Dan Hurley Coach's Show 2016-17

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

ramster, anything I could say to him about coaching issues wouldn't be received too well I would think......trying to tell a coach how to coach won't work.....it's like people are afraid to rock the boat...all the while knowing that there are problems.....

anything too critical will be glossed over.....there's a lot of things that I've heard Dan say to me and others that sound good, but none of those things are actually happening.....very frustrating to say the least......remember we're fans.....not his assistants or whoever.

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 7 years ago

Tonight's edition of the Dan Hurley Coach's Show

http://920whjj.iheart.com/media/play/27547012/

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 7 years ago

ATPTourFan wrote:Tonight's edition of the Dan Hurley Coach's Show

http://920whjj.iheart.com/media/play/27547012/

I kind of feel it'll be too sad to listen to....

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Actually PRT, a good deal of the time is spent making jokes and laughing.......it's not very funny right now.....

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

It would be nice to hear specifics on what is going wrong and how to fix it.......

Instead we get "We got to get better" in so many words.........Baron said that hundreds of times...and it never happened.....

Section104 · Unread post by **Section104** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:It would be nice to hear specifics on what is going wrong and how to fix it.......

Instead we get "We got to get better" in so many words.........Baron said that hundreds of times...and it never happened.....

I thought you were going to attend and ask the tough questions...

Rhody15 · Unread post by **Rhody15** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:It would be nice to hear specifics on what is going wrong and how to fix it.......

Instead we get "We got to get better" in so many words.........Baron said that hundreds of times...and it never happened.....

Rambone, I'm concerned for your health.

Cheer up! I know it's hard right now, but if EC plays like he did against Houston, Hassan comes back 100%, and with our favorable conference home schedule, we could get hot.

Shit, it can't really get any worse than it is now...

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

Next,"We gotta put da bawl in da baskit",
"Our seenyiz have gotta step up",
"Itz awl parta da prociss".
"We need betta infrastructya".
"Ya gotta hand it tuem".

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

I'm going to a couple of Mews shows......either they will be a happy experience....or you know.......

Rod, ha ha....let's hope Dan doesn't start with that!

I'm taking a break....let me know when we beat somebody good......

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 7 years ago

Thanks for posting the link to the replay, ATP
Just finished listening to the 45 minute show.
Good listen I thought. Addressed the injuries, performance of most everything player seeing floor time, Princeton Offence played by Holy Cross and William and Mary discussed by David Cox who handles scour duties for any team running Princeton offenses.....

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 7 years ago

Maybe we should run the Princeton offense...

hrstrat57 · Unread post by **hrstrat57** » 7 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Next,"We gotta put da bawl in da baskit",
"Our seenyiz have gotta step up",
"Itz awl parta da prociss".
"We need betta infrastructya".
"Ya gotta hand it tuem".

Ha ha ha!!

Don't forget:

we need to "attack da bucket"
We need to "score da ball"

Ha ha ha!!

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 7 years ago

Coffee with the Coach!

http://920whjj.iheart.com/media/play/27561440/

ramfan85 · Unread post by **ramfan85** » 7 years ago

hrstrat57 wrote:
rodfromcranston wrote:Next,"We gotta put da bawl in da baskit",
"Our seenyiz have gotta step up",
"Itz awl parta da prociss".
"We need betta infrastructya".
"Ya gotta hand it tuem".
Ha ha ha!!

Don't forget:

we need to "attack da bucket"
We need to "score da ball"

Ha ha ha!!

And now....."they're too far down the court to hear my instructions."

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Seriously? They can't figure things out by themselves after the endless hours of practice?

OMG........what a stupid statement if there ever was one.......

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

ATPTourFan wrote:Coffee with the Coach!

http://920whjj.iheart.com/media/play/27561440/

Very happy to hear Dan's comments on the need for improved guard play.

Especially this:

"It's getting the game to be played a little bit faster, it's getting the ball down the court on offense a little bit quicker, attacking a little bit earlier in possessions... that's something that guards can always control... I've got to do a better job of getting these guys in sync and getting these guys leading the way for us, especially offensively."

Can't tell you how long I've been waiting to hear this.

You can't argue with our Defensive and Offensive efficiency. Both are right around the top 50 in the country. Did anyone feel like we shot 50% yesterday? We are deceivingly good on offense. I know it doesn't look like it but there are not too many teams in the country that have been more efficient than us. It looks ugly.. but I'm sorry, you can't argue with the numbers.

