clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Study Hall: Mizzou 74, Ole Miss 68

That went really well! (mostly)

study hall 2020

I’m really not sure what direction to go here.

If I’d have said before the game that Mizzou was going to shoot well from outside, helping them to win relatively comfortably by 6 points... we would all probably take that result, right? After all this season wins have been scarce, so a win is better than the alternative. But leaving out the context and flow of the game certainly changes how we feel about things.

For 30 minutes the Mizzou offense was a death machine. They attacked the Ole Miss defense, and had the right play call with nearly every defensive switch. Kermit Davis again started spending his timeouts like he had an infinite supply. But while it felt like this was some blowout for most of the game, it was actually tied with nearly 5 minutes to play in the first half. Missouri closed on a 12-2 run. Then they opened the 2nd half with a 9-0 run.

All told it was a 21-2 Mizzou run over about 7 minutes of action which led to the scoring difference. For the next 6 minutes the teams traded baskets, and then the Missouri offense faltered.

Mizzou made just 3 FGs from the 10 minute mark to the end of the game. Things felt scary for a bit, but despite losing their most consistent ball handler with 1:30 to play, they held on.

Team Stats

study hall 2022 ole miss
  • It might surprise you to ever see this Missouri team shoot better from 3 than they did from 2: they didn’t, but it was close enough. Both teams like the mid range, and both teams had success from 2, but one team made 3 point shots and for once it was the Tigers! I KNOW! I’m a believer in it’s not always if but also when you hit your 3s. Mizzou canned 5 in the first half, and just 2 in the second half. But those 2 were to extend the lead to 20, and again to bump the lead back up to 9 with 4:12 to play.
  • Ballhandling is always going to be a problem for this team: but the idea going forward is to not give your opponent a huge advantage in shots. Ole Miss was just +2 in FGA. As Ole Miss was making their run, Mizzou had 9 turnovers including three shot clock violations in the last 6 minutes. But over the course of 40 minutes the disparity wasn’t bad enough to clip the achilles heel.
  • Another note on making 3s: it’s worth pointing out that Missouri still only took 14 3s. Ole Miss attempted 18. Mizzou made 7 to the Rebels 4 and that 9 points was basically the difference (the lead was 8 when Jarkel Joiner was given a dunk at the end of the game).

Player Stats

Your Trifecta: Kobe Brown, Ronnie DeGray III, Javon Pickett

study hall 2022 ole miss

On the season: Kobe Brown 38, Ronnie DeGray III 22, Amari Davis 22, Jarron Coleman 21, Javon Pickett 18, DaJuan Gordon 11, Trevon Brazile 8, Sean Durugordon 2, Yaya Keita 1, Jordan Wilmore 1

Despite not scoring, I actually thought Boogie played pretty well (offensively). If he makes just one or two of this 3FGAs this game likely stays a blowout.

DaJuan Gordon narrowly missed out on the trifecta, but his 3-4 stretch of made 3s took what was a close game and put incredible game pressure on the Ole Miss offense. He was only edged out of the trifecta because Javon Pickett played more minutes. But Pickett shouldn’t be overlooked for his contributions, a very Pickett like game in that he did a lot of little things well. He didn’t take any bad shots, was good around the rim, and even made his three point attempt. Realistically if he made his FTs the game probably doesn’t feel as tight as it got.

study hall 2022 ole miss

I’ll take Kobe Brown with a 15% usage and a 65% floor rate. I know Cuonzo Martin loves Brown for his versatility, but I think he’s often miscast in the lead role. I still think he’s a good player, but it’s 12-18% usage and with a high floor rate. Which basically means he’s not ending possessions but he’s still helping the team score.

I feel better with Amari Davis numbers. He didn’t land in the trifecta, but he’s a guy who is capable of putting the ball in the hole. He’s got a good turnover rate, he’s just got to be a little more consistent.

We don’t often talk about Trevon Brazile in these write-ups because he’s still learning how to make a consistent impact. I also think the team is still learning how to take advantage of Brazile's unique skill set. It’s not so much running plays as it’s his teammates understanding how to get him the ball in a good spot. Case in point will likely be in Film Room, but the play where Mizzou recognized the 1-3-1 zone, threw a cross pass to Pickett who caught it and lobbed it at the rim before he landed. Brazile caught the lob and was about to dunk when he was fouled. But that’s a play the team doesn’t make in the first half of the season. They’re learning that if you see Trevon lurking, just put the ball near the rim and he’ll clean it up.

So a win, a good win. And a win they needed. Because the next five games are going to be difficult. Missouri is 4-7 in conference. The 5th place team in the SEC is 6-6 (there are 4 teams at 6-6). So Missouri is one game back in the loss column from being tied for 5th. Wild.

Coming into Mizzou Arena on Tuesday is Arkansas, the 4th place team in the league. Then Missouri gets back to back games against Mississippi State, then a really tough week against Tennessee and at LSU. I’m not sure what’s on the table for this team this season. They’re obviously better than they were earlier in the year. But the first half of the season was bad enough it has rendered most of the gains meaningless in the context of post season play. This team is playing for pride, and maybe for the job of their coach.

There’s a tough stretch coming up and it begins with a revenge game against a rival who handed you the worst loss on the year.

Other SEC Results:

  • 1. Auburn 75, Texas A&M 58
  • 5. Kentucky 78, Florida 57
  • 19. Tennessee 73, Vanderbilt 64
  • Alabama 68, Arkansas 67
  • South Carolina 80, Georgia 68
  • LSU 69, Mississippi State 65

And the standings:

  1. Auburn, 11-1
  2. Kentucky, 10-2
  3. Tennessee, 9-3
  4. Arkansas, 8-4
  5. LSU, 6-6
  6. Alabama, 6-6
  7. Florida, 6-6
  8. Mississippi State, 5-6
  9. South Carolina, 5-7
  10. Vanderbilt, 5-7
  11. Missouri, 4-7
  12. Texas A&M, 4-8
  13. Ole Miss, 3-9
  14. Georgia, 1-11

True Shooting Percentage (TS%): Quite simply, this calculates a player’s shooting percentage while taking into account 2FG%, 3FG%, and FT%. The formula is Total Points / 2 * (FGA + (0.475+FTA)). The 0.475 is a Free Throw modifier. KenPomeroy and other College Basketball sites typically use 0.475, while the NBA typically uses 0.44. That’s basically what TS% is. A measure of scoring efficiency based on the number of points scored over the number of possessions in which they attempted to score, more here.

Effective Field Goal Percentage (eFG%): This is similar to TS%, but takes 3-point shooting more into account. The formula is FGM + (0.5 * 3PM) / FGA

So think of TS% as scoring efficiency, and eFG% as shooting efficiency, more here.

Expected Offensive Rebounds: Measured based upon the average rebounds a college basketball team gets on both the defensive and offensive end. This takes the overall number of missed shots (or shots available to be rebounded) and divides them by the number of offensive rebounds and compares them with the statistical average.

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.

Offensive Rating (ORtg): Similar to Adjusted game score, but this looks at how many points per possession a player would score if they were averaged over 100 possessions.

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 Floor % answers the question, “When a Player 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.