27   2
    Redding, Reggie        25:45  + 4  11/53  4-10  1- 3  0- 0 13/42  5/11  0/49  3/50  1/20  4/30  3/27   4
    Stokes, Corey          19:33  + 0   3/41  0- 1  0- 3  3- 4  4/29  2/11  1/36  0/38  1/19  1/22  3/20   2
    Wayns, Maalik          13:20  + 7  11/29  2- 6  1- 3  4- 5  9/26  2/ 9  1/25  0/26  0/11  0/15  2/16   1
    Yarou, Mouphtaou       10:09  + 5   2/23  1- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/17  0/ 9  0/21  1/19  0/11  1/ 8  1/11   3
    Cheek, Dominic         13:41  +17   5/32  1- 2  1- 1  0- 0  3/22  0/10  0/25  0/25  0/ 8  0/11  2/17   0
    Sutton, Maurice        01:30  - 3   0/ 2  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 4  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 1  1/ 2   0
    King, Taylor           19:43  - 2   6/35  2- 2  0- 3  2- 4  5/33  2/ 9  1/37  0/36  0/19  2/25  4/21   3
    Armwood, Isaiah        09:18  + 1   1/20  0- 2  0- 0  1- 2  2/ 9  0/ 3  1/20  0/19  1/ 8  0/ 8  2/13   3
    TOTALS                 40:00       82    19-42  7-21 23-30    63 16/26 10/76 11/76  4/34 13/43 26/41  27
    .                                        0.452 0.333 0.767       0.615 0.132 0.145 0.118 0.302 0.634    
    
    Efficiency: Villanova 1.079, Georgetown 1.013
    eFG%: Villanova 0.468, Georgetown 0.467
    Substitutions: Villanova 58, Georgetown 35
    
    2-pt Shot Selection:
    Dunks: Villanova 1-1, Georgetown 4-4
    Layups/Tips: Villanova 12-27, Georgetown 10-25
    Jumpers: Villanova 6-14, Georgetown 1-5
    
    Fast break pts (% FG pts): Villanova 6 (10.2), Georgetown 9 (15.8)
    Pts (eff.) after steal: Villanova 6 (60.0), Georgetown 15 (150.0)
    Seconds per poss: Villanova 14.8, Georgetown 16.9



    Saturday, January 16, 2010

    Once more unto the breach

    I can't speak for the rest of Hoya-dom, but the coincidence of the next stretch of games with the date on the calendar brings to mind the dreadful memory of last season's implosion:  on January 16th, 2009, the Hoyas sat at 12-3 (3-2) heading into a road game against stiff opposition (Duke).

    We all know how the rest of the season went:  4-12 (4-9).

    In the next 5 games, Georgetown plays four of KenPom.com's top-25 (through Friday's games), with three of those games on the road.  Ken's predictions:
    .                                    KenPom
    Date          Opponent    Rank     Exp. Score
    17-Jan      @ Villanova   [22]      L: 75-78
    20-Jan      @ Pittsburgh  [25]      L: 60-63
    23-Jan        Rutgers     [168]     W: 77-57
    25-Jan      @ Syracuse    [6]       L: 68-77
    30-Jan        Duke        [1]       L: 67-72

    Regardless of what you think about Ken's methodology, the fact is that the Hoyas are likely underdogs in four games the rest of this month, and will likely lose multiple times.  The question, to me, is not how the Hoyas do in this next stretch of five games, but rather how the team responds after this death-march.

    To be clear, the remaining schedule is no cake-walk with two tough road games (Louisville and West Virginia) and several other toss-ups.  Indeed, right now Georgetown's RPI strength-of-schedule projects to be #2 at the end of the regular season.

    This all got me to wondering how this year is stacking up against last season, at nominally the same point.

    My favorite comparison for this sort of thing is performance.  Simply put, I use KenPom's expected point spread, adjusted for the actual pace of the game, and compare it to the actual point spread of that game. That is, if the Hoyas are expected to beat Team A by 10 points, based on KenPom's stats, but actually win by 14 points, the net performance for that game is +4 points.