The problem, in my small mind, is the game tempo, which is ~300th in the country. We also have an average possession length that is ~200th in the country. Ok, so we are one of the most efficient teams in the country on offense... but with this tempo we end up getting into too many rock fights. You can't win a high percentage of rock fights. Especially if you don't have a "closer", someone who can take over a game in the final critical possessions. We've seen JT and EC be capable of this at times, but they have not consistently shown that they are that guy. We need to adjust our offensive philosophy to push the tempo, attack the basket, and try to score earlier in possessions. Theoretically with additional possessions we can create some distance between us and the opponent and sustain these late game runs by our opponents, instead of giving up the games late.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

We should be able to AVOID late game runs by our opponents...otherwise what you said is on point......some games are going to come down to the last couple of minutes no matter what....we have to start winning some of those.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 7 years ago

RoadyJay wrote:
ATPTourFan wrote:Coffee with the Coach!

http://920whjj.iheart.com/media/play/27561440/
Very happy to hear Dan's comments on the need for improved guard play.

Especially this:

"It's getting the game to be played a little bit faster, it's getting the ball down the court on offense a little bit quicker, attacking a little bit earlier in possessions... that's something that guards can always control... I've got to do a better job of getting these guys in sync and getting these guys leading the way for us, especially offensively."

Can't tell you how long I've been waiting to hear this.

You can't argue with our Defensive and Offensive efficiency. Both are right around the top 50 in the country. Did anyone feel like we shot 50% yesterday? We are deceivingly good on offense. I know it doesn't look like it but there are not too many teams in the country that have been more efficient than us. It looks ugly.. but I'm sorry, you can't argue with the numbers.

The problem, in my small mind, is the game tempo, which is ~300th in the country. We also have an average possession length that is ~200th in the country. Ok, so we are one of the most efficient teams in the country on offense... but with this tempo we end up getting into too many rock fights. You can't win a high percentage of rock fights. Especially if you don't have a "closer", someone who can take over a game in the final critical possessions. We've seen JT and EC be capable of this at times, but they have not consistently shown that they are that guy. We need to adjust our offensive philosophy to push the tempo, attack the basket, and try to score earlier in possessions. Theoretically with additional possessions we can create some distance between us and the opponent and sustain these late game runs by our opponents, instead of giving up the games late.

Can we maintain that offensive efficiency at a higher pace. We absolutely need to go faster. If we can maintain close to the same efficiency at even a slightly above average pace we'll be very tough to beat. It all starts with the big three guards playing with chemistry and in their roles.

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

RhowdyRam02 wrote:
Can we maintain that offensive efficiency at a higher pace. We absolutely need to go faster. If we can maintain close to the same efficiency at even a slightly above average pace we'll be very tough to beat. It all starts with the big three guards playing with chemistry and in their roles.

This is exactly what I envision the coaching staff debating...

Can we be as efficient at a faster pace and also not sacrifice anything at the defensive end? The other positive about how we have played so far this season is that we typically do not turn the ball over (yesterday was an exception). We are in the top 60 in turnover %. Coaches hate turnovers.

I think Dan is more comfortable coaching a slower paced, possession by possession battle where we take care of the basketball and depend on guys to make plays late in games so this could be part of the struggle to pull the trigger. I have no information to say this with certainty. It's just my hunch.

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 7 years ago

RoadyJay wrote:
RhowdyRam02 wrote:
Can we maintain that offensive efficiency at a higher pace. We absolutely need to go faster. If we can maintain close to the same efficiency at even a slightly above average pace we'll be very tough to beat. It all starts with the big three guards playing with chemistry and in their roles.

This is exactly what I envision the coaching staff debating...

Can we be as efficient at a faster pace and also not sacrifice anything at the defensive end? The other positive about how we have played so far this season is that we typically do not turn the ball over (yesterday was an exception). We are in the top 60 in turnover %. Coaches hate turnovers.

I think Dan is more comfortable coaching a slower paced, possession by possession battle where we take care of the basketball and depend on guys to make plays late in games so this could be part of the struggle to pull the trigger. I have no information to say this with certainty. It's just my hunch.

