SB Nation - Miguel Paul

Study Hall: Mizzou-Truman State

Bill C. — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:00:35 -0000

Why tweak a format that worked so well last year, right? While Statsheet.com doesn't track exhibition games, I still do, meaning you get the data tables without the pretty Statsheet graphs. Regardless, here's a statistical look back at the laughingest of exhibition laughers.

Mizzou 96, Truman State 33

	Truman	Mizzou
Points Per Minute	0.83	2.40
Points Per Possession (PPP)	0.46	1.33
Points Per Shot (PPS)	0.79	1.32
2-PT FG%	29.2%	57.9%
3-PT FG%	16.7%	18.8%
FT%	55.6%	72.4%
True Shooting %	33.1%	56.0%

	Truman	Mizzou
Assists	5	14
Steals	6	20
Turnovers	29	12
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	0.38	2.83

	Truman	Mizzou
Expected Offensive Rebounds	13	14
Offensive Rebounds	8	24
Difference	-5	+10

Damn...hold them to one less point, and we perfectly triple their score. Inexcusable.
Obviously we're not going to try to glean too much from any of this, but there's statistical domination, and there's statistical domination. I mentioned last week that Mizzou is as safe as anybody when it comes to avoiding slip-ups in these types of games, simply because when the athletic advantage is this significant, an opponent will have to shoot about 85% from the field to have a shot. And if Truman had indeed shot 85% from the field, they'd have ended up with around 26 more made field goals and 52-62 points...and they'd have still lost.
Didn't you miss having BCI in your life? I know I did.
Nice walk-up crowd, by the way. There's nothing truly amazing about attendance of 8,120, but considering we drew 4,300 for the first exhibition last year, I think that number's pretty outstanding.

If you're looking for red flags, here's what I've got to offer:

Missouri was 3-for-16 from 3-point range. A lot of the misses were open looks from people we know to be good shooters. Kimmeh and Justin Safford combined to go 1-for-5 from downtown, for instance. If there's a worry at all, it's that Miguel Paul and Michael Dixon combined to go 0-for-6. With such a small sample size, however, we'll obviously wait and see how the next few games go before we call this an actual worry.
Twelve turnovers is a bit much for an opponent like Truman State, even in a game where the starters averaged only 17.6 minutes. Kimmeh led the way with three, while Dixon and Laurence Bowers had two each, but ten of the turnovers came before halftime, and things got shored up tremendously in the second half. Again, this isn't a concern yet.
I mentioned wanting to see good things from Marcus Denmon, wanting him to prove to me he could be the second good long-range shooter that we needed, and he clearly didn't show that in opportunity #1. As with the others, this isn't a concern yet, just a missed opportunity. He's got plenty more chances to show what he can do. Meanwhile, he played great defense all night, and that's lovely.

That's about all I've got as far as negatives go. Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Laurence Bowers	16.11	0.90	18 Min, 14 Pts (6-for-12 FG), 12 Reb (8 Off), 2 Stl, 2 Blk, 2 TO
Keith Ramsey	11.04	0.69	16 Min, 9 Pts (4-for-6), 5 Reb, 2 Ast, 3 Stl
Zaire Taylor	10.35	0.52	20 Min, 7 Pts (1-for-1), 2 Reb, 3 Stl
J.T. Tiller	9.67	0.60	16 Min, 13 Pts (5-for-6), ridiculously good man-to-man defense
Kim English	9.67	0.48	20 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-8), 4 Reb, 5 Ast, 3 Stl, 3 TO
Tyler Stone	9.18	0.92	10 Min, 7 Pts (3-for-4), 7 Reb (3 Off)
Michael Dixon	7.03	0.41	17 Min, 10 Pts (5-for-9), 3 Reb, 3 Stl, 2 TO
Justin Safford	6.64	0.42	16 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-7), 4 Reb
John Underwood	4.79	0.40	12 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-5), 5 Reb (4 Off)
Steve Moore	3.91	0.30	13 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-2), 6 Reb (4 Off)
Miguel Paul	3.32	0.18	18 Min, 3 Pts (0-for-4), 2 Reb, 2 Ast, 3 Stl
Jarrett Sutton	2.93	0.42	7 Min, 5 Pts (2-for-4)
Marcus Denmon	0.39	0.02	17 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-5), 2 Reb, 2 Stl

* AdjGS = a take-off of the Game Score metric (definition here) accepted by a lot of basketball stat nerds. It does the same thing my previous measure of choice did (it takes points, assists, rebounds (offensive & defensive), steals, blocks, turnovers and fouls into account to determine an individual's "score" for a given game), only the formula is more used and accepted. The "adjustment" in Adjusted Game Score is simply matching the total game scores to the total points scored in the game, thereby redistributing the game's points scored to those who had the biggest impact on the game itself, instead of just how many balls a player put through a basket.