    I usually update the performance charts (linked at upper-right) after each game, but I won't hold it against you if you've never looked.  Here's team performance for last season and so far this year (click on any figure to enlarge):


    What's immediately obvious to me is that there's a lot less variability game-to-game.  The 2008-09 team could be tremendous (+20 points above expected against Maryland, Savannah St. and UConn) or lousy (-15 points below expected against West Virginia, Louisville and St. John's (II).  And remember, these expected point spreads are worked out using end-of-season stats (i.e. after the great collapse).

    Meanwhile, this season the Hoyas have played every game within 10 points of expectation - their best game was +6 points vs. DePaul, the worst was -9 points vs. Old Dominion.

    Allow me to quantify this variability, going even further back for context:
    Season        Games          SDev. of Perf.
    2007-08       First 17       ±  8.6 points
    2007-08       Last 17        ±  9.4
    2008-09       First 15       ± 14.6
    2008-09       Last 16        ±  9.3
    2009-10       First 15       ±  4.3
    It looks like typical variability for a ~16 game stretch is around ±9 points; that's to say that most games (about 2/3) should end up within 9 points of KenPom's predicted outcome, adjusting for actual game pace.

    As you can see, the early season last year was all over the place.  I'm not sure that was some sort of harbinger of impending doom, but it does show that you never knew what kind of performance Georgetown would bring to each game (despite going 12-3).  Also interesting to me is that the Hoyas only played 2 games all year slightly better than expected (here defined at 0-10 points above expected).  Essentially, either the Hoyas were very good - mostly early in the season - or they just weren't good at all.

    So far, this season is another matter entirely.  Most games the Hoyas are performing within ~4 points of what KenPom tells us to expect - good news for gamblers, I suppose.  As the great Dennis Green would say, they are who we think they are.

    But why?

    As my loyal reader knows, I can never leave well enough alone.  Instead of just looking at net performance, I can also look at offensive performance (points scored - expected points scored) and defensive performance (expected points allowed - points allowed).
    .                            SDev. of       SDev. of
    Season        Games          Off. Perf      Def. Perf
    2007-08       First 17        ±  6.9         ±  5.8
    2007-08       Last 17         ±  7.7         ±  6.8
    2008-09       First 15        ± 10.2         ±  8.3
    2008-09       Last 16         ± 10.5         ± 10.6
    2009-10       First 15        ±  7.0         ±  5.7
    What we see early (the first three lines) is that the variability of the offensive or defensive performance is less than the overall performance.  That's what we'd expect if the two are uncorrelated or vary together (i.e. when the team is playing well on offense, it's also playing well on defense).

    Also, for four of the five cohorts the variability of the defense is smaller than the variability of the offense.  This also makes intuitive sense, along the lines of the baseball adage that "speed never slumps." A several game hot- or cold-streak from outside is much more likely to manifest itself in these stats than running into several hot or cold teams consecutively.

    However, starting in the 2nd half of last season, and much more strongly now, we see that the variability of the offense and defense are larger than the overall variability of team performance.  What's happening now is that when the offense is playing poorly, the defense plays well (and vice versa).

    Excuse me while I whip this (graph) out:



    as compared to previous times:



    If I were a clever fellow, I'd be able to tell you why this is happening.  Maybe it's just small sample size.  I don't think it's related to rotations, especially this year (what rotations?).

    But if the trend continues, it means that, at the end of the game, Georgetown is performing about what KenPom's stats predict.  And he's predicting a whole lot of pain over the next two weeks.

    Friday, January 15, 2010

    Recap: Georgetown 85, Seton Hall 73

    Editors note:  This recap was written by Alan Greene (ignore the byline at the bottom)
    ----------------------
    Well, that felt a bit like vintage III-era Georgetown.

    No, not just the domination -- this was an 18-point game with 47 seconds left -- but the manner in which it occurred.

    There were several devastating runs driven by a combination of exceptional half-court D and a flurry of made buckets. There was a second-half run by the opponent that was calmly refuted.

    The typical Thompson-era weaknesses also appeared. Georgetown turned the ball over on almost 24% of its possessions, and gave up offensive rebounds at an alarming rate.

    In other ways it felt different. For one, the defense was not particularly good. Yes, the numbers below are a little deceptive as Seton Hall scored eight points late when everything was decided, but overall the defense was not strong.

