Game stats: Georgetown 64, Rutgers 51

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Home                            Visitor   
.            GEORGETOWN                      Rutgers         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            29        34        62
 
Points          29        35        64          28        23        51   

Effic.        100.6     104.2     102.5        97.1      68.5      81.7  
 
eFG%           53.6      50.0      51.5        50.0      33.9      41.7  
TO%            24.3      17.9      20.8        24.3      17.9      20.8  
OR%            20.0      35.7      29.2        37.5      18.2      26.3  
FTA/FGA       135.7     121.1     127.3        19.2      35.7      27.8  

Assist Rate   100.0      22.2      53.3        72.7      44.4      60.0  
Block Rate      5.6      22.7      15.0        14.3       0.0       4.5  
Steal Rate      6.9       8.9       8.0         6.9      14.9      11.2  
 
2FG%           42.9      53.3      50.0        38.9      36.4      37.5  
3FG%           42.9      25.0      36.4        50.0      16.7      35.7  
FT%            73.7      69.6      71.4        40.0      40.0      40.0

more stats after the jump

Game stats: Georgetown 69, Rutgers 63

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Visitor                         Home      
.            GEORGETOWN                      Rutgers         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            28        26        54

Points          33        36        69          33        30        63   

Effic.        117.7     137.2     126.8       117.7     114.3     115.7  
 
eFG%           64.6      63.0      63.8        61.9      36.4      46.3  
TO%            25.0      15.2      20.2        10.7      19.1      14.7  
OR%            36.4      55.6      45.0        16.7      60.0      45.9  
FTA/FGA        20.8      34.8      27.7        47.6      24.2      33.3  
 
Assist Rate    53.8      64.3      59.3        63.6      50.0      57.1  
Block Rate      0.0      13.6       8.3         0.0       0.0       0.0  
Steal Rate      3.6      11.4       7.3        17.8       3.8      11.0  
 
2FG%           57.1      65.0      61.8        50.0      27.3      36.1  
3FG%           50.0      33.3      46.2        57.1      36.4      44.4  
FT%            40.0      87.5      69.2        70.0      75.0      72.2

The biggest perceived negative from today's game is likely the huge advantage in offensive rebounds [17-9] that Rutgers had over the Hoyas.

The reality is that the teams got their own misses at essentially the same rate [GU: 45%, RU: 46%], it's just that Rutgers missed a ton more shots.


more stats after the jump

Recap: Georgetown 52, Rutgers 50

Image from here

In a game where Georgetown shot a historic low from the field in the first half, the Hoyas rode their stingy defense and a busy official's whistle to a two point victory over the Rutgers Scarlet Knights, 52-50.

 The big story for the game is that the Hoyas managed to shoot an eFG of 13% in the first half, and 33% for the game but still win.  It has also been noted that this is the third terrible shooting day for the Hoyas this season [34% vs. Howard, 33% vs. Providence] that has ended in a victory, thanks to the Hoyas stellar defense.  Prior to this season, the JT3-led Hoyas had managed one victory while shooting under 40% eFG (vs. Temple in Nov. 2009).

Out of morbid curiosity, I also went through the archives of this blog to find the worst shooting half since we've been keeping track.  The only time Georgetown has managed even a sub-25% eFG in a half was Feb 23rd of last year, when a shell-shocked Hoyas team collapsed after Chris Wright left the floor with a broken hand.

The Scarlet Knights deserve a world of credit for the terrible shooting performance in the first half [3-15 2FG, 0-8 3FG] by the Hoyas, but Georgetown wasn't just missing tough shots - the Hoyas went 0-6 on layups and tips, including a blown fast-break layup by Greg Whittington.  Rutgers' great FG defense came at a cost, though - lots of fouls.  Those fouls resulted in 18 free throw attempts in the Lift-off half (and 14 makes) and didn't end during the Vespers half, where Georgetown went to the line another 18 times, although making only 11.

The problem for Rutgers was two-fold in the second half:  Georgetown wasn't missing the easy shots anymore [4/5 on dunks, layups and tips], and had stopped turning over the ball.  After committing 9 turnovers on 31 possessions in the first half, the Hoyas finally held onto the ball after intermission, committing only 5 turnovers in their last 29 possessions to claw back into the game, and finally to win it.

Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Home                            Visitor   
.            Georgetown                      RUTGERS         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            31        30        61
 
Points          20        32        52          25        25        50   

Effic.         63.9     107.7      84.9        79.9      84.2      81.7  
 
eFG%           13.0      58.3      32.9        50.0      37.9      43.4  
TO%            28.8      16.8      22.9        28.8      20.2      24.5  
OR%            45.0      28.6      38.2        15.4      33.3      25.8  
FTA/FGA        78.3     100.0      87.8         8.3      17.2      13.2  

Assist Rate    66.7      66.7      66.7        80.0      40.0      60.0  
Block Rate     18.8      23.8      21.6        13.3       0.0       7.4  
Steal Rate     12.8      10.1      11.4        16.0      10.1      13.1  
 
2FG%           20.0      50.0      33.3        37.5      38.1      37.8  
3FG%            0.0      50.0      21.4        50.0      25.0      37.5  
FT%            77.8      61.1      69.4        50.0      60.0      57.1 

more stats after the jump

Recap: Georgetown 74, Rutgers 65

Georgetown's outside shooting touch returned in a big way in Piscataway this afternoon, as the Hoyas made 11 of 22 shots from behind the arc in a 74-65 win over Rutgers.

It certainly wasn't a showcase win, but at least the Hoyas were able to end a remarkable cold streak on 3FG in conference play. Now if they can figure out how to improve their defensive rebounding, and win the battle of turnover margin, they just might reach their ceiling.

Stats on the Georgetown athletics department website currently lack substitution info, so you'll only get a tempo-free box score for now.

Hopefully Mex Carey can rectify the situation, and a full recap will be forthcoming tonight.

Stats are now complete.

Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Visitor                         Home      
.            Georgetown                      Rutgers         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            28        32        59

Effic.        112.7     134.8     124.7        90.9     125.4     109.5  
 
eFG%           51.9      68.2      59.4        44.4      51.6      48.3  
TO%            21.8      25.1      23.6        21.8      18.8      20.2  
OR%            42.9      46.2      44.4        37.5      55.6      47.1  
FTA/FGA        15.4      68.2      39.6         7.4      35.5      22.4  
 
Assist Rate    41.7      36.4      39.1        81.8      35.7      56.0  
Block Rate     14.3      14.3      14.3         6.2      50.0      23.1  
Steal Rate     10.9       9.4      10.1        10.9      12.5      11.8  
 
2FG%           56.2      30.0      46.2        42.9      47.6      45.2  
3FG%           30.0      66.7      50.0        33.3      40.0      37.5  
FT%           100.0      86.7      89.5        50.0      72.7      69.2

Sometime, I wonder if my take on the game is at all similar to what others think.

The first half of today's game was encouraging to see, even though Georgetown continued to scuffle from deep [3/10 3FG].  Coming into the game, we'd expect the Hoyas to score about 1.15 point per possession, and they got very close simply by grinding away.  Julian Vaughn and Nate Lubick each grabbed two offensive rebounds while the team as a whole went 8/10 on layups (although Vaughn's missed dunk has been noted).  Georgetown still lost the ball too many times (6 TOs on 28 possessions), but at least forced the Scarlet Knights into as many.  Overall, the defense played well, and the offense did enough to build a lead.

The Vesper half was a bit worrisome for me.  The team scored 43 points, but made only 3/10 on 2FGs (including 3/7 on layups) and committed 8 turnovers on 32 possessions.  Instead, the Hoyas shot out of their (conference) minds in the half, going 8/12 from behind the arc.  Meanwhile, Rutgers started to improve their shooting accuracy as well, but also combined a +2 turnover margin in the half with 10 offensive rebounds (on 18 available misses) to manage nine more shots from the floor than Georgetown, while only attempting 4 fewer free throws.

The outside shooting exhibition in the second half is not likely to happen again this season, and the team can't consider itself cured of what ails it.  But what we saw just may be the best (or only) way for Georgetown to win games the rest of the season:  they scraped and clawed on defense and the boards just long enough for the outside shooting to find its way, and once that got rolling, rode it to the win.

It's not a very satisfying way to win games, but sometimes it's all you've got.

Recap: Rutgers 71, Georgetown 68

I wish I could say that tonight's result was a great shock, but it actually seemed like an eventuality with an impending showdown with Syracuse looming on the horizon. At the start of the most recent Villanova recap, I asked "Will the real Georgetown basketball team please stand up?"  The answer appears to be in emphatic "NO" and it should be a roller-coaster ride on down the stretch.

Was this the worst loss of the season for the Hoyas?  Not really, the South Florida game still rates worse.

Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Visitor                         Home      
.            Georgetown                      Rutgers         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            31        31        62

Effic.        103.6     115.7     109.8       106.8     122.1     114.6  
 
eFG%           55.6      53.3      54.4        51.6      50.0      50.9  
TO%            29.1      16.1      22.6        16.2       9.6      12.9  
OR%            35.7      50.0      43.3        37.5      35.3      36.4  
FTA/FGA         7.4      26.7      17.5         0.0      61.5      27.6  
 
Assist Rate    69.2      25.0      44.8        66.7      63.6      65.4  
Block Rate      4.5      16.7      10.0        15.8      12.0      13.6  
Steal Rate      6.5       6.4       6.5        16.2       9.6      12.9  
 
2FG%           47.4      64.0      56.8        54.5      38.9      47.5  
3FG%           50.0       0.0      30.8        30.0      50.0      38.9  
FT%           100.0      50.0      60.0         0.0      75.0      75.0

For whatever reason, the Hoyas couldn't be bothered to play defense today in Piscataway. Rutgers came into the game averaging about 0.95 points per possession in Big East play, but managed to score at a 1.15 pt/poss clip in the game.

