masthead.jpg

switchconcepts.com, U3dpdGNo-a25, DIRECT rubiconproject.com, 14766, RESELLER pubmatic.com, 30666, RESELLER, 5d62403b186f2ace appnexus.com, 1117, RESELLER thetradedesk.com, switchconcepts, RESELLER taboola.com, switchconceptopenrtb, RESELLER bidswitch.com, switchconcepts, RESELLER contextweb.com, 560031, RESELLER amazon-adsystem.com, 3160, RESELLER crimtan.com, switch, RESELLER quantcast.com, switchconcepts , RESELLER rhythmone.com, 1934627955, RESELLER ssphwy.com, switchconcepts, RESELLER emxdgt.com, 59, RESELLER appnexus.com, 1356, RESELLER sovrn.com, 96786, RESELLER, fafdf38b16bf6b2b indexexchange.com, 180008, RESELLER nativeads.com, 52853, RESELLER theagency.com, 1058, RESELLER google.com, pub-3515913239267445, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
February 8, 2006

Conference Numbers

Filed under: Uncategorized — Chas @ 8:28 am

So, Pitt has played 9 conference games so far and is 6-3. That means conference only stats are approaching relevance and usefulness.

Here are the overall conference numbers to this point.

Overall (9) – FG% — 3FG% —- 2FG% —– eFG%
Pitt ——— 42.9 —– 33.3 —— 46.6 ——- 47.6
Opponents — 42.4 —– 35.2 —— 45.8 ——- 48.0

Kind of interesting to see how close things really have been in conference, yet Pitt is 6-3. I’m going to split things up:

Home (4) — FG% — 3FG% —- 2FG% —– eFG%
Pitt ——— 46.4 —– 44.3 —— 47.1 ——- 52.1
Opponents — 42.5 —– 34.0 —— 47.2 ——- 48.6

Away (5) — FG% —- 3FG% —- 2FG% —– eFG%
Pitt ——— 40.0 —– 25.6 —— 46.2 ——- 43.9
Opponents — 42.2 —– 36.8 —— 44.4 ——- 47.5

There is only one difference between what Pitt does at home versus on the road: shooting 3s. Everything else is not noticeably different. Even on defense. But the variation between Pitt’s 3-point shooting on the road as compared to home is huge.

Not only is Pitt missing more 3s on the road, it is taking more 3s. Pitt has shot 27-61 at home (6.75-15.25/game) and 22-86 on the road (4.4-17.2/game).

Still that doesn’t full explain the 3 losses. After all, Pitt shot only 28.6 (4-14) versus Rutgers but hit 35.3 (6-17) against Georgetown.

There’s one other component missing when Pitt goes on the road — and especially in the losses. Free throw shooting. I’m not talking about the number of made shots. I’m talking about the number of attempts. Look at this:

Home (4) — FTA — FTM —— FT%
Pitt ——— 127 —— 75 ——– 59.1
Opponents — 48 —— 28 ——- 58.3

Away (5) — FTA — FTM —— FT%
Pitt ———- 98 —– 71 ——- 72.4
Opponents — 100 —– 71 ——- 71.0

Pitt is actually shooting free throws significantly better on the road. The problem is, they aren’t getting to the line enough. Over half of Pitt’s FTAs came in just 2 games (Louisville and RU).

In all but one of Pitt’s wins (Marquette), the Panthers attempted at least 24 free throws (average of about 30.5, but skewed a bit because of the D-OT game with ND where Pitt had 46 FTA) . In the 3 losses, Pitt averaged 14 trips. The high was 18 (UConn) and the low 10 (Georgetown).

How does a team get to the free throw line? Either by getting the other team to foul a lot (creating bonus situations early — DePaul) or by being fouled while shooting (aggressive play to the basket).

When Pitt plays good games it is passing the ball well, and taking good shots. The team isn’t settling for jumpers and shying away from contact. There is penetration (like against Syracuse). When Pitt is taking more 3-point attempts, they are not penetrating as much and/or just passing along the perimeter (St. John’s). They are avoiding contact, and if the shots aren’t falling, it isn’t creating more opportunities inside or space to make the pass for a player to drive to the basket.





Powered by WordPress © PittBlather.com

Site Meter