Study Hall: Mizzou vs Oregon

by Bill C. on Dec 6, 2009 9:00 AM CST in Mizzou Basketball 09-10 Comment 10 comments

Well, THAT was fun...

Mizzou 106, Oregon 69

	Mizzou	Ducks
Points Per Minute	2.65	1.73
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.35	0.88
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.66	0.96
2-PT FG%	65.7%	33.3%
3-PT FG%	48.3%	22.2%
FT%	72.0%	77.8%
True Shooting %	70.7%	41.1%

	Mizzou	Ducks
Assists	28	5
Steals	8	8
Turnovers	15	20
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.40	0.65

	Mizzou	Ducks
Expected Offensive Rebounds	10	19
Offensive Rebounds	9	24
Difference	-1	+5

Home games are fun.

I felt a blowout coming, but I chickened out and only predicted a 19-point win. I should have known better. I thought Oregon could win the rebounding battle, and if they were making their 3's, they might stay in the game a while. Well, they did rebound well, but they were terrible from behind the arc, and after dilly-dallying for a few minutes, Mizzou stomped on the throat, which is always fun to watch.

Three-pointers.

So...are three-pointers a strength for this team now? I'm so confused.

A near-perfect first half.

First half BCI: Mizzou 2.57, Oregon 0.42
First half FG%: Mizzou 60.0%, Oregon 24.2%
First half Points: Oregon 24, Kim English & Marcus Denmon 23

Eh?

Mizzou is a Top 20 team in Block %, but they are average at best in terms of rebounds. I guess Mizzou's good at jumping high but bad at positioning. Now, Oregon really is a strong rebounding team, and Mizzou improved their performance on the boards as compared to the Vandy game, but it's still clearly the single biggest issue this team faces moving forward.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

NCAA Basketball Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Laurence Bowers	22.2	1.06	21 Min, 14 Pts (5-for-6 FG), 7 Reb, 5 Ast, 2 Stl
Zaire Taylor	20.2	0.88	23 Min, 16 Pts (6-for-10 FG, 4-for-5 3PT), 5 Reb, 4 Ast, 3 Stl
Marcus Denmon	13.9	0.63	22 Min, 17 Pts (6-for-13 FG, 4-for-10 3PT), 5 Reb
Kim English	11.2	0.53	21 Min, 14 Pts (6-for-12 FG, 2-for-5 3PT), 3 Ast
Justin Safford	9.9	0.50	20 Min, 9 Pts (3-for-4 FG, 2-for-2 3PT), 5 Reb, 2 Ast
Michael Dixon	9.3	0.46	20 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-7 FG), 3 Reb, 3 Ast
Keith Ramsey	4.9	0.20	24 Min, 7 Pts (2-for-3 FG), 4 Reb, 2 Ast, 3 TO
J.T. Tiller	4.7	0.36	13 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-4 FG), 3 TO
Jarrett Sutton	3.0	1.51	2 MIn, 3 Pts (1-for-1 FG, as always)
Tyler Stone	2.7	0.89	3 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-1 FG)
Miguel Paul	2.2	0.16	14 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-1 FG), 6 Ast, 4 TO
John Underwood	1.3	0.33	4 Min, 2 Pts (0-for-1 FG)
Steve Moore	0.9	0.07	13 Min, 0 Pts

* AdjGS = a take-off of the Game Score metric (definition here) accepted by a lot of basketball stat nerds. It does the same thing my previous measure of choice did (it takes points, assists, rebounds (offensive & defensive), steals, blocks, turnovers and fouls into account to determine an individual's "score" for a given game), only the formula is more used and accepted. The "adjustment" in Adjusted Game Score is simply matching the total game scores to the total points scored in the game, thereby redistributing the game's points scored to those who had the biggest impact on the game itself, instead of just how many balls a player put through a basket.