    Part of that was the aforementioned offensive boards, but part of it was giving up a surprising number of easy buckets down low. The Hoyas did block 16% of Seton Hall's 2s, but it didn't keep the Hall from making layups.

    On offense, Julian Vaughn gave the team a nice low post threat that felt like a throwback, and there was definitely a Jon Wallace-style feel to the team's three-point shooting, but stylistically it is interesting to see the little differences.

    For one, Georgetown scored 22 fast break points. The Green-Wallace-Hibbert Hoyas might've taken four or five Big East games to generate that many.

    The team still brings its big men to the top of the key to open the lane and sets screens constantly. In the past, these shots often came from step-back threes and back cuts. Those still happen; but now the team has added a couple of highly effective wrinkles: the screen/pick and roll and the dribble drive.

    In the end, though, the similarities outweighed the differences. The Hoyas won because their combination of generating easy shots and excellent shooting overcame their turnovers and poor rebounding.

    The difference between mirroring 05-06 and 06-07 could be how well the Hoyas can fix those last two issues.

    Let's run the numbers:

    TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE 
    
    Home                            Visitor   
    Georgetown                      Seton Hall         
    .            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
    Pace            34        33        68 
    
    Effic.        128.5     122.7     125.5        81.8     134.6     107.8   
    
    eFG%           76.1      76.2      76.1        42.0      47.4      45.2  
    TO%            23.4      23.9      23.6        29.2       6.0      17.7  
    OR%            33.3      36.4      35.0        31.2      52.4      43.2  
    FT Rate        56.5      66.7      61.4        32.0      31.6      31.7  
    
    Assist Rate    43.8      64.3      53.3        50.0      47.1      48.1  
    Block Rate     11.1      19.4      16.3         5.6      13.3       9.1  
    Steal Rate     26.3       3.0      14.8        11.7      15.0      13.3   
    
    2FG%           72.2      66.7      69.7        50.0      48.4      49.0  
    3FG%           60.0      66.7      63.6        14.3      28.6      21.4  
    FT%            69.2      64.3      66.7        87.5      75.0      80.0


    At some point, a television announcer will see enough Hoya games (or Sports Information will send him or her a memo) to notice how much better the Hoyas are when Greg Monroe is on the floor, no matter how many shots he takes. He attracts defensive attention, facilitates and he's becoming absolutely devastating on defense, which is why he clocks in with the second best net points for the game.

    Austin Freeman had an excellent game shooting, but five turnovers held down his overall effectiveness a bit.

    Julian Vaughn, like most of the Hoyas, struggled a bit with rebounding today. He just couldn't seem to get a handle on anything. However, he showed off a series of excellent low post moves. Some plays he was merely physical; on another he had a great spin move in the lane that showed off some nice footwork.

    Jerelle Benimon struggled in his short time on the floor, picking up some fouls and getting out-rebounded. But he wasn't out of place and his FT stroke was nice.

    A series of folks thought this might be a bit of a breakout game for Henry Sims due to matchups. To a certain extent, they were right. Sims swatted a couple of shots, grabbed a key defensive board in the middle of the Seton Hall run and several offensive boards. He couldn't finish on offense, though, as he was a little weak with the ball.

    I'm not sure if I'm allowed to do this, but I'm taking the easy way out and picking both Chris Wright and Jason Clark as my players of the game.

    Many of Wright's buckets were of the easy layups variety, while Clark made a series of open and not so open jumpers. Clark's shooting was more impressive, but Wright's playmaking was just as important.

    But they are mostly getting this award for completely shutting down Jeremy Hazell. Defense is a team endeavor, but Wright and Clark traded off on Hazell and harassed him all night. When the game was still in doubt, Hazell had only nine points.


    INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS
    
    Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    
    Wright, Chris          60   23.8  153.6   21.9      61   100.1   12.2      +8.7  
    Monroe, Greg           46   22.3  106.7   10.9      47    71.7    6.7      +3.9  
    Freeman, Austin        62   23.3  104.5   15.1      61   100.8   12.3      +1.7  
    Clark, Jason           44   23.2  121.2   12.4      44   107.3    9.4      +2.2  
    Vaughn, Julian         50   16.4  144.0   11.8      50   107.6   10.8      +2.0  
    Thompson, Hollis       30    4.3  250.0    3.2      30   114.1    6.8      -0.9  
    Sanford, Vee            5   20.0    0.0    0.0       6   102.2    1.2      -1.1  
    Dougherty, Ryan         2  100.0    0.0    0.0       3   166.7    1.0      -2.2  
    Benimon, Jerrelle      18    5.6  200.0    2.0      20   125.4    5.0      -1.1  
    Sims, Henry            18    4.5  185.7    1.5      18   117.8    4.2      -1.1  
    TOTALS                 67         124.3   78.9      68   102.6   69.8     +11.9  
    
    Seton Hall            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    
    LAWRENCE, Keon         43   15.0  107.7    6.9      40   125.1   10.0      -2.1  
    POPE, Herb             38   35.9   68.2    9.3      37   123.8    9.2      -3.7  
    HAZELL, Jeremy         55   23.1   89.2   11.3      54   126.2   13.6      -3.5  
    MITCHELL, Robert       41   12.6  165.4    8.5      40   121.2    9.7      +0.5  
    HALL, Ferrakohn        31   15.9  122.2    6.0      30   119.8    7.2      -0.5  
    THEODORE, Jordan       34   23.0   99.2    7.8      37   115.7    8.6      -1.0  
    HARVEY, Eugene         27   20.0  110.3    6.0      26   135.5    7.0      -1.2  
    JACKSON, Jamel          4   50.0    0.0    0.0       4    35.0    0.3      -0.5  
    GARCIA, John           14    5.9  300.0    2.5      14   132.8    3.7      +0.1  
    ROBINSON, Jeff         53   16.4  132.4   11.5      53   122.5   13.0      -0.3  
    TOTALS                 68         103.3   69.8      67   122.8   82.3     -12.8

    HD BOX SCORE
    
    Seton Hall vs Georgetown
    01/14/10 7:00 at Verizon Center
    
    Final score: Georgetown 85, Seton Hall 73
    
    Seton Hall              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    LAWRENCE, Keon         25:13  - 6   6/48  3- 9  0- 0  0- 0  9/37  4/14  2/40  1/43  0/21  0/20  2/14   0
    POPE, Herb             22:17  -12   6/34  3- 9  0- 0  0- 2  9/35  2/10  0/37  4/38  1/19  6/22  4/11   5
    HAZELL, Jeremy         32:20  -16  17/55  3- 5  3- 9  2- 2 14/48  0/15  2/54  2/55  0/27  0/29  0/13   1
    MITCHELL, Robert       24:08  + 3   8/50  2- 5  0- 2  4- 4  7/43  2/16  0/40  0/41  1/17  2/25  2/15   3
    HALL, Ferrakohn        17:17  - 3   8/35  4- 5  0- 0  0- 0  5/27  0/ 9  0/30  1/31  1/15  2/15  1/11   4
    THEODORE, Jordan       20:44  -11   8/37  2- 4  0- 1  4- 5  5/34  4/13  3/37  2/34  0/17  0/21  1/ 7   1
    HARVEY, Eugene         15:46  - 7   7/27  2- 3  0- 0  3- 4  3/23  0/ 7  0/26  1/27  0/16  0/13  0/10   3
    JACKSON, Jamel         01:49  + 1   0/ 2  0- 0  0- 2  0- 0  2/ 4  0/ 1  0/ 4  0/ 4  0/ 1  0/ 3  0/ 1   0
    GARCIA, John           08:56  - 8   3/11  1- 1  0- 0  1- 1  1/12  0/ 3  0/14  0/14  0/ 8  0/ 8  0/ 4   2
    ROBINSON, Jeff         31:30  - 1  10/66  4- 8  0- 0  2- 2  8/52  1/20  2/53  1/53  0/24  4/29  2/14   2
    TOTALS                 40:00       73    24-49  3-14 16-20    63 13/27  9/67 12/68  3/33 16/37 13/20  21
    .                                        0.490 0.214 0.800       0.481 0.134 0.176 0.091 0.432 0.650    
    
    Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    Wright, Chris          37:10  +14  21/77  8-12  1- 2  2- 5 14/42  6/19  3/61  0/60  1/45  1/20  0/34   2
    Monroe, Greg           28:54  +21   8/69  2- 4  0- 0  4- 6  4/33  4/23  3/47  3/46  1/31  0/11  9/28   4
    Freeman, Austin        36:41  +16  16/79  5- 6  1- 2  3- 4  8/41  4/21  1/61  5/62  0/45  0/20  4/33   1
    Clark, Jason           27:50  +13  20/61  1- 2  4- 4  6- 7  6/31  0/17  1/44  3/44  1/37  0/15  2/27   3
    Vaughn, Julian         30:41  +10  13/60  6- 6  0- 1  1- 3  7/35  2/17  0/50  1/50  2/39  1/17  3/27   2
    Thompson, Hollis       16:31  + 3   5/38  1- 1  1- 1  0- 0  2/18  0/11  1/30  0/30  1/18  0/ 5  1/16   1
    Sanford, Vee           01:49  - 4   0/ 4  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 1  1/ 6  1/ 5  0/ 2  0/ 0  0/ 2   0
    Dougherty, Ryan        00:38  - 5   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 3  2/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 1   0
    Benimon, Jerrelle      10:02  + 2   2/24  0- 0  0- 0  2- 2  0/10  0/ 8  0/20  0/18  0/11  0/ 2  0/ 9   3
    Sims, Henry            09:44  -10   0/13  0- 2  0- 1  0- 0  3/ 9  0/ 3  0/18  0/18  2/16  3/10  1/ 8   0
    TOTALS                 40:00       85    23-33  7-11 18-27    44 16/30 10/68 16/67  8/49  7/20 21/37  16
    .                                        0.697 0.636 0.667       0.533 0.147 0.239 0.163 0.350 0.568    
    
    Efficiency: Georgetown 1.269, Seton Hall 1.074
    eFG%: Georgetown 0.761, Seton Hall 0.452
    Substitutions: Georgetown 24, Seton Hall 33
    
    2-pt Shot Selection:
    Dunks: Georgetown 4-4, Seton Hall 1-1
    Layups/Tips: Georgetown 15-21, Seton Hall 19-28
    Jumpers: Georgetown 4-8, Seton Hall 4-20
    
    Fast break pts (% FG pts): Georgetown 22 (32.8), Seton Hall 8 (14.0)
    Pts (eff.) after steal: Georgetown 16 (160.0), Seton Hall 12 (133.3)
    Seconds per poss: Georgetown 16.2, Seton Hall 19.4





    -------------------------

    Stats pages will be updated tomorrow night

    Sunday, January 10, 2010

    UConn highlights

    I slapped together some highlights from yesterday's game, for your viewing pleasure (higher quality version can be downloaded here):
    video
    Some stat pages were updated yesterday, the rest will be today.

    Saturday, January 9, 2010

    Recap: Georgetown 72, Connecticut 69

    After sleeping walking through a great part of the 1st half, Austin Freeman and the Georgetown Hoyas managed to erase a 19-point deficit on the way to a three point win at the Verizon Center.

    Let's run the numbers:

    TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
     
    .            Home                            Visitor   
    .            Georgetown                      Connecticut         
    .            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
    Pace            37        33        70
     
    Effic.         67.1     142.0     102.2       107.4      87.6      97.9  
     
    eFG%           33.3      56.6      46.9        55.9      44.0      50.8  
    TO%            21.5       6.0      14.2        16.1      27.2      21.3  
    OR%            10.0      52.6      30.8        33.3      31.2      32.4  
    FT Rate        33.3      15.8      23.1        20.6      40.0      28.8  
    
    Assist Rate    50.0      52.6      51.9        70.6      27.3      53.6  
    Block Rate      7.7      14.3      10.6        11.8      17.9      15.6  
    Steal Rate     10.7      18.1      14.2        10.7       3.0       7.1  
     
    2FG%           35.3      50.0      44.4        50.0      52.4      51.1  
    3FG%           20.0      50.0      35.0        50.0       0.0      33.3  
    FT%            77.8      66.7      73.3        28.6      70.0      52.9

    I'm posting up the stats now along with some quick comments, and will flush out the recap tonight.  If I have time tonight - and everyone behaves - I'll try to cobble together some highlights as well.

