:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/6633655/20120225_jel_sz2_272.0.jpg)
Ladies and gentlemen, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope and the Pipps!
Georgia Bulldogs (6-9)
| UGa |
Opp. | |
| Pace (No. of Possessions) |
63.9 | |
| Points Per Possession (PPP) |
0.93 | 0.97 |
| Points Per Shot (PPS) |
1.19 | 1.16 |
| 2-PT FG% | 45.5% | 44.8% |
| 3-PT FG% | 31.1% | 32.2% |
| FT% | 66.1% | 67.5% |
| True Shooting % | 50.4% | 50.2% |
| UGa | Opp. | |
| Assists/Gm | 11.7 | 11.1 |
| Steals/Gm | 6.6 | 7.8 |
| Turnovers/Gm | 15.2 | 13.1 |
|
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO |
1.20 | 1.44 |
| UGa | Opp. | |
| Expected Off. Rebounds/Gm | 10.5 | 11.3 |
| Offensive Rebounds/Gm | 10.1 | 10.4 |
| Difference | -0.4 | -0.9 |
The Dawgs are pretty good defensively.
Just keep that in mind when you look at what are some truly, astoundingly awful offensive numbers.
That's really all I can think to say here. Other than getting to the line (where they make a pretty poor percentage of their free throws), Georgia does virtually nothing well offensively. But on a neutral court, they did almost beat UCLA and stayed within 13 points of Indiana because of defense and their ability to keep the pace ultra-low (which is the perfect approach when you have no offense and want to minimize possessions). But ... yeah. Just look at the rankings below.
Ken Pomeroy Stats
| UGa Offense vs MU Defense Ranks |
|||
| UGa Offense | MU Defense | Advantage | |
| Efficiency | 242 | 51 | MU big |
| Effective FG% | 258 | 24 | MU big |
| Turnover % | 302 | 321 | push |
| Off. Reb. % | 218 | 65 | MU big |
| FTA/FGA | 47 | 9 | MU |
| MU Offense vs UGa Defense Ranks |
|||
| MU Offense | UGa Defense | Advantage | |
| Efficiency | 26 | 108 | MU |
| Effective FG% | 104 | 99 | push |
| Turnover % | 86 | 196 | MU big |
| Off. Reb. % | 8 | 92 | MU |
| FTA/FGA | 285 | 152 | UGa big |
Where the Dawgs are weakest
In a nutshell, they can't shoot (241st in 2PT%, 254th in 3PT%, 247th in FT%), they get a lot of shots blocked despite good size, they can't handle the ball at all (302nd in TO%, 307th in Steal%), and they are terribly inexperienced (250th in Experience).
Where they are best
They are a long team (26th in Effective Height, 60th in Def. Block%), they force you to settle for jumpers and don't give you great looks at the basket (100th in Def. 2PT%, 124th in Def. 3PT%), and they are strangely deep (10th in Bench Minutes), though in this case "deep" simply means "They have 11 guys who are basically interchangeable," not "They have 11 guys who are actually good."
Georgia's Season to Date
- Wins (Team Rank is from KenPom.com)
No. 97 USC (64-56)
No. 124 George Washington (52-41)
No. 167 Mercer (58-49)
No. 302 Jacksonville (68-62)
No. 310 East Tennessee State (54-38)
No. 335 Florida A&M (82-73) - Losses
at No. 1 Florida (44-77)
vs. No. 4 Indiana (53-66)
vs. No. 38 UCLA (56-60)
No. 58 Southern Miss (60-62, OT)
at No. 92 Georgia Tech (54-62)
No. 102 Iona (78-81, OT)
at No. 118 South Florida (53-64)
No. 173 Youngstown State (56-68)
No. 189 Mississippi State (61-72)
UGa vs. Top 50, Average Score: Opponent 67.7, Georgia 51.0 (-16.7)
UGa vs. No. 51-200, Avg. Score: Opponent 61.7, Georgia 59.6 (-4.1)
UGa vs. No. 201+, Avg. Score: Georgia 68.0, Opponent 57.7 (+10.3)
Basically, if Georgia scores over 60 points at its chosen, slow pace, you either stink defensively or fell asleep. But, again, the Dawgs are not a lost cause here. They did stay with Indiana and UCLA on a neutral court, and they did almost beat a not-awful Southern Miss team. If Mizzou's jumpers are drawing iron like they have at times this season, this game could stay frustratingly close for a while.
