The loss ended G'town's home win streak at 29 games (28 at Verizon, 15 against Big East teams).
Let's run the numbers:
TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
. Home Visitor
. GU Pittsburgh
. 1st Half 2nd Half Total 1st Half 2nd Half Total
Pace 31 27 58
Effic. 95.7 87.8 91.9 105.2 135.3 119.2
eFG% 40.7 41.7 41.2 44.4 54.7 49.3
TO% 12.8 14.6 13.6 15.9 11.0 13.6
OR% 22.2 17.6 20.0 47.6 66.7 55.6
FT Rate 37.0 29.2 33.3 5.6 12.5 8.8
Assist Rate 66.7 66.7 66.7 46.7 52.9 50.0
Block Rate 7.4 9.1 8.2 11.8 14.3 12.9
Steal Rate 6.4 7.3 6.8 3.2 7.3 5.1
2FG% 29.4 50.0 38.7 48.1 72.7 59.2
3FG% 40.0 20.0 30.0 22.2 10.0 15.8
FT% 80.0 57.1 70.6 50.0 50.0 50.0
The game was played at a slower pace than either team has averaged this season (Pitt at 66 possessions (adj.), G'town a fuzz slower).
The first half was a relatively even affair, with C. Wright's missed three right before the buzzer keeping the Hoyas behind heading into the locker room.
Frankly, Georgetown was lucky to be so close - the four factors for the 1st half indicate that the Panthers shot slightly better and held a decisive advantage on the boards; the Total Reb Pct. [=(OR% + DR%)/2] for G'town was 37%, so that Pitt was slightly less than twice as likely to get any available missed shot (remember that, as I'll return to it). The Hoyas shooting woes were inside the arc, where they missed 7/8 2-pt jumpers. Actually, the Hoyas shooting woes were anyone who didn't have the name "Summers" on the back of his uniform - D. Summers shot 3/6 2FG, 3/3 3FG while the rest of the team shot 2/11 2FG and 1/7 3FG in the half.
Meanwhile, both teams took care of the basketball with the Hoyas a bit more careful, and G'town also had a higher percentage of opportunities at the FT line, but could draw only 1 foul on D. Blair.
Georgetown's failure to get Mr. Blair into foul difficulties manifest itself in the 2nd half. There were 32 available missed shots in the 2nd half (17 by G'town, 15 by Pitt), and the Panthers came up with 24 of them, including 10 on the offensive glass; for the half, G'town Total Reb Pct. = 25%. Pitt's first four offensive rebounds didn't net any points, but last six resulted in 13 points. Overall, Pitt turned 20 off. rebounds into 24 points, while Georgetown converted 7 off. rebounds into 12 points - this is a case where sheer quantity trumps efficiency. (Note that I pulled those numbers directly from the play-by-play, rather than from my compiler). I suspect we'll need to return to The Problem of Rebounding several times this season.
Pitt also shot a significantly higher percentage and turned over the ball less than the Hoyas in the 2nd half.
Game over.
INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS
GU Off Poss Individ Def Individ
Player Poss Used ORtg Pts Prod Poss DRtg Pts Allow Net Pts
Summers, DaJuan 57 13.5 135.1 18.2 56 125.6 14.1 +4.1
Wright, Chris 55 7.5 85.5 6.4 52 123.1 12.8 -6.4
Monroe, Greg 53 16.7 87.1 14.5 51 101.8 10.4 +4.2
Freeman, Austin 58 8.9 74.7 6.7 58 109.3 12.7 -6.0
Sapp, Jessie 46 7.3 49.6 3.6 44 106.0 9.3 -5.7
Clark, Jason 11 1.7 81.4 1.4 12 140.8 3.4 -2.0
Vaughn, Julian 7 1.0 0.0 0.0 8 129.1 2.1 -2.1
Sims, Henry 3 0.0 - 0.0 3 0.0 0.0 +0.0
Wattad, Omar 10 2.4 45.9 1.1 11 115.0 2.5 -1.4
TOTALS 60 59.0 88.0 51.9 59 114.0 67.2 -15.3
Pittsburgh Off Poss Individ Def Individ
Player Poss Used ORtg Pts Prod Poss DRtg Pts Allow Net Pts
Fields, Levance 53 6.2 137.1 8.4 54 85.1 9.2 -0.7
Dixon, Jermaine 28 5.4 52.2 2.8 30 88.1 5.3 -2.5
Biggs, Tyrell 51 4.5 200.7 9.0 53 90.8 9.6 -0.7
Young, Sam 46 13.7 93.5 12.8 47 77.4 7.3 +5.5
Blair, DeJuan 44 14.2 147.8 20.9 46 73.0 6.7 +14.2
Brown, Gilbert 32 8.3 97.0 8.1 30 106.3 6.4 +1.7
Gibbs, Ashton 6 1.3 53.5 0.7 6 84.9 1.0 -0.3
Wanamaker, Brad 31 1.6 240.6 3.9 30 90.2 5.4 -1.5
McGhee, Gary 4 2.0 0.0 0.0 4 200.0 1.6 -1.6
TOTALS 59 57.1 116.6 66.6 60 87.5 52.5 +14.1
Looking at the individual net points box for today's game, I think it serves as a good example of how you can draw two sets of conclusions from the numbers therein, so it's important to combine the two to really understand what the stats are trying to tell us.
If you look at the last column (net points), you'd say that the following players had good games: Summers and G. Monroe of Georgetown, and S. Young, Blair and G. Brown of Pitt. That's it, as they say, that's the list.
If you look at a more familiar column (ORtg), you'd say that only Summers played well for Georgetown, while L. Fields, T. Biggs, Blair and B. Wannamaker had very strong games for the Panthers.
So, which is more correct? Well, both.
- Example #1: Biggs was highly efficient, producing 9 points in 4.5 possessions used (ORtg = 200), but he played 51 possessions (% Poss = 8.8), so he wasn't a dominant offensive player in the game. And since he played most of the game, he is credited for more points allowed than he produced. Was he really hurting his team? Well, he properly deferred to the three-headed leader (Young-Fields-Blair) of his team, who all are typically as or more efficient than he is. But his team may have been helped even more if he could have taken a possession or two from Young today.
- Example #2: Monroe was rather inefficient, with 14.5 points produced in 16.7 possessions used (ORtg = 87.1), but was able to end up as a positive contributor by using so many possessions (% Poss = 31.5) to accrue those points. Was he really helping his team? In this case, yes he was, since he had only 1 teammate (Summers) who was playing any more efficiently then himself.
Other thoughts:
- If anyone has seen J. Sapp's shot, please return it to him. But before anyone starts asking whether Sapp should sit more while he scuffles along, note that his defense was better than most of his teammates, so he's still playing hard despite his troubles.
- The non-Summers Hoyas ended the game shooting 2/15 3FG for the game. While G'town wasn't going to win either way with Pitt's rebounding, the lack of an outside threat beyond Summers let the Panthers clog the lane and challenge close-in shots - G'town ended 11/22 on dunks, tip-ins and layups.
- H. Sims played for a short stretch near the end of the 1st half, with the game still hotly contested; that was nice to see. Okay, I didn't actually notice, but that's what the box score and play-by-play say.
