Box Score Observations - the UWL kick the tires version

Opening Comments: This is truly a box score observation. I did not go to the game, see it on TV (maybe tonight), or listen on the radio.



It was great that the University scheduled a few exhibition games so I can get the kinks out of the system – which in my case is my spreadsheet. Very thoughtful. Please point out any errors so I can be ready to go when the real bullets are flying.



My comments and observations must be tempered by the fact that this is a game against a D3 opponent, obviously. Here goes ...



Summarizing the game in a few words: UW beat UWL in all phases of the game: Shot better, shot more often, got to the line more, fouled less, and turned the ball over less.



Pace: The game had 62 possessions, which is about normal for UW. Last year we averaged 60, 58 in conference games.



Efficiency: UW put up a most impressive 1.33 PPP. Last year we averaged a stellar 1.11, 1.09 in conference. UW held UWL to .94 PPP. That was pretty normal for UW, who held opponents to .95 last year, .97 in conference.



Shooting: UW won the quantity and quality battle inside the arc and at the line.



eFG%: UWL shot an eFG% of 49%, not bad. UW was at 57%. Last year, we held opponents to 46% and hit at 52%. UW restrained themselves and took only 28% of their shot attempts outside the arc.



3 pt shooting: Three point shooting was pretty even with UW getting a small edge. UWL made 38% (9 of 24) while UW was marginally better with 41% (7 of 17). UWL got 6 extra points outside.



2pt shooting: UW won the quantity and quality battle inside the arc. UWL was 14 of 32, 44%. UW took an extra 12 shots, 44, and made 10 extra baskets, 24 hitting 55%. UW picked up 20 points inside.



1pt shooting: UW got to the line 14 more times (UW 18, UWL only 4) and made a nice 15, or 83%. UWL hit all four of their shots. Will this be the year UW gets back the “we make more FT’s than our opponents attempt” crown back? UW picked up 11 points at the line.



Rebounding:



UW Defensive end: When UWL was shooting, there were 33 rebounding opportunities and UW got 26, or 79% leaving UWL with 21% of their misses. That is very good and a Bo Ryan trademark.



UW Offensive End: When UW was shooting, there were 31 opportunities for caroms and UW snared 15, or 48%. Regular readers will note that offensive rebounding is not something Bo stresses. So, getting 48% is highly unusual.



Turnovers: UWL had 12 turnovers for a good 19% turnover rate. UW topped that and only let 9 go for a very good 14%.



Opportunity Index: UW had a plus 11 Opportunity index (Plus 3 turnover margin and plus 8 offensive rebounding margin). That gave UW 11 extra chances in a 62 possession game.



Fouls: UWL was only whistled for 14 fouls while UW had but 6. Imagine, 6 fouls the whole game. Those 8 extra fouls translated into 14 extra free throw attempts and 10 extra points for UW.



Playing time: Bo played 9 ten or more minutes. Besides the starters, Smith got 14, Gasser an impressive 20, Bruesewitz 17, and Berggren 11. Obviously, an exhibition game.



Notable Performances: Leuer got a 15-10 dub dub, but needed 12 FGA and 5 FTA to get there. Nankivil scored 15 on 9 shots, 2-3 from deep and added three boards. Taylor hit double figures with 12 on 8 shots, two FGA’s. Since this was an exhibition game, it is sad to say that the Badger’s exploits will probably not be told around the campfires of my people for very long.



For UWL, Mane and Hanson did the damage scoring a combined 41 on 15 of 30 shooting, 7 of 16 from deep. That was the bulk of their offense.



Grading Shetown’s Predictions



1. The Badgers score more than 35 points in the paint. The Eagles are small and poor at defending it anyway. Jon and Keaton should have a field day. Miss. UW had 32 in the paint.



2. The freshman combine for more than 10 points. I like the newbies to use their size and athletic advantages to show what they can do offensively. Hit. The freshmen combined for an impressive 19 on only 11 FGA’s.(Brust 4, Dukan 6, Gasser 9, and Anderson 0).