Laurence Bowers: box score filler. When he stays out of foul trouble (i.e. when Mizzou plays teams without a talented, old-school 250-pounder at center), anyway. He's shooting 64% for the season, grabbing almost three offensive rebounds (six overall) per game, blocks almost two shots per game, has a 2-to-1 assist-to-turnover ratio (and BCI of 3.83)...I'm not sure I've ever seen a player like him. We just need to make sure he stays on the court.
By the way, Zaire Taylor is now shooting 59% from 3-point land. Just thought I'd mention that. As I mentioned before, he's never going to be a shoot-first guy, and we turned him into that, his percentages go down, but he has become a tremendously efficient shooter. We talk about how Mizzou needs one more pure scorer, but I'm curious how the offense develops with Bowers and Taylor both shaping up to be astoundingly efficient. Our "one more scorer" is probably one of these two, and I'm not sure what to think about that.
Then again, maybe that "one more scorer" is Marcus Denmon? As Long Duk Dong would say, I so confuse. When Mizzou looks good, they look so good that they mess with perspective.
So here's a question: how good is Steve Moore? He's got size that no other Mizzou player has, and that alone makes him more valuable than his stats suggest. He probably does good things for the overall team defense ... but how many good things? Because from a box score perspective, he's a blank slate. While we still have opportunities, I'd love to get Stone and/or Underwood (particularly Underwood) some PT with the first stringers just to see what happens, but I guess that's not going to happen.

Mizzou vs "Real" Opponents*

* "Real" opponents are BCS conference teams and solid mid-majors. So far, Mizzou's "real" opponents have been, according to me: Old Dominion, Richmond, Vanderbilt, and Oregon.

	Mizzou	Opp
Points Per Minute	1.92	1.74
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.08	0.98
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.31	1.27
2-PT FG%	46.1%	44.0%
3-PT FG%	38.8%	31.7%
FT%	73.5%	77.9%
True Shooting %	55.4%	52.5%

	Mizzou	Opp
Assists/Gm	15.5	11.3
Steals/Gm	9.5	6.5
Turnovers/Gm	13.5	20.3
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	1.85	0.88

	Mizzou	Opp
Expected Offensive Rebounds	51	50
Offensive Rebounds	44	56
Difference	-7	+6

Looking at just these four games, Mizzou is still looking alright from an offensive standpoint. The assists are nice (the Oregon game just balanced out the Vandy game in the end), and they're shooting alright. Really, the major question mark right now is in the rebounds department. Only Laurence Bowers (0.28) is averaging more than 0.20 rebounds per minute. For reference, DeMarre Carroll and Leo Lyons both averaged 0.26 last year. Keith Ramsey (0.20), Justin Safford (0.16) and Steve Moore (0.16) all need to pick up their games.

Player Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Zaire Taylor	15.8	0.51	31.0 MPG, 11.5 PPG (1.53 Pts Per Shot), 3.5 APG, 3.3 RPG, 3.5 SPG
Laurence Bowers	12.1	0.58	20.8 MPG, 8.3 PPG (1.38 PPS), 5.8 RPG, 1.5 APG, 1.3 BPG
Kim English	10.6	0.45	23.8 MPG, 14.8 PPG (1.16 PPS), 2.8 RPG, 1.3 SPG
J.T. Tiller	8.8	0.34	25.8 MPG, 10.8 PPG (1.30 PPS), 3.8 APG, 2.3 RPG, 2.8 TOPG
Keith Ramsey	8.3	0.29	28.5 MPG, 4.8 PPG (1.73 PPS), 5.8 RPG, 1.5 BPG, 1.3 SPG
Marcus Denmon	7.2	0.39	18.5 MPG, 8.8 PPG (1.46 PPS), 2.5 RPG
Justin Safford	6.7	0.35	19.3 MPG, 7.8 PPG (1.29 PPS), 3.0 RPG
Mike Dixon	5.4	0.36	15.3 MPG, 8.0 PPG (1.14 PPS), 1.5 APG
Jarrett Sutton	3.5	1.77	2.0 MPG
Tyler Stone	1.6	1.05	1.5 MPG
John Underwood	1.6	0.39	4.0 MPG, 2.0 PPG
Miguel Paul	-0.1	-0.01	9.7 MPG, 0.7 PPG, 2.0 APG
Steve Moore	-0.3	-0.04	7.8 MPG, 0.0 PPG, 1.3 RPG

