Dayton
2011 Team Stats (4 games)
65.0
PPG
64.9
Opp
+1.6
Margin
42.1%
FG%
38.0%
3P%
60.4%
FT%
39.3
RPG
16.0
APG
13.5
TO
79.3
Pace
Model Outputs
2010-2011
Output is shown as model rating with league rank in parentheses when available.
| Model | Output | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Elo Elo Streaming paired-comparison rating with recency baked into sequential updates. More → | 1572 (#52) | - |
| Bradley-Terry Bradley-Terry Static logistic paired-comparison model with one team strength parameter. More → | 1478 (#58) | - |
| Margin Margin Linear team-strength model fit on point differential instead of binary wins. More → | +32.0 (#62) | HCA +3.1 |
| Pythagorean Pythagorean Pythagorean win expectation from raw points scored and allowed. More → | 0.236 (#102) | - |
| Efficiency Efficiency Tempo-adjusted efficiency version of Pythagorean ratings. More → | 0.500 (#96) | NetEff +0.0 |
| Adjusted Efficiency Adjusted Efficiency Opponent-adjusted efficiency model with separate offensive and defensive components. More → | 0.208 (#94) | AdjNet -11.6 |
| Log Adjusted Log Adjusted Log-scale adjusted efficiency model that downweights blowout leverage. More → | 0.201 (#94) | AdjNet -11.8 |
2011 Schedule & Results
2011 Roster
Minutes by Position
The surface stays filled across the five on-court roles. Use the labels or legend to isolate how each player absorbs guard-to-big minutes.
| Player | Pos | GP | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | STL | BLK | TO | FGA | Numbers | PM | PM/G | PM/40 | FG% | 3P% | FT% | RAPM | TS% | eFG% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C. Wright
|
F | 20 | 27.6 | 11.9 | 7.8 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.3 | 2.9 | 4.0 | 16.6 | - | - | - | 44.4 | 0.0 | 42.3 | - | 128.7 | 44.4 |
C. Johnson
|
F | 20 | 29.1 | 11.2 | 5.8 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 1.2 | 3.2 | 15.4 | -46 | -23.0 | -152.3 | 40.6 | 38.9 | 84.6 | 0.74 | 159.9 | 51.6 |
J. Staten
|
G | 20 | 28.8 | 8.2 | 2.2 | 4.7 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 2.4 | 3.0 | 10.6 | - | - | - | 37.3 | 25.0 | 50.0 | - | 129.3 | 38.1 |
P. Williams
|
G | 20 | 26.4 | 8.0 | 2.4 | 1.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 2.5 | 8.4 | - | - | - | 49.0 | 43.8 | 83.3 | - | 149.1 | 62.7 |
J. Benson
|
F-C | 20 | 16.9 | 6.3 | 3.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 8.7 | - | - | - | 80.0 | 0 | 42.9 | - | 273.0 | 80.0 |
J. Parker
|
G | 20 | 16.0 | 5.9 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 7.7 | - | - | - | 26.7 | 38.5 | 100.0 | - | 178.4 | 35.0 |
L. Fabrizius
|
F | 19 | 12.6 | 4.6 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 1.3 | 4.5 | - | - | - | 44.0 | 36.8 | 75.0 | - | 162.6 | 58.0 |
D. Searcy
|
F-C | 20 | 13.7 | 3.6 | 3.9 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 6.9 | - | - | - | 53.3 | 0 | 50.0 | - | 226.7 | 53.3 |
B. Spearman
|
G | 20 | 10.4 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 3.2 | - | - | - | 30.8 | 40.0 | 0.0 | - | 174.9 | 38.5 |
R. Hill
|
F | 5 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 3.2 | - | - | - | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0 | - | 550.0 | 150.0 |
M. Kavanaugh
|
C | 17 | 8.7 | 1.8 | 2.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 3.4 | - | - | - | 62.5 | 0 | 57.1 | - | 139.9 | 62.5 |
D. Oliver
|
F | 18 | 10.6 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 3.6 | - | - | - | 16.7 | 0.0 | 0 | - | 216.7 | 16.7 |
B. Vonderhaar
|
G | 2 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | - | - | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 |
L. Nourse
|
G | 5 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.2 | - | - | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 |
P. Zestermann
|
F-C | 6 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.3 | - | - | - | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | - | 0.0 | 0.0 |
M. Asmus
|
- | 1 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | - | - | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 |
Numbers/Game vs RAPM
Not enough players with both Numbers/Game and RAPM to plot.
Advanced: Numbers = PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-TO-FGA, PM = total +/-, PM/G = per game, PM/40 = per 40 minutes, RAPM = Regularized Adj Plus-Minus, TS% = True Shooting, eFG% = Effective FG