Mizzou's freshmen dominated in the Tigers' first two basketball games

Apologies for the Study Hall tardiness. There have been, uh, some things going on in the Mizzou universe. Better late than never when the numbers are involved, yes?

Wofford

Your Trifecta: Wright-Puryear-Woods.

Missouri 83, Wofford 74

	Mizzou	Wofford
Pace (No. of Possessions)	67.6
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.23	1.09
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.66	1.35
2-PT FG%	60.5%	39.3%
3-PT FG%	41.7%	37.0%
FT%	68.8%	66.7%
True Shooting %	64.8%	53.2%
FTA/FGA	64.0%	60.0%
	Mizzou	Wofford
Assists	12	12
Steals	4	3
Turnovers	9	7
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	1.78	2.14
	Mizzou	Wofford
Expected Offensive Rebounds	9.6	13.7
Offensive Rebounds	5	8
Difference	-4.6	-5.7

• Mizzou was projected to win by about four points and won by nine. Success!
• This game was quite obviously won with shooting. Neither team had much of a presence on the offensive glass, and Wofford had a slight but not particularly significant advantage in terms of ball-handling. 3s and free throws were even, too. But 2-pointers? Mizzou was 23-for-38 (Kevin Puryear was 7-for-11, Russell Woods 4-for-5, KJ Walton 3-for-5), and Wofford was 11-for-28. Ballgame.

Mizzou Player Stats

(Definitions at the bottom of the post.)

Player	AdjGS	GmSc/Min	Line
Namon Wright	20.6	0.90	23 Min, 18 Pts (5-7 FG, 3-4 3PT, 5-8 FT), 7 Reb (2 Off), 3 PF
Kevin Puryear	17.3	0.54	32 Min, 20 Pts (8-14 FG, 1-3 3PT, 3-4 FT), 5 Reb, 1 Stl, 2 TO, 1 PF
Russell Woods	9.5	0.73	13 Min, 9 Pts (4-5 FG, 1-1 FT), 3 Reb (1 Off), 3 PF
Cullen VanLeer	8.1	0.67	12 Min, 5 Pts (2-2 FG, 1-1 3PT, 0-1 FT), 1 Reb (1 Off), 2 Ast
K.J. Walton	6.9	0.40	17 Min, 6 Pts (3-5 FG, 0-1 FT), 1 Reb 2 Ast, 1 Stl, 2 PF
Ryan Rosburg	6.5	0.32	20 Min, 6 Pts (1-2 FG, 4-6 FT), 3 Reb, 1 Stl, 3 PF
Terrence Phillips	4.9	0.17	29 Min, 7 Pts (2-5 FG, 0-1 3PT, 3-4 FT), 3 Reb, 3 Ast, 2 TO, 3 PF
Tramaine Isabell	4.4	0.44	10 Min, 4 Pts (2-2 FG), 3 Reb, 2 Ast, 1 Stl, 3 TO, 1 PF
Jakeenan Gant	2.5	0.16	16 Min, 4 Pts (1-5 FG, 0-3 3PT, 2-2 FT), 4 Reb (1 Off), 1 Ast, 1 Blk, 5 PF
Wes Clark	0.8	0.03	28 Min, 4 Pts (0-3 FG, 4-5 FT), 3 Reb, 2 Ast, 2 TO, 3 PF

Player	Usage%	Floor%	Touches/ Poss.	%Pass	%Shoot	%Fouled	%T/O
Namon Wright	25%	56%	1.7	0%	54%	46%	0%
Kevin Puryear	30%	46%	1.8	0%	74%	16%	11%
Russell Woods	23%	73%	1.3	0%	87%	13%	0%
Cullen VanLeer	11%	86%	3.6	81%	14%	5%	0%
K.J. Walton	18%	59%	3.1	67%	29%	4%	0%
Ryan Rosburg	13%	46%	1.0	0%	31%	69%	0%
Terrence Phillips	17%	40%	2.8	64%	18%	11%	7%
Tramaine Isabell	27%	46%	5.0	70%	12%	0%	18%
Jakeenan Gant	20%	32%	2.3	48%	40%	12%	0%
Wes Clark	14%	28%	2.2	57%	15%	18%	10%

