|
|
Post by NCAztec82 on Jan 28, 2015 4:52:40 GMT -8
Odd discrepancy between the first and last Fresno State games: 18 turnovers, we lost the first game by 2. 17 turnovers, we win the second game by 11.
Derrick Rose scored 30 points with 11 turnovers in the Bulls win over Golden State, so I'm wondering why so many turnovers would not have greater effect on winning or losing.
Yeah, there are other factors, but Coach repeatedly emphasizes how the Aztecs need to keep the team total below 10.
Our season average at this point in time is 12.6 TO/G. Arguably our best player, WSIII has 62 (>3 per game or 1 every 9 minutes), twice as many as the next guy, JJ at 31 (about 1 per game or 1 every 21 minutes). Among the starters, Spencer has the fewest turnovers.(<1 per game or barely 1 every half-hour).
Kell and Chol, who are not in the staring lineup, have 25 apiece (1.25 TO per game; Kell averages a turnover every 17 minutes, Chol has one every 12.2 minutes).
I'm thinking:
1. a player can offset the effect of turnovers, obviously, with more assists and steals
2. when a turnover occurs (late game vs. early game; ahead vs. behind) is maybe the more significant factor than whether is occurs
3. you can win with high turnovers if their points off turnovers is below a certain number
4. is this the so-called "lack of true point guard" argument again?
Any theories?
Go Aztecs!
|
|
|
|
Post by twobits on Jan 28, 2015 5:30:38 GMT -8
I would think of it in terms of how many possessions result in points scored...where a turnover is the same as a missed shot without an offensive rebound. Although our shooting percentage wasn't that good last night, we had a lot of offensive rebounds that resulted in points (we also made a good percentage of FTs).
I also would theorize that where the turnover occurs is important too....if it occurs in the backcourt, there is a good chance for a breakaway, easy bucket.... If it happens in the front court, there's a better chance your defense can get back in time to stop a easy score.
|
|
|
|
Post by NCAztec82 on Jan 28, 2015 6:08:52 GMT -8
I would think of it in terms of how many possessions result in points scored...where a turnover is the same as a missed shot without an offensive rebound. Although our shooting percentage wasn't that good last night, we had a lot of offensive rebounds that resulted in points (we also made a good percentage of FTs). I also would theorize that where the turnover occurs is important too....if it occurs in the backcourt, there is a good chance for a breakaway, easy bucket.... If it happens in the front court, there's a better chance your defense can get back in time to stop a easy score. This should be checked, but points per possession is Pomeroy"s "Adjusted Offensive Efficiency" stat (points per 100 possessions-adjusted for opponent). While our D is Top 3, our O is Top 180-something. Points off turnovers, yes, are great to get, but if we keep THEM from scoring, our TO's don't hurt so much. In a weird way they make for an entertaining game, i.e., we still get the W despite the TO's. |
|
|
|
Post by douchey1 on Jan 28, 2015 8:06:35 GMT -8
How many times did Shepard throw the ball into the stands
last night?
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jan 28, 2015 8:08:36 GMT -8
Odd discrepancy between the first and last Fresno State games: 18 turnovers, we lost the first game by 2. 17 turnovers, we win the second game by 11. Derrick Rose scored 30 points with 11 turnovers in the Bulls win over Golden State, so I'm wondering why so many turnovers would not have greater effect on winning or losing. Yeah, there are other factors, but Coach repeatedly emphasizes how the Aztecs need to keep the team total below 10. Our season average at this point in time is 12.6 TO/G. Arguably our best player, WSIII has 62 (>3 per game or 1 every 9 minutes), twice as many as the next guy, JJ at 31 (about 1 per game or 1 every 21 minutes). Among the starters, Spencer has the fewest turnovers.(<1 per game or barely 1 every half-hour). Kell and Chol, who are not in the staring lineup, have 25 apiece (1.25 TO per game; Kell averages a turnover every 17 minutes, Chol has one every 12.2 minutes). I'm thinking: 1. a player can offset the effect of turnovers, obviously, with more assists and steals 2. when a turnover occurs (late game vs. early game; ahead vs. behind) is maybe the more significant factor than whether is occurs 3. you can win with high turnovers if their points off turnovers is below a certain number 4. is this the so-called "lack of true point guard" argument again? Any theories? Go Aztecs! Because there is a lot more to the game than how many turnovers we have. The big differences are: Turnover margin -12 First Game (points off TO Margin -19) -4 Last Night (points off TO Margin -5) Free Throw Margin -6 First Game +19 Last Night Aztecs Offensive Rebounding Percentage23.8% First Game 44.7% Last Night
