Stat | 1st | 2nd | Full |
Pace | 27 | 25 | 52 |
OEff | 96.8 | 145.2 | 120.0 |
eFG% | 41.7% | 50.0% | 46.2% |
TO% | 18.6% | 20.2% | 19.4% |
OR% | 33.3% | 63.2% | 50.0% |
FTM/FGA | 25.0% | 28.6% | 26.9% |
DEff | 111.7 | 100.8 | 106.5 |
eFG% | 53.8% | 34.5% | 43.6% |
TO% | 21.9% | 11.8% | 17.1% |
OR% | 43.8% | 42.9% | 43.2% |
FTA/FGA | 19.2% | 20.7% | 20.0% |
Coming into the game, we had heard that Boston College had a nice offense, especially when their big 3 of Dudley (PPWS: 1.46, 1.11, 1.23 [1st, 2nd, full]), Rice (1.71, 1.12, 1.38) and Marshall (1.00, 0, 0.60) are going off. Since the rest of the team only accounted for 5 pts (all by Blair), the 2nd half shut down of Marshall (0-6 FG, 1 OR, 1 TO) caused the improvement in the Hoyas' defensive efficiency, although it also helped that Rice stopped hitting 30-ft. shots. The only significant improvement in the four factors is the drop in eFG%.
We had also heard that BC was not a great defensive team, but after starting the game 5-5, BC's switch to a 1-3-1 defense put the kibosh on G'town's vaunted offense, keeping them well below their season average efficiency. What changed in the 2nd half was a domination of the offensive boards (rebounding nearly 2/3 of missed own shots), which kicked the offensive efficiency into the stratosphere.
A growing concern is defensive glass, where Georgetown has once again allowed a team to rebound well above their season average; BC came in getting 38% off. rebounds. Vanderbilt is a lousy rebounding team, (OR = 29.7%, Rank = 282), but have rebounded above average, and better than their opponents, in their 2 tourney wins. That aspect will bear watching.
No comments:
Post a Comment