• 2-pointers and defensive rebounds. I already love Kevin Puryear's game.
• Size is going to be an obvious issue with this team, so team rebounding will be key. Six players with at least three rebounds = pretty damn nice team rebounding. Obviously Mizzou's got bigger opponents on the schedule, and breaking even against Wofford (and losing the battle to UMES) is a bad sign. But there's still a difference between being an issue and a killer weakness.
• VanLeer, Walton, Phillips, and Isabell all at 64% Pass or higher with two more at 48% or higher. Pretty impressive distribution ... at least until you notice four zeroes, I guess.
• Rosburg: 4-for-6 from the free thrown line!!

UMES

Your Trifecta: Phillips-Walton-Puryear. Freshman, freshman, freshman.

Season totals: Phillips 3, Puryear 3, Wright 3, Walton 2, Woods 1. Freshmen 8, sophomores 3, juniors 1.

Missouri 73, UMES 55

	Mizzou	UMES
Pace (No. of Possessions)	57.9
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.26	0.95
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.55	1.25
2-PT FG%	46.4%	41.7%
3-PT FG%	42.1%	35.0%
FT%	76.7%	63.6%
True Shooting %	60.6%	51.2%
FTA/FGA	63.8%	50.0%
	Mizzou	UMES
Assists	12	7
Steals	6	4
Turnovers	8	13
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.25	0.85
	Mizzou	UMES
Expected Offensive Rebounds	10.3	10.8
Offensive Rebounds	8	10
Difference	-2.3	-0.8

• Mizzou was projected to win by about 12 and won by 18. Success!
• Two games at 60% true shooting??? Is this real life???
• But seriously, you want to overcome rebounding disadvantages? Miss far fewer shots than your opponent. The 2011-12 method.
• Ball-handling was in Missouri's favor as well, obviously. Rebounding, not so much.

Mizzou Player Stats

(Definitions at the bottom of the post.)

Player	AdjGS	GmSc/Min	Line
Terrence Phillips	14.1	0.52	27 Min, 13 Pts (5-7 FG, 3-4 3PT), 3 Reb (1 Off), 2 Ast, 1 Stl, 1 TO, 3 PF
K.J. Walton	14.1	0.94	15 Min, 11 Pts (1-3 FG, 0-1 3PT, 9-10 FT), 3 Ast, 1 Stl, 1 PF
Kevin Puryear	13.3	0.51	26 Min, 13 Pts (4-7 FG, 5-6 FT), 5 Reb (1 Off), 1 Ast, 1 Stl, 2 TO
Wes Clark	12.0	0.39	31 Min, 15 Pts (4-11 FG, 3-6 3PT, 4-4 FT), 1 Reb, 3 Ast, 1 TO, 1 PF
Tramaine Isabell	4.9	0.41	12 Min, 4 Pts (2-5 FG, 0-1 3PT), 4 Reb (2 Off), 1 Ast
Jakeenan Gant	4.3	0.33	13 Min, 4 Pts (2-2 FG), 1 Reb, 1 Stl, 2 Blk, 1 TO, 4 PF
D'Angelo Allen	3.8	0.25	15 Min, 2 Pts (1-1 FG, 0-2 FT), 4 Reb (2 Off), 1 Stl, 2 PF
Namon Wright	2.4	0.09	26 Min, 7 Pts (1-8 FG, 1-4 3PT, 4-4 FT), 5 Reb (2 Off), 1 Ast, 2 TO, 2 PF
Cullen VanLeer	2.3	0.26	9 Min, 3 Pts (1-3 FG, 1-3 3PT), 1 Stl, 1 PF
Ryan Rosburg	1.5	0.15	10 Min, 0 Pts (0-0 FG), 3 Reb, 1 Blk, 1 PF
Russell Woods	0.9	0.06	15 Min, 1 Pts (0-0 FG, 1-4 FT), 1 Reb, 1 Ast, 1 Blk, 2 PF
Jimmy Barton	-1.2	-1.22	1 Min, 0 Pts (0-0 FG), 1 TO