3. The Badger shoot better than 36% from 3. I think LAX will try to limit points in the paint by collapsing on the post. This should make for some great looks from downtown. Hit. UW made 41% from deep.



4. The Badgers grab more than 79% of the rebounding opportunities on the defensive end. LaCrosse does not have a proficiency at offensive rebounding and are at a significant height disadvantage. This adds up to domination by the Badgers on the defensive boards. Miss. UW got 79%. Just to be sure, I expanded the cell and it was 78.8%. As is Shetown’s custom, he says “more than” and when an equal to or greater comment would have worked. Okay, I’m a tough grader. Shetown, you have an amazing knack for this.





Closing Thoughts: I look forward to watching the replay tonight if for no other reason than it has been 7+ grueling months since last the basketball team laced ‘em up.



On a side note, I need to pick a new favorite player. Last year it was Bohannon. Before that Krabbenhoft, Flowers, Tucker, Wilk, Danny Jones and a bunch more. This is an important decision that will undoubtedly be a heavy responsibility for whomever is anointed. Any thoughts would be helpful.

UW-LaCrosse Pre-Game Analysis

Opening Thoughts: Here's to the start of hopefully another successful season with Bo Ryan at the helm. We lose two starters in Trevon Hughes and Jason Bohannon, and Ian Markolf, but gain an excellent class of freshman including Josh Gasser, Duje Dukan, Ben Brust, and Evan Anderson. From early indications, only three starting spots are solidified... Jordan Taylor at the point, and Jon Leuer and Keaton Nankivil in the frontcourt. Junior Rob Wilson and true freshman Josh Gasser seem to be vying for the off guard spot and it's a three-way race for the small forward spot amongst Ryan Evans, Tim Jarmusz, and Mike Bruesewitz. My guesses are that seniority wins out with Wilson and Jarmusz getting the nods, even if their competitors get more playing time over the course of the season.

Wisconsin tips off the pre-season this Saturday with a meeting against the Eagles of UW-LaCrosse.


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.


UW-LaCrosse Likely Rotation (Last Season’s Statistics)
*G – 6’0” JR Tony Mane (22.3 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 1.9 APG, 40% 3PT, 92% FT, 103.9 OR, 8% TO, 3.5 FTR, 35% of FGAs are 3PT)

*G – 6’0” SO Jeff Heiden (2.9 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 1.2 APG, 38% 3PT, 82% FT, 107.5 OR, 16% TO, 2.0 FTR, 82% of FGAs are 3PT)

*G – 6’2” SR Trevor Stratton (15.0 PPG, 3.3 RPG, 1.5 APG, 37% 3PT, 82% FT, 107.1 OR, 11% TO, 3.4 FTR, 36% of FGAs are 3PT)

*F – 6’6” SO Kurt Kincaid (8.2 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 1.0 APG, 60% 2PT, 87% FT, 118.1 OR, 16% TO, 3.2 FTR, 37% of FGAs are 3PT)

*C – 6’9” SR Andy Merklein (5.3 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 1.8 APG, 1.1 BPG, 53% 2PT, 70.9 OR, 15% TO, 3.2 FTR, 12% of FGAs are 3PT)

F - 6’5” SR Andrew Haass (5.8 PPG, 3.4 RPG, 1.0 APG, 57% 2PT, 39% 3PT, 83% FT, 158.2 OR, 5% TO, 5.1 FTR, 14% of FGAs are 3PT)

G - 6’1” SR Austin Scott (5.5 PPG, 1.7 RPG, 1.0 APG, 44% 3PT, 93% FT, 116.4 OR, 14% TO, 2.7 FTR, 66% of FGAs are 3PT)

F - 6’4” SO Al Chery (5.4 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 1.1 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 51% 2PT, 106.9 OR, 20% TO, 4.6 FTR, 0% of FGAs are 3PT)

G - 6’0” SO Cory Degner (4.3 PPG, 2.0 RPG, 1.0 APG, 96.6 OR, 26% TO, 11.0 FTR, 16% of FGAs are 3PT)