I had a friend in town from Chicago, and the first thing I told him as we headed to the game was, if Laurence Bowers is really good, we're going to be great this year. Again, it was only Truman State (how many times can one person say that in one post?), but let's just say that his numbers were gaudy enough to excite me. You expect good numbers, but his were great. Eight offensive rebounds, and a nice touch on the 17-footer that Leo and DeMarre patented last year, plus a couple of steals and a couple of blocks? Yes, please.
Compared to my expectations, the person who impressed me most on Friday was Tyler Stone. I mentioned this in yesterday's podcast, but he was a lot bigger than I expected, and he was very smooth around the hoop. I'm not sure his range goes beyond 8 feet yet, but we've got plenty of bigs (Bowers and Safford, to name two) with good range--we need a guy with post moves and strength, and Stone's showing was encouraging. Obviously I'll wait to see him do that against a real opponent before I get too encouraged, but he looked really good.
As I also mentioned in the podcast, I cannot tell you the morbid enjoyment I got out of watching J.T. Tiller guard D2 guards man-to-man. It was almost uncomfortable to watch after a while. Meanwhile, Zaire Taylor and Kim English seemed perfectly content with distributing the ball and getting younger guys some opportunities to make plays. I assume we'll see more shots from both of them when the games get real. It really was fun, though, to watch English looking to get Jarrett Sutton the ball every second that he was on the court.
Get John Underwood a sandwich. Send him to The Diner for three Stretches every morning. Dude needs to gain some weight as soon as humanly possible. He had a really nice block and looked decent around the basket, but he's going to get pushed around this year. Get 20 pounds on him, and he could be a really nice defensive force in future seasons.
Not sure what to think about Steve Moore. He looked neither good nor bad, really.

Keys to the Game Revisited

From Friday's preview.

Show up. Mizzou did indeed show up.
Rebound. A 54-24 rebounding edge, and a +15 margin in expected rebounds. I consider those to be, uhh, pretty good numbers.
Marcus Denmon. Like I said, he didn't show much beyond good defense, but he's got plenty of opportunities to show what he can do.

Summary

Eight! Eight points in the second half! Great defense is fun to watch.

Rosters Set for Mizzou's Black and Gold Game

Evan Pfaff — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:15:12 -0000

More photos » by Mark J. Terrill - AP

Will Zaire Taylor be smiling after Mizzou’s Black & Gold game? (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Browse more photos »

Prep for the big homecoming football game against Texas the following day by catching the Tigers take on the Tigers for only $5 (or free with Student ID) this Friday in the annual Black & Gold game.

With players watching on, honorary coaches MO Governor Jay Nixon and UM System President Gary Forsee selected the teams Tuesday after practice at Mizzou Arena.

Their selections:

Black Squad
Honorary coach: Governor Jay Nixon
G-Zaire Taylor
G-Kim English
G-Mike Dixon
G-Jarrett Sutton (first half)
F-Keith Ramsey
F-Steve Moore
F-Tyler Stone

Gold Squad
Honorary coach: UM System President Gary Forsee
G-J.T. Tiller
G-Marcus Denmon
G-Miguel Paul
G-Jarrett Sutton (second half)
F-Laurence Bowers
F-Justin Safford
F-John Underwood

Follow Evan on Twitter at http://twitter.com/MizzouHoops

Poll

Who will win the Mizzou Black & Gold game?

The Black Squad

16 votes

The Gold Squad

14 votes

With Jarrett Sutton playing on both teams, it is too hard to predcit.

9 votes

39 votes | Poll has closed

Mizzou Links, 10-16-09

Bill C. — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:55:42 -0000

Mizzou-OSU Links!

The Trib (Dave Matter): Writer's Block: Talking Cowboys

BTS: What kind of impact has coordinator Bill Young made on the defense and the program in general?

Chatmon: Bill Young has had a great impact on the defense. He preaches forcing turnovers and aggressive play. His main thing was to put his players in positions to use their talent and make plays and it is clear the defense has improved. How much remains to be seen.

