« Five Questions - Charlotte Associate Head Coach, Rob Moxley | Main | Spiders Suffer Setback - Geriot Injured »
Statistical Look: The UMass NIT Run
By Guest | July 25, 2008
By: Contributor, Ray Floriani (Basketball Times/Hoopville)
SOUTH ORANGE, NJ - On the second Thursday in March, the UMass contingent exited Atlantic City’s Boardwalk Hall roughly after midnight. The evening had been a disappointment, to put it mildly. Coach Travis Ford’s club entered the Atlantic 10 Tournament with full intention of cutting down the nets.
At the half, everything was proceeding according to plan. After jumping out to a seemingly insurmountable seventeen-point lead against Charlotte, it appeared the Minutemen would coast to victory. The Niners, however, had other plans. Leemire Goldwire led a furious comeback which saw Charlotte score 50 second-half points, the Minutemen became unglued and were sent home early.
UMass accepted an NIT bid, regrouped and eventually made a run all the way to the championship game at Madison Square Garden. In this article, we look at both the regular season performance of the Minutemen and that of their NIT run.
Regular Season
Possessions Off. Efficiency Def. Efficiency
76 105 99
NIT Games
S.F. Austin 68 118 89
Akron 66 103 92
Syracuse 87 94 93
Florida 79 99 84
Ohio State 85 100 118
_________________________
Average: 77 103 95
How did they do it?
Defense.
Sure, we remember the exploits of Dante Milligan down low, Ricky Harris and Chris Lowe on the perimeter, and Gary Forbes a little bit of everywhere… but this was a defensive effort. In fact, the NIT efficiency on the defensive end was a whole four points lower (a significant figure) than during the regular season. Take away the Ohio State game - 118 - which cost UMass a chance to cut down the nets, and the defensive efficiency was an outstanding 90.
Pace was also a factor. UMass loved to push the ball as their A-10 figure of 76 possessions per game attests. In the NIT, UMass got into a few track meets as well, with Syracuse, Florida and Ohio State. In the first two rounds, however, opponents were able to slow the pace, yet UMass still prevailed.
Simply put, Ford’s club was effective in either transition or the half court set. Milligan’s inspired play on the interior was certainly an important factor in promoting that balance.
Turnovers. Or a lack of them.
Transition basketball usually means more possessions and accompanying turnovers.
Such was not the case with the Minutemen. They ran, yet valued the ball. As noted in previous articles, a turnover rate (turnovers divided by possessions) of under 20% is excellent. For the A-10 season, UMass checked-in with a turnover rate of 17%.
The NIT breakdown was as follows:
Opponent TO Rate
S.F. Austin 12%
Akron 21%
Syracuse 14%
Florida 14%
Ohio State 18%
Average: 16%
Studying these figures - and having watched the Akron game - makes the UMass win over the Zips even more impressive. The Minutemen had their worst game turnover-wise, were dragged into a slower tempo skirmish and trailed by nine midway through the second half. Yet they found a way to battle back. Chalk it up to senior leadership, savvy and determination; the Minutemen had those intangibles.
And oh, by the way… chalk it up to defense.
Topics: General |
