Barnes' rotations in Tex/Mem game (+/- stat featured)
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 5:39 PM CDT
in Basketball
30 comments
Bumped from the diaries. Very interesting look at Texas' season finale. --PB--
Finally I had some free time this weekend to do this.
First I went to the Texas vs Memphis box score/play-by-play. You can use this to check my work.
On Excel, I typed every single rotation Rick Barnes used, the duration of each rotation, and the net points each rotation gained/lost. After figuring out the net points for every rotation, I tabulated the +/- stat for every player. Here is the spreadsheet in a picture version.
Click to enlarge
If anyone wants the actual Excel file I created to play around with it, let me know.
Commentary on the box score after the jump.
The number in () beside the player name is how many minutes they played.
I listed the total plus/minus of the whole game. If you go to the spreadsheet though, you'll also notice that I listed the plus/minus of the players BEFORE we started fouling intentionally. This is when we first put Mooney in there to foul guys. I did this because since Mooney replaced Mason, Mooney and 4 others took the plus/minus hit when Memphis hit their FTs, while Mason didn't take this hit because he's on the bench. This makes Mason's total plus/minus look better than it should be compared to the others.
Lets get down to business. Here are the minutes played and plus/minus of every Texas player in the Memphis game (listed as minutes first, plus/minus last):
Augustin 39, -16
Abrams 38, -20
Mason 35, -9
James 24, -16
Atchley 23, -15
Johnson 16, -3
Pittman 15, -2
Wangmene 3, -3
Chapman 3, +2
Lewis 3, -2
Mooney 1, -6
Before I get into any analysis, realize that the plus/minus isn't a definite measure of a player's capability. Use common sense when extracting information from the spreadsheet. Also, there are flaws to this kind of analysis anyway. For one thing, I didn't take into account the Memphis rotations that were playing against the Texas rotations.
Regardless, here are some observations I, and hopefully you, will conclude from the spreadsheet.
- Of our starters, Abrams has the worst plus/minus; Mason has the best plus/minus. This should not be a surprise to anyone who watched the game. I remember a number of you in the game day thread who were commenting that Mason was the only one who showed up. He does so many things to help a team win. As for AJ's plus/minus, this is no surprise either, as Memphis was a horrible matchup for him. Their size, athleticism, and defense means they had a number of players that could completely shadow him and limit his effectiveness.
Conclusion: AJ had no business playing 38 minutes. He was a total liability in this game and a cancer on the court. This reminded me of Mack Brown playing the seniors over the better, younger players. I wish Barnes would've payed more attention to the matchups. In this game, AJ not only should've played less than 30 minutes, he probably should've come off the bench instead.
Looking to next year, I would like AJ to start only if he's a favorable matchup. If we're playing against small guards or bad defensive teams, of course AJ can start. But if we play a Memphis type team next year, I'd rather have Johnson and/or Pittman start. I guess I'd be satisfied with less AJ minutes more than anything. I can't see Barnes benching a senior. Especially if DJ leaves, AJ will be considered "the guy" next year.
I'm just glad that now I have STATS to support my disapproval of too much AJ. I said before the game even started that I would prefer Pittman or Johnson start in place of AJ to matchup with their size, which brings me to...
- The rotations that included Johnson, Pittman, and Chapman were great given the final deficit of 18. Also, if you take a look at our 4 rotations that generated a positive plus/minus. (before the fouling stage), they all featured one or a combination of these 3 players. Our best overall rotation of +3 featured Johnson AND Pittman. This rotation was significant, as it was the final 5 minutes of the 1st half. Even though Johnson/Pittman both played just about 15 minutes, and Chapman just 3 minutes, they were playing meaningful minutes. When they were in there, we did not lose much ground at all.
