This is an outstanding piece, and I am right in line with it. There is a basis for this theory.

Sorry, wrong post

I acquired all of the Division I team data since 2002, and from that we can observe some fascinating trends and data relationships in the data. This is a multipart series exploring some of that data.



The graph shows the Assist to Turnover Ratio (ATO), by year, for the last 23 seasons, through the morning of February 21, 2024. The grey line shows the ATO for all of Division I, while the green line shows the ATO for teams that made the NCAA tournament that year. Over time there has been a noticeable increase of ATO, about a 20%. As we saw a decrease in turnovers in Part 8, it is not surprising to see an increase in a stat where the denominator is declining over time.

As with %LOB, the performance difference between tournament teams and the national average has remained steady; roughly 0.7 higher for tournament teams.

UNC, shown in blue, has had significantly higher ATO than even the tournament teams in most years. While the current team is taking care of the ball at historic levels, its assist level is very low, hence the moderate difference between its ATO and the anticipated tournament ATO.

ATO has a correlation factor with Winning Percentage of 0.596, one of the highest of all of the stats. In fact it is just a hair lower than that of eFG%. So, this is one of the more important stats you'll see.

Next up: Assists Per Made Field Goal

Got to think this is Mack Brown last year…Moving forward who are some guys y’all like as the next Head Coach…


What about Collins the new DC…I know he struggled at Ga Tech but he had to rebuild that entire roster after Paul Johnson…He has SEC experience and he is a good recruiter…I don’t know but it’s something to think about…

They scored 16 in the 1st half vs Va Tech and trail by 25 in 2nd half!

I acquired all of the Division I team data since 2002, and from that we can observe some fascinating trends and data relationships in the data. This is a multipart series exploring some of that data.

Now we'll move onto other facets of Offense, and start with Percentage Loss of Ball (%LOB). The number is computed by dividing the number of possessions by a team by the number of turnovers. This analysis uses the "Smith Method" of defining a possession which is defined as ending whenever a team loses control of the ball. A possession can end with a made basket, a trip to the free throw line (1-and-1, 2, and 3-shot situations), a turnover, or an attempted field goal. It is important to remember the latter when gaining an understanding of this data compared to data published elsewhere. Stay tuned for much more on the topic of Possessions when I address the Ken Pomeroy data.



The graph shows the Percentage Loss of Ball, by year, for the last 23 seasons, through the morning of February 21, 2024. The grey line shows the Percentage Loss of Ball for all of Division I, while the green line shows the Percentage Loss of Ball for teams that made the NCAA tournament that year. Over time there has been a noticeable decline in %LOB, about a 15% reduction in the previous couple of decades. Perhaps this is due to players staying with coaches for shorter lengths of time or changes in officiating. Regardless, this is one of the stats that has changed significantly.

What has not changed is the performance difference between tournament teams and the national average. There has been a steady 1.25% difference through the years.

UNC, shown in blue, has had significantly lower %LOB than the rest of the nation in most years, with noticeable peaks in their worst seasons. The current team is handling the ball more cleanly than any since 1996.

Percent Loss of Ball has a correlation factor with Winning Percentage of -0.47, which is exactly the figure for Rebounding. We saw from the Part 7 discussion about Possession Differential (Rebounding) that it has a bigger impact on Winning Percentage than Defense does, so we can assume that %LOB is a pretty important stat, too.

Next up: Assist/Turnover Ratio