Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Minnesota State-Mankato Pre-Game Analysis

Opening Thoughts: Bo knew what he was doing in scheduling this exhibition. The Mavs make more free throws than their opponents attempt. They are aggressive on defense, forcing a ton of turnovers. They have a good inside player, who is their highest scoring returnee. They have some decent size at guard. Dare I say a 25-5 MSU-M team is a better game than Praire View A&M? Might be. We’ll found out tomorrow night.

Forums to Visit: I'm not even going to bother to look

What the expert nerds say:

Sagarin doesn’t care about this game.

Ken Pomeroy doesn’t care about this game either.

Vegas odds makers don’t care either.

MSU-Mankato Likely Rotation (Last Season’s Statistics)
*G – 5’9” SR Marcus Hill (11.1 PPG, 2.4 APG, 1.1 RPG, 46% 3PT, 89% FT, 107.8 OR, 15% TO, 4.3 FTR, 43% of FGAs are 3PT)

*G – 6’3” SR Taylor Morrow (5.1 PPG, 2.3 RPG, 1.2 SPG, 1.0 APG, 62% 2PT, 121.6 OR, 15% TO, 3.4 FTR, 31% of FGAs are 3PT)

*G – 6’5” SR Cameron Hodges (6.5 PPG, 3.9 RPG, 1.1 APG, 35% 3PT, 103.0 OR, 17% TO, 5.9 FTR, 28% of FGAs are 3PT)

*F – 6’6” SR Jefferson Mason (15.9 PPG, 8.1 RPG, 2.1 APG, 1.9 SPG, 1.0 BPG, 65% 2PT, 137.5 OR, 17% TO, 7.8 FTR, 10% of FGAs are 3PT)

*F – 6’7” FR Connor O’Brien (13 pts, 5 rebs, 2 stls, 1 blk on 5/9 shooting in first exhibition game)

G - 6’2” SR Joe Drapcho (6.2 PPG, 2.5 RPG, 1.5 APG, 1.2 SPG, 80% FT, 97.4 OR, 15% TO, 2.6 FTR, 35% of FGAs are 3PT)

G - 6’5” JR Stephen Kirschbaum (2.6 PPG, 1.4 RPG, 1.0 APG, 44% 3PT, 93% FT, 146.2 OR, 4% TO, 2.7 FTR, 66% of FGAs are 3PT)

C - 6’10” JR Mitch Grundman (1.9 PPG, 1.6 RPG, 106.9 OR, 20% TO, 8.0 FTR, 0% of FGAs are 3PT)

F - 6’9” JR Mike Bisenius (2.5 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 57% 2PT, 168.8 OR, 19% TO, 1.9 FTR, 0% of FGAs are 3PT)

OR = offensive rating, or personal points per possession (100.8 is average)
TO = percentage of personal possessions ending in turnover (20.4% is average)
FTR = # of free throws taken per 10 field goal attempts (3.77 is average)

Note: If I don’t list a player’s 2PT%, it’s not above 50%, if I don’t list 3PT%, it’s not above 33%, and if I don’t list FT%, it’s not above 75%

What MSU-Mankato is really good at:

1. Protecting the ball. They only turned it over 15.1% (4th best if in D1) of their possessions last season, or about one every 7 possessions.

2. Forcing turnovers. Their opponents coughed up the ball 22.7% of their possessions and had it stolen 12.2% of the time. Those are 46th and 27th in D1 respectively.

3. Shooting inside the arc. Last season, the Mavs shot 54.5% inside the arc, 73.8% from the line, and had only 6.9% of their two-pointers blocked. These would rank them 7th, 32nd, and 31st respectively if they were in D1.

4. Rebounding. MSU-M grabbed 35.2% (82nd) of the rebounding opportunities on offense and 70.3% (50th) on defense.

5. Getting to the free throw line and keeping their opponents off it. They attempted 4.4 (49th) free throws per 10 field goal attempts while their opponents only attempted 2.8 (15th).

What MSU-Mankato is really bad at:

1. Defending the arc. MSU-M surrendered a poor 35.6% shooting percentage outside the arc last season, which would have been 254th in D1.

2. Free throw defense. Apparently the Stomper mascot painted on the wall behind the basketball in Mankato isn’t intimidating enough, as their opponents shot a hot 73.5% from the free throw line last season. That would be 339th in D1.

Relative efficiency:

When MSU-Mankato has the ball: They scored an impressive 1.18 PPP last season, while UW gave up a stingy 0.89 last season.

When UW has the ball: They gave up a great 0.86 last season, while UW scored a sizzling 1.16 last season.

Pace: Mankato played at 73 possessions per game last season compared to UW’s 60. 73 is about what Washington, Texas, BYU, and Villanova were last season.

My expectations:

1. The Badgers score more than 35 points in the paint. Let’s try this again, against a better team.

2. The freshman combine for more than 15 points. I’m upping the ante on you guys, I hope you come though for me.

3. The Badgers grab more than 40% of the rebounding opportunities on the offensive end. Mankato is a decent defensive rebounding team, but I like the longer and more athletic Badgers to continue their offensive rebounding assault from Saturday against the Mavs.

Mankato lost several starters but return a decent core of players. They seem to like to play a run and gun style with a full court press, forcing turnovers and but giving up open looks from outside due to over-aggressiveness and playing the passing lanes. It’s a good test for the Badgers, but I still think they come away with a 72-48 victory.

No comments:

Post a Comment