Game #18, MVC #7, At Evansville 7pm Wednesday The Streak Continuum

[valpopal]

Stats reveal the story in the past three games and the difference in scores can be attributed to a schizophrenic 3-point percent by Valpo's opponents. In the two losses, Southern Illinois (8-15) and Evansville (10-16) surprisingly shot north of 50% from the outside. Valpo (11-27, a decent 40.7%) actually made more 3-pointers than Evansville, but Evansville's percent was an incredible 62.5%! The VU victory in between happened due to Illinois State shooting an awful 1-18 from the 3-point line, a miserable 5.6%, while Valpo neared their average with a 4-12 (33%). For the season, opponents are shooting a reasonable 33.8%. In fact, although VU is shooting a lower level at the 3-point line (31.5%), the overall number of made 3-pointers is remarkably even, 125 for opponents and 123 for Valpo.   

[JD24]

Difference in the game was Evansville having a few more FTs. Valpo had more FGs than Evansville.

[vu72]

The development of Darius into one of the leagues best point guards is nothing short of amazing.  Last year no one bothered to guard him and now he is scoring from the 3 as well as in the lane,  shooting 33% from the 3, over 80% from the line while having better than a 2 to 1 assist to turnover ratio and currently on pace to have the third most assists in a season in Valpo history!

[valpopal]

Difference in the game was Evansville having a few more FTs. Valpo had more FGs than Evansville.

That is misleading. Valpo had only 1 more field goal while making 10 more attempts, all outside 3-point misses where Valpo was 11-27 (41%) and Evansville was 10-16 (63%). Both teams had 17 2-point field goals. Therefore, the  Evansville edge in free throws largely came from VU fouls on drives inside that likely would have been field goals, which explains not only the fewer field goals recorded for Evansville but also their higher number of free throws. The difference in the game was the percentage performance from the 3-point line: 10-16 gives an efficiency of an amazing 30 points in 16 attempts (94% in 2-point terms) while 11-27 is an efficiency of 33 points in 27 attempts (61% in 2-point terms), decent but no match.

[justducky]

The development of Darius into one of the leagues best point guards is nothing short of amazing.  Last year no one bothered to guard him and now he is scoring from the 3 as well as in the lane,  shooting 33% from the 3, over 80% from the line while having better than a 2 to 1 assist to turnover ratio and currently on pace to have the third most assists in a season in Valpo history!

Went to the archives for TO comparisons. I thought that Deion Lavender might have a better assist to turn over ratio but he was less than 2 to 1 and was a very weak shooter from anywhere on the floor. The ratio for Lexus also trails. Trevor Anderson had great numbers but played so little from the injuries that they can't be compared. Reidinger also had a good ratio but with limited minutes and poor shooting. You have to go back to Keith Carter for great point guard number. 161 assists vs 59 turn overs his senior season!  . BUT! He was surrounded by excellent veteran shooters and playmakers instead of a center less band of rookies who largely can't shoot.

[JD24]

Difference in the game was Evansville having a few more FTs. Valpo had more FGs than Evansville.

That is misleading. Valpo had only 1 more field goal while making 10 more attempts, all outside 3-point misses where Valpo was 11-27 (41%) and Evansville was 10-16 (63%). Both teams had 17 2-point field goals. Therefore, the  Evansville edge in free throws largely came from VU fouls on drives inside that likely would have been field goals, which explains not only the fewer field goals recorded for Evansville but also their higher number of free throws. The difference in the game was the percentage performance from the 3-point line: 10-16 gives an efficiency of an amazing 30 points in 16 attempts (94% in 2-point terms) while 11-27 is an efficiency of 33 points in 27 attempts (61% in 2-point terms), decent but no match.

The assumption that the fouled shots would have created more FGs is misleading. So my analysis and your analysis fall into a to each his own way of looking at things. However, in pure numbers, it was the free throw difference which led to the difference in the score.

[Bumbo]

Darius could always play off and find shots for people reading the ball screen. Lottich's offense essentially had the point bring the ball up, feed the wing or post and then go stand in the corner. Lottich also never really inspired much confidence in Darius and frankly couldn't coach or motivate to the level of Rev.  completely different approach this year with the offense and instilling confidence. Rev should be able to surround Darius and probably another young pg with some perimeter shooting next season so yes expect the assist total to grow.

[valpopal]

Difference in the game was Evansville having a few more FTs. Valpo had more FGs than Evansville.

That is misleading. Valpo had only 1 more field goal while making 10 more attempts, all outside 3-point misses where Valpo was 11-27 (41%) and Evansville was 10-16 (63%). Both teams had 17 2-point field goals. Therefore, the  Evansville edge in free throws largely came from VU fouls on drives inside that likely would have been field goals, which explains not only the fewer field goals recorded for Evansville but also their higher number of free throws. The difference in the game was the percentage performance from the 3-point line: 10-16 gives an efficiency of an amazing 30 points in 16 attempts (94% in 2-point terms) while 11-27 is an efficiency of 33 points in 27 attempts (61% in 2-point terms), decent but no match.

The assumption that the fouled shots would have created more FGs is misleading. So my analysis and your analysis fall into a to each his own way of looking at things. However, in pure numbers, it was the free throw difference which led to the difference in the score.

I said "likely" would have created more field goals, which is undeniable and not misleading at all, especially when the total disparity in field goals was only 1. "Pure numbers" is the misleading part, since how those numbers were attained is the most important "difference" in the flow of the game and its outcome. Similarly, if a team were to win a game by 5 points and had 6 more free throw makes, but those were in the final 30 seconds on intentional fouls by the trailing team trying to catch up, the "pure numbers" would suggest free throws were the difference, but the flow of the game that led to the outcome would be completely different.