    A few bullet points from the tempo-free box:
    • The first half deficit (15 points at the half, 19 points with a minute left) was due mostly to inept offense, not bad defense.  Sure, you'd like to see UConn's off. efficiency to be under 100, but the Hoyas were scoring only about 2/3 of a point per possession in the half.
    • During the tip-off half, Georgetown scored 2 points in a 16 possession stretch, on 2 FTs by Greg Monroe.  Surprisingly, the Hoyas had only 3 turnovers during those 16 possessions - that means 12 possessions ended without a score even though Georgetown got off a shot or got fouled.
    • The blinking number there is the shockingly low turnover rate in the 2nd half - only 2 TOs on 33 possessions.  From my eye, and from the box score below, it appears that the Huskies are incredibly dependent upon fast-break points, and their inability to turn the Hoyas over in the 2nd half was a real problem.
    • The Vesper half comeback was built on good defense and great offense.  Georgetown still gave up too many fastbreak FGs (4), but Austin Freeman's shooting (7/11 2FG, 4/6 3FG) was exceptional.
    • Georgetown shot under 45% of 2FGs; that's likely thanks in part to the high block rate that UConn always strives for.

    INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS
    
    Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    Wright, Chris          66   28.1   68.8   12.8      66    99.7   13.2      -3.1  
    Monroe, Greg           64   17.5  119.8   13.4      63    85.0   10.7      +3.3  
    Freeman, Austin        64   31.2  127.5   25.4      65    83.7   10.9     +11.6  
    Clark, Jason           46   10.5   37.9    1.8      44   104.1    9.2      -5.3  
    Vaughn, Julian         53   17.8   99.2    9.4      54    92.1    9.9      +0.1  
    Thompson, Hollis       40    9.9  102.5    4.0      41    85.9    7.0      -1.2  
    Benimon, Jerrelle      22   10.4  109.1    2.5      22    81.8    3.6      -0.2  
    TOTALS                 71          98.8   69.4      71    90.9   64.5      +5.2  
    
    Connecticut           Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
    Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
    MAJOK, Ater            14    7.1    0.0    0.0      15   114.9    3.4      -2.3  
    DYSON, Jerome          47   31.8   80.5   12.0      45    92.8    8.3      +0.9  
    WALKER, Kemba          64   20.2   86.4   11.2      64   104.0   13.3      -2.2  
    ROBINSON, Stanley      67   25.9   82.0   14.2      68    97.9   13.3      -0.9  
    ORIAKHI, Alex          58   15.3  142.1   12.6      56    95.5   10.7      +3.0  
    COOMBS-McDANIEL, J     35   13.7  117.2    5.6      36    91.3    6.6      +0.1  
    EDWARDS, Gavin         49   17.3   83.0    7.0      47   102.7    9.7      -2.1  
    OKWANDU, Charles       21    7.8  204.3    3.4      24    96.8    4.6      +0.2  
    TOTALS                 71          94.4   66.0      71    98.6   70.0      -3.5

    While shooting out the lights, Austin Freeman used 31% of the possessions he played - that may be a record for him.  He also played solid defense in the game.

    Greg Monroe also had a solid game, albeit with far fewer possessions used.  He had some real defensive issues in the 1st half (not shown), although to be fair all the starters put up poor defensive stats in the 1st half except Freeman.

    Chris Wright had a poor game today, shooting only 3/11 on 2FGs.  He had four of those shots blocked, as he tested the strength of UConn's defense and lost.  The main point here, I think, is that the Hoyas can win against upper-level Big East teams with only two of the Big Three playing well, but will need all three to be on their game consistently to become an elite team in the league.

    Julian Vaughn had a nice workman-like effort.  His key offensive rebound and tip-in with 0:52 left turned out to be the shot to put Georgetown up for good (yeah, I'm giving him credit for it, even if he didn't get much of it).

    Jason Clark struggled again today.  After a great start to the season, Clark's offensive game has mostly been absent since the game against Butler.  His defense wasn't too hot today either - mostly cheap fouls, I suspect.

