Last month I published efficiency values for BIG EAST Conference members at about the quarter-pole of the season.
In an effort to keep the momentum going (and to provide some context at the end of the season), below appears efficiency values at approximately the mid-point of the 2006 season. There have been notable changes -- especially with Syracuse -- and probably deserve more attention than what I will give them.
Please note: It should be kept in mind that Connecticut, Louisville, Rutgers, and West Virginia have only played six games this season; the rest of the BIG EAST has played seven contests. As I have not adjusted the values, comparing the raw Total Offensive/Defensive Benefit values is inappropriate. Rather, pay special attention to the Scoring Efficiency Factor and Drive Efficiency Factor values. They are more indicative of just how good or bad a team has performed relative to the rest of the conference.
[Data: Offensive Efficiency]
SEF = Scoring Efficiency Factor
DEF = Drive Efficiency Factor
TOB = Total Offensive Benefit
[Woefully Truncated Analysis]
To be published.
Eds. Note: Syracuse-related analysis to appear on the Syracuse FanHouse.
[Data: Defensive Efficiency]
SEF = Scoring Efficiency Factor
DEF = Drive Efficiency Factor
TOB = Total Defensive Benefit
[Woefully Truncated Analysis]
To be published.
Eds. Note: Syracuse-related analysis appears on the Syracuse FanHouse. It can be found here.
In an effort to keep the momentum going (and to provide some context at the end of the season), below appears efficiency values at approximately the mid-point of the 2006 season. There have been notable changes -- especially with Syracuse -- and probably deserve more attention than what I will give them.
Please note: It should be kept in mind that Connecticut, Louisville, Rutgers, and West Virginia have only played six games this season; the rest of the BIG EAST has played seven contests. As I have not adjusted the values, comparing the raw Total Offensive/Defensive Benefit values is inappropriate. Rather, pay special attention to the Scoring Efficiency Factor and Drive Efficiency Factor values. They are more indicative of just how good or bad a team has performed relative to the rest of the conference.
[Data: Offensive Efficiency]
| 2006 Big East: Offensive Efficiency | ||||
| Team | PF | SEF | DEF | TOB |
| Louisville | 3.17 | 2.899 | 2.62 | 209.92 |
| West Virginia | 3.38 | 3.17 | 2.97 | 205.00 |
| Pittsburgh | 2.62 | 2.40 | 2.18 | 198.75 |
| South Florida | 2.60 | 2.25 | 1.898 | 161.33 |
| Connecticut | 2.21 | 1.96 | 1.71 | 138.67 |
| Syracuse | 1.797 | 1.59 | 1.39 | 123.92 |
| Cincinnati | 1.95 | 1.61 | 1.27 | 121.00 |
| Rutgers | 2.22 | 1.87 | 1.52 | 114.25 |
SEF = Scoring Efficiency Factor
DEF = Drive Efficiency Factor
TOB = Total Offensive Benefit
[Woefully Truncated Analysis]
To be published.
Eds. Note: Syracuse-related analysis to appear on the Syracuse FanHouse.
[Data: Defensive Efficiency]
| 2006 Big East: Defensive Efficiency | ||||
| Team | PF | SEF | DEF | TDB |
| Rutgers | 1.48 | 1.02 | 0.57 | 42.67 |
| Pittsburgh | 1.89 | 1.44 | 0.99 | 88.25 |
| West Virginia | 2.13 | 1.74 | 1.35 | 88.83 |
| Louisville | 1.74 | 1.51 | 1.29 | 103.17 |
| Connecticut | 1.87 | 1.61 | 1.35 | 115.08 |
| South Florida | 1.98 | 1.70 | 1.43 | 122.58 |
| Cincinnati | 2.05 | 1.74 | 1.44 | 132.17 |
| Syracuse | 2.69 | 2.31 | 1.92 | 171.25 |
SEF = Scoring Efficiency Factor
DEF = Drive Efficiency Factor
TOB = Total Defensive Benefit
[Woefully Truncated Analysis]
To be published.
Eds. Note: Syracuse-related analysis appears on the Syracuse FanHouse. It can be found here.
0 Responses to “2006 Big East Efficiency: Mid-Season Review”
Post a Comment