Opening Comments: UW beat Boston College 65 to 55. BC is not expected to do well in the ACC this year, but beating an ACC team always feels good.
Summarizing the game in a few words: UW got extra shots due to a ridiculously low 3 turnovers and two extra offensive rebounds and made enough inside the arc to compensate for a terrible long range shooting day.
Pace: The game had 55 possessions, the fewest this year. We started out with zippier games, but things have become more deliberate in Florida. The first three games were in the mid 60’s, now we are in the mid 50’s.
I do not assign a “quality” to pace. There is not good pace or bad pace. It is what it is. But, it is important to know the pace to determine how the game went.
Efficiency: Was it good offense or good defense? UW displayed excellent offense (or poor BC defense) by scoring 1.18 PPP. UW gave up 1.00 PPP to BC. We are usually closer to .90, so that was mediocre defense, I would think. BC’s late run really helped their PPP.
Shooting: UW continued our abysmal three point shooting hitting a season low 19%, but more than made up inside the arc.
eFG%: UW hit 48% to our opponent’s 43%. Our opponents have been at 46% and we have been at 51%.
3 pt shooting: UW lost the quantity and quality battle to BC. BC took 8 more threes (24 to UW’s 16) and made an extra 4 (BC made 7 and UW made only 3). That gave BC plus 12 outside the arc.
2pt shooting: BC hit a reasonable 47% of their two point shots – 14 of 30. But, UW took more, 41, made a higher percentage, 56%, and netted an extra 9 baskets (UW made 23, BC 14). [When I say “netted,” I mean netted like an accountants “net” as in totaled. Nankivil “netted” another one, but it did not go through the net, the basketball net, remarkably.] That gave UW an extra 18 points inside the arc. Of the 46 points UW scored inside the arc, 32 were in the paint and 14 midrange. UW outscored BC by 14 points inside the paint.
1pt shooting: BC hit 6 of 7 free throws for an excellent 86%. But, UW tried 13, 6 more, and made 10, 4 more. BC had better quality, but was trumped by UW’s superior quantity.
Rebounding: Rebounding was more or less a draw, with UW having only a slightly better day.
UW Defensive end: UW gathered 68% of BC’s misses, thus giving BC 32%. That is a lot for a Bo Ryan coached team, but close to the national average of 33%.
UW Offensive End: UW did well on the offensive boards, getting 36% of our misses. Crashing the boards has been good this year, although the Manhattan game not so much. The trend to date is that UW is more aggressive on the offensive glass than previous years. The Manhattan 31% is the low water mark during the first 5 games.
Turnovers: The good news for BC was they protected the ball well giving it up only 9 times, or16% of the time. The national average is about 21%. The bad news for BC is UW only gave it up 3 times, or 5%. So, the turnover margin went heavily in UW’s favor with a plus 6.
Opportunity Index: UW had a healthy plus 8 OI margin. UW had 2 extra offensive rebounds and plus 6 turnovers. UW had plus four points off turnovers (10 to 6) and plus 5 second chance points (16 to 11). That is about the margin in the game.
Fouls: BC fouled 17 times to UW’s scant 9. Those 8 extra fouls translated ultimately into only 4 points at the line. So, fouling was hardly the main story.
Playing time: Bo played 8 players and they all had double digit minutes. Taylor (36), Leuer (35) and Gasser (31) had the most minutes. Jarmusz chipped in starter-like 24 from the bench. Berggren and Brust did not make it into the game.
In my Manhattan write up I incorrectly said they would be playing 3 games in three days. They get tomorrow off and will play again on Sunday. So, they should get some rest for tired legs.
Notable Performances: Leuer had a nice line (no surprise). He scored 18 on 12 FGA’s and 4 FTA’s. Throw in 7 rebounds, 3 blocked shots and no turnovers and you have one great player. Jon, once again, long will the tales of your exploits be told around the campfires of my people.
Taylor scored 14 after an off day with Manhattan. But, his main contribution was defense on Reggie Jackson. Jackson outscored Taylor 18 to 14, but Jackson needed 21 shots and 4 FTA’s to get his 18 points. Jackson also had three turnovers to Taylor’s rock-solid one. Jackson used 24 possessions to get 18 points while Taylor got 14 with 14 possessions.
It was nice to see Rob Wilson make an offensive contribution. He scored 8 on 6 shots and snared two rebounds (one turnover) in 13 minutes. My people are discussing your exploits and are hoping for more opportunities.
Nankivil got 6 points and 7 rebounds.
The most impressive thing about Gasser is how I hardly notice him. He had a quiet 8 points. It is hard to imagine he is a freshman. One might think a freshman would stand out as being mistake prone or lost on the court. He played 31 minutes without a turnover. Remarkable.
Grading Shetown’s Predictions
1. Badgers establish a strong post game with more than 30 points in the paint. The Badgers ruin the Eagles' sparkling interior defensive stats. Hit. UW got 32.
2. The Badgers knock down more than 8 threes. BC isn't good defending the arc and I think the Badgers make up for the bad shooting against Manhattan. Miss. UW was 3-16. Ugh. I fully believe the shots will start falling.
3. Badgers grab more than 40% of the rebounding opportunities on the offensive end. This is becoming more than an early season anomaly. It’s a change in strategy. Granted I'm not sure how much longer it will stay if refs keep calling over the back on Bruiser, Leuer, Nankivil, and Gasser. Miss. UW got 36%, which is very good. Forty percent was an aggressive prediction, however. I admire your moxie.
4. The Badgers make more free throws than the Eagles attempt. This lovely stat has made a comeback this season and I think it continues. Hit. UW made 10 and BC tried 7. For the year, we are making our drinking game goal of making more free throws than our opponents attempt. I have us a at a plus 9.
Badgers clip the Eagles 71-62 in 60 possessions. Hit, but scaled back 7%. UW won 65-55 in 55 possessions.
Closing Thoughts: I was hoping to make a bad pun about BC (school and time period) and the stone age (maybe laying bricks) but nothing really jumped out.
The end of the game was quite frustrating, but we still had a nice win.
Beating a BE team, ND, on Sunday would put a nice cap on a successful weekend.
No comments:
Post a Comment