    The bench (Thompson, Benimon) contributed with low-usage, efficient offense and solid defense.  Would have liked to see a bit of Henry Sims, but oh well.


    Connecticut vs Georgetown
    01/09/10 12:00 at Verizon Center
    Final score: Georgetown 72, Connecticut 69
    
    Connecticut             Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    MAJOK, Ater            07:57  - 7   0/ 9  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/10  0/ 4  0/15  0/14  0/ 8  0/ 8  0/10   2
    DYSON, Jerome          27:18  - 1  12/44  6-11  0- 0  0- 0 11/36  4/12  1/45  5/47  1/31  0/19  4/28   4
    WALKER, Kemba          35:29  - 9   9/59  2- 6  0- 1  5- 8  7/55  6/22  1/63  5/63  0/39  1/35  2/33   2
    ROBINSON, Stanley      38:04  - 8  16/64  5-10  2- 8  0- 0 18/56  3/19  2/67  3/66  3/43  1/34  7/37   0
    ORIAKHI, Alex          32:03  - 6  11/52  4- 6  0- 0  3- 7  6/50  0/17  1/55  0/57  0/34  5/33  5/31   3
    COOMBS-McDANIEL, J     19:09  + 9  11/40  2- 2  2- 3  1- 2  5/30  1/12  0/35  1/34  0/22  0/17  1/19   0
    EDWARDS, Gavin         26:21  + 5   8/54  4- 9  0- 0  0- 0  9/39  1/17  0/46  1/48  2/30  1/20  7/22   3
    OKWANDU, Charles       13:39  + 2   2/23  1- 2  0- 0  0- 0  2/19  0/ 9  0/24  0/21  1/18  2/ 9  0/15   1
    TOTALS                 40:00       69    24-47  4-12  9-17    59 15/28  5/70 15/70  7/45 11/35 27/39  15
    .                                        0.511 0.333 0.529       0.536 0.071 0.214 0.156 0.314 0.692    
    
    Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
    Wright, Chris          36:44  - 4  14/65  3-11  2- 5  2- 2 16/57  4/19  2/65  3/65  0/44  0/34  1/31   4
    Monroe, Greg           35:25  - 4  15/63  6-12  0- 1  3- 7 13/56  2/17  3/62  3/63  1/43  1/35  9/31   3
    Freeman, Austin        36:31  + 8  33/69  7-11  5- 9  4- 4 20/61  2/14  3/64  3/63  0/42  2/35  5/33   0
    Clark, Jason           25:59  + 8   0/51  0- 1  0- 4  0- 0  5/47  0/19  0/44  0/46  0/32  2/29  1/23   4
    Vaughn, Julian         30:40  +15   6/62  3- 7  0- 0  0- 0  7/54  3/22  0/54  1/53  4/35  3/29  4/27   1
    Thompson, Hollis       22:40  - 4   2/34  0- 2  0- 0  2- 2  2/32  3/13  2/40  0/39  0/24  1/20  0/18   2
    Benimon, Jerrelle      12:01  - 4   2/16  1- 1  0- 1  0- 0  2/18  0/ 4  0/21  0/21  0/15  1/13  3/12   2
    TOTALS                 40:00       72    20-45  7-20 11-15    65 14/27 10/70 10/70  5/47 12/39 24/35  16
    .                                        0.444 0.350 0.733       0.519 0.143 0.143 0.106 0.308 0.686    
    
    Efficiency: Georgetown 1.029, Connecticut 0.986
    eFG%: Georgetown 0.469, Connecticut 0.508
    Substitutions: Georgetown 22, Connecticut 24
    
    2-pt Shot Selection:
    Dunks: Georgetown 1-1, Connecticut 6-6
    Layups/Tips: Georgetown 12-23, Connecticut 15-24
    Jumpers: Georgetown 7-21, Connecticut 3-17
    
    Fast break pts (% FG pts): Georgetown 10 (16.4), Connecticut 18 (30.0)
    Pts (eff.) after steal: Georgetown 14 (140.0), Connecticut 7 (140.0)
    Seconds per poss: Georgetown 18.1, Connecticut 16.0




    ---------------------

    Stats pages will get updated tonight or tomorrow.