Statistics National Rankings So Far
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48
  1. #1
    Pro
    Points: 68,009, Level: 80
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 41
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    timappelgate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cedar Falls, IA
    Posts
    2,303
    Points
    68,009
    Level
    80
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 44
    Given: 7

    Statistics National Rankings So Far

    PPG- 83.5 (37th)
    RPG- 40.0 (85th)
    APG- 18.3 (28th)
    FGP- .508 (26th)

    Not bad. All these are national rankings btw. Go Clones!


    R.I.P "Gibbons" 4/3/2012
    R.I.P RollsRoyce 4/12/2012

  2. #2
    Addict
    Points: 151,788, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    6,088
    Points
    151,788
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 77
    Given: 11

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    The rebounding surprises me the most.



  3. #3
    Pro
    Points: 59,551, Level: 75
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 499
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    jahfg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ames
    Posts
    2,745
    Points
    59,551
    Level
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 58
    Given: 28

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    These statistics mean nothing given that most teams haven't played anyone worth a crap.


    I don't bring my own opinions, just attack others.

  4. #4
    Legend
    Points: 222,660, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 15.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    10,523
    Points
    222,660
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 411
    Given: 475

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    I hope they are national rankings. It would suck if we were 85th in rebounding in the big 12.


    Nobody but HB knows for sure. You pretty much know nothing....like Knownothing would like to say.
    Word

  5. #5
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 58,878, Level: 75
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 1,172
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,399
    Points
    58,878
    Level
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 55
    Given: 1

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneYoda View Post
    The rebounding surprises me the most.
    RPG really means nothing. With our fast pace, its obvious that we'll have a lot of rebounds, just because we have a lot of possessions. The key will be rebounding margin.



  6. #6
    Pro
    Points: 59,683, Level: 75
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 367
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,510
    Points
    59,683
    Level
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 75
    Given: 16

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Use kenpom.com for statistics, not espn.com.

    I'm not sure how you left out 3-point numbers. ISU is 12th nationally in 3-pointers made and 13th nationally in 3-point percentage. (39 for 87; 44.8%)

    Between our excellent shooting and our opponents' poor shooting, there's a good reason why we've been better than expected so far, and it has almost nothing to do with assists per game or rebounds per game, which are nearly meaningless statistics anyway. If not meaningless, they're definitely inferior statistics to things like Assist rate and Off Reb. %.

    And, for all the talk about up-tempo, our pace is basically the same as it was last year under McDermott.



  7. #7
    Starter
    Points: 10,211, Level: 30
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 339
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    CycloneJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    770
    Points
    10,211
    Level
    30
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 42

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by kucyclone View Post
    Use kenpom.com for statistics, not espn.com.

    I'm not sure how you left out 3-point numbers. ISU is 12th nationally in 3-pointers made and 13th nationally in 3-point percentage. (39 for 87; 44.8%)

    Between our excellent shooting and our opponents' poor shooting, there's a good reason why we've been better than expected so far, and it has almost nothing to do with assists per game or rebounds per game, which are nearly meaningless statistics anyway. If not meaningless, they're definitely inferior statistics to things like Assist rate and Off Reb. %.

    And, for all the talk about up-tempo, our pace is basically the same as it was last year under McDermott.
    You are 100% insane if you really think that.



  8. #8
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 84,703, Level: 90
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 847
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience PointsCreated Album pictures
    azepp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    3,964
    Points
    84,703
    Level
    90
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 183
    Given: 128

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneJames View Post
    You are 100% insane if you really think that.
    334 points so far this year, 346 through 4 games last year. We're actually averaging fewer points per game so far.



  9. #9
    Speechless
    Points: 288,652, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 17.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    VeloClone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn Park, MN
    Posts
    15,484
    Points
    288,652
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 2,203
    Given: 3,796

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by kucyclone View Post
    Use kenpom.com for statistics, not espn.com.

    I'm not sure how you left out 3-point numbers. ISU is 12th nationally in 3-pointers made and 13th nationally in 3-point percentage. (39 for 87; 44.8%)

    Between our excellent shooting and our opponents' poor shooting, there's a good reason why we've been better than expected so far, and it has almost nothing to do with assists per game or rebounds per game, which are nearly meaningless statistics anyway. If not meaningless, they're definitely inferior statistics to things like Assist rate and Off Reb. %.

    And, for all the talk about up-tempo, our pace is basically the same as it was last year under McDermott.
    The difference is that Freddy considers a 2 on 2 or 3 on 3 a transition advantage where often GMac often seemed to call off the dogs because it was only a 3 on 2 advantage and "we are thin so we need to conserve our energy and not run with these guys". Freddy doesn't seem to care that we are thin. He is going to run and to hell with the consequences. He may very well win more than he loses in that gamble; who knows. After any transition opportunity is gone, then we still settle down and probe the defense for an opening. Up-tempo does not necessarily mean rushed.


