clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Hopping Along

Wolfpack offense, last four seasons (full season numbers; nat'l rank in parenthesis):
 AdjOE (Rk) eFG% (Rk) TO% (Rk) OR% (Rk) FTR (Rk)
2004 121.7 (3) 52.7 (34) 19.9 (89) 30.9 (215) 28.5 (74)
2005 116.2 (14) 53.2 (33) 18.5 (31) 30.6 (215) 27.3 (92)
2006 111.5 (40) 55.0 (10) 19.6 (77) 26.0 (310) 29.9 (30)
2007 113.3 (46) 54.9 (13) 21.8 (202) 28.1 (306) 29.7 (46)
You need not be good at all four factors in order to have a good offense, but, obviously, the more diversified your strengths, the better.

Herb Sendek's offenses relied on a high eFG% and a low TO%, eschewing offensive rebounds, and that worked out fine. But we lost one of those staples this season (the low TO%) and didn't make up for it by improving our offensive rebounding. Although this year's offense looks like it's in the same ballpark as the last three, it really isn't. Pomeroy's adjusted numbers give more weight to a team's most recent performances, so State's late-season surge provided a jolt that is misleading (particularly in comparison to last year's offense, which slumped at the end). We spent the majority of this year with an offense ranked in the 70s (still not bad, but not close to recent years, either).

The Wolfpack offense in conference play (conference rank in parenthesis):
 OE (Rk) eFG% (Rk) TO% (Rk) OR% (Rk) FTR (Rk)
2005 112.0 (4) 54.1 (3) 19.4 (7) 30.5 (10) 30.6 (4)
2006 110.2 (4) 55.6 (1) 20.2 (4) 27.2 (12) 33.5 (2)
2007 101.1 (11) 53.1 (1) 22.5 (11) 26.2 (12) 25.6 (8)
A few weeks ago, the Tobacco Road Report noted:

[T]he Wolfpack haven't won a conference game when they had less than a 55 percent EFG.

That's our offense summed up in one line. Fifty-five percent isn't merely good shooting, it's great shooting. If we were anything less than great, we lost. Next year, it's all about finding a second leg to stand on, be it through a significant improvement in either TO% or OR%, or, more likely, an incremental improvement in both.