Earlier, we wrote that the teams that defend the best will be at the top of the WAC and the best defensive squad will win it. Whether it be for better or for worse, all predictions should be re-visited so as to judge their merits. Here's the field goal percentage defense numbers to date in WAC play:
FIELD GOAL PCT DEFENSE
# Team G FG FGA Pct
1.Utah State.......... 11 235 573 .410
2.Nevada.............. 10 235 557 .422
3.Hawaii.............. 11 236 541 .436
4.Boise State......... 10 250 569 .439
5.Idaho............... 9 204 462 .442
6.New Mexico State.... 11 292 658 .444
7.Louisiana Tech...... 11 250 559 .447
8.Fresno State........ 9 243 536 .453
9.San Jose State...... 10 264 567 .466
Well, USU is running away as the top team in the conference so it shouldn't come as any surprise that the Aggies are also the best defensive squad. What's interesting is that Utah State was at .442% last season -- fifth in the league.
What is surprising is Nevada's lack of consistency considering the stellar defensive number the Wolf Pack is showing (.422%) but having a bunch of newcomers and players performing in new roles needs to be factored into such an equation. Mark Fox's team led the WAC in field goal percentage defense last season at .430%.
We're a little surprised that Hawaii is way up there at .436% after last season's .482%. The athleticism of the Rainbow Warriors has improved so maybe that is leading the betterment.
Idaho has made a 4% inprovement: .442% now to last season's .482%. Louisiana Tech has made similar strides with a now .447% from a .529% of a year ago.
New Mexico State was at .442% in 2007-2008 and is at .444% now.
San Jose State's .466% -- last place -- is a primary reason for the team's inability to put together any sort of winning streak. But what's interesting is that the Spartans were sixth in the league last season with the same .466%.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
How's our prediction coming along?
Posted by Kevin McCarthy at 9:54 AM
Labels: WAC basketball
1 comment:
Great post... I ran the numbers for Idaho and your postulate is dead-on.
Post a Comment