inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

Efficiency the past 15 years.

There was an article I read last week about the top coaches of the past five years.

The piece was an interesting one that compared the Points Per Possession of 30 major conference coaches minus the Points Per Possession of their opponents.

Inspired by what I was looking at, I've set up a similar table including every Princeton team from 1996-97 through 2010-11. Instead of using Points Per Possession, I'm working with Offensive Efficiency, which is Points Per Possession multiplied by 100. It was easier to get accurate data this way. For those more comfortable with Points Per Possession, just slide each decimal point two spaces to the left while you're reading!

Breaks between years should make it easier to visualize these numbers by head coach.

 
 Year   Tigers     Foes   Diff.
10-11    107.1	   97.5	    9.6 
09-10    100.4	   88.7	   11.7
08-09     96.9	   95.9	    1.0
07-08     94.6	  105.3	  -10.7

06-07     92.3	   97.8	   -5.5
05-06     93.7	  100.3	   -6.6
04-05    101.2	   97.7	    3.5

03-04    105.3	   95.2	   10.1
02-03    109.0    101.8	    7.2
01-02    101.6	   97.2	    4.4
00-01    100.8	  101.3	   -0.5

99-00    101.6	   89.9	   11.7
98-99    107.9	   92.0	   15.9
97-98    115.5	   89.6	   25.9
96-97    111.6	   92.1	   19.5

In 2009-10, the offensive efficiency for Tiger opponents was worst in the nation, a testament to Princeton's defense.

It is surprising that the 2000-01 Ivy League champions finished with a negative number.

In 1997-98, Princeton's offensive efficiency was sixth-best in the nation. The Tigers had the highest OE of any Princeton team in the past 15 years as well as the second-lowest OE for their foes during this span, creating the biggest differential and confirming how efficient the 97-98 squad was on both sides of the basketball.

Gregg Lange said,

May 9, 2011 @ 11:41 am

2000-01 is no mystery statistically: with a new coach in September and the unexpected losses of Gloger and Chris Young, it's astonishing the numbers weren't worse. What's amazing is how they won any games, much less a sole 11-3 Ivy championship and 16-11 overall.

[Actually, blowout losses to Duke, TCU and UNC probably skew the numbers a lot, too]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. JTIII's first year is one of the most masterful coaching jobs I've ever seen on any level in any sport. With a gargantuan on-court assist to Nate Walton.

Jon Solomon said,

May 9, 2011 @ 12:02 pm

I will be curious to check if any other Ivy champs from the past 15 years have had a negative Efficiency Margin. Will try and look up tonight.

Jon Solomon said,

May 9, 2011 @ 1:43 pm

Here you go. 00-01 Tigers the only negative EM NCAA Tournament representative from the Ivy League over the last 15 seasons. All others > +9.3.

09-10 Cornell - 114.8 / 97.2 / 17.6
08-09 Cornell - 109.6 / 96.4 / 13.2
07-08 Cornell - 110.6 / 99.3 / 11.3
06-07 Penn - 107.8 / 98.5 / 9.3
05-06 Penn - 103.3 / 90.6 / 12.7
04-05 Penn - 100.3 / 90.5 / 9.8

02-03 Penn - 108.6 / 93.2 / 15.4
01-02 Penn - 109.7 / 95.5 / 14.2

99-00 Penn - 103.5 / 92.9 / 10.6
98-99 Penn - 109.2 / 93.2 / 16.0

09-10 Cornell had an EM that was lower than the 96-97 and 97-98 Princeton squads, but their 1.15 PPP is nothing to sneeze at.

Jon

david bennet said,

May 10, 2011 @ 7:01 pm

Jon,

Any word on the recruit, whose name I have forgotten, who was reconsidering his admission?

David

Jon Solomon said,

May 10, 2011 @ 7:10 pm

No new news on the Clay Wilson front. That situation will resolve itself the next few weeks, I believe.

Jon Solomon said,

May 9, 2012 @ 11:50 pm

The 2011-12 Tigers' Efficiency Margin was +6.9 for the season.

104.0 on offense
97.1 on defense

Jon

RSS feed for comments on this post

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.