2022 Offseason

PRock

Elite Member
Insider
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Posts
6,451
Likes
13,264
Turnover Rate (TORate): This is the percentage of personal possessions used on turnovers. It can be highly dependent on context. Players that do little passing or dribbling (i.e. spot-up shooters) will have an artificially deflated TO%.
True, same can be said for elite PGs, except the low TO rate is not artificial. Ace has all the raw materials to be elite, if he can get the TOs down.

We could go old school with the Assist to TO ratio. Elite = 3 to 1 for college PGs, Ace was at ~1.8 to 1, which qualifies as good, but not great and clearly not elite.

Can’t see any reasonable arguement that our fortunes last year weren’t primarily dictated by the team’s lack of care with the ball—and that starts with the primary ball handler.

I stand by the original statement, if Ace can get the TOR to 20 and/or “Assists to TO ratio” above 2. This team will dance as a single digit seed, barring some unexpected glaring issue elsewhere.

I believe he and the team will improve in that area, so it ought to be a great season.
 

TampaKAP

Elite Member
Insider
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Posts
4,896
Likes
9,810
True, same can be said for elite PGs, except the low TO rate is not artificial. Ace has all the raw materials to be elite, if he can get the TOs down.

We could go old school with the Assist to TO ratio. Elite = 3 to 1 for college PGs, Ace was at ~1.8 to 1, which qualifies as good, but not great and clearly not elite.

Can’t see any reasonable arguement that our fortunes last year weren’t primarily dictated by the team’s lack of care with the ball—and that starts with the primary ball handler.

I stand by the original statement, if Ace can get the TOR to 20 and/or “Assists to TO ratio” above 2. This team will dance as a single digit seed, barring some unexpected glaring issue elsewhere.

I believe he and the team will improve in that area, so it ought to be a great season.
For the record, I wasn’t arguing for or against your statement. I simply posted the kenpom definition for the metric being discussed in the kenpom screenshot. The reality is I haven’t seen or read anything but the question and the screenshot response 🤷🏾‍♂️
 

dsilvester

Elite Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Posts
283
Likes
662
I'm living in Trotwood, opposite side of town, probably for another year. Welcome to town! Always good to have more Rams!
I don't get over that part of town often, but would always like to see a fellow Ram fan.
UD Arena is a great college basketball venue, like the Stu, but bigger. I'm planning on going when VCU comes to town with a friend who's a UD fan. Still hoping to see some Rams.
We will be going to the Air Force museum at WrightPat with family coming for Thanksgiving.
PM me some time. The Dayton area is a patch work of small town that used to be mostly farming communities. So, there will be a lot of Fall Festival type of things coming up if you are interested in that kind of thing. Night life, probably more around Wright Pat than my part of town. Oregon District near downtown is probably the best known.
PM me some time if you want.
I am in Huber Heights. Seems like a good suburb. The fall festivals are fun. I grew up in a farming community outside of Toledo so polka music and beer and apple festivals are the best.
 

Ramlove81

Elite Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Posts
6,734
Likes
10,743
I'm not a high roller like you. Maybe some day I'll be able to go to a Fazoli.
I prefer Donato's, for fast food Italian in the Dayton area. Not sure if there are any Donato's in Richmond. Go to Marion's Pizza and get a bacon and kraut pizza, a favorite of my wife's family, me not so much.
For a little higher end, try El Mezon (some Mexican but more South American cuisine, lady who started it is from Columbia I think), several places in the Oregon District (Thai 9 my favorite). Right around UD Arena, not real familiar with but Dewey's Pizza, Bibibop Asain Grill, Flanagan's Pub... a few I've heard of, haven't been too. Some of you who travel to UD for games probably know more than I do.
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Posts
1,976
Likes
2,926
True, same can be said for elite PGs, except the low TO rate is not artificial. Ace has all the raw materials to be elite, if he can get the TOs down.

We could go old school with the Assist to TO ratio. Elite = 3 to 1 for college PGs, Ace was at ~1.8 to 1, which qualifies as good, but not great and clearly not elite.

Can’t see any reasonable arguement that our fortunes last year weren’t primarily dictated by the team’s lack of care with the ball—and that starts with the primary ball handler.

I stand by the original statement, if Ace can get the TOR to 20 and/or “Assists to TO ratio” above 2. This team will dance as a single digit seed, barring some unexpected glaring issue elsewhere.

I believe he and the team will improve in that area, so it ought to be a great season.
The number of turnovers has generally been high throughout MRs tenure regardless of personnel. Noticeably higher then under Wade, Smart, Grant. Ironically; the MR team with the fewest turnovers and best turnover margin was 2019-20, and that was a poop show. VCU was still +2 in the turnover margin last year, as most MR teams have been. If I had to bet what the limiting reagent has been, I would say rebounding.

Are the turnovers a symptom of an offense that often struggles, causing players to force things more?
 

duncanlamb

Elite Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Posts
21,474
Likes
25,320
The number of turnovers has generally been high throughout MRs tenure regardless of personnel. Noticeably higher then under Wade, Smart, Grant. Ironically; the MR team with the fewest turnovers and best turnover margin was 2019-20, and that was a poop show. VCU was still +2 in the turnover margin last year, as most MR teams have been. If I had to bet what the limiting reagent has been, I would say rebounding.

