This topic contains 2 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by 
Chewy 12 years, 4 months ago.
rickybobby
NbanflguyEver want a way to compare every player in college basketball? John Hollinger has your answer. With his college player efficiency ratings (PER), we can evaluate the productivity of Division I hoopsters from Arizona to Youngstown State to see who’s really helping his team the most.Coming on the heels of a nearly 20-point victory, the last topic we should need to cover is North Carolina’s defense. Despite how outmatched Texas appeared at certain intervals during the defeat, it’s evident that, unless North Carolina corrects some fundamental areas of its defense, these defensive lapses will be the cause of future defeats.
According to tempo-free statistics compiled by Ken Pomeroy, North Carolina is a tough draw, sporting offensive and defensive rates that rank in the nation’s top 10. Although none of the Tar Heels is among John Hollinger’s top 50 for PER, the Heels are well accounted for in the ACC’s PER rankings; Harrison Barnes (22.95) might be the best-known Heel, but he doesn’t have UNC’s highest conference PER; that title belongs to John Henson (26.30).
Thus far, UNC has played six quality opponents (Michigan State, UNLV, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Long Beach State and Texas), and has limited them to 44 percent from within the arc and 30 percent from long range. Only two of those teams have connected on better than 50 percent of their 2-point field goals: Long Beach State (53 percent) and Kentucky (52 percent).
PLAYER PER SOS* Herb Pope 34.87 .470 Mike Scott 34.75 .400 Ricardo Ratliffe 34.75 .312 Jared Sullinger 34.45 .463 Steven Pledger 33.58 .395 *Source: Kenpom.com Because the Heels have Henson, Tyler Zeller and freshman James Michael McAdoo, their ability to affect 2-point field goals makes sense. For example, per Pomeroy, Henson’s block rate is 10.8 percent. However, the Heels are vulnerable on the defensive glass if their bigs continually try for the sensational play.
Overall, opponents are grabbing 30.5 percent of their misses, and Henson’s defensive rebounding ratio of 22.6 percent indicates that he too often tries for the block rather than securing the board. Zeller’s defensive rate of 17.1 percent shows a similar tendency. Against Texas, freshmen Jaylen Bond and Jonathan Holmes grabbed nine offensive boards between them, and the UNC bigs earlier struggled to keep Michigan State’s Draymond Green (seven offensive boards) and Kentucky’s Michael Kidd-Gilchrist (four offensive boards) off the glass. According to Synergy Sports Technology, the Heels allow opponents to score 1.024 points per offensive putback — the highest rate of their defensive categories.
Barnes, for all his talents, is a surprisingly poor rebounder. Although he possesses a muscular, 6-foot-8 frame, he grabs just 8.6 percent of boards, which is a lower rate than his backup, Reggie Bullock. If he were a better rebounder, it would make more sense for Henson and Zeller to aggressively go for blocks. Barnes’ weakness on the boards is made more glaring by their desire to swat shots. And in Carolina’s two losses (UNLV and Kentucky), the Heels allowed 13 and 14 offensive boards, respectively. Teams that crash the offensive glass are going to give the Tar Heels trouble.
Ya Herd
Entering the season, it was unclear whether Marshall would be a legit contender for Conference USA’s title or yet another team hyped too early by the college basketball nation.
PLAYER PER SOS* Jarrod Jones 31.14 ..442 Will Barton 29.73 .716 Jackie Carmichael 28.93 .276 Arsalan Kazemi 28.54 .376 Javon McCrea 27.98 .498 *Source: Kenpom.com One unknown for the Herd was their interior punch; in 2011, Marshall was good at corralling its own misses but not so great at limiting second-chance opportunities for opponents. The addition of Dennis Tinnon, though, has supplied Tom Herrion’s squad with the best frontcourt in the conference. The junior, who took a circuitous route to Huntington, has played in 11 games this season and has the team’s highest PER (26.52) and best rebounding rate (18.3 percent).
For a forward whose usage rate is a scant 13.4 percent, Tinnon gets the majority of his touches by crashing the glass. No one in the conference has a higher offensive rebounding rate (17.1) for the amount of minutes he plays (nearly 30), and only three other in-conference bigs have a stronger defensive rebounding rate. Tinnon (along with former Oklahoma commit Robert Goff) has boosted Marshall’s offensive rebounding percentage (data supplied by Pomeroy) to second-best in the nation (44 percent). The 6-8 forward has used 84 possessions so far this season; 38 percent of those possessions are the result of offensive rebounds, and Tinnon converts 1.15 points per board.
Guard play
PLAYER PER SOS* Damian Lillard 33.52 .536 Ken Horton 31.31 .377 Justin Edwards 30.44 .497 Scott Eatherton 30.17 .415 Terell Parks 29.87 .480 *Source: Kenpom.com Although the Summit League will earn only one bid to the NCAA tournament in March, this non-BCS conference features two of the nation’s best point guards. Nate Wolters (South Dakota State) and Reggie Hamilton (Oakland) are not household names just yet. But after the former’s team beat Washington and the latter’s beat Tennessee, we should be hearing more about them.
Hamilton’s PER (26.15) slightly edges out Wolter’s (25.96), but the Jackrabbits guard has a higher assist ratio (21.7 percent). South Dakota State has the conference’s most efficient offense (1.10 PPP), and, because Wolters is extremely careful with the ball, sporting a turnover ratio of 7.8 percent, it makes sense that he should use the majority of the team’s possessions.
Hamilton, however, is a much different guard; though he stands just 5-11, he loves to get inside. He already has attempted 129 2-pointers this season, roughly 20 percent more than anyone else on the Oakland squad. In what will be the calendar year’s final most entertaining matchup, Oakland hosts SDSU on Dec. 30, and the winner will be considered the conference favorite.
0
Chewy
| You must be logged in to reply to this topic. | Login |