By the Quarters

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I've been noticing that some games we seem to start slowly. I know in the past we had some great teams that would blow people away right out of the gate, but my sense was that we weren't seeing much of that this year.

So I decided to look at the scoring margin by quarter - a stat Pomeroy helpfully provides. So here's the average scoring margin per quarter:

Q1 = 2.83
Q2 = 4.75
Q3 = 5.75
Q4 = 6.08

That isn't the whole picture. We "lost" 10 quarters and tied another in the 12 games (no quarter data for Chaminade). Four of the 10 losses and the tie happened in the 1st quarter. Two each in the other quarters.

Here are the raw margin numbers.

Tulane      3  11   5   1
Chatt      -1  12  13  16
Long Beach 15   8  -2   5
Hawaii      4   4   1   6
OK St      13   0  15   5
Wisc        3   6  10  -4
Indiana   -15   3   1   2
Radford    21   1   8  13
Davidson    0  10   2  -3
Tenn       -7  -1   6   4
Kentucky   -4  -1  -1   3
N.Iowa      3   4  11  25

Two of the 2 games where we hit them hard in Q1 were against creampuffs. So if you subtract creampuffs, I suspect the trend becomes more pronounced (but I'm too lazy to check).

 

[DSouthr]

I've been noticing that some games we seem to start slowly. I know in the past we had some great teams that would blow people away right out of the gate, but my sense was that we weren't seeing much of that this year.

So I decided to look at the scoring margin by quarter - a stat Pomeroy helpfully provides. So here's the average scoring margin per quarter:

Q1 = 2.83
Q2 = 4.75
Q3 = 5.75
Q4 = 6.08

That isn't the whole picture. We "lost" 10 quarters and tied another in the 12 games (no quarter data for Chaminade). Four of the 10 losses and the tie happened in the 1st quarter. Two each in the other quarters.

Here are the raw margin numbers.

Tulane      3  11   5   1
Chatt      -1  12  13  16
Long Beach 15   8  -2   5
Hawaii      4   4   1   6
OK St      13   0  15   5
Wisc        3   6  10  -4
Indiana   -15   3   1   2
Radford    21   1   8  13
Davidson    0  10   2  -3
Tenn       -7  -1   6   4
Kentucky   -4  -1  -1   3
N.Iowa      3   4  11  25

Two of the 2 games where we hit them hard in Q1 were against creampuffs. So if you subtract creampuffs, I suspect the trend becomes more pronounced (but I'm too lazy to check).

So what does that tell you when you see scoring margin distribution rise in each qtr? It tells me that we wear teams down with depth, we force foul trouble on opposing key players, we are fresh legs when they tire.

When teams come out on the first qtr they are guns blazing, that is when they have their best shot at getting in to us, they are hyped and legs are fresh. But as the game wears on Roy goes liberal to his bench and Roy does not call a bunch of TOs to help the opponents recover their legs. We keep the pressure on with very talented guys that come at you in waves and sooner or later it breaks most of them down. We have always cut in to leads when we were down or increased leads we owned near the end of halves when opponents legs are the most tired.

 

[Archer2]

I agree with what you said for the most part. I also think we need to run more set plays to get our bigs established earlier. I think our shot selection at the beginning of games often leaves something to be desired.

Perimeter guys can get shots whenever they want, it is harder for bigs to get shots. I would like to see a concerted effort to get touches for our bigs on every possession possible during the first five minutes of a game. I really think this would help Kennedy and Isaiah, especially Isaiah.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Last year, Roy almost always made a point of running plays for Brice right out of the gate. Even when Brice missed his first few shots, we'd usually keep getting him the ball. He was that important to our offense. Once he was hitting, it became easier for our other guys.

I agree that not calling TOs is part of the wear-them-down strategy. But I still think when they are killing us in the first quarter, a TO makes sense. They're fresh and calling a TO then isn't going to help them much later.

If we are not going to be a Hansbrough-era breakaway team that lands a knockout punch from the git-go, I wonder if we may need to emphasize defense in the first quarter. Sometimes it seems to me that it takes too long for our D to get in gear.

Any ideas on that?

 

[DSouthr]

Last year, Roy almost always made a point of running plays for Brice right out of the gate. Even when Brice missed his first few shots, we'd usually keep getting him the ball. He was that important to our offense. Once he was hitting, it became easier for our other guys.

I agree that not calling TOs is part of the wear-them-down strategy. But I still think when they are killing us in the first quarter, a TO makes sense. They're fresh and calling a TO then isn't going to help them much later.

If we are not going to be a Hansbrough-era breakaway team that lands a knockout punch from the git-go, I wonder if we may need to emphasize defense in the first quarter. Sometimes it seems to me that it takes too long for our D to get in gear.

Any ideas on that?

Speaking for this season as well as seasons at this time, in pre-conference play you don't know the opponents as well as you know them in your conference, that leads to some degree of feeling out the opponents. Not as much by the coach but more by the players figuring out what they can do as well as what their opponents can do, the kind of thing film can not tell you. You as well have to get used to the whistle, how that set of refs is calling that game on that night.

The larger aspect however, IMO, is teams see UNC on the schedule and they know, to not be embarassed they have to play the game of their lives they get amped up for it, with the smaller programs you have guys that want to prove they belong on the court with a bigger program. With the bigger programs it is we deserve to be respected as a power program just like you, it is time to make a statement. As the game wears on those things tend to fade and it becomes the game where talent, skill, coaching, and development begins to show itself.

Note, the hard part is intensity level, we don't always begin the game with an intensity level that you need to play with when you get to this level. That is when your leaders have to step up and provide that intensity or they find Roy screaming on the side lines as he gets the second unit off the bench and ready to check in. We don't always have more talent than our opponents, we have to play with a higher level of intensity to over come that and even vs teams we do have more talent than, we can sometimes come out and just go thru the motions early on.

 

[Archer2]

Last year, Roy almost always made a point of running plays for Brice right out of the gate. Even when Brice missed his first few shots, we'd usually keep getting him the ball. He was that important to our offense. Once he was hitting, it became easier for our other guys.

Any ideas on that?

Yes, he did. When Brice got off early, he generally had his best games. I think that would benefit both Kennedy and Isaiah, and by benefitting them, benefit the whole team.

You as well have to get used to the whistle, how that set of refs is calling that game on that night.

The importance of this cannot be overstated. some games are brawls and some games touch fouls will be called. Players have to be able to adjust to games being called differently.

Note, the hard part is intensity level, we don't always begin the game with an intensity level that you need to play with when you get to this level. We don't always have more talent than our opponents, we have to play with a higher level of intensity to over come that and even vs teams we do have more talent than, we can sometimes come out and just go thru the motions early on.

A legitimate point, and we're certainly guilty at times. We're experienced enough that nerves shouldn't be an issue at the outset of big games, but they appeared to be in both the IU and the UK games.