F - 6’5” SO Jordan Rumpel (3.2 PPG, 3.5 RPG, 50% 3PT, 53% 2PT, 131.5 OR, 19% TO, 0.7 FTR, 7% of FGAs are 3PT)

Key:
OR = offensive rating, or personal points per possession (100.8 is average)
Poss = possession usage when on the court
Shot = share of shots taken when on the court
TO = percentage of personal possessions ending in turnover (20.4% is average)
OffReb = % of offensive rebounding opportunities grabbed by player (anything in double digits is good)
DefReb = % of defensive rebounding opportunities grabbed by player (anything above 15% is good for forwards/center, double digits for guards)
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 UW-LaCrosse is really good at:

1. Protecting the ball. They only turned it over 14.3% (2nd best if in D1) of their possessions last season, or about one every 7 possessions. Wisconsin turned it over at 14.9% rate (3rd in D1).

2. Pump-faking. Their opponents only blocked 4.9% of their two-point attempts (2nd if in D1). Wisconsin had 7% of theirs blocked, good for 34th.

3. Shooting from anywhere. Last season, the Eagles shot 49.8% inside the arc, 38.7% outside of it, and 74.1% at the charity stripe. These would rank them 90th, 21st, and 27th respectively if they were in D1. Wisconsin 50% (83rd), 35.7% (100th), and 73.2% (38th) themselves.

4. Keeping their opponents off the charity stripe. UW-L only sent their opponents to the line 7 times for every 20 field goal attempts (113th), The Badgers were above average at this last season, allowing 5 FTAs per 14 FGAs, or 140th.


What UW-LaCrosse is really bad at:

1. Rebounding offensively. If they were a Division 1 team last season, they would be in 324th in the category, grabbing slightly more than 1 offensive rebound per 4 opoprtunities. Wisconsin is poor at this also, having been 249th at it last season.

2. Forcing turnovers. Their defense forced about 2 turnovers per 11 possessions, which would have bee good for 289th in D1. The Badgers were below average at this last season, forcing a turnover once every five possessions, or 201st in the nation.

3. Getting to the free throw line. The Eagles didn’t get to the line much, as they only attempt one free throw for every three FGAs. That would qualify for 302nd in Division I. Wisconsin wasn’t much better, only 3 tenths of a percent better and 296th.

4. Defending the paint. UW-LX surrendered a poor 50.7% shooting percentage inside the arc last season, which would have been 291st in D1. Wisconsin was significantly better at 45.2%, or 72nd.

5. Free throw defense. Apparently the Eagle painted on the wall behind the basketball in LaCrosse isn’t intimidating enough, as their opponents shot a white hot 75.6% from the free throw line last season. That would be second last in D1.


Relative efficiency:

When UW-LaCrosse has the ball: They scored an impressive 1.11 PPP last season, while UW gave up a stingy 0.89 last season.

When UW has the ball: They gave up a horrible 1.07 last season, while UW scored a sizzling 1.16 last season.


Pace: LaCrosse played at 66 possessions per game last season compared to UW’s 60.


My expectations:

1. The Badgers score more than 35 points in the paint. The Eagles are small and poor at defending it anyway. Jon and Keaton should have a field day.

2. The freshman combine for more than 10 points. I like the newbies to use their size and athletic advantages to show what they can do offensively.

3. The Badger shoot better than 36% from 3. I think LAX will try to limit points in the paint by collapsing on the post. This should make for some great looks from downtown.

4. The Badgers grab more than 79% of the rebounding opportunities on the defensive end. LaCrosse does not have a proficiency at offensive rebounding and are at a significant height disadvantage. This adds up to domination by the Badgers on the defensive boards.


UW-LaCrosse lost no significant players from last season’s 17-9 squad and the Badgers lost their starting backcourt. If LAX was mid-major D1 team I might be a little concerned. Alas, they are not, so I predict a thumping by the Badgers, 75-45.