HD BOX SCORE
Pittsburgh vs GU
01/03/09 12:00 at Verizon Center
Final score: Pittsburgh 70, GU 54
Pittsburgh Min +/- Pts 2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A FGA A Stl TO Blk OR DR PF
Fields, Levance 36:14 +16 6/65 3- 6 0- 3 0- 0 9/63 8/27 1/54 0/53 0/27 1/33 3/32 3
Dixon, Jermaine 19:07 + 8 2/32 1- 2 0- 5 0- 0 7/31 1/14 0/30 0/28 0/17 1/16 0/19 3
Biggs, Tyrell 33:52 +20 14/64 7- 8 0- 2 0- 0 10/59 0/23 0/53 0/51 1/28 1/29 1/33 3
Young, Sam 31:53 +13 14/53 4- 9 2- 4 0- 0 13/51 0/18 1/47 5/46 0/25 4/27 4/27 1
Blair, DeJuan 30:39 +12 20/52 9-16 0- 0 2- 4 16/53 3/15 1/46 0/44 2/24 7/29 10/28 3
Brown, Gilbert 20:33 + 8 9/38 4- 6 0- 1 1- 2 7/38 1/13 0/30 1/32 1/14 3/21 3/16 2
Gibbs, Ashton 03:46 + 0 0/ 5 0- 0 0- 1 0- 0 1/ 5 1/ 2 0/ 6 0/ 6 0/ 4 0/ 3 0/ 3 0
Wanamaker, Brad 20:53 + 8 5/38 1- 2 1- 3 0- 0 5/37 2/15 0/30 0/31 0/14 0/20 4/16 1
McGhee, Gary 03:03 - 5 0/ 3 0- 0 0- 0 0- 0 0/ 3 0/ 1 0/ 4 2/ 4 0/ 2 1/ 2 0/ 1 1
TOTALS 40:00 70 29-49 3-19 3- 6 68 16/32 3/60 8/59 4/31 20/36 28/35 17
. 0.592 0.158 0.500 0.500 0.050 0.136 0.129 0.556 0.800
GU Min +/- Pts 2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A FGA A Stl TO Blk OR DR PF
Summers, DaJuan 38:35 -18 22/52 3- 6 4- 5 4- 6 11/48 1/11 0/56 2/57 0/47 1/32 1/34 3
Wright, Chris 36:07 -11 5/52 1- 5 0- 2 3- 4 7/47 4/16 0/52 0/55 0/43 0/32 1/30 1
Monroe, Greg 34:22 -11 15/49 6-12 0- 1 3- 3 13/46 2/11 1/51 4/53 2/39 2/31 6/28 2
Freeman, Austin 38:39 -22 7/48 1- 3 1- 5 2- 4 8/49 1/14 1/58 0/58 0/48 1/35 5/35 2
Sapp, Jessie 28:31 - 8 3/40 0- 2 1- 5 0- 0 7/41 3/12 2/44 1/46 2/36 0/28 0/28 0
Clark, Jason 08:58 - 8 2/ 9 1- 1 0- 1 0- 0 2/ 8 0/ 2 0/12 0/11 0/10 0/ 7 0/ 7 0
Vaughn, Julian 05:38 - 5 0/ 5 0- 1 0- 0 0- 0 1/ 5 0/ 1 0/ 8 0/ 7 0/10 0/ 4 0/ 8 1
Sims, Henry 01:25 + 2 0/ 2 0- 1 0- 0 0- 0 1/ 3 0/ 0 0/ 3 0/ 3 0/ 2 0/ 3 0/ 2 0
Wattad, Omar 07:45 + 1 0/13 0- 0 0- 1 0- 0 1/ 8 1/ 5 0/11 1/10 0/10 0/ 3 0/ 8 0
TOTALS 40:00 54 12-31 6-20 12-17 51 12/18 4/59 8/60 4/49 7/35 16/36 9
. 0.387 0.300 0.706 0.667 0.068 0.133 0.082 0.200 0.444
Efficiency: Pittsburgh 1.186, GU 0.900
eFG%: Pittsburgh 0.493, GU 0.412
Substitutions: Pittsburgh 25, GU 25
2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Pittsburgh 3-3, GU 4-5
Layups/Tips: Pittsburgh 18-29, GU 7-17
Jumpers: Pittsburgh 8-17, GU 1-9
Fast break pts: Pittsburgh 6 (0.090), GU 4 (0.095)
Seconds per off. poss: Pittsburgh 21.2, GU 18.8
No comments:
Post a Comment