clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Study Hall: Mizzou vs UT-Pan American

In-depth statistical analysis suggests that Mizzou will win most of the games they play when they pull off a 44-2 first-half run.  I know, it's ballsy to say that, but it's statistically true.

Mizzou 100, UT-Pan American 44

Points Per Minute
2.50 1.10
Points Per Possession (PPP)
1.33 0.59
Points Per Shot (PPS)
1.43 0.85
2-PT FG% 57.4% 26.9%
3-PT FG% 56.5% 30.8%
FT% 58.3% 42.9%
True Shooting % 66.4% 37.8%
Mizzou UTPA
Assists 28 10
Steals 17 5
Turnovers 10 22
Ball Control Index (BCI)
(Assists + Steals) / TO
4.50 0.68
Mizzou UTPA
Expected Offensive Rebounds 11 14
Offensive Rebounds 9 5
Difference -2 -9


  • This was one of those games that help the stats stay steady after a bad game.  I mean, 56.5% from 3-point range?  4.50 to 0.68 in BCI?  +7 Expected Rebound Margin?  Yeah, fun stuff.
  • Not going to say much about this one, but I guess one area for improvement was offensive rebounding, where Mizzou responded to me saying they could be a very good offensive rebounding team by pulling down only nine.  Not that it mattered, but hey, we're always looking for areas of improvement, right?
  • 66.4% True Shooting %.  Nice.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

Player AdjGS* GmSc/Min Line
Kim English 23.6 1.03 23 Min, 25 Pts (9-for-12 FG, 5-for-6 3pt FG), 3 Ast, 3 Stl
Zaire Taylor 16.0 0.64 25 Min, 13 Pts (6-for-8), 3 Reb, 5 Ast, 3 Stl
Laurence Bowers 11.5 0.55 21 Min, 14 Pts (7-for-10), 5 Reb, 2 Ast
Keith Ramsey 9.0 0.45 20 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-3), 5 Reb, 5 Ast, 4 Stl, 2 Blk, 3 TO
Marcus Denmon 8.5 0.45 19 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-5), 3 Reb, 2 Stl
Michael Dixon 8.5 0.37 23 Min, 9 Pts (4-for-7), 7 Ast
Miguel Paul 6.0 0.28 21 Min, 5 Pts (2-for-7), 3 Reb, 6 Ast
Justin Safford 4.5 0.50 9 Min, 7 Pts (2-for-4), 5 Reb
John Underwood 4.0 0.29 14 Min, 1 Pt (0-for-2), 8 Reb, 2 Stl
Jarrett Sutton 3.7 0.74 5 Min, 6 Pts (2-for-4)
Steve Moore 2.0 0.15 13 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-5), 3 Reb
Tyler Stone 1.5 0.21

* 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.

  • Welcome to 2009-10, Kimmeh!  We've been wringing our hands a smidge about #24, and now he's averaging 15.5 PPG.  Good times with small sample sizes.  The thing about Kim English is, even when his shot is horribly cold, it still looks pretty coming out of his hands.  I always think his shot is going in, and yesterday it did in droves.
  • Laurence Bowers with a simply effortless 14-5-2 while playing extremely passive basketball in the second half.  I've always been in the front car of the Bowers Bandwagon, and even I'm starting to think he may be better than I thought.
  • Michael Dixon was forcing the issue far too much in the opening minutes, but once he relaxed, he was dominant.  And even though we agree that Miguel Paul should probably never shoot, I still can't say enough about how effective our "line change" late in the first half could be when those two come in to run a tiring opponent off the court.
  • I think it's pretty clear that Marcus Denmon will be taking over J.T. Tiller's "lockdown defender" role next year when Tiller's gone.  Really active, accurate hands on defense.
  • I'm torn about Steve Moore right now.  There were 2-3 plays where he looked outstanding--his block and dive into the stands was lovely, and he showed a couple of really nice post moves.  But the other 11-12 minutes he was into the game, he just sort of blended into the scenery.  He's got about 50 pounds on John Underwood, and I'm sure he'll be the #4 big man after Ramsey-Safford-Bowers for most of this season, but I wonder how long he can fend off Underwood next year, when #35 puts on some weight.  And this says nothing of the fact that we're losing one guy (Ramsey) and adding two (Kadeem Green, Tony Mitchell) next season.
  • From my limited exposure to Tyler Stone, I've got to say that I still really like his presence near the rim, but his range is quite small right now.  Needs to work on that jumper.

Keys to the Game Revisited

From Yesterday's preview.

  1. 3-Point Shooting.  Mizzou: 13-for-23 (56.5%) from 3-point range.  UTPA: 8-for-26 (30.8%), 3-for-15 in the first half.  The law of averages evened out as they always do, and suddenly Mizzou's overall shooting percentages don't look too bad.

  2. Turnovers.  I mentioned that if UTPA had any chance of hanging around, it was because of turnovers.  To their credit, they only committed 22 turnovers, which really wasn't too bad.  But they forced only 10.  They needed about 25 more.

  3. Justin Safford.  Safford probably needs to put together some solid performances if he wants to keep his spot in the starting lineup.  He responded to the adversity by ... traveling on the game's first possession and, two minutes later, committing another turnover that led to a breakaway dunk.  I like Saffy, but he's pretty clearly the #3 big man right now.  Again, it doesn't really matter who starts, it matters who plays the most minutes, but still ... Saffy's going to need to put together some good minutes in San Padre.


What can you say?  It's never not fun watching a game like this.  It was almost uncomfortable to watch after a while, as Mizzou really was able to do whatever it wanted late in the first half, but with the dunks, smiles, 3's, etc., it was a fun game.  Tuesday opponent Chattanooga is not a wonderful team by any means, but they're probably better than the outmanned Broncs, so Mizzou will need to play well again.  That said, I'm sure they will.