    "There are five real good recruits in the state. We got three of them. One couldnít get into school, and the other went to (the University of) Iowa...which is about the same thing." - Coach Johnny Orr

  10. #10
    Pro
    Points: 59,683, Level: 75
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 367
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,510
    Points
    59,683
    Level
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 75
    Given: 16

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneJames View Post
    You are 100% insane if you really think that.
    I guess both me and the objective statistics are on the side of insanity.



  11. #11
    Starter
    Points: 10,211, Level: 30
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 339
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    CycloneJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    770
    Points
    10,211
    Level
    30
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 42

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by kucyclone View Post
    I guess both me and the objective statistics are on the side of insanity.
    I can't find any stats for fast break points. And you can't tell me that overall points is an indication of tempo. Even if we have less fast break points this year than last year we are still a much more up-tempo year. It all comes down to converting the opportunities, which we missed several opportunities in yesterdays game (especially in the first half). On top of the I'd like to see a stat on the average time from rebound or made basket to the top of the key going to other way. I can garuntee you it would be significantly faster. Just because we haven't scored as many points as last year 4 games in doesn't mean we aren't playing any faster.



  12. #12
    Speechless
    Points: 336,692, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 6.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    bawbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, IA
    Posts
    19,444
    Points
    336,692
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,173
    Given: 2,045

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneJames View Post
    I can't find any stats for fast break points. And you can't tell me that overall points is an indication of tempo. Even if we have less fast break points this year than last year we are still a much more up-tempo year. It all comes down to converting the opportunities, which we missed several opportunities in yesterdays game (especially in the first half). On top of the I'd like to see a stat on the average time from rebound or made basket to the top of the key going to other way. I can garuntee you it would be significantly faster. Just because we haven't scored as many points as last year 4 games in doesn't mean we aren't playing any faster.
    ken pomeroy has a tempo stat, as defined here:
    Tempo: We can estimate possessions very well from box score stats by using this formula: FGA-OR+TO+0.475xFTA.
    For each team, possessions are counted for the team and their opponents, and then averaged. A teamís average tempo is total possessions divided by minutes. This value is then adjusted for schedule, considering the preferred pace of each opponent and when each game was played.
    Our tempo last year was 69.1 (80th in the country). Our tempo this year is 69.6 (76th in the country).



  13. #13
    Pro
    Points: 59,683, Level: 75
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 367
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,510
    Points
    59,683
    Level
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 75
    Given: 16

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneJames View Post
    I can't find any stats for fast break points. And you can't tell me that overall points is an indication of tempo. Even if we have less fast break points this year than last year we are still a much more up-tempo year. It all comes down to converting the opportunities, which we missed several opportunities in yesterdays game (especially in the first half). On top of the I'd like to see a stat on the average time from rebound or made basket to the top of the key going to other way. I can garuntee you it would be significantly faster. Just because we haven't scored as many points as last year 4 games in doesn't mean we aren't playing any faster.
    Please define up-tempo for me.

    I would assume, under any definition, that playing up-tempo would lead to more offensive possessions per game. That hasn't been the case through four games.



  14. #14
    Just Win Baby
    Points: 299,761, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Clones85''s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,339
    Points
    299,761
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 2

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    There is a large difference so far in pace for ISU this year as opposed to last. Huge difference. We are taking shots that would have gotten pulled last year. We may be on pace right now but I am guessing over the course of a season you will see that this years team plays at a quicker tempo



  15. #15
    Starter
    Points: 10,211, Level: 30
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 339
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    CycloneJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    770
    Points
    10,211
    Level
    30
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 42

    Re: Statistics National Rankings So Far

    Quote Originally Posted by kucyclone View Post
    Please define up-tempo for me.

    I would assume, under any definition, that playing up-tempo would lead to more offensive possessions per game. That hasn't been the case through four games.
    I would say up-tempo is subjective. And while generally I would agree that playing up-tempo would generate more offensive possessions, it doens't have to. If you push the ball up the court every chance you get, but more often than not the defense got back quickly, then the offense will settle into a set play. I'm not saying we run a Grinell offense where we throw up a three before 10 seconds have elapsed. But in my opinion from going to the games, we push the ball up the floor much quicker than we did under Gmac. Obviously, its hard to compare 4 games from this year with 4 games from last year because we are comparing playing pasties. It will be interesting to see how we play against better competition. Although I would argue if ISU played Creighton last year the score would have been in the 60's or 70's and not the 90's. But both teams shot the ball very well.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • TV: Cyclones.tv
  • HOOPS: Iowa State vs. Mississippi Valley State
  • December 31, 2014
  • 06:00 PM