The Houston Game was one where we ran more and they ran more - chicken and the egg but bottom line is the score was much higher. We only had 3 steals in that game. So to your point, what to you give up by increasing the pace of the game? What do you gain by increasing the pace of the game? Bottom line is to win the game, but Houston showed it's not as simple as simply increasing the pace.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 7 years ago

I just want to see us consistently play one style and have some sort of identity. I found it odd that we played three slow paced defensive games in a row (Valpo, PC, and ODU) and then decided to play a fast paced offensive game against Houston. I'm not sure if that's Hurley trying to switch the style depending on our opponent or if our opponent is the one dictating the pace of the game.

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 7 years ago

Or did he read this Board with most of posters telling him that the team needed to run and then he went back against Holy Cross

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

We've heard for years about how we'll be playing this
up tempo offense and play pressure defense all over the court.
Neither ever happens.
That one man on the ballhandler coming up the floor
is useless.
Never any traps until the last minute of a losing game.
To run, you need rebounds.
That doesn't happen using four guards.
Our assists to baskets ratio is among the worst in D-1.
If we're in the top 50 on offense, it's a carry over from
Dartmouth and Marist blowouts.
65 points twice,63 and 51 in 4 of the last 5 games.
I don't care what stats say, that's pretty weak offense.

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

ramster wrote:
The Houston Game was one where we ran more and they ran more - chicken and the egg but bottom line is the score was much higher. We only had 3 steals in that game. So to your point, what to you give up by increasing the pace of the game? What do you gain by increasing the pace of the game? Bottom line is to win the game, but Houston showed it's not as simple as simply increasing the pace.

Actually ramster, that is not true. Just because the game was relatively high scoring does not mean it was played up-tempo. Both us and Houston rank about the same in tempo... VERY SLOW. Per kenpom, Houston's tempo actually ranks as a SLOWER pace than us.

In our game against Houston each team had 67 possessions. To give you an idea of how slow that pace is, an average of 67 possessions/game ranks 305th in the country. The Valpo game was played at the same pace.

The problem against Houston is that our defense was awful. To give you an idea of how bad it was, we gave up 1.22 points for every one of Houston's possessions. How bad is that you ask? If we averaged 1.22 that would be good for the honor of WORST defensive team in the country.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Yeah, people saying how "efficient" our offense is.....

Who gives a rat's ass if we're losing those games? Putting lipstick on a pig.....

Efficient losing that is.....our assist numbers are horrendous......

RJ, how many times did we foul their 2 best players...they drove by us to the hole at will...and if they didn't score, they were fouled.....

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 7 years ago

RoadyJay wrote:
ramster wrote:
The Houston Game was one where we ran more and they ran more - chicken and the egg but bottom line is the score was much higher. We only had 3 steals in that game. So to your point, what to you give up by increasing the pace of the game? What do you gain by increasing the pace of the game? Bottom line is to win the game, but Houston showed it's not as simple as simply increasing the pace.

Actually ramster, that is not true. Just because the game was relatively high scoring does not mean it was played up-tempo. Both us and Houston rank about the same in tempo... VERY SLOW. Per kenpom, Houston's tempo actually ranks as a SLOWER pace than us.

In our game against Houston each team had 67 possessions. To give you an idea of how slow that pace is, an average of 67 possessions/game ranks ranks 305th in the country. The Valpo game was played at the same pace.

The problem against Houston is that our defense was awful. To give you an idea of how bad it was, we gave up 1.22 points for every one of Houston's possessions. How bad is that you ask? If we averaged 1.22 that would be good for the honor of WORST defensive team in the country.

Are these all kenpom stats that you need a subscription to see? If they are, have we played any games where we would be in the top 100 for tempo? I really would've thought the Houston game was definitely a faster tempo than Valpo.

Edit: Also here's what I don't get and maybe you can explain how kenpom calculates this. We had 59 fg attempts in both the Houston and Valpo game. The Houston game we got to the line 23 times and the Valpo game we only got there 10 times. We also had 12 turnovers in the Houston game compared to 9 against Valpo. Houston had more fg attempts, ft attempts and turnovers than Valpo. How could the game be played at the same pace if all the those stats are the same or higher?

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 7 years ago

RoadyJay wrote:
ramster wrote:
The Houston Game was one where we ran more and they ran more - chicken and the egg but bottom line is the score was much higher. We only had 3 steals in that game. So to your point, what to you give up by increasing the pace of the game? What do you gain by increasing the pace of the game? Bottom line is to win the game, but Houston showed it's not as simple as simply increasing the pace.