The game is offense and defense. Both of those can be broken down to getting shots and making shots. Getting shots is a function of turnovers and offensive rebounds. Making shots can be maximized by working for good shots and getting to the free throw line. Aztec Turnovers is part of one part of half the game. |
|
|
|
Post by NCAztec82 on Jan 28, 2015 8:48:07 GMT -8
Odd discrepancy between the first and last Fresno State games: 18 turnovers, we lost the first game by 2. 17 turnovers, we win the second game by 11. Derrick Rose scored 30 points with 11 turnovers in the Bulls win over Golden State, so I'm wondering why so many turnovers would not have greater effect on winning or losing. Yeah, there are other factors, but Coach repeatedly emphasizes how the Aztecs need to keep the team total below 10. Our season average at this point in time is 12.6 TO/G. Arguably our best player, WSIII has 62 (>3 per game or 1 every 9 minutes), twice as many as the next guy, JJ at 31 (about 1 per game or 1 every 21 minutes). Among the starters, Spencer has the fewest turnovers.(<1 per game or barely 1 every half-hour). Kell and Chol, who are not in the staring lineup, have 25 apiece (1.25 TO per game; Kell averages a turnover every 17 minutes, Chol has one every 12.2 minutes). I'm thinking: 1. a player can offset the effect of turnovers, obviously, with more assists and steals 2. when a turnover occurs (late game vs. early game; ahead vs. behind) is maybe the more significant factor than whether is occurs 3. you can win with high turnovers if their points off turnovers is below a certain number 4. is this the so-called "lack of true point guard" argument again? Any theories? Go Aztecs! Because there is a lot more to the game than how many turnovers we have. The big differences are: Turnover margin -12 First Game (points off TO Margin -19) -4 Last Night (points off TO Margin -5) Free Throw Margin -6 First Game +19 Last Night Aztecs Offensive Rebounding Percentage23.8% First Game 44.7% Last Night
The game is offense and defense. Both of those can be broken down to getting shots and making shots. Getting shots is a function of turnovers and offensive rebounds. Making shots can be maximized by working for good shots and getting to the free throw line. Aztec Turnovers is part of one part of half the game. Not so sure defense breaks down the same way as offense. They will always get and make shots, so really, it becomes about shots they like to take and shots they don't like to take. As it relates to the TO stat, I concur that keeping the differentials in our favor will lead to winning games. Point is, as usual, one can be misled looking at a "bad" stat without context. Makes me less likely to SMH whenever Winston is being Winston. Lol |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jan 28, 2015 8:58:57 GMT -8
Because there is a lot more to the game than how many turnovers we have. The big differences are: Turnover margin -12 First Game (points off TO Margin -19) -4 Last Night (points off TO Margin -5) Free Throw Margin -6 First Game +19 Last Night Aztecs Offensive Rebounding Percentage23.8% First Game 44.7% Last Night
The game is offense and defense. Both of those can be broken down to getting shots and making shots. Getting shots is a function of turnovers and offensive rebounds. Making shots can be maximized by working for good shots and getting to the free throw line. Aztec Turnovers is part of one part of half the game. Not so sure defense breaks down the same way as offense. They will always get and make shots, so really, it becomes about shots they like to take and shots they don't like to take. As it relates to the TO stat, I concur that keeping the differentials in our favor will lead to winning games. Point is, as usual, one can be misled looking at a "bad"stat without context. Makes me less likely to SMH whenever Winston is being Winston. Lol It does apply to defense. You can reduce the number of shots they take by getting defensive rebounds and creating turnovers. You can reduce their shooting percentages and trips to the free throw line by playing good tough defense. On offense working for and getting good shots doesn't always result in a good shooting percentage, likewise on defense forcing tough shots won't always be reflected in your opponent's shooting percentage. I don't see much difference. |
|
|
|
Post by Old School on Jan 28, 2015 9:16:57 GMT -8
I was watching WS drive to the basket, from my vantage point, he was dribbling the ball high (about chest height) and away from his body during his drive. Then the ball got stripped.