How did they do it?

1. Cut down on turnovers.  Rutgers averages a 22% turnover rate in conference, but managed to commit only eight in the game.  The 12.9% TO rate for this game was their best performance of the season.
    
2. Made their 2-pt FGs in the Lift-off half. Rutgers has shot about 47% on 2FGs this year, while Georgetown allows teams to shoot about 45%.  The Scarlet Knights made 8/15 dunk, lay-up and tip-in attempts, but also shot 4/7 on 2-pt jumpers.
    
3. Made their 3-pt FGs in the Vesper half.  Rutgers is shooting 33% on 3FGs in Big East play, but managed to make 4/8 3FGs in the second half.  Mike Rosario was 0/6 behind the arc in the first half, but a solid 2/4 in the second.
    
4. Mostly, they just didn't turn the ball over.

Offensively, the game was about as expected for Georgetown.  First half turnovers and poor inside shooting were offset by hot outside shooting [Hollis Thompson 2/2 3FGs], and when the 3-ball stopped dropping the 2nd half [0/5, but the last was shot under duress], the Hoyas made their 2FGs [16/25 = 15/19 on layups and tip-ins; 1/6 on 2-pt jumpers] and gathered half of their own missed shots.

An obvious sore spot was the poor FT shooting in the 2nd half:  Chris Wright missed both attempts and Austin Freeman missed the front-end of a 1-and-1.  While this surely hurt, I'd say the inability to make stops on defense was the critical failure in the game.

INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS

Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
Vaughn, Julian         41   15.3   74.4    4.7      41   120.8    9.9      -4.1  
Monroe, Greg           61   30.6  109.5   20.4      60   109.3   13.1      +3.7  
Wright, Chris          56   21.6   52.0    6.3      56   105.3   11.8      -6.0  
Freeman, Austin        54   21.8  121.8   14.3      53   111.7   11.8      +1.9  
Clark, Jason           58   12.6  121.3    8.9      59   108.9   12.9      -1.5  
Thompson, Hollis       34   12.1  185.8    7.6      32   105.3    6.7      +2.1  
Sanford, Vee            0     -     -      0.0       1   200.0    0.4      -0.4  
Benimon, Jerrelle       9   23.0  103.5    2.1      10    39.5    0.8      +1.3  
Sims, Henry             2    0.0    -      0.0       3   136.7    0.8      -0.8  
TOTALS                 63         103.3   64.4      63   108.3   68.3      -3.5  

Rutgers               Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
MILLER, Dane           60   17.5  135.9   14.2      58   100.3   11.6      +3.2  
MITCHELL, Jonathan     52   19.2  141.4   14.1      51   103.6   10.6      +3.6  
NDIAYE, Hamady         49   24.8  111.9   13.6      47    96.4    9.1      +3.2  
ROSARIO, Mike          58   24.3   70.7    9.9      57   109.3   12.5      -4.0  
BEATTY, James          46    3.7  216.9    3.7      45   103.0    9.3      -1.8  
JOHNSON, Austin        23   21.6  125.3    6.2      24   101.2    4.9      +1.3  
JACKSON, Patrick        3   66.7    0.0    0.0       5   108.9    1.1      -1.6  
COBURN, Mike           22   15.2  117.1    3.9      24   101.0    4.8      -0.2  
OKAM, Brian             2   75.0   66.7    1.0       4   102.5    0.8      -0.2  
TOTALS                 63         110.8   66.7      63   102.5   64.6      +3.6

The old saw that Georgetown goes as Chris Wright goes is getting tired - I just wish there was a body of evidence to dispute it.  The tally to date:

Chris Wright scores 10+ points:  Georgetown 16-0
Chris Wright scores <10 points:  Georgetown 2-6

There have been games when Chris Wright didn't score, but was still able to help the team (e.g. at Marquette). This was not one of those games.  In spite of playing well on defense [3 steals, 3 def. rebounds], Chris was a severe liability on offense:  by either advanced metric [ORating = 52, Pts. Produced = 6.3] this was his worst offensive game of the year, probably most closely resembling his effort against Old Dominion.  His missed 3FGA with 0:11 left and the Hoyas trailing 66-67 was certainly defensible (he was wide open), but still caused me to yell "Oh no!" as he took the shot - I would have much preferred that he drove the lane to force the defense to react.

Greg Monroe rates quite well tonight:  he seemed to able to score against defensive stalwart Hamady N'Diaye with relative ease by using his quickness advantage, once again led the team with 6 assists and 8 rebounds [3 OR, 5 DR] and also had four blocks.  His 5 turnovers also led the team, and might hint at something that the stats package doesn't pick up on - 4 of 5 turnovers were by a Rutgers steal, which they converted into 9 points.  To be fair, only 4 of those 9 points were on a fast break (i.e. directly attributable to the steal), but this is something that I should be able to track in the future (i.e. next season).

Austin Freeman struggled from behind the arc today [1/6 3FG], his worst outside shooting effort since the ODU game.  Otherwise, he was typical Austin Freeman, grinding out points, playing smart offensive and middling defensive basketball.  Rutgers was very smart to give that foul with 0:06 left, as the shot he launched afterward was true.  Unfortunately for Georgetown, he wasn't able to get a good look at the buzzer (but still almost made it).

Jason Clark played well at both ends, although he was a bit frustrated with the officiating - taking a silly charge late in the game.  His defense in the first half on Mike Rosario was outstanding.

Julian Vaughn had a quiet and frankly poor game.  He was held to 1 off. rebound for the second straight game, and - to my eye - struggled to recover after hedging out against guards.

Hollis Thompson had a nice game on the road, and Jerrelle Benimon made a nice 3FG long 2FG when dared by the defense.

HD BOX SCORE

Georgetown vs Rutgers
2/14/10 4:00 p.m. at Piscataway, N.J. - The RAC
Final score: Rutgers 71, Georgetown 68

Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Vaughn, Julian         24:47  - 4   6/45  3- 4  0- 0  0- 0  4/34  1/15  0/41  4/41  0/24  1/18  2/18   3
Monroe, Greg           38:35  + 4  19/68  7-13  1- 2  2- 3 15/56  6/21  0/60  5/61  4/38  3/29  5/34   0
Wright, Chris          36:36  - 5   6/62  2- 6  0- 2  2- 4  8/50  2/24  3/56  2/56  0/34  0/26  3/27   3
Freeman, Austin        33:37  - 5  17/54  6- 9  1- 6  2- 3 15/47  1/16  0/53  1/54  0/33  2/26  3/29   2
Clark, Jason           36:58  - 6   8/62  4- 5  0- 1  0- 0  6/51  3/23  0/59  2/58  0/37  2/27  4/31   5
Thompson, Hollis       20:32  + 5  10/39  2- 5  2- 2  0- 0  7/34  0/13  1/32  0/34  0/21  1/17  0/18   1
Sanford, Vee           00:06  - 2   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0   0
Benimon, Jerrelle      07:27  + 2   2/10  1- 2  0- 0  0- 0  2/11  0/ 4  0/10  1/ 9  0/ 9  1/ 6  3/10   1
Sims, Henry            01:22  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 4  0/ 1  0/ 3   0
TOTALS                 40:00       68    25-44  4-13  6-10    57 13/29  4/63 15/63  4/40 13/30 21/33  15
.                                        0.568 0.308 0.600       0.448 0.063 0.238 0.100 0.433 0.636    

Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
MILLER, Dane           36:35  + 9  13/70  4- 8  1- 1  2- 4  9/55  4/21  1/58  2/60  2/39  3/31  7/27   2
MITCHELL, Jonathan     32:24  - 4  24/56  5- 6  4- 6  2- 2 12/47  1/11  2/51  1/52  0/35  1/29  6/22   1
NDIAYE, Hamady         29:04  + 7  11/55  4- 8  0- 0  3- 3  8/44  0/15  2/47  2/49  4/31  5/27  2/22   3
ROSARIO, Mike          35:41  + 9  10/68  1- 6  2-10  2- 3 16/54  3/22  0/57  2/58  0/36  0/31  0/24   1
BEATTY, James          29:09  + 2   2/51  0- 0  0- 1  2- 2  1/42  4/18  2/45  0/46  0/30  0/26  0/19   0
JOHNSON, Austin        15:32  + 5   6/29  3- 5  0- 0  0- 0  5/24  2/ 9  0/24  0/23  0/18  2/12  1/13   2
JACKSON, Patrick       03:25  - 6   0/ 1  0- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/ 3  0/ 0  0/ 5  0/ 3  0/ 5  0/ 3  1/ 3   2
COBURN, Mike           15:10  - 5   3/23  1- 3  0- 0  1- 2  3/20  3/ 8  1/24  0/22  0/22  0/11  0/17   1
OKAM, Brian            03:00  - 2   2/ 2  1- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 4  1/ 2  0/ 4  0/ 0  0/ 3   0
TOTALS                 40:00       71    19-40  7-18 12-16    58 17/26  8/63  8/63  6/44 12/33 17/30  12
.                                        0.475 0.389 0.750       0.654 0.127 0.127 0.136 0.364 0.567    

Efficiency: Rutgers 1.127, Georgetown 1.079
eFG%: Rutgers 0.509, Georgetown 0.544
Substitutions: Rutgers 20, Georgetown 18

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Rutgers 1-3, Georgetown 1-1
Layups/Tips: Rutgers 13-23, Georgetown 22-29
Jumpers: Rutgers 5-14, Georgetown 2-14

Fast break pts (% FG pts): Rutgers 11 (18.6), Georgetown 4 (6.5)
Pts (eff.) after steal: Rutgers 15 (187.5), Georgetown 4 (100.0)
Seconds per poss: Rutgers 18.7, Georgetown 19.3

----------


Stats pages will be updated tomorrow.

