Importnce of Statistics

[sybarite]

I have mentioned that I examined the NCAA statistics at the end of last season to see what good teams did. Keep in mind as you look at some of these statistics that the eight teams that were seeded #1 or #2 were:

North Carolina
Duke
Maryland
Connecticut
Oklahoma
Ohio State
Tennessee
LSU

Rutgers was generally regarded as the next seed. Now, look at where they finished in which categories.

Team Field Goal Percentage 2005-2006

1 Duke
35 31-4 1125 2259 49.8
2 Ohio St.
32 29-3 904 1836 49.2
3 LSU
35 31-4 1020 2090 48.8
4 Vanderbilt
32 21-11 823 1718 47.9
5 Maryland
38 34-4 1130 2363 47.8
6 Connecticut
37 32-5 1013 2134 47.5
7 Oklahoma
36 31-5 1029 2180 47.2
8 Tennessee
36 31-5 1005 2133 47.1
9 North Carolina
35 33-2 1041 2216 47.0
10 Boston College
33 21-12 850 1810 47.0

Notice that all eight top seeds were in the top ten in Field Goal Percentage.

Team Field Goal Percentage Defense, 2005-2006

1 Coppin St.
31 22-9 571 1659 34.4
2 South Carolina
29 17-12 567 1635 34.7
3 Liberty
31 25-6 600 1730 34.7
4 Connecticut
37 32-5 749 2143 35.0
5 Duke
35 31-4 732 2085 35.1
6 Montana
28 21-7 605 1723 35.1
7 Bucknell
29 18-11 604 1717 35.2
8 Western Ill.
30 23-7 562 1597 35.2
9 Tulsa
32 26-6 677 1920 35.3
10 Louisiana Tech
31 26-5 650 1842 35.3
11 George Washington
32 23-9 620 1745 35.5
12 LSU
35 31-4 722 2021 35.7
13 Brigham Young
32 26-6 635 1777 35.7
14 Auburn
29 14-15 613 1711 35.8
15 IUPUI
28 17-11 588 1637 35.9
16 Winthrop
29 14-15 565 1570 36.0
17 Rutgers
32 27-5 592 1641 36.1
18 Long Beach St.
28 18-10 600 1661 36.1
19 Oregon
29 14-15 613 1696 36.1
20 Temple
32 24-8 629 1733 36.3
21 Alabama St.
30 15-15 556 1531 36.3
22 Mercer
29 14-15 591 1623 36.4
23 UTEP
29 14-15 596 1634 36.5
24 Delaware
30 22-8 576 1575 36.6
25 North Texas
28 19-9 605 1649 36.7

Only three of the eight top seeds were in the top 25 in field goal percentage defense.


Turnovers per Game 2005-2006
1 Coppin St.
31 22-9 571 1659 34.4
2 South Carolina
29 17-12 567 1635 34.7
3 Liberty
31 25-6 600 1730 34.7
4 Connecticut
37 32-5 749 2143 35.0
5 Duke
35 31-4 732 2085 35.1
6 Montana
28 21-7 605 1723 35.1
7 Bucknell
29 18-11 604 1717 35.2
8 Western Ill.
30 23-7 562 1597 35.2
9 Tulsa
32 26-6 677 1920 35.3
10 Louisiana Tech
31 26-5 650 1842 35.3
11 George Washington
32 23-9 620 1745 35.5
12 LSU
35 31-4 722 2021 35.7
13 Brigham Young
32 26-6 635 1777 35.7
14 Auburn
29 14-15 613 1711 35.8
15 IUPUI
28 17-11 588 1637 35.9
16 Winthrop
29 14-15 565 1570 36.0
17 Rutgers
32 27-5 592 1641 36.1
18 Long Beach St.
28 18-10 600 1661 36.1
19 Oregon
29 14-15 613 1696 36.1
20 Temple
32 24-8 629 1733 36.3
21 Alabama St.
30 15-15 556 1531 36.3
22 Mercer
29 14-15 591 1623 36.4
23 UTEP
29 14-15 596 1634 36.5
24 Delaware
30 22-8 576 1575 36.6
25 North Texas
28 19-9 605 1649 36.7

Only three of the eight top seeds were in the top 25 in fewest turnovers!