Haisten: In every sense, the Cowboys are better. There are fewer missed tackles and fewer blown coverage assignments. During last week's 36-31 victory at Texas A&M, OSU totaled nine quarterback pressures, four sacks and eight pass break-ups. In 13 games last season, OSU's defense managed only 16 sacks. Missouri, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma had a combined total of 196 pass attempts against the Cowboys. In those games, OSU totaled only three sacks. Through five games this season, the Cowboys have 11 sacks. For the 12-game regular season, they are on pace for 26. Seven of this year's 11 sacks have been recorded by linemen. Last season, OSU got only 9½ sacks from linemen. Entering the Missouri game, the Cowboys are 60th in total defense (improved from last season's 93rd), 37th in rush defense (improved from 52nd) and 89th in pass defense (improved from 109th).
KC Star: Mizzou can get season back on track with redemption at OSU
Tulsa Beacon: OSU hosts Missouri without Dez Bryant, Kendall Hunter
The Missourian: 10 Things to think about while driving to Oklahoma State
Pistol Pete, the mascot version, is super creepy. The Cowboy mascot is supposed to be a likeness to Frank Eaton, the real-life cowboy known as Pistol Pete. There's just one problem. When it comes to mascots you got to go full-on caricature or not go at all. Okie St. ended up with a regular-sized guy, a super gigantic head and way too realistic facial features. It makes for a terrifying combination. There's a lot of pain behind those enormous eyes.
Daily Oklahoman: OSU's Keith Toston does it all for mom
Daily Oklahoman: Missouri QB Blaine Gabbert puts up big numbers
PowerMizzou: Cowboy Insider: Five questions for Saturday
The Trib: Behind the Stripes Webcast: Episode 10, Part 1
The Trib: Behind the Stripes Webcast: Episode 10, Part 2

Mizzou-UConn: Statistical...so close

Bill C. — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 03:40:40 -0000

I guess we used up our luck with Marcus Denmon's 5 points (the bank shot and the 70-footer) at the end of the first half of the Memphis game. When the game was on the line, Mizzou's shots rimmed out and UConn's shots banked in. That was the difference. It's basketball.

All the credit in the world to UConn for making their free throws, grabbing the rebounds, and regaining their composure when Mizzou's pressure all but broke them down at the beginning of the second half, but in a game where both teams' styles dominated (Mizzou with the turnovers, UConn with the boards), the game came down to bounces, and UConn got them.

(You'd think the Sports God would have favored the underdog--especially one in the "Best program to never make the Final Four" race--but I guess after George Mason got the bounces over UConn in '06, UConn got the nod. Such is life.)

With that minor bout of self-pity out of the way, it's on to the stats!

	Mizzou	UConn
Points Per Minute	1.88	2.05
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.01	1.11
Points Per Shot (PPS)	0.99	1.55
2-PT FG%	46.6%	61.0%
3-PT FG%	27.8%	16.7%
FT%	50.0%	58.3%
True Shooting %	46.1%	61.1%

	Mizzou	UConn
Assists	21	15
Steals	10	3
Turnovers	6	17
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	5.17	1.06

	Mizzou	UConn
Expected Offensive Rebounds	17	10
Offensive Rebounds	12	11
Difference	-5	+1

	Mizzou	Opp
Points Per Minute	2.11	1.94
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.17	1.08
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.30	1.26
2-PT FG%	54.6%	50.0%
3-PT FG%	30.3%	25.8%
FT%	69.8%	72.5%
True Shooting %	55.7%	52.9%

	Mizzou	Opp
Assists/Gm	17.8	12.5
Steals/Gm	7.3	4.0
Turnovers/Gm	7.3	13.0
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	3.45	1.27

	Mizzou	Opp
Expected Offensive Rebounds/Gm	13.3	13.5
Offensive Rebounds/Gm	10.8	14.8
Difference	-2.5	+1.3

	Mizzou	Memphis
Points Per Minute	2.55	2.28
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.24	1.11
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.65	1.32
2-PT FG%	58.7%	59.3%
3-PT FG%	37.5%	20.0%
FT%	66.7%	58.3%
True Shooting %	62.3%	54.8%

	Mizzou	Memphis
Assists	17	16
Steals	9	8
Turnovers	12	14
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.17	1.71

	Mizzou	Memphis
Expected Offensive Rebounds	13	14
Offensive Rebounds	12	15
Difference	-1	+1