Recap: Georgetown 88, Rutgers 63

Georgetown used a 12-0 run in the first half and a 15-0 run in the second to easily defeat the Rutgers Scarlet Knights today at the Verizon Center.

Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Home                            Visitor   
.            Georgetown                      Rutgers         
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            33        36        68
 
Effic.        140.7     117.1     128.8        88.7      94.8      92.2  
 
eFG%           70.0      72.9      71.3        52.1      50.0      50.9  
TO%             9.2      27.9      19.0        30.6      13.9      22.0  
OR%            16.7      50.0      31.8        31.2      20.0      25.0  
FT Rate        13.3      62.5      35.2        29.2       6.1      15.8  

Assist Rate    66.7      56.2      61.8        90.0      35.7      58.3  
Block Rate     10.0      11.1      10.7         5.3      10.5       7.9  
Steal Rate     15.3       8.4      11.7         6.1       8.4       7.3  
 
2FG%           63.2      68.4      65.8        50.0      50.0      50.0  
3FG%           54.5      60.0      56.2        35.7      33.3      34.5  
FT%           100.0      46.7      57.9        57.1      50.0      55.6

The Hoyas had a very strong offensive half to start the game, committing only 3 turnovers (to Rutgers' 10) on the way to a 17-point lead at the break.

Georgetown had an excellent selective shooting performance in the Lift-off half [1/1 dunks, 10/13 layups and tip-ins, 1/5 2FG jumpers and 6/11 3FGs] while limiting the Scarlet Knights to only 10 2FGAs (5 made).  The Hoyas weren't rebounding particularly strongly in the half, but Rutgers could only turn their five offensive rebounds into 4 points.

The Vesper half was another lopsided affair, as G'town pulled out to a 33-point lead before Coach Thompson emptied the bench after the final media timeout.  The Hoyas were more sloppy with the ball in the 2nd half - even ignoring their 3 turnovers in the final four possessions during garbage time, they had 7 turnovers in 30 possessions (23%).  However, they managed to do a much better job protecting the glass at both ends, gathering fully half of their own misses (5/10).  And they actually shot better in the Vesper half [2/3 dunks, 6/9 layups, 5/7 2FG jumpers, 3/5 3FGs].

The Hoyas also shot better than 50% from behind the arc for the third time in four games (also vs. Pittsburgh and Seton Hall).

In fact, Georgetown has improved their outside shooting from 35.8% (= 57/159) out-of-conference to 44.7% (= 55/123) during their first eight conference games.  Frankly this worries me, as I just don't think 45% shooting for 3FGA is sustainable for the rest of the season.

Here's how the Hoyas have shot the ball in-conference play historically (courtesy of StatSheet.com):

.                      Conf.      Best
Season     GU 3FG%   Avg 3FG%   Team 3FG%
2004-05     34.5       34.1       39.4
2005-06     35.1       35.0       41.6
2006-07     37.0       33.9       37.9
2007-08     34.6       34.3       40.7
2008-09     33.0       33.9       38.9
2009-10     44.7       33.6       45.6

Notre Dame has lead the Big East in 3FG% each of the past five seasons, but never shot 42% over the course of an entire conference season.  Right now, Marquette is the league leader, and the Hoyas and Warriors are the only teams shooting better than 41% for the year in-conference.

INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS

Georgetown            Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
Wright, Chris          55   26.3  110.5   16.0      51    83.8    8.6      +5.6  
Monroe, Greg           55   29.5  148.9   24.2      55    85.8    9.4     +12.5  
Freeman, Austin        46   22.5  124.6   12.9      45    99.3    8.9      +3.3  
Clark, Jason           38   14.6  142.5    7.9      37    89.0    6.6      +2.2  
Vaughn, Julian         34   25.3  163.1   14.0      31   102.6    6.4      +6.4  
Thompson, Hollis       42    9.8  136.7    5.6      42    78.6    6.6      +0.7  
Sanford, Vee           15   12.9   97.0    1.9      16   123.9    4.0      -1.3  
Dougherty, Ryan         3   33.3    0.0    0.0       4   113.3    0.9      -1.0  
Benimon, Jerrelle      30    9.0   97.1    2.6      30    69.0    4.1      -0.4  
STEPKA, Stephen         2    0.0    -      0.0       3   137.8    0.8      -0.8  
Sims, Henry            15   22.8  110.5    3.8      16    90.9    2.9      +0.8  
TOTALS                 67         130.0   88.9      66    89.7   59.2     +28.1  

Rutgers               Off     %           Pts      Def           Pts   
Player                Poss  Poss  O.Rtg   Prod     Poss  D.Rtg  Allow    Net Pts
ROSARIO, Mike          43   43.8   76.8   14.5      45   146.7   13.2      -5.9  
NDIAYE, Hamady         57   18.4  112.8   11.9      59   139.4   16.4      -3.7  
BEATTY, James          59   13.2   75.8    5.9      61   116.5   14.2      -5.7  
MILLER, Dane           47   18.2   42.7    3.7      48   143.6   13.8      -9.4  
MITCHELL, Jonathan     53   17.6  148.2   13.8      53   112.0   11.9      +2.6  
JOHNSON, Austin        13    1.1  300.0    0.4      14   165.2    4.6      -2.0  
JACKSON, Patrick       15   20.0    0.0    0.0      16    69.4    2.2      -2.2  
COBURN, Mike           34   16.1  163.5    9.0      31   124.3    7.7      +1.7  
OKAM, Brian             9   17.9   76.1    1.2       8    30.0    0.5      +0.7  
TOTALS                 66          92.4   60.3      67   126.2   84.6     -23.4

This was the Greg Monroe show, as he used nearly 30% of available possessions while posting an offensive rating just shy of 150.  Monroe was a model of high-usage efficiency, making 9/11 2FG, 1/1 3FG and co-leading the team with 6 assists and 3 off. rebounds.  And he put up that high ORating while still committing 4 turnovers in the game - there's still room for improvement, gosh darn it.  A quick look at the historical record indicates that he's only had one better performance, his second-ever college game last season against Drexel (I have no recollection of that game, but that's why I write these things down).

His front-court partner in crime - Julian Vaughn - also had a solid game against the apparently overwhelmed Rutgers' big men.  Vaughn also missed only 1 shot, and made 4/4 FTs in the game, bringing him over 50% shooting for the season (21/39) after starting out the year 1/10 from the line.  More importantly, he's been able to improve his assist rate (13.5 to 16.2) while decreasing his turnover rate (23.9 to 17.3) from out-of-conference to in-conference.  Julian had a 30% turnover rate last season, so this is a huge leap for him.

Chris Wright had a couple of issues out there today (4 turnovers, 2 shot attempts blocked) but still managed to look good by shooting a scintillating 4/5 from deep while dropping six dimes.

Austin Freeman and Jason Clark struggled just a bit from outside (2/7 3FG combined) but were otherwise solid.  Well, actually Freeman missed two more FTs today, dropping him down to 88.5% for the season and jeopardizing his standing in the 180-shooter club - he's currently 52.6% FG, 46.3% 3FG, 88.5% FT (= 187.4%).  Yeah, I'm now tracking this.

The bench contributed 16 points to the cause, with Thompson and Benimon (today's defensive star) seeing significant time in the first half while the outcome was still in doubt.  Vee Sanford saw his most playing time (16 possessions) since the early season.  Henry Sims didn't get into the game until well into the 2nd half, and may have officially fallen out of the rotation.  However, he comported himself quite well when he did get in, with two sweet drives on consecutive plays (with assists from Monroe on each) and a just-missed alley-oop.