Rebound Margin, 2005-2006

1 Maryland
38 34-4 1720 45.3 1267 33.3 11.9
2 Oklahoma
36 31-5 1613 44.8 1220 33.9 10.9
3 Liberty
31 25-6 1364 44.0 1035 33.4 10.6
4 Duke
35 31-4 1532 43.8 1167 33.3 10.4
5 South Carolina
29 17-12 1221 42.1 981 33.8 8.3
6 Hampton
29 7-22 1292 44.6 1055 36.4 8.2
7 Tennessee
36 31-5 1418 39.4 1124 31.2 8.2
8 James Madison
31 24-7 1356 43.7 1109 35.8 8.0
9 LSU
35 31-4 1397 39.9 1131 32.3 7.6
10 Boston College
33 21-12 1281 38.8 1037 31.4 7.4
11

Five of the eight top seeds were in the top ten in rebounding margin.


Scoring Margin, 2005-2006
1 Duke
35 31-4 3009 86.0 2038 58.2 27.7
2 North Carolina
35 33-2 2877 82.2 2095 59.9 22.3
3 LSU
35 31-4 2595 74.1 1866 53.3 20.8
4 Ohio St.
32 29-3 2289 71.5 1694 52.9 18.6
5 Maryland
38 34-4 3166 83.3 2471 65.0 18.3
6 Tennessee
36 31-5 2819 78.3 2197 61.0 17.3
7 Connecticut
37 32-5 2692 72.8 2058 55.6 17.1
8 Georgia
32 23-9 2554 79.8 2051 64.1 15.7
9 Stanford
34 26-8 2671 78.6 2137 62.9 15.7
10 Chattanooga
31 27-4 2328 75.1 1905 61.5 13.6
11 Baylor
33 26-7 2469 74.8 2024 61.3 13.5
12 Utah
34 27-7 2353 69.2 1910 56.2 13.0
13 DePaul
34 27-7 2558 75.2 2119 62.3 12.9
14 Bowling Green
31 28-3 2142 69.1 1745 56.3 12.8
15 Sacred Heart
31 26-5 2221 71.6 1838 59.3 12.4
16 South Carolina
29 17-12 2002 69.0 1648 56.8 12.2
17 Louisiana Tech
31 26-5 2261 72.9 1883 60.7 12.2
18 Texas A&M
32 23-9 2227 69.6 1840 57.5 12.1
19 Rutgers
32 27-5 2045 63.9 1661 51.9 12.0
20 Purdue
33 26-7 2221 67.3 1840 55.8 11.5
21 Oklahoma
36 31-5 2748 76.3 2334 64.8 11.5
22 Indiana St.
33 27-6 2512 76.1 2137 64.8 11.4
23 Montana
28 21-7 1972 70.4 1654 59.1 11.4
24 Western Ky.
34 27-7 2510 73.8 2126 62.5 11.3
25 James Madison
31 24-7 2116 68.3 1766 57.0 11.3
26

curiously, only seven of the eight were in the top ten in scoring margin. OU was 21st.

Some of the statistics that I examined are no longer readily available. But, this does tend to show that Field Goal Percentage is far more important than defense or turnovers.

[tx4OU]

Is this your hypothesis from just last year's statistics or have you looked at multiple years?
Thanks.

[sybarite]

I have only looked at last year's statistics, and I've only looked at the women's statistics. The numbers are overwhelming. It isn't really a hypothesis. It is simply an observation that those things that "experts" are sure that good teams do is not necessarily true.

Fact: the data says that good teams shoot well. Since the only category in which all eight seeds are in the top ten is field goal percentage, it would appear to be a signficant determinant.

Defensive field goal percentage is not nearly so indicative of a good team. Teams that rebound would appear to have an advantage. It is obvious that turnovers do not carry the weight that some people place on them. Exactly why is the turnover made? If it is made by getting a better shot, it may well be worth it.

This is no hypothesis, just an observation of facts.

