Welcome to “That’s A Wrap,” our attempt to make some sense of the 2010-11 season. Sit back. Relax. Grab some popcorn. Get your read on. Today: Indiana’s Team Offense.
Final Stats: 69.9 ppg, 46.1 FG %, 34.6 3PT %, 72.6 FT %, 51.6 eFG %, 12.9 turnovers per game
For as much as Indiana’s offense was criticized for a lack of cohesion at times throughout this season, there was movement in a positive direction in three important categories year-over-year in Bloomington.
Consider these numbers:
– Effective field goal percentage – defined as (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA): 51.6 percent overall in 2010-2011 (48.5 percent in Big Ten games) compared to 46.4 percent overall in 2009-2010 (43.9 percent in Big Ten games).
– Adjusted offensive efficiency rating – defined here: 109.0 overall in 2010-2011 (102.3 in Big Ten games) compared to 99.9 overall in 2009-2010 (92.9 in Big Ten games).
– Turnover percentage – defined as turnovers / possessions: 19.9 percent overall in 2010-2011 (18.3 percent in Big Ten games) compared to 23.0 percent overall in 2009-2010 (23.3 percent in Big Ten games).
But with any good news, there’s usually a bit of bad news as well.
While Indiana progressed in two of the four factors to winning (eFG% and turnover percentage), the Hoosiers regressed in both offensive rebounding percentage and free throw rate, which isn’t exactly encouraging for a program looking to remove itself from the conference cellar:
– Offensive rebounding percentage – defined as OR / (OR/DR): 32.1 percent overall in 2010-2011 (29.9 percent in Big Ten games) compared to 35.0 percent overall in 2009-2010 (34.2 percent in Big Ten games).
– Free throw rate – defined as free throws made / field goals attempted: 36.9 percent overall in 2010-2011 (31.0 percent in Big Ten games) compared to 41.8 percent overall in 2009-2010 (39.8 percent in Big Ten games).
The dive in offensive rebounding percentage is concerning when you consider Indiana was the second best team in this area during Big Ten play a year ago and ended up ninth this season. Tom Crean has stressed the importance of offensive rebounding in his coaching philosophy and this team didn’t perform at a high enough level.
The decrease in free throw rate (from 2nd to 6th in Big Ten play) seems like a result of being too perimeter oriented (IU shot 77 more 3-pointers this season) and failing to attack the basket with enough regularity.
Shining moment: 80 points (74.4 eFG %, 131.0 efficiency rating) in a win over Michigan at Assembly Hall on Jan. 15.
Bottom line: As the current roster continues to mature and the talent improves with the additions of Austin Etherington and Cody Zeller, Indiana’s offense should move into the top half of the Big Ten next season. But just how far the unit progresses could hinge on bounce back seasons on the offensive glass and getting to the foul line at a far higher rate.
Filed to: Four factors