- Joined
- Oct 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,656
- Reaction Score
- 4,696
Jim Fuller, in a link to several articles provided by Nan today, puts up some comparative figures on stats such as points, turnovers, rebounds, and assists for this year's squad vs. last year's.
In JIm's very interesting article, I couldn't find where he was explicit about whether or not the two teams had played in an identical number of games at this pre-NCAAs point in the season. Wanting to be sure that we were comparing an orange with an orange, rather than just assuming that to be the case, I checked it out. Looks like 33 for both teams.
From the tone of the Fuller article, he is surprised or thinks most others will be surprised, that this year's team has only put up 48 fewer points at this stage. That's a shortfall of only about a point and a half a game. You folks check me out on this, but my recollection is that quite a number of us were expecting comparable points from this year's team, posting one or more threads on that issue?? As I recall, our collective thesis was that we were losing very few points per game from Dixon, and we were adding three kids whose combined scoring abilities seemed to at least offset the points lost from Moore. Then, we added in some improved scoring from the other returnees. Whether that recollection is correct or not, I for one am not surprised by this particular stat. Others?
Jim noted that we were down "slightly" in assists. There I am surprised. Thought we'd be up. Maya was so good at creating her own shot. And I thought he addition of Banks would bring us some additional distribution capability (although she certainly came with the rep of being able to create her own shots, too). Of course I thought Banks would log alot more minutes. Also thought there would be improved passing from the returning backcourt as a factor in keeping assists growing, and that Stokes might be pointing up some nice numbers from the low post on passes rec'd. Your take?
Again from Jim, rebounds down this year "slightly." Suppose that is a mild surprise for me, with the arrival of Stokes, the health of Johnson, development of Buck and Dolson. That is ALOT of bigs, and I was hopeful that they would all be used and be kept fresh and aggressive.
Jim's biggest surprise was that we are essential even in turnovers. Given the way the season has gone, I'd say that was my biggest surprise as well. it has felt to me like we've been giving it away this year like Halloween candy. You?
This year's squad has done very well on Points Allowed and Take Aways (I think those were his other two categories), and I can't remember what The Yard had been anticipating there.?? Where the new squad has done most poorly is on the all-important category of loses, putting up as many in this one season as we've had in the last three or four combined. Not a good thing. Here my recollection is that most of you were figuring losses numbering somewhere in that 3-6 range???
In JIm's very interesting article, I couldn't find where he was explicit about whether or not the two teams had played in an identical number of games at this pre-NCAAs point in the season. Wanting to be sure that we were comparing an orange with an orange, rather than just assuming that to be the case, I checked it out. Looks like 33 for both teams.
From the tone of the Fuller article, he is surprised or thinks most others will be surprised, that this year's team has only put up 48 fewer points at this stage. That's a shortfall of only about a point and a half a game. You folks check me out on this, but my recollection is that quite a number of us were expecting comparable points from this year's team, posting one or more threads on that issue?? As I recall, our collective thesis was that we were losing very few points per game from Dixon, and we were adding three kids whose combined scoring abilities seemed to at least offset the points lost from Moore. Then, we added in some improved scoring from the other returnees. Whether that recollection is correct or not, I for one am not surprised by this particular stat. Others?
Jim noted that we were down "slightly" in assists. There I am surprised. Thought we'd be up. Maya was so good at creating her own shot. And I thought he addition of Banks would bring us some additional distribution capability (although she certainly came with the rep of being able to create her own shots, too). Of course I thought Banks would log alot more minutes. Also thought there would be improved passing from the returning backcourt as a factor in keeping assists growing, and that Stokes might be pointing up some nice numbers from the low post on passes rec'd. Your take?
Again from Jim, rebounds down this year "slightly." Suppose that is a mild surprise for me, with the arrival of Stokes, the health of Johnson, development of Buck and Dolson. That is ALOT of bigs, and I was hopeful that they would all be used and be kept fresh and aggressive.
Jim's biggest surprise was that we are essential even in turnovers. Given the way the season has gone, I'd say that was my biggest surprise as well. it has felt to me like we've been giving it away this year like Halloween candy. You?
This year's squad has done very well on Points Allowed and Take Aways (I think those were his other two categories), and I can't remember what The Yard had been anticipating there.?? Where the new squad has done most poorly is on the all-important category of loses, putting up as many in this one season as we've had in the last three or four combined. Not a good thing. Here my recollection is that most of you were figuring losses numbering somewhere in that 3-6 range???