Normally, you dribble the ball low (about knee height), close to your body and shield the ball with your upper torso or other arm.
/shaking head
Oldie Out
|
|
|
|
Post by azson on Jan 28, 2015 9:31:10 GMT -8
Odd discrepancy between the first and last Fresno State games: 18 turnovers, we lost the first game by 2. 17 turnovers, we win the second game by 11. Derrick Rose scored 30 points with 11 turnovers in the Bulls win over Golden State, so I'm wondering why so many turnovers would not have greater effect on winning or losing. Yeah, there are other factors, but Coach repeatedly emphasizes how the Aztecs need to keep the team total below 10. Our season average at this point in time is 12.6 TO/G. Arguably our best player, WSIII has 62 (>3 per game or 1 every 9 minutes), twice as many as the next guy, JJ at 31 (about 1 per game or 1 every 21 minutes). Among the starters, Spencer has the fewest turnovers.(<1 per game or barely 1 every half-hour). Kell and Chol, who are not in the staring lineup, have 25 apiece (1.25 TO per game; Kell averages a turnover every 17 minutes, Chol has one every 12.2 minutes). I'm thinking: 1. a player can offset the effect of turnovers, obviously, with more assists and steals 2. when a turnover occurs (late game vs. early game; ahead vs. behind) is maybe the more significant factor than whether is occurs 3. you can win with high turnovers if their points off turnovers is below a certain number 4. is this the so-called "lack of true point guard" argument again? Any theories? Go Aztecs! Unlike complex theories to try and explain our enigmatic pull-your-hair-out-in-frustration Aztecs, the Rose example is easy to explain: no Bogut for GS. Warriors make Rose and Chi pay if the big man plays, probably win by 10 (even with their head-scratching-probably-will-never-happen-again-this-season 0-13 on 3PAs in the 2nd half). Bulls (i.e. Gasol and Noah) outrebounded GS by 13 and had countless 2nd chance points. GS better pray to God that Bogut is healthy for the playoffs. They're 28-2 with him, 8-5 w/o him. Reminds me of KL's value to SA. |
|
|
|
Post by gigglyforshrigley on Jan 28, 2015 9:37:47 GMT -8
Its an example of stats not telling the whole story. There's a lot more to basketball than what shows up on a stat sheet, that's why you can't over-analyze basketball with stats. Live ball turnovers are also a lot worse than dead ball turnovers. A lot of Shep's turnovers were dead ball turnovers if I remember correctly, except for 1 (or 2?) where he threw it away and they got a wide open fast break dunk -- I know he was responsible for 1 of those but I can't remember who was responsible for the second one
|
|
|
|
Post by NCAztec82 on Jan 28, 2015 9:46:22 GMT -8
Not so sure defense breaks down the same way as offense. They will always get and make shots, so really, it becomes about shots they like to take and shots they don't like to take. As it relates to the TO stat, I concur that keeping the differentials in our favor will lead to winning games. Point is, as usual, one can be misled looking at a "bad"stat without context. Makes me less likely to SMH whenever Winston is being Winston. Lol It does apply to defense. You can reduce the number of shots they take by getting defensive rebounds and creating turnovers. You can reduce their shooting percentages and trips to the free throw line by playing good tough defense. On offense working for and getting good shots doesn't always result in a good shooting percentage, likewise on defense forcing tough shots won't always be reflected in your opponent's shooting percentage. Forcing tough shots "won't always" lower their shooting pctg., but I guarantee you it will more often than it won't. I do agree that Aztec Turnovers are part of half the game, (or was that part of part of half) but it's really a part of both halves. Basketball possessions are "opportunities," and not all lost opportunities lead to lost ball games if the other guy is giving you the ball more than you're giving it to him. Turnovers are like playing defense against yourself, but I think Coach emphasizes intense, aggressive D at this level because it adds an unseen scoring component to our "Offense". Lately, our players have been a little lax with ball security, as our average TO's per game is still too high. Since the Aztecs don't particularly thrive on high Assist numbers, Turnovers should have a greater negative impact on SDSU than on most teams? Remember X having some 200+ minutes without turning the ball over? It's already covered in this thread, but Aztec Turnovers are one factor that seems most attributable to INDIVIDUAL skill, than team play or team concepts. Perhaps, this explains why they are seen as merely part of a part of a half of the game. |
|