Are the turnovers a symptom of an offense that often struggles, causing players to force things more?
Forcing thing more...a good example is the NIT game against Wake.


"
VCU finished with 19 total turnovers, 13 of which came in the half. Wake Forest scored 13 points off those giveaways.
And many of those turnovers, like the bobbled pass midway through the first half, were unforced — 50-50 passes as Rhoades described, those of a risky variety.
“Sometimes teams are just going to make plays. And good players make good defensive plays,” Rhoades said. “But, like today, I just thought we had too many unforced turnovers.”

 
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Posts
1,976
Likes
2,926
@PRock, here are the turnovers, rebounding, and free throw numbers in VCUs 10 losses.



VCU: 15 tov, 22 rbs, 7-15 ft Wagner: 13 tov, 38 rbs (14 offensive), 13-15 ft

VCU: 12 tov, 28 rbs, 6-11 ft Chatt: 8 tov, 29 rbs (10 offensive), 9-13 ft

VCU: 18 tov, 31 rbs, 7-13 ft Baylor: 17 tov, 33 rbs(13 offensive), 18-24 ft

VCU: 11 tov, 28 rbs, 14-24 ft UCONN: 21 tov, 47 rbs(16 offensive) 23-28 ft

VCU: 13 tov, 24 rbs, 6-8 ft St Bon: 9 tov, 30 rbs (6 offensive), 23-27 ft

VCU: 7 tov, 19 rbs, 7-9 ft Dav: 16 tov, 30 rbs (5 offensive), 11 – 14 ft

VCU: 16 tov, 20 rbs, 14-16 ft Day: 11 tov, 38 rbs (16 offensive) 9-14 ft

VCU: 17 tov, 29 rbs, 12-15 ft St L: 17 tov, 30 rbs(8 offensive) 21-25 ft

VCU: 16 tov, 26 rbs, 6-9 ft Rich: 11 tov, 26 rbs(5 offensive) 26-32 ft

VCU: 19 tov, 32 rbs, 23-27 ft WF: 14 tov, 28 rbs(6 offensive), 29-37 ft



I think its pretty easy to see that rebounding and a free throws are a bigger factor in our loses than the turnovers. The advantage or disadvantage in turnover margin was usually small. In losses, the opponents advantage in rebounding or free throws was generally far more pronounced. Only the Wake loss could you make a reasonable argument that turnovers were the dominant factor in the loss, though Wake made 6 more free throws and we lost by 6. So that’s even questionable.

On the reverse side, in 11 or our 20 wins we were above our season average of 15.1 turnovers or had at least as many as the opposition, usually both (8 of 11).
 
Last edited:

PRock

Elite Member
Insider
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Posts
6,451
Likes
13,264
@PRock, here are the turnovers, rebounding, and free throw numbers in VCUs 10 losses.



VCU: 15 tov, 22 rbs, 7-15 ft Wagner: 13 tov, 38 rbs (14 offensive), 13-15 ft

VCU: 12 tov, 28 rbs, 6-11 ft Chatt: 8 tov, 29 rbs (10 offensive), 9-13 ft

VCU: 18 tov, 31 rbs, 7-13 ft Baylor: 17 tov, 33 rbs(13 offensive), 18-24 ft

VCU: 11 tov, 28 rbs, 14-24 ft UCONN: 21 tov, 47 rbs(16 offensive) 23-28 ft

VCU: 13 tov, 24 rbs, 6-8 ft St Bon: 9 tov, 30 rbs (6 offensive), 23-27 ft

VCU: 7 tov, 19 rbs, 7-9 ft Dav: 16 tov, 30 rbs (5 offensive), 11 – 14 ft

VCU: 16 tov, 20 rbs, 14-16 ft Day: 11 tov, 38 rbs (16 offensive) 9-14 ft

VCU: 17 tov, 29 rbs, 12-15 ft St L: 17 tov, 30 rbs(8 offensive) 21-25 ft

VCU: 16 tov, 26 rbs, 6-9 ft Rich: 11 tov, 26 rbs(5 offensive) 26-32 ft

VCU: 19 tov, 32 rbs, 23-27 ft WF: 14 tov, 28 rbs(6 offensive), 29-37 ft



I think its pretty easy to see that rebounding and a free throws are a bigger factor in our loses than the turnovers. The advantage or disadvantage in turnover margin was usually small. In losses, the opponents advantage in rebounding or free throws was generally far more pronounced. Only the Wake loss could you make a reasonable argument that turnovers were the dominant factor in the loss, though Wake made 6 more free throws and we lost by 6. So that’s even questionable.

On the reverse side, in 11 or our 20 wins we were above our season average of 15.1 turnovers or had at least as many as the opposition, usually both (8 of 11).
Sure, giving up ORs is a challenge and an area needing improvement, no arguments here. Still, i am not going to pearl clutch over an OR deficiency, when despite it, we still had the 8th rated defense in the country.

I am hopeful that we can break the top 340 in terms of the % of possesions we turn the ball over, to give a little boost to the 209th ranked offense.
 
Top