Player	Usage%	Floor%	Touches/ Poss.	%Pass	%Shoot	%Fouled	%T/O
Terrence Phillips	17%	62%	2.5	60%	35%	0%	5%
K.J. Walton	29%	52%	6.5	61%	10%	29%	0%
Kevin Puryear	26%	45%	2.6	30%	35%	25%	10%
Wes Clark	26%	40%	3.6	54%	33%	10%	3%
Tramaine Isabell	24%	40%	3.1	54%	46%	0%	0%
Jakeenan Gant	14%	61%	0.8	0%	67%	0%	33%
D'Angelo Allen	7%	50%	0.6	0%	38%	63%	0%
Namon Wright	27%	23%	2.5	31%	42%	17%	10%
Cullen VanLeer	20%	28%	1.1	0%	100%	0%	0%
Russell Woods	7%	35%	2.1	64%	0%	36%	0%

• Relying on freshmen obviously doesn't usually work long-term, but my goodness, was this some mature play on their part. Combined: 77 minutes, 40 points on 18 FG attempts (!), eight rebounds, six assists, four steals, and three turnovers. My goodness. Yes, it was UMES. Of course. But ... hot damn, these freshman have already shown more than last year's freshmen did in the first couple of weeks. And last year's freshmen have even admitted it. Phillips and VanLeer are hitting the floor and nailing open 3s. And Walton making all those late free throws was Kimmie-esque.
• You do figure that Woods and Rosburg are going to have to meet a certain baseline in most games. And 2.4 points in the AdjGS department is probably pretty far below that threshold. One point, four rebounds, and four free throws (three missed) isn't going to cut it. But Mizzou still had another six players with 3+ rebounds, so there's that.

Summary

Mizzou has exceeded expectations by about five points in both games. Because it's super early, the Tigers still rank 143rd in Ken Pomeroy's ratings, and only six remaining opponents rank lower than that, so it's not like we're talking about a potential NCAA Tourney team here or anything. But Pomeroy has Mizzou projected to go about 13-17, and if they can stay ahead of those projections for a while, then perhaps a .500 season or better isn't in any way out of reach. It's hard to reach too many conclusions after games against two iffy/bad teams. But I'll take that one.

I'll also take what we've seen from the freshmen so far. With Martavian Payne out, this team is playing two juniors, a senior, and eight freshmen/sophomores. The core of Missouri's next good team might be on the court, and we've already seen more glimpses of that team. Mizzou has shot well, gotten to the line, and played basketball that is actually pretty fun to watch. We didn't see any of those things last year.

Bottom line: I'll take it. Mizzou will still probably lose at Xavier this evening, but I'll take it. Baby steps for this young team.

---

AdjGS: a take-off of the Game Score metric (definition here) accepted by a lot of basketball stat nerds. It takes points, assists, rebounds (offensive & defensive), steals, blocks, turnovers and fouls into account to determine an individual's "score" for a given game. 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.

Usage%: This "estimates the % of team possessions a player consumes while on the floor" (via). The usage of those possessions is determined via a formula using field goal and free throw attempts, offensive rebounds, assists and turnovers. The higher the number, the more prevalent a player is (good or bad) in a team's offensive outcome.

Floor%: Via Basketball-Reference.com: Floor % answers the question, "when Player X uses a possession, what is the probability that his team scores at least 1 point?". The higher the Floor%, the more frequently the team probably scores when the given player is involved.

Touches/Possession: Using field goal attempts, free throw attempts, assists and turnovers, Touches attempt to estimate "the number of times a player touched the ball in an attacking position on the floor." Take the estimated touches and divide it by the estimated number of possessions for which a player was on the court, and you get a rough idea of how many times a player touched the ball in a given possession. For point guards, you'll see the number in the 3-4 range. For shooting guards and wings, 2-3. For an offensively limited center, 1.30. You get the idea.

Anyway, using the Touches figure, we can estimate the percentage of time a player "in an attacking position" passes, shoots, turns the ball over, or gets fouled.