If you diagramed the way the Missouri Tigers would march into Coleman Coliseum on Tuesday night and escape with a win, the first 25-30 minutes offered the exact blue print.
The pace was agreeable for the Tigers, they were able to frustrate and cajole the Tide into taking more guarded shots. Alabama made just 6 of their first 18 three point attempts, and if you’ve followed Alabama at all over the last few years you know shooting a heavy amount of threes is a priority for the Nate Oats offense. Even at the 8-minute mark they were 7 of 20.
Before Alabama hit their 8th three-pointer, the Tigers had just a four-point deficit. They weren't playing great, and they were missing the usual offensive output from Sean East, but they were making Alabama play with them. They scrapped, clawed, and fought their way each possession.
And then Rylan Griffen went off. In the final 10 minutes Alabama scored 38 points, and Griffen had 16 of those points. That includes four three-point shots which spurred Alabama from a 4-point lead to a 13-point lead. At some point, the Mizzou offense just ran out of gas in keeping up with Griffen as he was throwing flames.
The 38 points in the last 10 minutes is hard to overcome no matter who you are, but especially if you’re on the road. In the first 30 minutes Alabama scored 55 points, if they’d have kept that pace it would have netted them 72-73 points. They added another 20 on top of it. The Tigers were able to keep it close-ish until Griffen hit back-to-back threes to separate from a 7-point lead to a 13-point lead. From there, they were chasing and it was too much.
It is another example of Missouri not being intimidated on the road. Alabama is a great offensive team with a definitive style and Missouri had the game plan to slow them down. But...
- Alabama was +5.8 in expected rebounds and +10 in second-chance points: this team, like last year, doesn’t rebound well. Giving an offensive team with the top efficiency rating in the country extra looks will usually come back to bite you.
- This was one of Missouri’s better offensive nights: but it was just the second time they gave up greater than 1.3 points per possession.
- They’re just really tough to beat when they shoot it well from outside: 48% is shooting it well.
68 possessions is a slower pace for Alabama, so Mizzou won that part. But that’s an average of about 17 possessions every 10 minutes, and for 30 minutes that works to about a 1.07 points per possession average. Against Alabama that’s terrific. Missouri’s 1.10 would have won the game. But the final 10 minutes the Tide’s PPP jumped to 2.2. They missed 3 shots, they got an offensive rebound on each one and converted with two field goals and 2-2 at the free throw line. In the last 10 minutes they made 14 free throws on 14 attempts.
They basically didn’t miss. It was perfect offensive basketball, made worse by poor defensive rebounding by Missouri.
Your Trifecta: Tamar Bates, Nick Honor, Noah Carter
On the season: Sean East II 34, Noah Carter 18, Tamar Bates 17, Nick Honor 12, Caleb Grill 6, Aidan Shaw 3, Connor Vanover 3, Trent Pierce 3, Anthony Robinson II 3, Jesus Carralero-Martin 2
Dare I say welcome back to the trifecta, Nick Honor? There’s been no secret that we’ve been critical of Honor’s role this year, and his play has suffered. But if he can regain his shooting stroke and again be a threat from outside then he’s a guy who will be able to help this team win some games down the stretch.
It was a good night from Tamar Bates, but it goes without saying that if you have 19 points on 8 shots you didn’t take enough shots. But it’s hard to complain about Bates these days, this was the 7th straight game in double figures and he’s running with a 127.4 Offensive Rating while his possessions are creeping up. He’s over 20% usage on the year, and nearly 24% against Alabama.
Dennis Gates deployed everyone in this game. Without John Tonje and Caleb Grill still out, that he still played 13 guys (and 12 during crunch time minutes) is a helluva thing. He still has a hard time fully quitting his senior starters, and I’m not sure it’s good for the freshmen or younger players to be thrown to the wolves for super-long stretches. Still, it’s nice to see those guys get some extended run. It can only benefit them. Now if they could knock down a few shots...
If you’re the type of person who is into rebounding “rates” here’s some food for thought as we continually complain about rebounding. Mizzou only collected 23 total rebounds, they were -12 on the glass overall, and -5 in offensive rebounds. But if you look at minutes distribution it might make you feel a little better about things moving forward.
- Jordan Butler played 11 minutes and had 3 rebounds.
- Aidan Shaw played 15 minutes and had 3 rebounds.
- Trent Pierce had 2 rebounds in 7 minutes.
- Ant Robinson played 17 minutes and had 2 rebounds.
So freshmen and sophomores collected 10 rebounds in one-quarter of the minutes available. Or 43% of the team rebounds in 25% of the minutes. Pierce has a season-long defensive rebound rate of 18.6%, Ant is 12.4% (that’s what Carralero Martin has), and Butler is at 19.8%. Aidan Shaw is the only player who qualifies for a national ranking with his minutes played, and he’s a 17.1%. So the two freshmen with size rebound even better than Shaw who most think is a good rebounder.
The younger guys are better at rebounding. Being taller does help, but maybe that will quell some concerns about Gates and his approach to rebounding. It doesn’t help as much this season, but hopefully, it’s a sign of things to come.
Still, it’s a loss.
That’s 7 in a row to high major teams, and Dennis Gates is sub .500 for the first time since November of 2021. Florida comes to Columbia on Saturday night, the Gators are beatable but are also just 1-3 in the SEC and are coming off an ugly road loss to Tennessee. They’ll surely not want to be 1-4 with a sub-100 loss to Missouri. That might blow a big hole into their NCAA Tournament hopes.
I don’t know, if I’m Mizzou that sounds like fun.
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.
%Min: This is easy, it’s the percentage of minutes a player played which were available to them. That would be 40 minutes, or 45 if the game goes to overtime.
Usage%: This “estimates the % of team possessions a player consumes while on the floor” (via sports-reference.com/cbb). 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.
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. This combined with Usage Rate gives you a sense of impact on the floor.
IndPoss: This is approximates how many possessions an individual is responsible for within the teams calculated possessions.
ShotRate%: This is the percentage of teams shots a player takes while on the floor.
AstRate%: Attempts to estimate the number of assists a player has on teammates made field goals when he is on the floor. The formula is basically AST / (((MinutesPlayed / (Team MP / 5)) * Team FGM) - FGM).
TORate%: Attempts to estimate the number of turnovers a player commits in their individual possessions. The formula is simple: TO / IndPoss
Floor%: Via sports-reference.com/cbb: 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.
In attempting to update Study Hall, I’m moving away from Touches/Possession and moving into the Rates a little more. This is a little experimental so if there’s something you’d like to see let me know and I’ll see if there’s an easy visual way to present it.