Actually ramster, that is not true. Just because the game was relatively high scoring does not mean it was played up-tempo. Both us and Houston rank about the same in tempo... VERY SLOW. Per kenpom, Houston's tempo actually ranks as a SLOWER pace than us.

In our game against Houston each team had 67 possessions. To give you an idea of how slow that pace is, an average of 67 possessions/game ranks 305th in the country. The Valpo game was played at the same pace.

The problem against Houston is that our defense was awful. To give you an idea of how bad it was, we gave up 1.22 points for every one of Houston's possessions. How bad is that you ask? If we averaged 1.22 that would be good for the honor of WORST defensive team in the country.

I agree the defense was bad. We only had 3 steals. We also had two players go off on us for monster games. Look at who was guarding those two players. Peters had a huge game against us. Cartwright had a humongous game against us hitting 4 three pointers in the first half alone - having 4 total all season before that. My point was it is not just about running but I get your point - we really didn't run as the score might have indicated.

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

The numbers are meaningful... Take a look at the chart of our offensive and defensive efficiency numbers for all of our games thus far:

: efficiency.jpg (33.2 KiB) Viewed 1519 times

kenpom shows that the average offense/defense efficiency rating is 1.04.

Green in the Offense column means then that we played above average offense, red indicates below average offense. Same for the Defense column... Green means we played above average defense and red indicates below average defense.

So what does this tell us:

Our best offensive game was against Marist.
Best defensive game was against ODU and we needed to play that good of a defensive game because our offense was bad
Our Defense wasn't great against Cincinnati but our offense carried us
We played good enough defense overall to beat Valpo and PC but our offense let us down
We played good enough offense to beat Houston but our defense let us down
The games we played both above average offense and defense... Dartmouth, Marist, Brown, Belmont, Holy Cross. We need to put together more complete games against the better teams

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

So, bottom line is:
We put it all together against lesser teams.
Have yet to do it against a higher quality opponent.

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

josephski wrote:
Are these all kenpom stats that you need a subscription to see? If they are, have we played any games where we would be in the top 100 for tempo? I really would've thought the Houston game was definitely a faster tempo than Valpo.

Edit: Also here's what I don't get and maybe you can explain how kenpom calculates this. We had 59 fg attempts in both the Houston and Valpo game. The Houston game we got to the line 23 times and the Valpo game we only got there 10 times. We also had 12 turnovers in the Houston game compared to 9 against Valpo. Houston had more fg attempts, ft attempts and turnovers than Valpo. How could the game be played at the same pace if all the those stats are the same or higher?

I do have a subscription... not sure if you can still see some of these numbers without one. Some of what I am posting here is me taking some of his data and manipulating it in a spreadsheet.

Here is how kenpom calculates possessions per game:

Tempo/Pace – The number of possessions per 40 minutes. Possessions is not an official NCAA statistic, so it must be estimated. The formula I am using is:

Possessions = FGA-OR+TO+.42*FTA (I use .475 for the free throw mulitplier now.)

This is a pretty standard computation that accounts for when possession is lost by a team. The only bit of uncertainty is the free throw portion, because we don’t always know how a team got to the line. If they are shooting two, then the two FTAs account for one possession. But if they go to the line for one after making a shot, then the one FTA has no possession attached to it, because the previous FGA accounts for it.

The .42 multiplier estimates how many FTAs equal one possession. It has to be slightly less than one half. John Hollinger in Pro Basketball Prospectus uses .44. Dean Oliver in Basketball on Paper and other work uses .40. I’m splitting the difference. The difference between .4 and .44 means about a 1% change in the efficiency/tempo calculations.

I do a tempo calculation for each team in a game, average those two numbers and apply it to each team for the game, since each team’s total possessions should be nearly equal. Then I average the tempo for every team’s games-to-date to come up with the figures shown.

I think what you are missing is the Offensive Rebounds part of the equation. You should be able to get very close to what he is calculating for tempo/pace with the above formula. He makes some minor adjustments after he calculates the number of possessions and calls it tempo/pace.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 7 years ago

RoadyJay wrote:The numbers are meaningful... Take a look at the chart of our offensive and defensive efficiency numbers for all of our games thus far:

efficiency.jpg

kenpom shows that the average offense/defense efficiency rating is 1.04.