Conclusion: Barnes should have matched up with their size... ALL GAME LONG. This goes back to 1) of AJ's minutes. He doesn't thrive in this type of game. On the other hand, Johnson, Pittman, and Chaps all should've played more minutes, as their size matched up well with Memphis' bigs. Barnes really screwed up on this IMO. I mentioned that our best rotation featured Johnson AND Pittman before halftime. Then at the start of the 2nd half, Barnes goes back to the starting lineup. While we did make a minor comeback initially, that rotation eventually lost us another net 2 points. Not enough Gary, not enough Dexter, and Chapman didn't play at all in the 2nd half.
To wrap up what is probably my biggest diary ever, I will re-state my desire for Abrams to start next year only selectively. Against small teams that don't D up well, AJ can play and thrive. But next year when we run into big teams, Barnes HAS to match up with their size by playing Johnson, Pittman, Hill, Chaps, and Wingman more and way less of AJ. Hopefully next season they will all get more minutes by default. I was really impressed by Johnson in particular in the Memphis game. Like Mason, he didn't look intimidated. He made jumpers and he made his free throws.
Don't think that I'm blaming Barnes for the loss though. I don't think we win this game under any circumstance. However, if we matched up with their size better, I believe we could've made this a competitive game, which was my goal. I didn't expect a win, but I expected to hang in there with them. Instead, they kicked the crap out of us, and Barnes' decision to not matchup with their size and play AJ for almost the entire game was conducive to our pathetic performance.
By the way, before I end this, you should know that you can watch the replay of ANY NCAA tournament game in great quality from this year at this link:
http://www.janeironation.5gigs.com/n...
Below is a direct link of the Texas/Memphis game. You can use this to analyze a particular rotation, instead of just relying on the limited +/- statistic. I've given the time on the spreadsheet so you can locate on the video when exactly this rotation is on the court:
WATCH THE TEXAS/MEMPHIS GAME HERE
EDIT: Link doesn't work, so just use the link right above it and search for the Texas/Memphis game.
0 recs |
30 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Bringing that game replay link onto this site
is akin to offering Howard dean a video replay of the singular event that prevented him from being a presidential candidate.
Good analysis though, as always
by bendj on Apr 6, 2008 6:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Edit
I meant to say "In this game, AJ not only should've played less than 30 minutes, he probably should've come off the bench instead."
Also, the MMS link expired, so the direct link to the game doesn't work. Just go to the link right above that, click on "Memphis vs Texas" and then click on either "External Player" (opens up Windows Media Player) or "Windowed" (plays it in a tab).
It's awesome. Want to see the finish of the UCLA/A&M game, the Drake/WKU game, or the KU/Davidson game? Just click on their game, watch the video and scroll to the end portion of the video till you find it.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 6:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Appreciate
the work you put into this. My understanding of this is that we need to put bigger, tougher guys on the court against teams with bigger, tougher guys. It is Sunday and I say "Amen."
by bfaut86 on Apr 6, 2008 6:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes
for some reason, it felt like Barnes thought we could go small against them and actually play well (I guess by running).
It's kind of ironic. Barnes is generally known to be a defensive-oriented coach that favors a slow, half-court tempo with big men being involved in offense/defense strategies. He couldn't use this style last year for obvious reasons.
But in the Memphis game, he should have used this style, and he had the bodies to play a half-court game, but he decided not to.
The score of the only Memphis loss of the season was in the 60's. I wish Barnes would've payed more attention to this and realize that slowing it down is the best option. If you play slow, you need to have a good halfcourt defense, and you do this my awarding more minutes to the big guys that can D up, and less to the shorties that can't D up well (AJ in this case).
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad you did this
it's extremely interesting. Though one game of +/- doesn't really tell you anything concrete. You can't extrapolate worth anything from such a small sample. It's easy to pick AJ's worst game of the year and come to this specious conclusion: "AJ had no business playing 38 minutes. He was a total liability in this game and a cancer on the court." And then you go on to say how he shouldn't be playing against ANY teams that are big because in this ONE game he played poorly. It just doesn't follow.
And seriously, "A cancer on the court"? Lay off the heavy rhetoric, man. He had a terrible game. (So did DJ and Damion). He's not a cancer.
by billyzane on Apr 6, 2008 6:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I clearly stated
that AJ can play and thrive against certain teams (most teams actually). But it's very clear that against the bigger teams that play strong defense, he's ineffective. If we played Memphis 9 more times, AJ would have 9 more horrible games. It's all about the matchups.
