A mid-conference season player-by-player breakdown

  • 02/05/2015 11:19 am in

We’re just past the midway point of the Big Ten conference schedule and the Hoosiers are 6-4 in league play heading into Sunday’s matchup with Michigan at Assembly Hall.

Here’s a player-by-player look at how each Hoosier has performed with ten league games in the books (Note: stats, charts are conference games only):

Yogi Ferrell – 14.4 ppg, 4.6 apg, 2.6 rpg, 50.8 effective field goal percentage in 37 minutes per game

Ferrell currently ranks 2nd in percentage of minutes played in Big Ten games behind Myles Mack of Rutgers and his turnover percentage is just 12, which is 4.7 percent lower than where he finished last season in league games. He’s taken a team-high 67 3s in 10 league games and has hit 37.3 percent, but he’s been hot recently from deep (51.4 percent over his last five).

Beyond taking care of the ball better, Ferrell is also 11th in assist rate in the conference, has the 12th best offensive rating and seems to be on track for All-Big Ten honors as the best player on a team that has been one of the league’s surprises.

James Blackmon Jr. – 14.4 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 45.2 effective field goal percentage in 30.4 minutes per game

Blackmon Jr. and Ferrell are tied for the team lead in scoring in Big Ten play, but the freshman’s efficiency has taken a major dip. After posting an effective field goal percentage of 57.1 in non-conference play, Blackmon Jr. is down nearly 12 percent in that statistic in conference play. After making 44.3 percent of his 3s in non-conference games, he’s only hit at a 34 percent clip in conference. He shot 53 percent on left wing 3s in non-conference play and 59 percent on right wing 3s, but both numbers are down through 10 league games, per Shot Analytics:

020515jbj

However, Blackmon Jr. has come up with other ways to contribute outside of just scoring. He’s the team’s second best rebounder and his turnover percentage (13.6) is second best among rotation regulars.

Troy Williams – 12.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 1.6 apg, 55.6 effective field goal percentage, 23.2 defensive rebounding percentage in 27.3 minutes per game

There’s a reason many believe that Williams is the x-factor for Indiana. In IU’s six conference wins, he’s averaging 15.6 points and 8.3 rebounds per game. In four conference losses, he’s averaging just 7.3 points and four rebounds.

When he’s playing within himself and making simple plays, he’s a difficult matchup that can make IU’s offense go as either a facilitator or a finisher operating on the baseline. From a percentage standpoint, he’s the league’s third best defensive rebounder and is in the top 20 in offensive rebounding. The key for Williams down the stretch is taking care of the ball better. His turnover percentage (22.8) is the second highest among IU’s rotation players.

Robert Johnson – 9.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 1.4 apg, 58.9 effective field goal percentage in 25.6 minutes per game

As the competition level has increased, Johnson’s shooting percentages have gone up and his turnover percentage has decreased. After shooting 41.5 percent on 3s in non-conference play and 52.8 percent on 2s, he’s up to 43.2 percent on 3s and an identical 52.8 percent on 2s in league play.

His turnover percentage was 25.2 in non-conference play and that number is down to 20.2 percent in conference games. That’s still too high for a player who has the ball in his hands frequently, but it’s improvement nonetheless and a sign of growth for a young player who is a pivotal piece moving forward.

Collin Hartman – 5.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 70.0 effective field goal percentage in 24.7 minutes per game

Hartman was one of the team’s surprises in the non-conference, but his role has shifted from super sub to starter in the last month following a knee injury to Hanner Mosquera-Perea. He’s continued to shoot it superbly and his effective field goal percentage of 70 currently leads all Big Ten players. He also ranks in the top 20 in the conference in offensive rebounding and block percentage.

The one glaring weakness in his offensive profile through ten conference games is his turnover percentage (25.2), which is the highest on the roster.

Nick Zeisloft – 5.9 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 60.7 effective field goal percentage in 19.5 minutes per game

Zeisloft has continued in a role as a 3-point specialist and it’s one that he’s filling more than capably. He’s taken 42 shots in conference play and 36 of them have come from behind the 3-point line. He’s made 15 of them, good for 41.7 percent.

As illustrated below by Shot Analytics, Zeisloft is a difficult cover from both wings:

020515zeis

Emmitt Holt – 3.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 0.6 bpg, 56.5 field goal percentage in 13.3 minutes per game

The freshman from Rochester has come through big on several occasions this season, but his role at this point seems to be clearly defined as a backup big man. After making 80 percent of his field goals in non-conference play, he’s down into the mid 50s in conference games while his overall rebounding numbers have remained consistent.

Hanner Mosquera-Perea – 5.3 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 0.6 bpg, 50.0 field goal percentage in 13 minutes per game

Mosquera-Perea has only played in three conference games, but is expected back in the next 10 days. His effectiveness in those three contests was diminished by early foul trouble as he picked up two fouls in all three games before the first media timeout. His performance at Nebraska, however, a night he posted 12 points and 10 rebounds, was a major reason Indiana was able to emerge from Pinnacle Bank Arena with a victory.