Green in the Offense column means then that we played above average offense, red indicates below average offense. Same for the Defense column... Green means we played above average defense and red indicates below average defense.

So what does this tell us:
Our best offensive game was against Marist.
Best defensive game was against ODU and we needed to play that good of a defensive game because our offense was bad
Our Defense wasn't great against Cincinnati but our offense carried us
We played good enough defense overall to beat Valpo and PC but our offense let us down
We played good enough offense to beat Houston but our defense let us down
The games we played both above average offense and defense... Dartmouth, Marist, Brown, Belmont, Holy Cross. We need to put together more complete games against the better teams

You are doing phenomenal work right now and making this board interesting to read again. Thank you for your effort.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 7 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:So, bottom line is:
We put it all together against lesser teams.
Have yet to do it against a higher quality opponent.

Belmont would probably be about an average A10 team this year. That bodes well for conference play considering the numbers say we played fairly well against them but people on here weren't happy.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

I think it's because Belmont had their best player out, and
the game was relatively competitive, plus it was a home game.

15 Year Lurker · Unread post by **15 Year Lurker** » 7 years ago

I think it's a little ridiculous making a big deal about the opposite end of the court comment.

But it's not ridiculous wondering why Andre Berry never plays. He has more good plays per minute played than anyone in the country. I don't get it at all. I think the team even plays a lot better when he is out there. It just seems obvious.

And no I'm not related to him.

section(105) · Unread post by **section(105)** » 7 years ago

Next show the Break Hotel, Narragansett......12/27.....interesting venue choice, hope Steve can find it......Andre Berry does not defend his position, in man, well enough to get more PT.....I think it is in the DH school of hoops that players play straight up man defense first as the prerequisite to major playing time.....hiding him in a zone is just not gonna happen.....we've plowed this ground many times.....

URI2006_Andy · Unread post by **URI2006_Andy** » 7 years ago

Love the data RhodyJay. I looked at points per possession when our 3 starting guards shoot for the cincy, valpo, pc, and Houston games. EC and JT are much more efficient shooting 3s than shooting 2s. JG is more efficient shooting 2s but I think he may be the best shooter of the three. My point is against good teams our guards have difficulty getting into the lane and scoring. Maybe a better strategy against good teams is to encourage our guards to shoot more 3s and drive less. All it takes is one make or two makes to build confidence that could carry over to late game situations. Also opens up the offensive glass for Our bigs. Plus if our guards are cold from the outside, we're going to lose against the good teams anyways.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

How many times has Berry been beaten 1 on 1? Then compare that to all the guys getting beat each game. I dont think Berry solves anything just being on the court but he doesn't get exposed as much as people claim.

Then Hurley saying the Houston game was too fast for Berry. Maybe. All games are probably too fast for Umass's Holloway but they roll him out there and see if maybe he is too big. You know force the other team to change what they're doing.

Get fouls on their guys. Impose your lineup. WIN THE GAME. No road wins is a shame.

steveystuds06 · Unread post by **steveystuds06** » 7 years ago

Berry has a knack of being in the right spot when our guards drive. He always finishes. He's not going to make a difference on D, but he's not this awful defender people make him out to be. Especially since he lost weight and gained some quickness. He does enough good on offense that I'll take his defense. The truth is unless we have a bunch of injuries he's not getting in and it must be so frustrating for him.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 7 years ago

RoadyJay wrote:
josephski wrote:
Are these all kenpom stats that you need a subscription to see? If they are, have we played any games where we would be in the top 100 for tempo? I really would've thought the Houston game was definitely a faster tempo than Valpo.

Edit: Also here's what I don't get and maybe you can explain how kenpom calculates this. We had 59 fg attempts in both the Houston and Valpo game. The Houston game we got to the line 23 times and the Valpo game we only got there 10 times. We also had 12 turnovers in the Houston game compared to 9 against Valpo. Houston had more fg attempts, ft attempts and turnovers than Valpo. How could the game be played at the same pace if all the those stats are the same or higher?
I do have a subscription... not sure if you can still see some of these numbers without one. Some of what I am posting here is me taking some of his data and manipulating it in a spreadsheet.

