[BostonCard]

Traveling today so I haven’t watched the game yet - but that is a bizarre box score. It reinforces the how the hell did they win that game thoughts on this board. Looking forward to watching later.

But
Rebounds -10
Assists -2
Fouls -5
Made FT -6
Turnovers -8 ( so the good direction)
3 pt shooting -18.1% (26.3 to 44.4% though on only 9 VT shots)
Still slightly outshot overall -1.7%

Seriously how is that a winning box score? Not complaining but wow. I guess turnovers must have been the key - Stanford with 9 more shots.  But the numbers still don’t really track overall. I would have thought the FT and rebounding deficits would have overwhelmed the turnovers.

The bottom line is we took 64 shots, and made 28, while Tech took 55 shots, and made 25.  So, that 9 shot discrepancy made the difference in the game.  A big part of that was the 8 turnover discrepancy.  Despite the large rebounding edge for Tech, the offensive rebound edge (ie, second chance points) was only 2.  Most of that excess shot wound up going into three point attempts (we took 10 more threes than they did), so even though their percentage was substantially higher, we had one more more made three pointer than they did.  And because of that, the made percentage in two pointers was higher (23/45, 51% vs. 21/46, 46%).

All that adds up to us getting 61 points (23 2's and 5 3's) from the floor versus only 54 points (21 2's and 4 3's) for Tech.  The foul discrepancy nearly made up for it, as they got 20 points off free throws while we only got 14.  That came from a combination of more free throw shots (27 vs. 23) and a higher made percentage (74% vs. 61%) which gave them a 6-point advantage.  Thankfully we had a 7 point advantage from the floor.

BC

[BostonCard]

Traveling today so I haven’t watched the game yet - but that is a bizarre box score. It reinforces the how the hell did they win that game thoughts on this board. Looking forward to watching later.

But
Rebounds -10
Assists -2
Fouls -5
Made FT -6
Turnovers -8 ( so the good direction)
3 pt shooting -18.1% (26.3 to 44.4% though on only 9 VT shots)
Still slightly outshot overall -1.7%

Seriously how is that a winning box score? Not complaining but wow. I guess turnovers must have been the key - Stanford with 9 more shots.  But the numbers still don’t really track overall. I would have thought the FT and rebounding deficits would have overwhelmed the turnovers.

The bottom line is we took 64 shots, and made 28, while Tech took 55 shots, and made 25.  So, that 9 shot discrepancy made the difference in the game.  A big part of that was the 8 turnover discrepancy.  Despite the large rebounding edge for Tech, the offensive rebound edge (ie, second chance points) was only 2.  Most of that excess shot wound up going into three point attempts (we took 10 more threes than they did), so even though their percentage was substantially higher, we had one more more made three pointer than they did.  And because of that, the made percentage in two pointers was higher (23/45, 51% vs. 21/46, 46%).

All that adds up to us getting 61 points (23 2's and 5 3's) from the floor versus only 54 points (21 2's and 4 3's) for Tech.  The foul discrepancy nearly made up for it, as they got 20 points off free throws while we only got 14.  That came from a combination of more free throw shots (27 vs. 23) and a higher made percentage (74% vs. 61%) which gave them a 6-point advantage.  Thankfully we had a 7 point advantage from the floor.

BC