[tx4OU]

It is pretty interesting. If you are ever inclined to look at more then just last year with the same statistic categories, please post your findings as I think that may further add to your discovered observations.

[sybarite]

Here is the top 25 Field Goal Percentage from 2004-2005. But, I don't know which teams were the top seeds.

1 Ohio St. 35 30-5 966 1901 50.8
2 Vanderbilt 32 24-8 928 1885 49.2
3 Stanford 35 32-3 994 2063 48.2
4 Boston College 30 20-10 758 1578 48.0
5 Wis.-Green Bay 31 27-4 842 1775 47.4
6 Missouri St. 33 25-8 857 1808 47.4
7 LSU 36 33-3 1027 2186 47.0
8 Western Ky. 30 20-10 871 1854 47.0
9 Liberty 33 26-7 865 1845 46.9
10 Iowa 33 23-10 858 1831 46.9
11 Minnesota 34 26-8 824 1768 46.6
12 DePaul 31 26-5 955 2054 46.5
13 Baylor 36 33-3 976 2120 46.0
14 Tennessee Tech 29 21-8 675 1467 46.0
15 Connecticut 33 25-8 878 1913 45.9
16 Duke 36 31-5 1013 2209 45.9
17 Middle Tenn. 33 24-9 835 1823 45.8
18 Texas Tech 32 24-8 871 1908 45.6
19 Gonzaga 32 28-4 831 1825 45.5
20 Iowa St. 30 23-7 804 1766 45.5
21 Texas 31 22-9 804 1777 45.2
22 Kansas St. 32 24-8 876 1963 44.6
23 West Virginia 34 21-13 869 1948 44.6
24 Maryland 32 22-10 884 1983 44.6
25 North Carolina 34 30-4 969 2176 44.5

[Bob_Ballew]

Or does it mean that the highest field goal percentage shooting team gets a higher seed? ;)

I have a passion for a team that plays tough defense and rebounds well. Last night's game for Baylor is an example where you can get a win with a lousy FG %. It is hard to equate how these things can convert to points on the scoreboard. Notice how close all those FG percentages are. Many of them are less than 1% apart. I feel that there are too many more variables in the scheme of things that determine the outcome.

[sybarite]

2005 Tournament

Tempe:
1. North Carolina----25
2. Baylor----------13
Kansas City
1. Michigan state
2. Stanford------3
Chattanooga
1. LSU------------7
2. Duke-----------16
Phildadelphia
1. Tennessee
2. Ohio State-----1

Michigan State and Tennessee weren't in the top 25 that year, and the statistics were not so confirming that this was THE definitive pattern. But, it was still one of the more revealing statistics.



Compare to

Turnovers per game:

1 Villanova 31 19-12 304 9.8
2 Wis.-Green Bay 31 27-4 385 12.4
3 South Fla. 32 21-11 400 12.5
4 La Salle 28 12-16 378 13.5
5 Valparaiso 28 18-10 379 13.5
6 Utah 34 26-8 463 13.6
7 Texas Tech 32 24-8 439 13.7
8 Maine 30 20-10 412 13.7
9 Rutgers 35 28-7 481 13.7
10 LSU 36 33-3 496 13.8
11 Penn St. 30 19-11 415 13.8
12 Texas A&M 31 16-15 430 13.9
13 Ohio St. 35 30-5 488 13.9
14 Stanford 35 32-3 490 14.0
15 Michigan St. 37 33-4 520 14.1
16 Wyoming 28 16-12 395 14.1
17 Xavier 32 22-10 452 14.1
18 Boston U. 31 15-16 440 14.2
19 Kansas St. 32 24-8 456 14.3
20 Creighton 29 19-10 421 14.5
21 Idaho 30 19-11 437 14.6
22 New Mexico 31 26-5 452 14.6
23 West Virginia 34 21-13 496 14.6
24 Niagara 29 17-12 426 14.7
25 Southern Methodist 30 19-11 442 14.7
26 Oakland 29 21-8 428 14.8
27 Drexel 29 19-10 430 14.8
28 Iowa St. 30 23-7 445 14.8
29 Auburn 29 16-13 431 14.9
30 Baylor 36 33-3 536 14.9

Notice that only four of the top 25 teams in fewest turnovers ranked in the eight seeds.