I did not say he shouldn't play at all, but 38 minutes is definitely not what he should be playing against a Memphis type of team. I'd say more in the 20's range. Take away some of his minutes and distribute them to the big guys that could actually be productive in this game.
If we're playing a small team with small guards that can't shadow him, I'd be OK with him playing 40 minutes. Memphis is not one of these teams.
I don't know about it being his worst game of the year. If "cancer" is too strong of a word, then fine, but he was a liability and we had better options than him.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
AJ did pretty well
against Kansas both times we played them, who is probably the most comparable to Memphis on our schedule.
Looking back at the stats you can say that we should not have played AJ as much, but I think from Barnes prospective, they got down early, and he wanted his best threat to get hot and hit threes. Maybe that was not the correct decision, and slowing the game down and pounding out a slow comeback would have been better.
Also, if you look at the before fouling numbers, which seem to be a better indicator, every starter was at least -15, indicating that none of them had any business being on the court, which about how everyone played that night.
by Wells on Apr 6, 2008 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
AJ vs Kansas
In two games vs KU this season, he combined for 11/29 from the field (38%) and 5-19 from three (26%). I'm not sure if "pretty well" would be the term I'd use to describe those performances. I do remember that he did contribute to the team in other ways in our W vs them like the block on Rush. The last game though, was not so good.
We also played other big teams like Michigan State and Wisconsin.
vs Michigan State: 9-20 FG and 6-15 from three in 38 minutes.
vs Wisconsin: 7-17 FG and 2-5 from three in 40 minutes.
These are OK numbers, but for a guy that won't be able to play defense well against much bigger guys, the amount of minutes he plays is just not worth it.
Next year, we should have a number of big men that can play valuable minutes for us against big teams. To get them minutes, the most logical decision would be to take a portion of AJ's minutes and distribute them among the big guys.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
AJ minutes
I think will be more dependent on if Mason continues to develop his scoring threat. If Mason is a scoring threat, then the need for AJ to spread the floor is reduced. Also Balbay and Brown will hopefully be ready to contribute minutes.
While I disagree that AJ should have played less this season, as I think the options just weren't there, I think next year we will have many more options. It will be interesting to see if Barnes will use those options to match up better with big teams.
by Wells on Apr 6, 2008 9:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
With BZ on this one
Goingforthecorner,
Your work is awesome. I really appreciate you doing this, but I'd caution all of us about reading too much into a single game and caution all of us even more about reading too much into this single game.
Memphis was a matchup nightmare not just for Texas but for all of college basketball. There is a reason they have only lost one game and are 40 minutes away from a national title.
Also, as Wells mentions below, it's not like DJ and Mason were killing out there while AJ was holding them back. We got torched and dominated from the opening tip.
I am with you on the two guard lineup and I think that is exactly what we'll see next year. I also believe the two guard lineup is what Barnes prefers. However, with this year's cast, the best five included three guards. And those five also gave us the best chance to win. Period.
Next year:
PG: Mason, Balbay
SG: Abrams, Brown, Smith
SF: James, (hopefully Devin Ebanks or Wesley Witherspoon)
PF: Johnson, Wangmene, Chapman
C: Atchley, Hill, Pittman
AJ will definitley still start next year and deserves to. Memphis is the rare team on the schedule where Barnes will consider playing a bigger lineup. But for most of the other 35+ games next year, playing AJ for 30+ minutes will occur and it will also give the Longhorns the best chance to win.
by awiggo on Apr 6, 2008 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes on Barnes
Just remember the first (and the second, I believe) game Gary was available Rick started him instead of Mason, but he just wasn't ready. Had Gary been able to play the entire season, we might have seen a different lineup in March.
by jimmer on Apr 6, 2008 10:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
AJ will start every game next year even if we played Memphis on steroids. He's the senior and will probably be "the man", the guy that every fan (even casual UT fans) know. He will not be benched.