HD BOX SCORE

Rutgers vs Georgetown
01/23/10 12:00 at Verizon Center
Final score: Georgetown 88, Rutgers 63

Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
ROSARIO, Mike          26:30  -27  15/39  3- 8  3-10  0- 0 18/37  2/ 9  0/45  2/43  0/26  1/24  0/14   1
NDIAYE, Hamady         35:18  -27  10/57  4- 7  0- 0  2- 3  7/48  3/17  0/59  2/57  3/35  3/29  4/18   3
BEATTY, James          35:31  -17   7/60  0- 0  2- 3  1- 3  3/51  3/21  3/61  4/59  0/35  1/31  1/19   0
MILLER, Dane           28:04  -30   0/42  0- 1  0- 5  0- 0  6/40  5/16  0/48  4/47  0/29  1/25  3/16   3
MITCHELL, Jonathan     31:33  - 7  21/55  3- 7  5- 8  0- 0 15/48  0/14  1/53  0/53  0/30  1/29  3/18   0
JOHNSON, Austin        08:27  -18   0/ 8  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 9  1/ 2  0/14  0/13  0/ 8  0/ 7  1/ 4   3
JACKSON, Patrick       09:42  +11   0/21  0- 0  0- 3  0- 0  3/14  0/ 8  0/16  1/15  0/ 6  0/ 8  2/ 6   1
COBURN, Mike           20:13  -12  10/27  4- 4  0- 0  2- 3  4/29  0/ 6  1/31  1/34  0/18  0/20  0/11   3
OKAM, Brian            04:42  + 2   0/ 6  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 9  0/ 3  0/ 8  0/ 9  0/ 3  2/ 7  1/ 4   1
TOTALS                 40:00       63    14-28 10-29  5- 9    57 14/24  5/67 15/66  3/38  9/36 15/22  15
.                                        0.500 0.345 0.556       0.583 0.075 0.227 0.079 0.250 0.682    

Georgetown              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Wright, Chris          31:31  +35  16/81  1- 5  4- 5  2- 3 10/47  6/27  1/51  4/55  0/21  0/15  4/27   2
Monroe, Greg           32:54  +20  21/74  9-11  1- 1  0- 0 12/47  6/21  1/55  4/55  1/24  3/17 11/30   1
Freeman, Austin        27:03  +21  14/65  5- 7  1- 4  1- 3 11/41  3/20  0/45  0/46  0/17  0/15  2/23   1
Clark, Jason           22:11  +19   9/54  2- 3  1- 3  2- 2  6/35  2/18  1/37  1/38  0/17  0/14  2/19   2
Vaughn, Julian         20:19  +20  12/52  4- 5  0- 0  4- 4  5/31  3/15  0/31  1/34  0/11  3/11  2/14   1
Thompson, Hollis       26:17  +19   8/55  1- 2  2- 3  0- 2  5/29  0/17  2/42  0/42  0/16  0/12  1/25   1
Sanford, Vee           09:58  -11   2/ 9  1- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 8  0/ 2  0/16  1/15  0/ 9  0/ 7  0/10   2
Dougherty, Ryan        01:48  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 4  1/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 2   1
Benimon, Jerrelle      17:29  +11   1/35  0- 0  0- 0  1- 2  0/21  1/12  2/30  1/30  1/11  1/11  2/18   1
STEPKA, Stephen        01:12  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 2   0
Sims, Henry            09:18  - 1   5/15  2- 4  0- 0  1- 4  4/ 9  0/ 4  1/16  0/15  1/10  0/ 5  0/10   0
TOTALS                 40:00       88    25-38  9-16 11-20    54 21/34  8/66 13/67  3/28  7/22 27/36  12
.                                        0.658 0.562 0.550       0.618 0.121 0.194 0.107 0.318 0.750    

Efficiency: Georgetown 1.313, Rutgers 0.955
eFG%: Georgetown 0.713, Rutgers 0.509
Substitutions: Georgetown 22, Rutgers 20

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Georgetown 3-4, Rutgers 2-2
Layups/Tips: Georgetown 16-22, Rutgers 6-12
Jumpers: Georgetown 6-12, Rutgers 6-14

Fast break pts (% FG pts): Georgetown 10 (13.0), Rutgers 4 (6.9)
Pts (eff.) after steal: Georgetown 6 (75.0), Rutgers 5 (100.0)
Seconds per poss: Georgetown 18.6, Rutgers 17.5

-------

Stats pages will be updated tomorrow morning (hopefully).

Recap: Georgetown 57, Rutgers 47

Hoyas win! Hoyas win! Hoyas win!

Sorry if that was too obvious, but Georgetown was able to turn the page on a woeful January with a ten-point win at the Verizon Center tonight.

Not to go all Sports Guy (or Ray Floriani) on you, but I'll be writing this recap while watching the replay on ESPN360 - I wasn't able to watch or listen live thanks to a crazy-insane schedule these days. And thanks to SFHoya99 for writing a couple of nice posts here while I struggle to keep up.


Thoughts after first TV timeout [GU 2, RU 2]:
- A. Freeman is drifting on his jump shot.
- C. Wright can get by his man at will, but then what?
- D. Summers is trying too hard (2 fouls).
- Rutgers turns the ball over frequently.

Thoughts after 2nd TV timeout [GU 11, RU 10]:
- Rutgers finds its outside shot [RU 2/5 3FG in the 1st half]
- N. Mescheriakov looks promising, with very good hustle
- A. Freeman creates offense by driving and passing (still misses a 3FG)
- Bob Wentzel tells us that JTIII has installed a precision offense at Georgetown that eschews offensive rebounds for outside shots (G'town was 8th nationally in Off. Reb % [40.2] in 2007). The Hoyas off. rebounding problems are personnel-driven, not scheme-driven.

Thoughts after 3rd TV timeout [GU 19, RU 14]:
- Mescheriakov misses a wide-open 3FG, which he has to take [G'town ended the 1st half 2/9 3FG].
- J. Vaughn commits a "venial sin" of fouling a 3FG shooter. Wentzel +1.
- Vaughn and Mescheriakov seem to play behind their man in the post on defense. Monroe fronts his man.
- Freeman generates more offense by driving then kicking to Clark for a 3FG [Freeman with 3 assists in the 1st half].
- The announcers point out that G'town has 3 freshmen and 2 sophomores on the court. With Summers sitting with 2 fouls, anytime Sapp needs a rest only frosh and sophs are available.
- Dare I say, free Henry Sims [Sims led the team in Net Pts. for the 1st half (+4.0)].

Thoughts after 4th TV timeout [GU 22, RU 16]:
- Georgetown had 3 shots blocked on one possession (2 on Wright, 1 on Sims) - I wonder how many the official scorer will record [three, it turns out].
- Rutgers with more turnovers (11 so far) [RU 38.8% TO Rate in the 1st half].
- Wright with another drive without a plan [Wright had only 1 TO in the 1st half].

Thoughts heading into the half [GU 27, RU 18]:
- Sims with a nice backdoor pass to Freeman, who is called for a charge. Was that the 1st backdoor pass of the game?
- Monroe ended the half with consecutive assists. He ended the half +13 (+/-), leading the Hoyas.
- I'd like to say that Georgetown played a great defensive half, but I think most of the credit comes from Rutgers [RU: 58.1 Off. Eff. in the 1st half].
- Georgetown ended the half with an off. eff. of 87.2 - not very good, but with Rutgers struggles it doesn't have to be.
- 30 possessions for the half, but it felt even slower.


2nd half, thoughts after 1st TV timeout [GU 35, RU 21]:
- J. Sapp bails out the offense with a 3FG with 1 sec left on the shot clock. A quiet 9 points so far for Sapp.
- Rutgers turns the ball over their first two possessions of this half.

2nd half, thoughts after 2nd TV timeout [GU 45, RU 26]:
- Clark and Mescheriakov hit back-to-back 3FGs, causing a Rutgers timeout. Georgetown has now shot 4/5 3FG to start the second half, and pulled ahead by 20. This kind of outside shooting cures many ills.
- This game is starting to put me to sleep.

2nd half, thought after 3rd TV timeout [GU 49, RU 36]:
- M. Rosario has decided to use most possessions now [38% Poss. Used this half].
- The losing streak may have left some scars. The Hoyas are up 49-29 and look depressed. Maybe they're just disinterested. Sparse crowd, too.
- Rosario with a 7-0 run by himself as Georgetown's offensive execution starts to get sloppy.

2nd half, thoughts after 4th TV timeout [GU 56, RU 42]:
- I realized during the break that G'town will score only 8 more points the rest of the way.
- Wright breakaway lay-up - six points left.
- Mescheriakov with a spin in the post - four points left.
- Freeman doesn't drift on a 3FG and it goes in. One point left.

End of the game thoughts [GU 57, RU 47]
- Last Hoya point by Wright at the FT line.
- Game over. Other than some hot outside shooting, the Hoyas looked listless in the 2nd half.
- Rutgers lost this game with tons of turnovers and poor shooting on 2FG (RU was 3/17 on 2FG jumpers).


