Individual Plus/Minus numbers

Solid effort by Morrissey in this game. He’s the one that got the team going in the second half with a couple of nice defensive plays (taking the charge under the basket and then diving on the floor to get a jump ball tie up) that were followed by a couple of quick baskets (a fast break off a steal by Battle and a spot up three ball on a semi break).

Pairs (plus minus numbers)

This bar chart shows the complete set of the plus/minus numbers.
Select any individual player on the left to see just his pairings (the bar where he is paired with himself represents his individual +/- number for the game.
Ctl-shft to select any combination of players to compare.

Pairs (minutes played)

Pairs (+/- per minute numbers)

• Penn State 74 Lehigh 55

Note: My prediction algorithm is based on Ken Pomeroy offensive and defensive efficiency ratings. I use my own methodology to tweak his ratings based on where the game is being played, then calculate a predicted score using the adjusted efficiency ratings and the expected pace of the game.

[table=10]

[table=11]

[table=12]

Here’s the plus minus number for Penn State for the Colgate game:

[table=8]

The cream of the crop, Claxton and Cornley, led the charge in this game. Mike Walker once again comes up with very solid plus minus numbers.

[table=9]

Since everyone was on the plus side of the board today, each player picked up one whole game in the win column and the relative order of all remained the same. Mike Walker continues to lead the pack in the 40 min projection.

• Indiana 87 W Carolina 55
• Michigan 73 Central Mich 66
• MSU 86 IUPU-Fort Wayne 60
• Ohio State 75 Presbyterian 51
• PSU 72 Denver 54
• Louisville 66 Purdue 59
• Wisconsin 82 Wis-GB 53

Note: My prediction algorithm is based on Ken Pomeroy offensive and defensive efficiency ratings. I use my own methodology to tweak his ratings based on where the game is being played, then calculate a predicted score using the adjusted efficiency ratings and the expected pace of the game.

Here’s their scoring breakdown:

Denver scores more from the line than Princeton did because they are one, better at getting there, and two, much better at shooting free throws (Princeton was one of only a handful of teams that’s worse than us from the line).

Like most Princeton style teams, they take lots of threes (second in the country in percentage of shots that are three pointers – 51.7%) along with a lot of ball movement (third in the country in assists per made FG – 72.1%).

The Pioneers also have one traditional Princeton offense factor that was missing from this year’s Princeton team – a center who can float out beyond the arc and make a three ball (Adam Tanner who is taking 2 or 3 per game from out there and hitting about 35%).

There’s two guys on the team we should look out for. The real threat appears to be #11 Kyle Lewis who is tied for the team lead in three pointers attempted and who makes them at a deadly rate – 50%. But I’m going to suggest that the guy we need to worry about is #5 Tyler Bullock. Tyler has shown a willingness to take threes, 23 on the season, but has been shooting badly, only 26%. For some reason, some unknown player always seems to have a career game against us and Tyler looks like he could be the guy.

Here’s a breakdown of where the both teams are getting their points.

No surprise that PSU gets so few FT points.

I’m actually a little surprised. I expected Princeton to have a larger percentage on their 3′s.