Georgia Player Stats
| Player | AdjGS*/Gm | GmSc/Min | Line |
| Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (6'5, 205, So.) | 19.3 | 0.58 | 33.4 MPG, 16.9 PPG (51% 2PT, 33% 3PT, 76% FT), 6.7 RPG, 2.3 SPG, 1.9 APG, 1.9 TOPG |
| Nemanja Djurisic (6'8, 230, So.) | 5.6 | 0.24 | 23.1 MPG, 8.1 PPG (42% 2PT, 24% 3PT, 76% FT), 4.1 RPG, 1.5 APG, 2.7 TOPG |
| Charles Mann (6'4, 205, Fr.) | 5.4 | 0.28 | 19.5 MPG, 5.9 PPG (36% 2PT, 33% 3PT, 62% FT), 2.7 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.4 TOPG |
| Donte' Williams (6'9, 225, Jr.) | 5.3 | 0.24 | 21.5 MPG, 5.7 PPG (49% 2PT, 42% FT), 5.1 RPG, 3.2 PFPG |
| Brandon Morris (6'7, 205, Fr.) | 4.7 | 0.34 | 13.5 MPG, 4.0 PPG (46% 2PT, 33% 3PT, 71% FT), 1.9 RPG |
| Marcus Thornton (6'8, 235, Jr.) | 3.8 | 0.17 | 22.0 MPG, 3.8 PPG (41% 2PT, 17% 3PT, 56% FT), 4.4 RPG, 1.3 TOPG, 2.8 PFPG |
| Tim Dixon (6'9, 225, So.) | 3.7 | 0.31 | 12.0 MPG, 2.5 PPG (60% 2PT, 88% FT), 2.3 RPG |
| John Cannon (6'10, 240, So.) | 3.6 | 0.33 | 10.9 MPG, 3.6 PPG (52% 2PT), 2.4 RPG |
| Sherrard Brantley (6'2, 187, Sr.) | 3.6 | 0.19 | 18.6 MPG, 3.5 PPG (43% 2PT, 35% 3PT, 57% FT), 1.2 RPG, 1.2 APG |
| John Florveus (6'11, 240, Sr.) | 3.1 | 0.17 | 17.6 MPG, 2.7 PPG (55% 2PT, 50% FT), 3.3 RPG |
| Vincent Williams (6'0, 165, Sr.) | 3.0 | 0.14 | 21.1 MPG, 4.1 PPG (25% 2PT, 35% 3PT, 44% FT), 2.4 APG, 1.3 RPG, 1.8 TOPG |
| Kenny Gaines (6'3, 195, Fr.) | 1.1 | 0.12 | 9.1 MPG, 2.5 PPG (39% 2PT, 22% 3PT, 63% FT) |
* AdjGS = a take-off of the Game Score metric (definition here) accepted by a lot of basketball stat nerds. It redistributes a team's points based not only on points scored, but also by giving credit for assists, rebounds (offensive & defensive), steals, blocks, turnovers and fouls. It is a stat intended to determine who had the biggest overall impact on the game itself, instead of just how many balls a player put through a basket.
- Highest Usage%: Caldwell-Pope (28%), Djurisic (27%), Mann (24%)
- Highest Floor%: Dixon (43%), Morris (40%), Caldwell-Pope (38%)
- Highest %Pass: V. Williams (66%), Brantley (63%), Mann (58%)
- Highest %Shoot: Cannon (71%), D. Williams (54%), Gaines (52%)
- Highest %Fouled: Morris (21%), D. Williams (19%), Florveus (18%)
- Highest %T/O: Florveus (24%), Cannon (19%), D. Williams (16%)
- I'm not sure I've seen anything like the above table before. One player logging over 6.0 Adj. GS points per game, and 10 logging between 3.0 and 5.9. They've had some personnel issues here and there -- Marcus Thornton can't get or stay healthy, Donte' Williams and Kenny Gaines were suspended for the Florida game, etc. -- but I'm not sure it matters. If one or two players are out, somebody equally talented (and limited) steps in.
- Make no mistake, though: Caldwell-Pope is kind of a stud.
- Without an absurdly high usage rate, he dominates Georgia's stat line. He has scored 27% of the Dawgs' points, taken 41% of their 3-pointers and 23% of their free throws, grabbed 22% of their defensive rebounds and logged 35% of their steals. He does everything for a team that really can't do much of anything other than play decent defense.
Keys to the Game
- Limit Caldwell-Pope. Obviously. It might seem too obvious, but it obviously stands to reason that if a player that valuable to the box score has a bad night, the team will probably struggle to make up the difference.
- Stay out of foul trouble. Without Laurence Bowers, Mizzou is still limited offensively. The Tigers need their full legion of potential scorers (namely, Jabari Brown and Earnest Ross) to avoid fouls and stay in the game, but both players might spend a decent amount of time guarding Caldwell-Pope (though my first guess is that Keion Bell gets the first shot at him). If Georgia can hinder Mizzou's lineup in this regard, the Dawgs could stay close in a really, really low-scoring affair.
- Hit the glass, dammit. Mizzou broke even on the glass after losing the rebounding battle to both Bucknell and Alabama without Tony Criswell. With Criswell back in the lineup, things may be looking up in this regard (though losing Bowers still hurts quite a bit), but Mizzou's core identity this year is in rebounding and rather physical play. Hammer Georgia with that identity.
Prediction
PAAAAAAIN.
The odds are decent that this is an ugly affair, but if Mizzou can get the jumpers to fall early, via the usual suspects (Brown, Ross, Phil Pressey), the Bulldogs might cave in the face of another early deficit like the one they faced against Florida. This is not an experienced team, and outside of Caldwell-Pope there is not a single reliable offensive option. This is exactly the kind of bounceback opponent Mizzou wants to face following the tough trip to Ole Miss, but if the Tigers aren't clicking offensively, it could be a battle for quite a while. I say the Tigers eventually pull away and win, 76-59, but if you're into aesthetics, you might just want to skip this one.