Let's run the numbers:

TEMPO-FREE BOX SCORE
 
.            Home                            Visitor   
.            GU                              Rutgers 
.            1st Half  2nd Half   Total      1st Half  2nd Half   Total
Pace            30        30        61

Effic.         87.2      99.5      93.0        58.1      96.2      76.7

eFG%           37.9      67.5      50.0        36.8      52.0      45.5
TO%            16.2      29.8      22.8        38.8      29.8      34.3
OR%            38.1      16.7      30.3        14.3      35.7      25.0
FT Rate        31.0      30.0      30.6        26.3      12.0      18.2

Assist Rate    70.0      72.7      71.4        33.3      72.7      58.8
Block Rate      0.0       5.9       3.2        20.0       0.0      12.9
Steal Rate     22.6      13.3      17.9         3.2      16.6       9.8

2FG%           40.0      54.5      45.2        28.6      41.2      35.5
3FG%           22.2      55.6      38.9        40.0      50.0      46.2
FT%            55.6      50.0      53.3        80.0     100.0      87.5

INDIVIDUAL NET POINTS STATS

GU                    Off    Poss           Individ     Def             Individ             
Player                Poss   Used    ORtg   Pts Prod    Poss    DRtg   Pts Allow   Net Pts
Summers, DaJuan        25     7.9    59.0     4.7        25     88.0      4.4       +0.3  
Wright, Chris          47     7.6    88.7     6.7        49     75.1      7.4       -0.6  
Monroe, Greg           53    11.7   103.1    12.0        53     43.8      4.6       +7.4  
Freeman, Austin        49     8.0    86.6     6.9        48     74.8      7.2       -0.3  
Sapp, Jessie           33     5.3   130.1     7.0        35     89.9      6.3       +0.7  
Mescheriakov, Nikita   31     8.0    58.6     4.7        31     86.5      5.4       -0.7  
Clark, Jason           30     3.8   123.3     4.7        30     59.1      3.5       +1.1  
Vaughn, Julian          2     0.0     -       0.0         3    146.7      0.9       -0.9  
Sims, Henry            21     3.7   147.9     5.5        22     83.0      3.7       +1.8  
Wattad, Omar            9     2.0     0.0     0.0         9     34.3      0.6       -0.6  
TOTALS                 60    58.0    89.9    52.1        61     72.0     43.9       +8.2    

Rutgers               Off    Poss           Individ     Def             Individ             
Player                Poss   Used    ORtg   Pts Prod    Poss    DRtg   Pts Allow   Net Pts
Echenique,Gregory      37     4.0    49.1     2.0        37    102.1      7.6       -5.6  
Chandler, Corey        30    10.4     9.2     1.0        28     85.7      4.8       -3.8  
Farmer, Anthony        45     7.5   110.9     8.3        46     86.2      7.9       +0.4  
Rosario, Mike          54    19.3    80.5    15.5        53     92.3      9.8       +5.7  
Ndiaye, Hamady         43     4.8    93.1     4.4        41     83.2      6.8       -2.4  
Pettis,Earl            36     7.4   123.4     9.1        36     76.6      5.5       +3.6  
Inman, J.R             19     2.2    22.0     0.5        18    116.8      4.2       -3.7  
Kuhn, Mike              1     0.0     -       0.0         2      0.0      0.0       +0.0  
Jackson, Patrick        0     0.0     -       0.0         0     95.0      0.0       +0.0  
Coburn, Mike           17     2.6    49.7     1.3        15    104.7      3.1       -1.8  
Griffin, Jaron         23     1.6   116.0     1.9        24     88.0      4.2       -2.3  
TOTALS                 61    59.8    73.5    44.0        60     89.9     54.0      -10.0

HD BOX SCORE

Rutgers vs GU
02/03/09 7:00 at Verizon Center
Final score: GU 57, Rutgers 47

Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Echenique,Gregory      24:26  -19   2/19  1- 4  0- 0  0- 0  4/21  0/ 5  0/37  0/37  2/24  0/15  3/25   1
Chandler, Corey        19:27  - 8   0/18  0- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/17  1/ 6  0/28  8/30  0/15  1/12  2/18   1
Farmer, Anthony        30:18  -11   7/32  2- 6  1- 2  0- 0  8/33  5/ 8  1/46  1/45  0/28  0/22  2/30   1
Rosario, Mike          34:25  -11  20/41  3- 9  4- 8  2- 2 17/40  1/ 8  2/53  5/54  1/29  1/25  2/29   2
Ndiaye, Hamady         28:17  + 4   7/38  2- 2  0- 0  3- 3  2/33  0/12  0/41  3/43  1/18  0/20  5/20   2
Pettis,Earl            23:46  - 3   8/33  3- 4  0- 0  2- 3  4/28  1/ 9  3/36  2/36  0/17  2/17  3/16   3
Inman, J.R             12:03  -11   0/11  0- 2  0- 0  0- 0  2/12  0/ 3  0/18  0/19  0/ 9  1/10  4/ 8   3
Kuhn, Mike             01:04  + 0   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 2  0/ 0  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 2  0/ 1   0
Jackson, Patrick       00:04  - 1   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0   0
Coburn, Mike           11:00  + 3   0/17  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/12  2/ 7  0/15  2/17  0/ 4  0/ 6  1/ 5   0
Griffin, Jaron         15:10  + 7   3/26  0- 0  1- 3  0- 0  3/22  0/10  0/24  0/23  0/11  0/11  1/13   2
TOTALS                 40:00       47    11-31  6-13  7- 8    44 10/17  6/60 21/61  4/31  7/28 23/33  15
.                                        0.355 0.462 0.875       0.588 0.100 0.344 0.129 0.250 0.697    

GU                      Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Summers, DaJuan        16:41  - 3   5/22  1- 3  1- 3  0- 0  6/20  1/ 6  1/25  3/25  0/14  1/15  2/10   3
Wright, Chris          31:55  + 8   5/45  2- 7  0- 2  1- 2  9/38  3/14  2/49  1/47  0/27  1/26  0/21   1
Monroe, Greg           34:44  +20  10/53  4- 8  0- 0  2- 5  8/45  6/16  4/53  2/53  0/27  1/29  6/26   0
Freeman, Austin        32:21  + 7   7/45  1- 3  1- 3  2- 2  6/41  3/14  1/48  2/49  0/23  0/28  4/21   2
Sapp, Jessie           21:57  + 1  11/32  2- 3  2- 2  1- 2  5/30  0/ 9  0/35  1/33  0/17  1/19  3/15   1
Mescheriakov, Nikita   20:03  + 1   7/27  2- 2  1- 5  0- 0  7/23  0/ 7  1/31  2/31  0/17  0/14  0/15   5
Clark, Jason           20:22  + 6   6/29  0- 0  2- 3  0- 0  3/22  2/ 9  2/30  2/30  1/17  1/15  2/17   1
Vaughn, Julian         01:52  - 4   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 1  0/ 1   2
Sims, Henry            13:58  + 3   6/19  2- 4  0- 0  2- 4  4/17  0/ 4  0/22  0/21  0/ 8  2/13  1/ 8   1
Wattad, Omar           06:07  +11   0/13  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 8  0/ 5  0/ 9  1/ 9  0/ 4  0/ 5  0/ 6   0
TOTALS                 40:00       57    14-31  7-18  8-15    49 15/21 11/61 14/60  1/31 10/33 21/28  16
.                                        0.452 0.389 0.533       0.714 0.180 0.233 0.032 0.303 0.750    

Efficiency: GU 0.950, Rutgers 0.770
eFG%: GU 0.500, Rutgers 0.455
Substitutions: GU 27, Rutgers 27

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: GU 0-0, Rutgers 2-2
Layups/Tips: GU 11-21, Rutgers 6-12
Jumpers: GU 3-10, Rutgers 3-17

Fast break pts: GU 2 (0.041), Rutgers 4 (0.100)
Seconds per off. poss: GU 20.3, Rutgers 20.0

Another post on rebounding

Georgetown lost to the Pitt Panthers yesterday, for the Hoyas' second loss of the season, due in large part to a massive discrepancy in rebounds: 48 to 23. That's a rebounding margin of -25, or two more than the total number of rebounds that the Hoyas secured.

A few weeks ago, SFHoya99 wrote a prescient article explaining a pair of slightly more sophisticated statistics (Off. Reb. % and Def. Reb. %), which we tend to use around here rather than rebounding margin. I won't explain here why we prefer them (do read his article if you'd like to know why, it's very good), but I will re-post the equations to calculate each.

.                      Off. Reb.
Off. Reb. % = ----------------------------
.             (Off. Reb. + Opp. Def. Reb.)


.                       Def. Reb.
Def. Reb. % = ----------------------------
.             (Def. Reb. + Opp. Off. Reb.)

These are simple calculations - we're just looking at the number of rebounds gathered divided by total opportunities to get those rebounds. We'd expect teams to get about 1/3 of their own misses and 2/3 of their opponents', and we treat offensive and defensive rebounds separately. Again, re-read the above linked article for more information.


About a year ago, I also wrote a note about Georgetown rebounding difficulties, added to the end of a recap of an ugly road win against Rutgers. I'd like to return to it, and update the underlying statistics in an attempt to put the Pitt game into some perspective.

I mentioned then, and again in yesterday's recap, another rebounding stat called Total Reb. %. This is also a simple-to-calculate metric that serves as the stat-head analogue to rebounding margin, and is merely the average of Off. Reb. % and Def. Reb. %. That is:

.             (Off. Reb. % + Def. Reb. %)
Tot. Reb. % = ---------------------------
.                          2

If two teams perform equally well in a game at rebounding, each should end up with a Tot. Reb. % = 50%. Here's an example you might find in a typical box score:

Team A         vs.   Team B
OR   DR   TR         OR   DR   TR
14   20   34         10   28   38

If you were to simply look at rebounding margin, you'd say that Team B out-rebounded Team A by four. However, if you were to calculate rebounding percentages, you'd see that the teams were even on the glass. For example, Team A's OR % = 14 / (14 + 28) = 33.3; that is, while Team A was on offense there were 42 (= 14 + 28) rebounding opportunities, and they got 14 of them, or one-third. Here are all the numbers for our hypothetical game:

.     Team A          vs.        Team B
OR %   DR %   TR %         OR %   DR %   TR %
33.3   66.7    50          33.3   66.7    50

Of course, this is not to say that rebounding margin always gives misleading information. In yesterday's game, Georgetown ended up with a Tot. Reb. % = 32.2, which looks nearly as bad as the -25 rebounding margin I mentioned at the top.