	Mizzou	Marquette
Points Per Minute	2.08	1.98
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.18	1.13
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.30	1.32
2-PT FG%	57.1%	39.1%
3-PT FG%	31.8%	35.7%
FT%	70.0%	84.8%
True Shooting %	57.0%	53.0%

	Mizzou	Marquette
Assists	14	8
Steals	6	4
Turnovers	7	12
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.86	1.00

	Mizzou	Marquette
Expected Offensive Rebounds	13	14
Offensive Rebounds	10	16
Difference	-3	+2

	Mizzou	Big Red
Points Per Minute	1.95	1.48
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.26	0.95
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.32	0.92
2-PT FG%	59.0%	39.5%
3-PT FG%	25.0%	28.6%
FT%	89.5%	58.3%
True Shooting %	57.9%	42.6%

	Mizzou	Big Red
Assists	19	11
Steals	4	1
Turnovers	4	9
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	5.75	1.33

	Mizzou	Big Red
Expected Offensive Rebounds	11	15
Offensive Rebounds	9	17
Difference	-2	+2

	Marquette	USU
Points Per Minute	1.45	1.43
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.01	0.99
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.23	1.08
2-PT FG%	42.9%	50.0%
3-PT FG%	26.3%	30.4%
FT%	82.6%	75.0%
True Shooting %	50.8%	50.4%

	Marquette	USU
Assists	7	11
Steals	4	2
Turnovers	9	9
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	1.22	1.44

	Marquette	USU
Expected Offensive Rebounds	11	11
Offensive Rebounds	10	7
Difference	-1	-4

	Mizzou	OSU
Points Per Minute	1.68	1.48
Points Per Possession (PPP)	0.94	0.83
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.05	1.00
2-PT FG%	54.5%	48.6%
3-PT FG%	19.4%	16.7%
FT%	72.2%	65.0%
True Shooting %	46.6%	43.5%

	Mizzou	OSU
Assists	13	8
Steals	9	6
Turnovers	10	17
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.20	0.82

	Mizzou	OSU
Expected Offensive Rebounds	14	14
Offensive Rebounds	11	13
Difference	-3	-1

	Mizzou	Baylor
Points Per Minute	1.83	1.50
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.17	0.96
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.43	1.07
2-PT FG%	47.1%	50.0%
3-PT FG%	47.1%	25.0%
FT%	70.8%	62.5%
True Shooting %	59.3%	47.6%

	Mizzou	Baylor
Assists	17	8
Steals	7	7
Turnovers	11	13
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.18	1.15

	Mizzou	Baylor
Expected Offensive Rebounds	11	13
Offensive Rebounds	12	12
Difference	+1	-1

	Mizzou	Tech
Points Per Minute	2.03	1.50
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.24	0.92
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.45	1.09
2-PT FG%	61.4%	40.0%
3-PT FG%	33.3%	26.7%
FT%	65.2%	72.7%
True Shooting %	61.3%	46.4%

	Mizzou	Tech
Assists	16	12
Steals	8	4
Turnovers	11	14
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.18	1.14

	Mizzou	Tech
Expected Offensive Rebounds	10	13
Offensive Rebounds	12	13
Difference	+2	+0

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
J.T. Tiller	14.63	0.56	8 Pts, 5 Reb. 5 Ast, 2 Stl
Keith Ramsey	12.77	0.75	8 Pts, 3 Reb, 3 Ast, 2 Stl
Matt Lawrence	11.84	0.44	13 Pts, 3 Reb, 2 Ast
Leo Lyons	10.24	0.41	13 Pts, 2 Reb, 4 Ast, 2 Stl, 3 TO
Justin Safford	8.78	0.59	9 Pts, 4 Reb
Zaire Taylor	6.25	0.17	8 Pts, 2 Reb, 4 Ast, 2 Stl
DeMarre Carroll	6.12	0.25	12 Pts, 4 Reb
Marcus Denmon	2.53	0.18	2 Pts, 2 Reb, 2 Ast
Miguel Paul	2.26	0.45	2 Pts
Laurence Bowers	1.33	0.66	2 minutes
Michael Anderson Jr.	-0.53	-0.53	1 minute
Kim English	-4.26	-0.53	0 Pts, 2 Reb