More reference points: DeMarre Carroll averaged 17.3/game last year, and Leo Lyons 13.5. I've compared Bowers to Lyons numerous times, and the fact that Lyons '08-09 and Bowers '09-10 averaged/are averaging the same per-minute total (0.58) makes me feel better about that comparison. The only question for now is, who's picking up the slack for Carroll's absence? Right now the answer is, strangely enough, Zaire Taylor.

Summary

One batch of great play can make you forget how frustrated you were earlier in the week. Oregon's not very good beyond the rebounding thing, but Mizzou played wonderfully. If they play that well on Wednesday, they will blow a beyond-banged-up Oral Roberts team off the court.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So much variance...

and not just small sample size. This team looks like it may just have a Jeckyl and Hyde personality in that some nights the fighting CMAs will impose their will on an opponent, smothering it, keeping it from doing anything (all the creampuffs and Oregon). Other nights, the fighting CMAs will look like they’re playing their game but the other team is playing its game too, if that makes any sense (ODU, Richmond, Vandy).

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Dec 6, 2009 9:40 AM CST reply actions

I don't think they were playing their game (at least not well) against Richmond

They did cause a gross number of turnovers against Vandy though.

If you watch Rambo backwards, it's Sylvester Stallone healing people with his magic bullet vacuum.

by ratherfantastic on Dec 6, 2009 9:42 AM CST up reply actions

To be fair...

we could be a bit Jeckly and Hyde last year too. (It’s easy to forget that.) But once the team got stabalized you didn’t see as much variance.

I think this team will take longer to stabalize and will still have a bit more variance in performance, but should still be good.

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Dec 6, 2009 9:43 AM CST reply actions

Zaire is becoming my favorite player

In a subjective sense, he’s the person I feel most comfortable taking a shot.

by ris-d on Dec 6, 2009 1:12 PM CST reply actions

Moore

Bill, i hear what you’re saying about seeing stone or underwood but i honestly think moore is our only chance against pittman and aldrich. the more playing time he against (especially against good competition) the better. honestly it seems like he is still a freshman to me since he barely played any last year. hopefully he shows us a glimpse of something before conference play or he might just be foul fodder against some of those big boys.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Dec 6, 2009 1:28 PM CST reply actions

I absolutely hope he's a contributor...

…but if he’s just fouling and not really grabbing rebounds, his size is only so much of an asset. It’s pretty clear what our rotation is going to be, but I was still hoping to catch a few glimpses of Stone/Underwood just to make sure they’re not better options…

Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!

by Bill C. on Dec 6, 2009 1:40 PM CST up reply actions

Kimmie mused that

since Mizzou is a team that forces a lot of turnovers, each forced turnover is one less chance that we get at a defense rebound.

"I was a victim of a series of accidents, as are we all."

by sirensofsilence on Dec 6, 2009 1:29 PM CST reply actions

yes, but it's also one less opportunity for offensive rebound

I base the Expected Rebounds figure off of the number of missed shots, so Kimmeh is right that if they don’t get a shot off, then rebounds aren’t as big a deal, but they’re still something of a big deal if the other team is getting above the number of expected offensive rebounds. Rebounds and free throws were the biggest factors in the Vandy loss, and while one game isn’t a trend, it’s still the biggest red flag.

Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!

by Bill C. on Dec 6, 2009 1:39 PM CST up reply actions

It seems to me

(and this is purely observational, no stats to back it up) that Missouri’s tendency to overreact when helping on defense leads to a lot of offensive rebounds for the other team. It just seems that any time a guy gets into the lane against us someone comes flying over from the other side of the lane going for the block, and often that leads to an opposing big man standing right under the basket with no one on him for an easy putback.

by thatguy. on Dec 6, 2009 2:34 PM CST reply actions