After all this introduction, allow me to roll out another in a never-ending series of overly busy plots, looking at Georgetown's Tot. Reb. % for this and the last two seasons (click to enlarge).

The points represent individual games, the solid black line indicates the 50% rebounding rate (a draw with the opponent), the solid blue, red and gray lines represent moving averages of the data (n=5 for 2006-7 and 2007-8; n=3 for 2008-9) and the dashed lines are linear fits to each year's data.

A few comments and observations:

• Tot. Reb. % is not a stat that is adjusted for opponent, so playing a run of great or lousy rebounding teams can make your team look better or worse than they may be over the course of the season. For the sake of argument, we'll assume that the relative rebounding ability of teams played at the same time of year is roughly equal season to season.
  

• The three-year trend from comparing the linear-fit lines from each season indicates that this team is the worst of the three, and by a substantial margin. Do keep in mind that there is quite a bit of uncertainty for these fits which I don't indicate, so the differences would not be considered significant in the true sense of that word.

• More interestingly (to me) are the observed seasonal trends from comparing the moving averages for previous years, and which may be repeating again this year:
  1. After starting the season essentially neutral or noisy, the team rebounding improves strongly in December. I suspect this is from a diet of "cupcakes" during the exam period.
  2. The Big East conference season begins, and it is a shock to the Hoyas. Rebounding performance drops dramatically.
  3. By February, the team has recovered - or more likely worked hard in practice - and is rebounding nearly as well as during the December stretch.
  4. By March, the rest of the league has caught up, and Georgetown is now rebounding equally well as their opponents.

• Just by looking at the moving averages, this year's team, while starting much more poorly than previously, looks to have recovered to roughly last year's level, before the beating from Pitt. However, it should be pointed out that about this time last year, the Hoyas took the same type of pounding on the boards in the aforementioned Rutgers game.

The question to be answered in the next few weeks is whether this team can follow the lead of its predecessors and make the same type of commitment to rebounding by February.

Big East HD Box Scores - Rutgers

Go to:

Cincinnati | UConn | DePaul | Georgetown | Louisville | Marquette | Notre Dame | Pitt
Providence | Rutgers | St. John's | Seton Hall | S. Florida | Syracuse | Villanova | W. Virginia

See here for more info about HD box scores.

Looking for 2009-10 HD scores?  Try here.

Big East Schedule

Date       Time        Home Team      Road Team     Location           HD Box?
31-Dec-08  2:00 p.m.   Rutgers        Pittsburgh    Piscataway, N.J.     Yes
03-Jan-09  7:00 p.m.   Connecticut    Rutgers       Storrs, Conn.        Yes
07-Jan-09  7:30 p.m.   Rutgers        Marquette     Piscataway, N.J.     Yes
10-Jan-09  7:30 p.m.   Rutgers        Syracuse      Piscataway, N.J.      No
14-Jan-09  7:30 p.m.   Cincinnati     Rutgers       Cincinnati, Ohio      No
21-Jan-09  7:30 p.m.   Rutgers        Louisville    Piscataway, N.J.     Yes
24-Jan-09  7:00 p.m.   St. John's     Rutgers       New York, N.Y.        No
29-Jan-09  9:00 p.m.   Seton Hall     Rutgers       Newark, N.J.
31-Jan-09  7:00 p.m.   Rutgers        DePaul        Piscataway, N.J.
03-Feb-09  7:00 p.m.   Georgetown     Rutgers       Washington, D.C.
08-Feb-09  12:00 p.m.  Rutgers        Seton Hall    Piscataway, N.J.
14-Feb-09  7:00 p.m.   Providence     Rutgers       Providence, R.I.
19-Feb-09  9:00 p.m.   Villanova      Rutgers       Villanova, Pa.
22-Feb-09  3:00 p.m.   Rutgers        West Virginia Piscataway, N.J.
25-Feb-09  9:00 p.m.   Notre Dame     Rutgers       Notre Dame, Ind.
01-Mar-09  2:00 p.m.   Rutgers        Providence    Piscataway, N.J.
03-Mar-09  7:00 p.m.   Syracuse       Rutgers       Syracuse, N.Y.
07-Mar-09  2:00 p.m.   Rutgers        USF           Piscataway, N.J.

HD BOX SCORE

Pittsburgh vs Rutgers
12/31/08 2:00 p.m. at Piscataway, N.J. - The RAC
Final score: Pittsburgh 78, Rutgers 72

Pittsburgh              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Biggs, Tyrell          32:18  +14   6/64  3- 5  0- 0  0- 0  5/49  1/23  0/51  0/52  2/34  4/25  6/32   3
Young, Sam             34:04  - 6  18/62  6-10  2- 2  0- 1 12/48  0/14  0/57  2/58  1/38  1/30  3/32   3
Blair, DeJuan          08:02  - 1   2/13  1- 4  0- 0  0- 0  4/16  0/ 5  0/12  0/15  0/ 6  2/11  0/ 3   4
Fields, Levance        34:15  + 6  11/69  2-10  2- 3  1- 2 13/53  6/22  2/55  1/58  0/32  0/31  4/29   1
Dixon, Jermaine        28:27  + 2  10/57  3- 4  0- 3  4- 6  7/43  2/19  3/47  1/48  2/24  0/24  2/23   2
Brown, Gilbert         22:40  + 9  11/47  4- 7  0- 1  3- 4  8/35  0/13  0/40  1/41  1/31  2/21  2/30   0
Gibbs, Ashton          08:40  + 1   3/14  0- 0  1- 2  0- 0  2/10  0/ 4  0/15  2/14  0/15  0/ 5  2/14   0
Wanamaker, Brad        22:58  + 1  15/45  2- 2  2- 5  5- 6  7/28  4/ 9  0/38  1/39  0/28  0/18  5/26   2
Robinson, Nasir        00:00  + 0   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0  0/ 0   0
McGhee, Gary           08:36  + 4   2/19  1- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/13  0/ 7  0/15  1/15  0/ 7  1/ 5  2/ 6   1
TOTALS                 40:00       78    22-43  7-16 13-19    59 13/29  5/66  9/68  6/43 10/33 27/39  16
.                                        0.512 0.438 0.684       0.448 0.076 0.132 0.140 0.303 0.692

Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
ECHENIQUE, Gregory     29:03  - 6   4/51  2- 8  0- 0  0- 0  8/50  1/18  0/52  0/50  3/35  4/31  4/27   0
NDIAYE, Hamady         23:12  - 4   0/41  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/30  1/14  0/35  2/35  1/24  2/18  2/17   4
CHANDLER, Corey        34:50  - 2  17/64  5- 9  2- 7  1- 1 16/55  1/16  1/60  2/57  0/39  2/33  6/31   2
FARMER, Anthony        33:02  - 1  20/63  5- 6  1- 1  7- 9  7/48  3/16  0/56  1/53  0/38  0/28  3/30   3
ROSARIO, Mike          35:35  + 1  22/68  6-10  2-10  4- 4 20/57  4/17  2/61  1/59  1/38  0/33  3/33   4
PETTIS, Earl           05:13  - 5   0/ 8  0- 0  0- 1  0- 0  1/ 8  0/ 3  0/ 9  0/ 9  0/ 4  0/ 6  0/ 4   1
INMAN, JR              27:42  - 1   7/52  1- 7  1- 1  2- 2  8/46  1/16  1/48  2/47  0/27  4/29  4/23   2
COBURN, Mike           11:23  -12   2/13  1- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/21  3/ 4  0/19  0/20  0/10  0/17  1/ 5   1
TOTALS                 40:00       72    20-43  6-20 14-16    63 14/26  4/68  8/66  5/43 12/39 23/33  17
.                                        0.465 0.300 0.875       0.538 0.059 0.121 0.116 0.308 0.697

Efficiency: Pittsburgh 1.147, Rutgers 1.091
eFG%: Pittsburgh 0.551, Rutgers 0.460
Substitutions: Pittsburgh 19, Rutgers 19

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Pittsburgh 1-2, Rutgers 1-2
Layups/Tips: Pittsburgh 13-19, Rutgers 10-17
Jumpers: Pittsburgh 8-22, Rutgers 9-24

Fast break pts: Pittsburgh 10 (0.154), Rutgers 14 (0.241)

HD BOX SCORE

RUTGERS vs Connecticut
1/3/09 7:00 p.m. at Harry A. Gampel Pavilion  Storrs, Conn.
Final score: Connecticut 80, RUTGERS 49