Stanford Robinson – 4.1 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 0.6 apg, 38.5 effective field goal percentage in 12 minutes per game

After experimenting with a switch to his shooting hand, Robinson has returned to life as a southpaw in recent weeks and it’s seemed to help him as he’s knocked down 11 of his 14 free throw attempts in league play. He owns the lowest turnover percentage (9.6) of any IU player in conference games, but his wild drives into the lane are often disruptive to the offense. Nonetheless, Robinson remains in the rotation because he’s capable of playing solid defense when engaged.

Max Hoetzel – 2.3 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 53.1 effective field goal percentage in 8.9 minutes per game

Hoetzel continues to show no fear when his number is called and while his minutes are typically brief, he usually tries to make something happen. The best example of that was the Illinois game where he logged just five minutes, but came up with six points in a win over the Illini. Like most of IU’s young players, he still has plenty of room for growth in terms of defensive awareness, but he’s done a solid job of filling a role in his first season.

All tempo-free stats via KenPom.com.

Filed to:

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    And how did those embarrassments work out for us? I guess we’ll find out today, although we’re at home against a much-hobbled Michigan, so I’d expect a win no matter what happened in the previous game.

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    Don’t conflate “good” or “high salaried” with “great.”

  • guest

    That is my fear that this team has peaked with the Maryland game. I love the Hoosiers but it seems some of the fight is gone ….

  • Outoftheloop

    We shall see.

  • Outoftheloop

    Not if you are 6’3-4. The question is why does Stan not have a mid-range game after 2 years at IU?

  • Outoftheloop

    The answer is easy: embarrassed at MSU next game W v #22 OSU, embarrassed at Purdue, next game W v Rutgers, embarrassed at WI next game W v MI. That is 3/3 = 100%. That is working out very well! IU lost at OSU but it was just a road loss to a good team, not embarrassing.

  • Outoftheloop

    For a “smart” guy you are stupid when it comes to baseball. If you had actually played you would know that there are many good HS pitchers in HS not “good enough” to play in college, but good enough to hang an “o-for” on you. There are many good pitchers in college not good enough for the minor leagues, but good enough that you could not even get a fouled off swing. There are many good pitchers in the minors not good enough to play in the majors, but good enough to make you look silly. There are ONLY good pitchers in the majors, all earning millions of dollars/year, but not good enough to be great pitchers. But each team has 4-5 great pitchers. Yes, “great” does equal “high-salaried”. Only some of those great pitchers are All-Star level and fewer still Hall-of Famers. You are out-of -your-league on this one.

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    Your so-called pattern simply comes down to road games vs. home games: against good competition, IU tends to lose very badly on the road and handle its business at home.

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    Every MLB pitcher is great compared to a high schooler, but that’s an unfair comparison (a straw man; apples vs. oranges). If you were to compare MLB pitchers to each other — a far fairer comparison — there are sub par, average, above average, good, and great. Most teams are lucky to have one great pitcher (some — SF Giants, for instance — have more than one). Only the “great” pitchers are nominated for the Cy Young or the All-Star team.

    People get overpaid all the time and then teams try to dump them a few years later because their salaries are burdensome.

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    Yogi manages to put up a good percentage in the lane despite his 5’11” status.

    Fair point. I was hoping that Troy would have a jumper this year, but let’s hope he develops that for next year (if he does leave for the NBA).

  • Outoftheloop

    In case you missed it Yogi is a very special player! If he stays all 4 years at IU, he will own many, many all-time records. He will be the best point guard in IU history. We should enjoy him while we haave him (Isaiah was not a PG, he was a guard and he was great!)

  • Outoftheloop

    Wrong! Only road games against teams standing #1 or 2 in the B1G. You conveniently forget the road wins against NE and IL.

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    Did you not see the caveat “against good competition”? NE and IL aren’t making the tourney and are basically .500 teams (NE one game below, IL one game above); thus, I wouldn’t qualify them as “good competition.” And they don’t fit your theory about bouncing back from embarrassing losses anyway.

  • Outoftheloop

    You are wrong! According to the latest Nobel Prize winning economist “the market” immediately takes into account all factors and correctly evaluates value. Thus, overpaid pitchers will take a pay reduction or be gone, which happens all of the time. You really missed on the “apples to oranges” example. It is categorically false to say comparing major league pitchers to all baseball players who are pitchers and start from HS on constitutes “oranges”. They are clearly different levels of “apples”, i.e. high level baseball pitchers (excluding all pitchers who do not get to start at the HS level)!

  • IUfanPurduePhD

    MLB contracts are guaranteed and are paid no matter what sort of decline a player has. Why do you think that the Yankees are trying to weasel out of A-Rod’s contract through an unusual clause (hoping to see him suspended for life)? Because if he isn’t tossed from the league, they have to pay him far more than he’s worth.

    Keep telling yourself whatever you need to tell yourself in order to “win” this argument. Compare Little Leaguers to Hall of Famers if you want. I’m done. Peace.