Here is how kenpom calculates possessions per game:

Tempo/Pace – The number of possessions per 40 minutes. Possessions is not an official NCAA statistic, so it must be estimated. The formula I am using is:

Possessions = FGA-OR+TO+.42*FTA (I use .475 for the free throw mulitplier now.)

This is a pretty standard computation that accounts for when possession is lost by a team. The only bit of uncertainty is the free throw portion, because we don’t always know how a team got to the line. If they are shooting two, then the two FTAs account for one possession. But if they go to the line for one after making a shot, then the one FTA has no possession attached to it, because the previous FGA accounts for it.

The .42 multiplier estimates how many FTAs equal one possession. It has to be slightly less than one half. John Hollinger in Pro Basketball Prospectus uses .44. Dean Oliver in Basketball on Paper and other work uses .40. I’m splitting the difference. The difference between .4 and .44 means about a 1% change in the efficiency/tempo calculations.

I do a tempo calculation for each team in a game, average those two numbers and apply it to each team for the game, since each team’s total possessions should be nearly equal. Then I average the tempo for every team’s games-to-date to come up with the figures shown.

I think what you are missing is the Offensive Rebounds part of the equation. You should be able to get very close to what he is calculating for tempo/pace with the above formula. He makes some minor adjustments after he calculates the number of possessions and calls it tempo/pace.

Thanks for posting that RJ. Does kenpom have +/- for the players in the box score or do you know any site that does?

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 7 years ago

Seawrightspostgame wrote:Then Hurley saying the Houston game was too fast for Berry. Maybe. All games are probably too fast for Umass's Holloway but they roll him out there and see if maybe he is too big. You know force the other team to change what they're doing.

I say this as someone who wants to see Berry play more, cheers loudly when he comes in, and doesn't think the Holy Cross game was too fast for him. The Houston game was absolutely too fast for him. It was glaring.

Also I think you should find a better example then UMass. Does anyone think Kellogg is a good coach?

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

josephski wrote:
Thanks for posting that RJ. Does kenpom have +/- for the players in the box score or do you know any site that does?

There is a stat called Box Plus/Minus (BPM). It's is a box score-based metric for evaluating basketball players' quality and contribution to the team. I look at it on sports-reference.com.

BPM relies on a player's box score information and the team's overall performance to estimate a player's performance relative to league average. BPM is a per-100-possession stat.

The scale for the NBA is: 0.0 is league average, +5 means the player is 5 points better than an average player over 100 possessions (which is about All-NBA level), -2 is replacement level, and -5 is really bad.

Note: It appears that for college basketball the average BPM is higher than in the NBA. So I wouldn't say that a +5 for a college player means that they are an All-American.

Here are the current NCAA BPM leaders:

For our team here are the current BPMs:

: URI_BPM.jpg (43.85 KiB) Viewed 1276 times

If you believe in this metric then you can see how valuable Hass is to this team. You can also see that Berry has a poor rating in this category. This metric does not take into account minutes played so obviously you have to take Eric Dadika and Will Leviton's stats with a grain of salt. They obviously would not sustain this BPM if they played significant minutes. Or would they?

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

RhowdyRam02 wrote:
Seawrightspostgame wrote:Then Hurley saying the Houston game was too fast for Berry. Maybe. All games are probably too fast for Umass's Holloway but they roll him out there and see if maybe he is too big. You know force the other team to change what they're doing.
I say this as someone who wants to see Berry play more, cheers loudly when he comes in, and doesn't think the Holy Cross game was too fast for him. The Houston game was absolutely too fast for him. It was glaring.

Also I think you should find a better example then UMass. Does anyone think Kellogg is a good coach?

Absolutely fair point. I brought him up because he is a tank. I also recently saw them play PC waiting for the Houston game to come on.

I am actually a guy that enjoys Hurley's spirit and dont mind at all his sideline antics. Dont mind a 41-40 finish to a game. Dont mind if you play 5 centers or 5 guards(but you better win). I dont love the family mystic or the ppl that are Hurley groupies.

All that being said Kellogg knocked out URI last time they played and URI was the higher seed. I have zero thoughts about Kellogg despite hating Umass. I am aware this board hates Kellogg and that is fine with me.