RUTGERS                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
ECHENIQUE, Gregory     13:55  -12  12/24  2- 4  0- 0  8- 8  4/21  0/ 4  1/27  0/27  0/16  2/15  0/ 6   2
NDIAYE, Hamady         08:12  - 5   2/14  1- 2  0- 0  0- 0  2/11  2/ 4  0/18  1/17  1/10  0/ 6  2/ 5   3
CHANDLER, Corey        11:34  - 3   0/22  0- 4  0- 0  0- 0  4/17  0/ 5  1/22  0/23  0/13  1/12  0/ 4   0
FARMER, Anthony        15:19  - 3   2/31  1- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/24  1/ 8  0/30  1/31  0/19  0/15  0/ 7   2
ROSARIO, Mike          11:39  -18   7/13  1- 2  1- 3  2- 2  5/17  1/ 2  0/23  3/22  1/16  0/13  2/ 8   3
PETTIS, Earl           08:26  -17   3/ 9  0- 0  1- 1  0- 0  1/12  0/ 3  0/16  1/15  0/13  0/ 8  0/ 7   1
INMAN, JR              12:23  -15   5/15  2- 6  0- 0  1- 1  6/16  0/ 1  0/20  0/22  0/15  0/13  1/ 5   1
JACKSON, Patrick       04:36  - 2   0/ 9  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 5  0/ 1  0/ 7  0/ 8  0/ 4  0/ 4  0/ 0   0
COBURN, Mike           08:26  -17   0/ 9  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/12  1/ 4  0/16  2/15  0/13  0/ 8  0/ 7   1
GRIFFIN, Jaron         05:30  - 8   0/ 9  0- 1  0- 1  0- 0  2/10  0/ 4  0/11  0/10  0/11  0/ 6  1/ 6   0
TOTALS                 20:00       31     7-24  2- 5 11-11    29  5/ 9  2/38  8/38  2/26  4/20  6/11  13
.                                        0.292 0.400 1.000       0.556 0.053 0.211 0.077 0.200 0.545

Connecticut             Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
ADRIEN, Jeff           14:40  +17   8/39  2- 2  0- 0  4- 5  2/24  1/13  0/29  1/29  1/19  1/11  5/16   1
ROBINSON, Stanley      09:46  + 9   4/24  2- 2  0- 0  0- 0  2/15  1/ 8  0/20  0/20  1/14  1/ 7  4/13   0
THABEET, Hasheem       09:26  +20  11/27  4- 5  0- 0  3- 4  5/14  0/ 6  0/18  1/19  1/11  1/ 6  0/11   1
DYSON, Jerome          12:53  +10   4/33  1- 4  0- 1  2- 4  5/17  2/11  1/25  0/26  0/12  0/ 6  1/ 9   2
PRICE, A.J             13:34  +11   3/33  1- 2  0- 0  1- 2  2/21  6/12  1/27  1/28  0/18  0/10  3/15   0
BEVERLY, Donnell       02:06  + 4   0/ 6  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 3  0/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 0  1/ 2   0
WALKER, Kemba          09:37  + 9   7/25  2- 3  1- 1  0- 0  4/13  1/ 6  2/17  0/17  0/ 9  0/ 4  1/ 6   0
AUSTRIE, Craig         10:43  +13   4/28  2- 2  0- 0  0- 0  2/15  2/ 8  0/20  0/18  0/15  1/ 6  0/13   0
HARALSON, Scottie      01:21  + 4   0/ 4  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 1  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 0  0/ 2   0
EDWARDS, Gavin         13:17  + 1  10/30  4- 6  0- 0  2- 2  6/16  0/ 7  0/25  2/24  0/16  1/ 5  1/11   3
OKWANDU, Charles       02:37  + 2   0/ 6  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 2  0/ 2  0/ 4  1/ 4  0/ 2  0/ 0  0/ 2   1
TOTALS                 20:00       51    18-26  1- 2 12-17    28 13/19  4/38  6/38  3/24  5/11 16/20   8
.                                        0.692 0.500 0.706       0.684 0.105 0.158 0.125 0.455 0.800

Efficiency: Connecticut 1.342, RUTGERS 0.816
eFG%: Connecticut 0.696, RUTGERS 0.345
Substitutions: Connecticut 18, RUTGERS 14

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Connecticut 8-8, RUTGERS 3-3
Layups/Tips: Connecticut 6-9, RUTGERS 3-7
Jumpers: Connecticut 4-9, RUTGERS 1-14

Fast break pts: Connecticut 16 (0.410), RUTGERS 4 (0.200)
Seconds per off. poss: Connecticut 13.4, RUTGERS 18.4

HD BOX SCORE

Marquette vs Rutgers
01/07/09 7:30 p.m. at Piscataway, N.J. - The RAC
Final score: Marquette 81, Rutgers 76

Marquette               Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Burke, Dwight          21:30  + 7   8/50  4- 4  0- 0  0- 0  4/34  0/15  1/40  1/41  0/22  1/18  3/15   3
Hayward, Lazar         26:03  + 8  10/58  3-10  0- 3  4- 4 13/41  2/19  1/47  2/51  0/25  2/22  3/19   3
James, Dominic         36:16  + 3  15/75  6- 9  1- 4  0- 1 13/53  6/21  2/66  1/68  0/41  0/30  2/31   1
McNeal, Jerel          34:51  +14  16/76  3- 5  1- 4  7- 8  9/53  3/25  2/62  1/65  1/34  1/29  3/29   0
Matthews, Wesley       37:16  + 0  23/76 10-10  0- 0  3- 6 10/55  2/19  2/67  1/68  1/39  0/31  6/29   1
Acker, Maurice         03:44  + 2   0/ 6  0- 0  0- 1  0- 0  1/ 6  1/ 3  0/ 6  0/ 6  0/ 2  0/ 3  1/ 3   0
Hazel, Patrick         10:44  - 5   0/11  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/14  0/ 4  0/18  1/17  0/10  1/11  0/11   2
Cubillan, David        05:09  - 9   0/ 5  0- 1  0- 0  0- 0  1/ 6  0/ 2  0/10  0/ 9  0/ 9  0/ 4  0/ 5   1
Butler, Jimmy          16:49  + 1   9/30  3- 6  0- 1  3- 5  7/22  0/ 8  1/31  2/30  1/22  1/13  0/20   2
Otule, Chris           07:38  + 4   0/18  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/11  0/ 8  0/13  2/15  0/11  0/ 4  1/ 8   2
TOTALS                 40:00       81    29-46  2-13 17-24    59 14/31  9/72 11/74  3/43  8/33 20/34  15
.                                        0.630 0.154 0.708       0.452 0.125 0.149 0.070 0.242 0.588

Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
ECHENIQUE, Gregory     23:42  -21   8/32  3- 4  0- 0  2- 3  4/32  0/ 9  0/42  1/39  1/30  4/21  2/16   2
NDIAYE, Hamady         32:26  + 0   2/66  1- 1  0- 0  0- 2  1/55  0/27  0/62  2/59  3/39  0/29  5/27   3
CHANDLER, Corey        31:14  -13  19/57  4-10  3- 6  2- 2 16/50  2/15  0/59  4/57  0/39  2/30  5/26   3
FARMER, Anthony        23:27  -17   6/34  3- 4  0- 1  0- 0  5/29  3/10  0/42  2/39  0/31  0/18  3/19   5
ROSARIO, Mike          32:11  - 8  22/61  7-14  2-10  2- 2 24/53  0/15  1/61  2/58  0/38  3/30  2/29   5
PETTIS, Earl           13:19  + 8   4/34  2- 3  0- 1  0- 0  4/24  2/13  0/27  1/26  0/11  1/ 9  1/11   2
INMAN, JR              23:44  +10   9/51  3- 3  1- 1  0- 0  4/38  1/17  0/43  1/45  0/23  3/18  5/23   4
COBURN, Mike           16:36  + 9   6/34  2- 4  0- 0  2- 2  4/27  1/13  1/29  2/30  0/16  1/13  0/12   0
GRIFFIN, Jaron         03:25  + 7   0/11  0- 0  0- 1  0- 0  1/ 7  0/ 5  0/ 7  1/ 7  0/ 3  0/ 2  0/ 4   0
TOTALS                 40:00       76    25-43  6-20  8-11    63  9/31  2/74 17/72  4/46 14/34 25/33  24
.                                        0.581 0.300 0.727       0.290 0.027 0.236 0.087 0.412 0.758    

Efficiency: Marquette 1.095, Rutgers 1.056
eFG%: Marquette 0.542, Rutgers 0.540
Substitutions: Marquette 27, Rutgers 27

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Marquette 4-4, Rutgers 3-3
Layups/Tips: Marquette 19-28, Rutgers 15-21
Jumpers: Marquette 6-14, Rutgers 7-19

Fast break pts: Marquette 21 (0.328), Rutgers 9 (0.132)
Seconds per off. poss: Marquette 14.6, Rutgers 18.4

10-Jan-09
Syracuse 82, Rutgers 66
No substitution data available with play-by-play.


14-Jan-09
Cincinnati 71, Rutgers 59
Substitution data only from StatSheet.com - compiler not yet compatible.

