IdaGriz01
Well-known member
Much of the discussion of the woes for the Griz (men’s team) has focused on the bench players, the guys who come in to spell the starters and give them a blow (physically and mentally). So, being a numbers guy, I wondered if there were any signs in the stats that might be of interest. Yes, I realize that numbers can’t tell everything, but it seemed like important on-court factors should show up, at least a little bit, in the stats.
So … here goes. I picked two stats that I thought might show something: Bench minutes, and their points scored as a fraction of the total team points for the game. For the Griz, I used only numbers for their conference games … and compared them to those of the opponents.
The Griz bench has averaged 47.6 minutes of playing time, and they’ve scored 16.5% of the team’s points.
The opponents’ benches have averaged 58.7 minutes, and they’ve scored 22.2% of their teams’ points.
That difference of 10+ minutes of bench playing time between the Griz and their opponents seems pretty significant and kinda supports the feeling we’ve had. Not quite as sure about the point percentage difference.
I wondered what a “norm” might be. I decided to go with teams from the P-5 and G-5 conferences, and collected over forty more-or-less randomly-selected data points. Thus, my list includes ranked team like Houston, Auburn, and Gonzaga … and not so hot ones like Marshall, Michigan, and Washington. Not “scientifically” selected, but I thought they were a reasonably representatively sample. (Perhaps when I get another slow day, I might compare stats for other weak conferences to the better ones.)
The teams in my sample play their bench an average of 52.7 minutes … less than the average for the Big Sky, but 5 minutes more than the Griz. Their bench players contribute 23.5% of their teams’ total points … pretty close to the Big Sky (non-Griz) average, but 7% more than the Griz. Of course, it can be argued that IF the Griz bench played as many minutes as the overall average, they’d score a higher percentage of the team’s points. And they would, but they’d still be short of the Big Sky or “representative” contribution. (Which is perhaps why they don’t get to play as much.)
All that being said … GO GRIZ! :egriz:
Addendum: In preparing my list from outside the Big Sky, I noticed that, generally speaking, coming off the bench is death to your three-point shot. I did not take specific notes (wish I had), but I'd venture to say that bench players scored zero points on treys in probably 80-90% of the games.
So … here goes. I picked two stats that I thought might show something: Bench minutes, and their points scored as a fraction of the total team points for the game. For the Griz, I used only numbers for their conference games … and compared them to those of the opponents.
The Griz bench has averaged 47.6 minutes of playing time, and they’ve scored 16.5% of the team’s points.
The opponents’ benches have averaged 58.7 minutes, and they’ve scored 22.2% of their teams’ points.
That difference of 10+ minutes of bench playing time between the Griz and their opponents seems pretty significant and kinda supports the feeling we’ve had. Not quite as sure about the point percentage difference.
I wondered what a “norm” might be. I decided to go with teams from the P-5 and G-5 conferences, and collected over forty more-or-less randomly-selected data points. Thus, my list includes ranked team like Houston, Auburn, and Gonzaga … and not so hot ones like Marshall, Michigan, and Washington. Not “scientifically” selected, but I thought they were a reasonably representatively sample. (Perhaps when I get another slow day, I might compare stats for other weak conferences to the better ones.)
The teams in my sample play their bench an average of 52.7 minutes … less than the average for the Big Sky, but 5 minutes more than the Griz. Their bench players contribute 23.5% of their teams’ total points … pretty close to the Big Sky (non-Griz) average, but 7% more than the Griz. Of course, it can be argued that IF the Griz bench played as many minutes as the overall average, they’d score a higher percentage of the team’s points. And they would, but they’d still be short of the Big Sky or “representative” contribution. (Which is perhaps why they don’t get to play as much.)
All that being said … GO GRIZ! :egriz:
Addendum: In preparing my list from outside the Big Sky, I noticed that, generally speaking, coming off the bench is death to your three-point shot. I did not take specific notes (wish I had), but I'd venture to say that bench players scored zero points on treys in probably 80-90% of the games.