I have to agree that he will average 30+ minutes. 95% of the teams we'll face won't be able to completely neutralize AJ like Memphis did. 95% of the time, he will get looks he can make.
I just hope that next season when the time comes where we have to go big in order to win, that Barnes is willing to sacrifice minutes of AJ, along with other guards for bigger guys so we can matchup with the the big teams.
Against Memphis, going big was no doubt the correct choice, and Barnes instead stayed with the 3-guard lineup almost exclusively and played AJ for almost the whole game. That is the source of my disappointment and the premise for making this diary.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 7, 2008 12:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Close
Given James' foul problems, you've got to have a replacement in the rotation, and that's Johnson. I'd move Atchley to PF, which is his natural position on offense and Wangmene to C, assuming he bulks up.
Johnson, Wangmene, and Chapman all have such different styles of play that you would not have a coherent lineup with those substitutions.
AJ must be there because he will be a senior guard.
by Caradoc on Apr 7, 2008 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+/- stat
is more of a reflection of the ideal rotations to use against a certain team, rather than individual players. I tried to emphasize this in my original post.
You can get a clue on the best rotations by looking at the rotation plus/minus numbers. The player +/- minus numbers will confirm this, which is indeed the case with AJ, Johnson, and Pittman.
To summarize, we should've give more minutes to those big guys. To give them minutes, we have to take away minutes from another player, preferably someone who doesn't matchup well against Memphis. Abrams is obviously this player.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
GFTC
You really make a good point in the article and through your comments when you say that the big men really could've used more minutes.
You do not help your argument by pinning it on AJ.
I have been thinking about how a two guard lineup would've been much more effective in this matchup. But, this does not mean scrap AJ, it means substitute Mason, AJ and DJ throughout, most often having two out of the three on the court. I believe that Barnes just did not trust the big guys to give him minutes, while at the same time expecting too much out of the three guards.
You could look at Mason's PT and say he gave up way to much on the bottom right of the zone. You could say DJ shot terribly, and Mason could've run the point. You could say AJ's size and poor shooting hurt us. But singling out AJ is rediculous.
Overall, great analysis and thank you for taking the time to put it together.
Interesting side note, if DJ leaves then we will almost certainly go to a two guard lineup - which I guess in my mind also means Damion at the 3, in whatever capacity that would be. Damion being such a phenomenal rebounder does not encourage playing him at guard in the college game.
by jimmer on Apr 6, 2008 8:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Your idea
works well also. Any idea that involves more minutes for our big guys is a good idea to me. I did focus probably too much on AJ, but I felt that Mason needs to be out there because he can play defense among other things, and DJ is obviously our best player, and as a scoring PG, he could drive and dish to these big men.
Totally agree about the 2 guard lineup. I focused on AJ losing minutes because I wanted the 2 guard to be DJ and Mason. James needs to move to his natural 3 spot and have a combo of the centers and Johnson play the 4-5 spot.
If you look at the rotations in the spreadsheet before the intentional fouling, there were 15 rotations. Out of these 15, 13 of them included the three guard lineup of DJ, AJ, and Mason. ARGH! Just way too undersized for Memphis. In the other 2 rotations, it was James at the three.
The starting lineup I want next year would go something like DJ, Mason, James, Johnson, and Atchley. Good balance of size, defense, rebounding, and shooting. Sadly, this rotation NEVER occurred a single time in the entire game.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 6, 2008 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, but
let's be realistic and sub AJ for DJ in that lineup b/c DJ is gone. With Balbay and Brown substituting for Mason and AJ.