URI2006_Andy · Unread post by **URI2006_Andy** » 7 years ago

I don't know exactly what goes into BPM but I will say Akele is a smart player. Does the little things. Looks for the shooters after getting an offensive rebounds, finds the open spot and angle to receive the pass along the perimeter, finds a guard right away after getting a defensive rebound. Those little things add up in close games. We saw a little bit of him and KI in together vs HC. I'd like to see more of that.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

I think BPM is another idiotic metric used by stat geeks to try to appear
above the rest of us mortals.
You could be the best defensive player on the planet,
playing with four guys in work boots, and get tagged with
a negative rating.
Or, you could be a shitty defensive player, playing on an offensive
juggernaut, and have a positive rating.
I'm sure Steph Curry, an average defensive player,
has a very high plus rating, for that reason.

RoadyJay · Unread post by **RoadyJay** » 7 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:I think BPM is another idiotic metric used by stat geeks to try to appear
above the rest of us mortals.
You could be the best defensive player on the planet,
playing with four guys in work boots, and get tagged with
a negative rating.
Or, you could be a shitty defensive player, playing on an offensive
juggernaut, and have a positive rating.
I'm sure Steph Curry, an average defensive player,
has a very high plus rating, for that reason.

I don't think any of these metrics are perfect or that a coach should decide who he plays based on these metrics. I do think they are useful and shouldn't be ignored. Just one more tool to evaluate how players stack up against each other.

In the case of BPM it does factor in the team's performance. So the best defensive player on the planet playing with four guys in work boots is adjusted for.

In the case of Steph Curry... He had an offensive BPM of 12.4 and a defensive BPM of 0.1. This gives him a total BPM of 12.5. Since a score of 0.0 indicates and average NBA player you were dead on saying he is an average NBA defender. The 12.4 offensive BPM was best in the league last year.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 7 years ago

Thanks for posting that and I agree, it's not perfect but certainly can give you a decent idea of how guys are performing. It doesn't surprise me that our guards are all near the bottom because Terrell and EC have been inconsistent (more so EC than Terrell) and Jarvis really hasn't played that well so far this year. I don't think Hassan has had a bad game yet and Iverson has been killed by getting into foul trouble but usually plays fairly well when he's in.

I think Iverson is the most interesting of guys on that list. We all watched how he played in the Cincy game when he was able to stay out of foul trouble and play 33 minutes. I don't know how you keep him out of foul trouble but that's definitely one of the keys to us playing our best is having Iverson on the court.

Does kenpom have box scores for each game with every player's +/- for that specific game?

Blue Man · Unread post by **Blue Man** » 7 years ago

Ignoring the fact that our 2 walk-ons are seen as 2 of our top 5 "best" players by this metric, Iverson being that high in the positive calls a lot into question.

I firmly believe that this team goes with Iverson. Proof being that when he plays well in big games, we win (Cinci). But if he plays poorly (Duke, Valpo, PC, Houston) we lose. Unfortunately he's been more bad than good this year. Not saying he's not capable of being much better (he is), and not saying he can't turn it around (he could), but just saying that as of right now the BPR doesn't accurately reflect his on-court performance.

Considering I've audibly called out his +/- in 3 games after I really had to stifle vomit watching him play, (he was -13,-11, and -12), you can't tell me this stat is accurate or valuable.

Ramtastico · Unread post by **Ramtastico** » 7 years ago

I'm changing my screen name to "PlayErikDadikaMore"

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 7 years ago

Blue Man wrote:Ignoring the fact that our 2 walk-ons are seen as 2 of our top 5 "best" players by this metric, Iverson being that high in the positive calls a lot into question.

I firmly believe that this team goes with Iverson. Proof being that when he plays well in big games, we win (Cinci). But if he plays poorly (Duke, Valpo, PC, Houston) we lose. Unfortunately he's been more bad than good this year. Not saying he's not capable of being much better (he is), and not saying he can't turn it around (he could), but just saying that as of right now the BPR doesn't accurately reflect his on-court performance.

Considering I've audibly called out his +/- in 3 games after I really had to stifle vomit watching him play, (he was -13,-11, and -12), you can't tell me this stat is accurate or valuable.

What site do you use to see the +/- or are you just doing it on your own?

I agree too about the team goes with Iverson. It's tough because if you give Akele more minutes then we might gain some consistency but Akele does not have the same ceiling in terms of skill that Iverson has.

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 7 years ago

Ramtastico wrote:I'm changing my screen name to "PlayErikDadikaMore"

PEDM

"PlayWilliamLevitonMore" PWLM

Login • Register