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
DeMarre Carroll	16.44	0.56	14.3 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.5 APG, 1.3 SPG
J.T. Tiller	15.76	0.52	13.0 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.3 APG, 2.0 SPG
Leo Lyons	14.93	0.51	17.3 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 2.0 APG
Matt Lawrence	8.74	0.33	11.0 PPG, 2.5 RPG, 1.3 APG, 1.0 SPG
Zaire Taylor	8.19	0.28	8.5 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 2.0 APG, 1.3 SPG
Kim English	7.14	0.66	9.0 PPG, 1.5 RPG
Keith Ramsey	4.12	0.37	3.0 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 1.3 APG
Justin Safford	4.06	0.43	4.0 PPG, 1.8 RPG
Marcus Denmon	1.60	0.11	3.0 PPG, 1.8 RPG, 1.3 APG
Steve Moore	1.60	1.60	1 minute
Laurence Bowers	1.35	0.34	8 minutes
Miguel Paul	0.46	0.07	0.5 PPG, 1.3 APG
Jarrett Sutton	0.00	0.00	<1 minute
Michael Anderson Jr.	-0.06	-0.06	2 minutes

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
J.T. Tiller	25.65	0.73	23 Pts (on 16 shots), 4 Reb, 3 Ast, 3 Stl
DeMarre Carroll	20.62	0.71	17 Pts, 6 Reb, 6 Ast, 2 Stl, 4 PF
Zaire Taylor	16.69	0.76	14 Pts (on 7 shots), 4 Reb, 2 Stl
Leo Lyons	12.64	0.44	15 Pts, 12 Reb, 2 Ast, 2 Blk, 5 PF
Matt Lawrence	10.43	0.39	13 Pts, 3 Reb, 3 TO
Justin Safford	7.00	0.54	7 Pts
Kim English	4.42	0.37	6 Pts, 2 Ast
Marcus Denmon	3.19	0.29	5 Pts, 1 soul-crushing half-courter
Laurence Bowers	1.47	0.25	2 Pts, 3 PF
Miguel Paul	-0.98	-0.08	0 Pts
Keith Ramsey	-1.47	-0.49	0 Pts, 3 PF

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
DeMarre Carroll	19.62	0.63	15.0 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 4.7 APG, 1.7 SPG, 1.0 BPG
Leo Lyons	16.40	0.54	18.7 PPG, 8.7 RPG, 1.3 APG, 1.0 BPG
J.T. Tiller	16.16	0.50	14.7 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 4.0 APG, 2.0 SPG
Kim English	10.61	0.91	12.0 PPG, 1.3 RPG, 1.0 APG
Zaire Taylor	8.80	0.32	8.7 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 1.3 APG, 1.0 SPG
Matt Lawrence	7.84	0.30	10.3 PPG, 2.3 RPG, 1.0 APG, 1.0 SPG
Justin Safford	2.65	0.35	2.3 PPG, 1.0 RPG
Steve Moore	1.57	1.57	1 minute
Keith Ramsey	1.53	0.17	1.3 PPG, 1.0 RPG
Laurence Bowers	1.45	0.24	6 minutes
Marcus Denmon	1.33	0.09	3.3 PPG, 1.7 RPG, 1.0 APG
Michael Anderson Jr.	0.36	0.36	1 minute
Jarrett Sutton	0.00	0.00	1 minute
Miguel Paul	-0.08	-0.01	0.0 PPG, 1.3 APG

SB Nation - Miguel Paul

Study Hall: Mizzou-Truman State

Mizzou 96, Truman State 33

Player Stats

Keys to the Game Revisited

Summary

Rosters Set for Mizzou's Black and Gold Game

Who will win the Mizzou Black & Gold game?

The Black Squad

The Gold Squad

With Jarrett Sutton playing on both teams, it is too hard to predcit.

Mizzou Links, 10-16-09

Mizzou-UConn: Statistical...so close

Player Stats

Keys to the Game Revisited

Mizzou vs NCAA Tournament

Mizzou-Memphis: Statistical Hello World

Player Stats

Mizzou vs NCAA Tournament

You Never Know

Mizzou-Marquette: Statistical Onions

Player Stats

Mizzou vs NCAA Tournament

Mizzou-Cornell: Statistical Round of 32!

Player Stats

Keys to the Game Revisited

Marquette-Utah State

Mizzou in the Big 12 Tourney: Statistical Champs

Missouri 67, OSU 59

Missouri 73, Baylor 60

Big 12 Tournament

Mizzou-Tech: Statistical Bucking the Trend

Player Stats

Keys to the Game Revisited