Field Goal Percentage Defense:

Liberty 33 26-7 633 1931 32.8
2 Duke 36 31-5 721 2156 33.4
3 Connecticut 33 25-8 605 1805 33.5
4 LSU 36 33-3 693 2028 34.2
5 La.-Lafayette 31 22-9 660 1913 34.5
6 Texas Tech 32 24-8 662 1901 34.8
7 Stanford 35 32-3 715 2035 35.1
8 TCU 33 23-10 686 1951 35.2
9 Gonzaga 32 28-4 651 1843 35.3
10 New Mexico 31 26-5 587 1661 35.3
11 Auburn 29 16-13 603 1705 35.4
12 Lamar 27 9-18 592 1668 35.5
13 UCF 29 19-10 596 1679 35.5
14 Notre Dame 33 27-6 680 1913 35.5
15 Alabama St. 29 15-14 534 1500 35.6
16 San Jose St. 30 18-12 665 1856 35.8
17 Northwestern St. 29 17-12 694 1931 35.9
18 Massachusetts 29 14-15 578 1607 36.0
19 Marist 29 22-7 562 1558 36.1
20 North Carolina 34 30-4 724 1994 36.3
21 Delaware St. 28 16-12 516 1419 36.4
22 Hartford 31 22-9 590 1621 36.4
23 Tex.-Pan American 28 14-14 531 1458 36.4
24 Kansas St. 32 24-8 623 1708 36.5
25 Texas-San Antonio 28 16-12 600 1643 36.5

In field goal percentage defense, only four of the eight seeds were ranked.

Rebound Margin

1 Liberty 33 26-7 1473 44.6 1018 30.8 13.8
2 DePaul 31 26-5 1367 44.1 1013 32.7 11.4
3 Old Dominion 31 22-9 1372 44.3 1023 33.0 11.3
4 Chattanooga 30 25-5 1289 43.0 1022 34.1 8.9
5 Duke 36 31-5 1563 43.4 1256 34.9 8.5
6 Minnesota 34 26-8 1263 37.1 974 28.6 8.5
7 UC Santa Barb. 30 21-9 1252 41.7 1005 33.5 8.2
8 Eastern Mich. 31 23-8 1254 40.5 1014 32.7 7.7
9 Connecticut 33 25-8 1329 40.3 1074 32.5 7.7
10 Tex. A&M-Corp. Chris 30 23-7 1290 43.0 1072 35.7 7.3
11 Tennessee 35 30-5 1469 42.0 1215 34.7 7.3
12 Michigan St. 37 33-4 1500 40.5 1236 33.4 7.1
13 Kansas St. 32 24-8 1262 39.4 1035 32.3 7.1
14 Gonzaga 32 28-4 1288 40.3 1065 33.3 7.0
15 Boston College 30 20-10 1116 37.2 908 30.3 6.9
16 Maryland 32 22-10 1356 42.4 1137 35.5 6.8
17 Baylor 36 33-3 1429 39.7 1183 32.9 6.8
18 Long Beach St. 28 19-9 1163 41.5 974 34.8 6.8
19 North Carolina 34 30-4 1448 42.6 1221 35.9 6.7
20 Ga. Southern 30 16-14 1328 44.3 1136 37.9 6.4
21 Stanford 35 32-3 1381 39.5 1163 33.2 6.2
22 TCU 33 23-10 1467 44.5 1266 38.4 6.1
23 Texas Tech 32 24-8 1326 41.4 1136 35.5 5.9
24 Colorado St. 28 15-13 1139 40.7 974 34.8 5.9
25 Ohio St. 35 30-5 1225 35.0 1020 29.1 5.9

Five of the top 25 in rebound margin were in the top eight seeded teams.

Of these categories, Field Goal Percentage, once again, was the most definitive with six in the top 25. It wasn't quite as definitive as eight in the top ten. But, it was the most indicative statistic.