In case someone doesn't know it, StatBroadcast puts up various stats about the players. For
this game,
# Player EFF Game +/- Pts Pts Net Floor% Use% FDr Min Min%
Score Prod Allw Pts
3* AGARA 23 17.6 6 14 14.6 -0.6 44.9 20.7 5.9 36 90
6* IJIWOYE 5 0.9 9 1.5 7.6 -6.2 22.6 3.7 1 21 52.5
13* CLARDY 4 1.6 -9 8.8 11 -2.2 32.1 14.7 2 24 60
20* BOSGANA 9 5.8 -4 10.1 10.5 -0.4 31.1 18.7 4.1 29 72.5
21* DEMETRE 9 4.7 -12 5 9.3 -4.3 31 10.3 3.1 23 57.5
22* STEVENSON 5 3.6 13 6.5 8.4 -1.9 44.4 10.3 4.2 19 47.5
34* HEAL 2 16.6 17 11.5 17 -5.5 35.4 17.7 2 36 90
40* OGDEN 4 1.6 7 1.5 4.4 -2.9 100 0.8 0 11 27.5
45* UMEH 0 -0.7 -2 0 0.4 -0.4 0 1.4 3 2 5
This is only one table of three for each team. Their page gives some hint at what the numbers are, but I don't understand why Net Pts are negative for every player on the winning team (Wake Forest had 3 players with positive Net Pts). For that matter, I also don't understand Points Produced and some of the others.
Hmmm... the +/- numbers are different than on the Visitor page (an issue is how you count FT when a player comes in or goes out at the FT break. IMO, the player leaving should get credit/blame). But the differences here are quite big. In one, Heal had 17; in the other, she had only 9.
While some like Clardy's offense, I see her failing on defense. But then I was surprised to see Stevenson as having one of the better +/- numbers.
It was nice to see 80% FT%, 46% 3PT%, 47% FG%, 28.5% Off Reb%, 87.9% Def.Reb%.
(01-16-2025, 11:36 PM)BosCard Wrote: I’m happy for the win but the unforced turnovers against a not very good defensive team just crush my soul. Sometimes it seems like our goal is to pass the ball until someone makes a turnover.
Wake Forest averages 16.94 turnovers forced per game. Stanford had 17 turnovers.
(Stanford is #40 in fewest turnovers made/game at 13.6.)
I did feel that the announcers were respectful of, and knowledgeable about Stanford. I appreciated that.
At least on the replay, the half time show (at 6:45PM their time) was canned. Poor show by the ACC, yet again.