Tulsa

BearcatTalk

Help Support BearcatTalk:

For anyone that follows KenPom....

pp100p = points per 100 possessions

UC
Offense: 105.4 pp100p (97th)
Defense: 92.8 pp100p (16th)

Tulsa
Offense: 102.8 pp100p (152nd)
Defense: 93.2 pp100p (27th)

Judging off that, they're crazily similar to us haha. Defensive-oriented that can struggle to get the ball in the hoop. But they've also had an easier schedule than us.
 
#BearcatNation said:
For anyone that follows KenPom....

pp100p = points per 100 possessions

UC
Offense: 105.4 pp100p (97th)
Defense: 92.8 pp100p (16th)

Tulsa
Offense: 102.8 pp100p (152nd)
Defense: 93.2 pp100p (27th)

Judging off that, they're crazily similar to us haha. Defensive-oriented that can struggle to get the ball in the hoop. But they've also had an easier schedule than us.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Even with most of the season being done, Tulsa of all the AAC teams seems like the toughest one to gauge just how good they are.
 
Also fwiw, Tulsa ranks 5th in pomeroy's "luck" rating. Basically it means their game to game efficiency coincides with a lesser record. In other words they've been very good in close games. That kind of scares me because I don't see us blowing them out.
 
Conference games only stats for individual players.

yyjV42wh.jpg
 
Last edited:
When we go small with cobb, caupain, Johnson, clark, and Ellis we have 4 of the top 14 in the conference in steal % + Ellis as a rim protector. I like it ALOT and would like to see that 5 man unit get some run.
 
Last edited:
cincrulz11 said:
KJ shooting 39.7% from 3 in conference play. Wow.
Click to expand...

Not to mention we are shooting 36.5% from 3 as a team in conference. If that were a full season stat it would be better than any Bearcat team (but one) at least back to '96 (which is where my data cut off). If you throw out Sanders that stat would be 40% as a team and that would be higher than any team back to '96.


Someone tell me this team can't shoot
 
waterhead said:
Not to mention we are shooting 36.5% from 3 as a team in conference. If that were a full season stat it would be better than any Bearcat team (but one) at least back to '96 (which is where my data cut off). If you throw out Sanders that stat would be 40% as a team and that would be higher than any team back to '96.


Someone tell me this team can't shoot
Click to expand...

Just to put those numbers in perspective. In conference play as a team we are shooting 36.5% which would rank #5 in the career rankings of individual Bearcats between Van Exel and Logan. Without Sanders #'s we would rank #1...just a smidge ahead of Williams career stats.

I understand these are not realistic comparisons but it does give you some perspective on how we have been shooting in conference from long range
 
waterhead said:
Just to put those numbers in perspective. In conference play as a team we are shooting 36.5% which would rank #5 in the career rankings of individual Bearcats between Van Exel and Logan. Without Sanders #'s we would rank #1...just a smidge ahead of Williams career stats.

I understand these are not realistic comparisons but it does give you some perspective on how we have been shooting in conference from long range
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying...but you can't just pick and choose the sample size. "Without Sanders", " Without this game or that game", etc... The other teams would get a boost from that too. Burton and Flint shot 5-31 combined in the Kansas game in '96. "Without that..." I know you're just giving it perspective, but the #s are what they are. We're doing pretty well right now imo without tweaking the #s.
 
jacobkdoyle said:
Time to man up.
Click to expand...

haha. I have no control over how our team plays. They typically have trouble on the road. Teams with good guard play seem to play career games against us. Woodard is a guy who shoots ALOT of 3s, if he misses awesome. But if he doesnt it could end up bad. We have the advantage downlow, but they still seem to crash the defensive boards really well. This is a game where we need both shaq and sanders to show up( I havent checked, but has that happened yet this year? Seems like its one or the other or neither) We cant have KJ,Cobb or Sanders not making a 3, because you know we are going to shoot them. SO if the shots arent falling weve got to do a better job of penetrating the lane and attacking the basket
 
coachpipe said:
haha. I have no control over how our team plays. They typically have trouble on the road. Teams with good guard play seem to play career games against us. Woodard is a guy who shoots ALOT of 3s, if he misses awesome. But if he doesnt it could end up bad. We have the advantage downlow, but they still seem to crash the defensive boards really well. This is a game where we need both shaq and sanders to show up( I havent checked, but has that happened yet this year? Seems like its one or the other or neither) We cant have KJ,Cobb or Sanders not making a 3, because you know we are going to shoot them. SO if the shots arent falling weve got to do a better job of penetrating the lane and attacking the basket
Click to expand...

I'm looking for a huge rebounding game from Clark. He and Shaq need to be the best players on the floor. I definitely agree on Cobb, Sanders and KJ needing to knock down a some shots. I'm confident that at least one of those guys will hit multiple 3s. It'd be nice to set the tone early and go up big like we have lately.
 
So UCF v S Fla is on ESPNU and we're on CBS Sports? That sucks. But I guess 6 central time would too early of a start on a weeknight for Tulsa.

And I guess I shouldn't complain about non-HD when some people don't even get it at all. This conference sucks.
 
jacobkdoyle said:
I get what you're saying...but you can't just pick and choose the sample size. "Without Sanders", " Without this game or that game", etc... The other teams would get a boost from that too. Burton and Flint shot 5-31 combined in the Kansas game in '96. "Without that..." I know you're just giving it perspective, but the #s are what they are. We're doing pretty well right now imo without tweaking the #s.
Click to expand...

That's why I started with giving the numbers with Sanders included so someone wouldn't say I was picking and choosing:)
 
waterhead said:
That's why I started with giving the numbers with Sanders included so someone wouldn't say I was picking and choosing:)
Click to expand...

I hope we make 3s tonight without shooting many. I'm starting to feel like it's going in anytime Caupain or KJ get a wide open shot. I used to only feel that way about Troy.
 
jacobkdoyle said:
I get what you're saying...but you can't just pick and choose the sample size. "Without Sanders", " Without this game or that game", etc... The other teams would get a boost from that too. Burton and Flint shot 5-31 combined in the Kansas game in '96. "Without that..." I know you're just giving it perspective, but the #s are what they are. We're doing pretty well right now imo without tweaking the #s.
Click to expand...

I see both sides but I think the most important thing to take from these numbers is that we, incorrectly, tend to say this team can't shoot. That just isn't true. Sure, they started slow this year, but it's been pretty obvious lately that there are some guys who can shoot the heck out of the ball. Troy has been great. It is almost a shock when he takes a three and it doesn't go in. KJ has really rebounded from his early struggles. Shaq has really improved his consistency although a smaller sample size. This team will go as far as their offense takes them. The efficiency has been pretty good of late. Hopefully that is a trend that will continue into the AAC and NCAA Tourneys. When they play inside out their efficiency skyrockets. Have to feed the post.
 

Similar threads

Q
  • Poll
Conference Play Predictions
Replies
6
Views
17K
sedziobs
S
Q
ECU Part II
2 3
Replies
46
Views
48K
TheRealMick
T
Q
USF Part II
Replies
3
Views
17K
Queens_NYC
Q
Q
Temple Part II
Replies
6
Views
16K
sirthought
S
Q
Stetson
Replies
13
Views
40K
sirthought
S
Back
Top