When discussing next season, remember what AJ added to his game this year - inside the arc scoring and defensive quickness. If he can work just as hard to improve his ball handling and passing for next season, he can be really effective even as undersized as he is.
by jimmer on Apr 6, 2008 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kinda Off topic but
I dont see AJ playing the point next season. He doesn't drive and penetrate.(at least he hasn't displayed it). Despite his improved midrange, hes really still a catch and shoot guy. Mason is an intiguing option. He's really show some good driving ability and decent shooting. He's no DJ, but froma PG standpoint, he's way ahead of AJ. Balbay and Brown are unknown quantities at this point.
by owenh on Apr 6, 2008 9:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree also
Mason will move to the point should DJ leave as I expect.
by awiggo on Apr 6, 2008 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
seriously, you play Pittman more against Memphis
you lose by 40.
You can show all the +/- stats you want, and run all the scenarios you want, but Pittman physically is not capable of playing bigtime minutes against a team like Memphis.
They would have run his ass into the ground, and he would have been dead by halftime.
I think Barnes was well aware of this, and this was the reason he only received limited minutes.
I don't think Pittman is ever going to be the player many of you seem to think he will become, a starter capable of giving you ~30 minutes a game and a star. I don't think he has the disipline to get his weight down to a point where he can play a full game (or even 3/4 of a game) against a team that wants to run. Even if he does get his weight down, I'm not sure if he is built to play that type of a game, period (he doesn't seem to be a fast big man, more of a plodder).
I know he was coming off an injury going into this game, but I could see giving serious minutes to Johnson against Memphis before I'd look at Pittman.
I appreciate all the work you put into this spreadsheet, though.
by Beergut on Apr 7, 2008 12:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not asking
for 40 or even 35 minutes from Dexter or any of those big guys. In fact the beauty of next year is no one will have to play huge minutes.
Johnson and Pittman both played about 15 minutes. Abrams played 38 minutes. If we simply took away about 13-16 minutes from AJ and distributed them to Pittman, Johnson, James, and Chapman, I have a strong feeling we could've the game would've been closer.
I can't say how close exactly, but I think the deficit would probably hover around the low teens and at least keep the game at a competitive level and not balloon to 21 (this is where we resorted to fouling).
by goingforthecorner on Apr 7, 2008 1:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bleh editing typos
If we simply took away about 13-16 minutes from AJ and distributed them to Pittman, Johnson, James, and Chapman, I have a strong feeling we could've kept the game closer.
by goingforthecorner on Apr 7, 2008 1:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most Big Men
Do not play 30-40 minutes.
Lopez twins and K-Love average around 25 a game. If Dexter can get up to that, its all we really need for him in a college setting. Dozier and Dorsey for Memphis average 25 minutes a game. Even the aTm big men are around that same mark.
If Dexter can play 15 or so now, hes not that far off from hitting his mark, and Im sure Todd Wright will get him there physically.
He still makes some crazy mental mistakes though, I hope another off season can help him in that regard to make him worthy of the 25 or so minutes.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Apr 7, 2008 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
GFTC makes a good point.
There is a very large down side to playing AJ. Part stems for DJ. Nobody would doubt DJ has to be on the court but the problem is DJ and AJ on the court at the same time. That back court is to small and light weight against some teams. Because both DJ and Aj are small they cover a smaller amount of court even accounting for their quickness. This means the front three get moved further from their spots near the basket and it effects the whole defense. If you bring Mason in for his defense where does AJ go? Three small guards?
This goes back to talks earlier in the season. The fact is AJ no matter what his up side, has a bigger down side not due to his skill but his size, any big guard is going to shoot right over him and take away his shot and if you bring Atchely or James out rebounding suffers.
If it were my team it would be first with the most minutes DJ, Mason and AJ in the back court, James, Atchely, Johnson, Wangmene and Pittman and would never have three guards out on the court unless we were matched up agianst a small guard oriented team.
by Xerxes on Apr 7, 2008 10:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Fact or opinion?
I know it is a saying but one of my peeves is stating opinions as facts. I don't believe AJ's down side outweighs his up side, and obviously neither did Barnes.
by Wells on Apr 7, 2008 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barnes has proof, a top 8 team
on the other hand if we are right it might be just a small difference only against the best teams like Kansas and Memphis but also might be the difference between the great year the Horns had and a Championship.
by Xerxes on Apr 7, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