Louisville vs Rutgers
1/21/09 7:02 p.m. at Piscataway, N.J. - The RAC
Final score: Louisville 78, Rutgers 59

Louisville              Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
Williams, Terrence     34:59  +19  23/67  8-12  1- 2  4- 6 14/45  1/18  4/59  6/59  1/34  3/23  8/35   0
Clark, Earl            34:53  +18  15/68  6- 8  0- 2  3- 3 10/42  3/21  2/60  2/60  1/36  0/20  7/34   2
Samuels, Samardo       21:15  + 5  15/39  6- 9  0- 0  3- 5  9/24  0/10  1/34  4/36  1/19  1/12  1/16   5
Sosa, Edgar            26:08  + 7  10/50  2- 4  1- 3  3- 4  7/30  4/15  0/42  0/43  0/26  0/16  3/24   2
Smith, Jerry           22:00  + 2   4/33  2- 2  0- 1  0- 1  3/25  0/12  0/32  1/33  0/22  0/14  2/21   0
Knowles, Preston       19:19  +19   2/44  1- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/25  1/13  1/39  0/36  0/16  1/12  1/17   1
Delk, Reginald         01:53  + 1   0/ 5  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 1  0/ 0  0/ 3  0/ 3  0/ 1  0/ 1  0/ 2   0
Scott, Will            03:17  + 1   0/ 8  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 4  0/ 3  0/ 6  0/ 7  0/ 2  0/ 1  0/ 0   0
Swopshire, Jared       05:07  + 1   0/10  0- 0  0- 1  0- 0  1/ 7  0/ 2  0/ 8  0/ 8  0/ 1  0/ 5  1/ 3   1
Jennings, Terrence     18:45  +14   3/39  0- 0  0- 0  3- 4  0/25  0/13  1/34  3/32  4/18  1/13  1/21   2
McGee, Andre           12:24  + 8   6/27  0- 0  2- 2  0- 0  2/17  2/ 9  0/23  1/23  0/10  0/ 8  1/12   4
TOTALS                 40:00       78    25-38  4-11 16-23    49 11/29  9/68 17/68  7/37  8/25 26/37  17
.                                        0.658 0.364 0.696       0.379 0.132 0.250 0.189 0.320 0.703

Rutgers                 Min   +/-   Pts  2PM-A 3PM-A FTM-A  FGA    A    Stl    TO   Blk    OR    DR   PF
ECHENIQUE, Gregory     37:46  -14  13/59  5-11  0- 0  3- 5 11/55  0/17  3/63  0/64  1/38  2/35  5/23   3
NDIAYE, Hamady         13:15  - 5   4/14  2- 3  0- 0  0- 0  3/17  0/ 4  0/20  0/19  1/11  0/11  1/10   5
CHANDLER, Corey        28:12  + 1   9/49  3- 4  1- 5  0- 0  9/43  7/16  2/46  4/50  0/29  2/24  4/20   1
FARMER, Anthony        09:51  - 8   0/10  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/15  0/ 4  0/17  1/18  0/ 9  0/11  0/ 5   1
ROSARIO, Mike          32:41  -11  21/53  3- 8  4-10  3- 4 18/48  2/12  1/57  5/57  1/34  3/30  1/22   3
PETTIS, Earl           11:59  -13   2/16  0- 1  0- 2  2- 2  3/16  1/ 5  0/21  0/19  0/ 9  0/13  1/ 6   0
INMAN, JR              26:53  -16   5/45  2- 7  0- 1  1- 2  8/40  2/14  0/49  0/49  0/27  2/26  3/15   2
JACKSON, Patrick       03:10  - 8   0/ 0  0- 0  0- 0  0- 0  0/ 4  0/ 0  0/ 6  1/ 5  0/ 1  0/ 4  1/ 2   0
COBURN, Mike           30:09  -11   5/49  2- 2  0- 1  1- 2  3/42  4/16  2/51  4/50  0/29  0/26  0/20   2
GRIFFIN, Jaron         06:04  -10   0/ 0  0- 1  0- 1  0- 0  2/ 5  0/ 0  0/10  1/ 9  0/ 3  0/ 5  0/ 2   0
TOTALS                 40:00       59    17-37  5-20 10-15    57 16/22  8/68 16/68  3/38 11/37 17/25  17
.                                        0.459 0.250 0.667       0.727 0.118 0.235 0.079 0.297 0.680

Efficiency: Louisville 1.147, Rutgers 0.868
eFG%: Louisville 0.633, Rutgers 0.430
Substitutions: Louisville 25, Rutgers 25

2-pt Shot Selection:
Dunks: Louisville 8-8, Rutgers 5-5
Layups/Tips: Louisville 10-16, Rutgers 7-18
Jumpers: Louisville 7-14, Rutgers 5-14

Fast break pts: Louisville 13 (0.210), Rutgers 12 (0.245)
Seconds per off. poss: Louisville 14.5, Rutgers 20.4

24-Jan-09
St. John's 70, Rutgers 59
No play-by-play available for game.

Analysis: Georgetown 58, Rutgers 46

Workmanlike, or perhaps desultory.

Both would seem to accurately describe Georgetown's 12 point win at the RAC this afternoon in Piscataway against struggling Rutgers. It certainly is an indicator of how far Georgetown has come in the last 3 1/2 years that a 12 point road win in conference can leave one disappointed, but the Hoyas have raised the bar and fans are happy to oblige.

Behind 11-23 3FG shooting, Georgetown closed the 1st half on a 10-2 run, then opened the 2nd half 14-5 to turn a 1-point deficit into a 16-point lead. Let's run the numbers:

	Offense				Defense
	1st Half	2nd Half	Total		1st Half	2nd Half	Total
Pace	29	29	58
Eff.	94.7	106.1	100.5		70.2	89.0	79.7
eFG%	58.7%	63.2%	60.7%		33.3%	35.5%	34.4%
TO%	21.1%	24.0%	22.5%		31.6%	20.5%	26.0%
OR%	8.3%	23.1%	16.0%		47.6%	52.2%	50.0%
FTA/FGA	0.0%	68.4%	31.0%		0.0%	29.0%	14.8%
FTM/FGA	0.0%	36.8%	16.7%		0.0%	12.9%	6.6%
Assist Rate	54.5%	44.4%	50.0%		55.6%	50.0%	52.6%
Block Rate	8.3%	14.3%	10.5%		13.0%	11.5%	12.2%
Steal Rate	7.0%	17.1%	12.1%		14.0%	13.7%	13.9%
2FG%	50.0%	42.9%	47.4%		30.4%	30.8%	30.6%
3FG%	45.5%	50.0%	47.8%		28.6%	40.0%	33.3%
FT%	-	53.8%	53.8%		-	44.4%	44.4%

*Neither team shot a FT in the 1st half


The 1st half was the least efficient offensive 1st half for Georgetown this season (previously, that honor went to the Alabama game), thanks mostly to a poor showing on the offensive glass, where the Hoyas normally average an OReb percentage of 35%. Georgetown collected a total of 4 offensive rebounds on 25 opportunities.

While the offense improved in the 2nd half, the defense did worse. But, thanks mostly to the Scarlet Knights terrible shooting, the game was never in doubt. Rutgers came in with an eFG% = 44.2% (315/341 teams), so this was not a surprise, but the OR of 50%(!!) certainly was, especially as they came in as a middle-of-the-road offensive rebounding team (34.4%, 139/341). I suspect that Georgetown's recent struggles with rebounding may have encouraged Fred Hill to have his team crash the offensive glass, and frankly that was about all that went well for Rutgers today.

Today's highlight (courtesy of Jon Wallace):



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More on Rebounding

Today's game, along with the Memphis game, most prominently exposed a weakness of this Georgetown team, namely rebounding. I thought I'd take a further look at what tempo-free stats can tell us about rebounding performance.

First, allow me to introduce yet another stat to the canon, Total Rebounding %. This is simply the sum of OR% and DR%, divided by 2 (as I normally report opponent's OR%, DR% is the equivalent of [1- Opp OR%]). If 2 teams are equally adept at rebounding, you'd expect each to have Tot. Reb. = 50%, regardless of how many times each team missed a shot. And therefore, if your team has a Tot. Reb. > 50%, they did a better job than their opponent on the glass that game.

Here's a plot of both last year's and this year's Tot. Reb. %, both plotted against month and day.

That egregiously high data point from last season was the Seton Hall game, while the lowest point this season was today's game against Rutgers. Through the first eight games of this season, the rebounding effort was comparable to last season, but the Memphis, Fordham and now Rutgers games are all poorer than anything seen last year.

But comparing total rebounding % from game to game may be a bit too simplistic; after all, getting beat on the boards 60% to 40% by Memphis is one thing, but is it on a whole 'nother level when Fordham does it?

We can account for this by using KenPom.com's offensive and defensive factors stats to produce something analogous to my performance stats, but for rebounds. I can work out what we would expect each team to allow for total rebounding against Georgetown, and compare this to what Georgetown actually got. That is to say:

Tot. Reb. Performance = Total Reb. % / [(Ave. Tot. Reb. % + Opp. Ave. Tot. Reb. % Allowed)/2]

Here's the same plot as above, but now we're looking at Tot. Reb. Perf. rather than Total Reb. % (note that Tot. Reb. Perf. is also a percentage, where 100% would mean that your team rebounded as well as expected, higher = better, lower = worse).

While the two plots look similar, there are some subtle improvements. Now we can see that last season, Georgetown was normally quite strong on the glass and never rebounded less efficiently than 89% of expected. At Seton Hall, the Hoyas rebounded at 152% of expected efficiency, and, yes, that 89% was the Final Four game against Ohio St.

Meanwhile, the last 2 games this season have truly terrible (Fordham = 80%, Rutgers = 66%). For the Memphis game, Georgetown rebounded at 86% of expected efficiency, which is still poor but no where near as bad as today's effort; the 4th, and earliest, bad rebounding game was against ODU, where just about everything else went right.

As always, I must remind my reader(s) that the stats data I'm using for this year are subject to change as the season progresses - who knows, maybe Fordham and Rutgers will suddenly turn out to be great rebounding teams (I doubt it).

To sum up, if you are worried about how well the Hoyas have been rebounding the ball, you've got every right to be.