Turnovers (and the frequency with which they are occurring) have been a key talking point this season and this has only been amplified the last 36 hours on the heels of UNC’s somewhat stunning 26-turnover disaster at Clemson. The Tar Heels are currently turning the ball over 16.9 times a game, given that, I wanted to take a look at how that number of turnovers, and more importantly, the percentage of possessions in which they are turning the ball over, compared to previous seasons under Roy Williams. (The numbers enclosed in the parentheses correspond to ACC games.)
| 2003-2004 | 2004-2005 | 2005-2006 | 2006-2007 | 2007-2008 | 2008-2009 | 2009-2010 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poss/40 | 75.5 (75.9) | 76.1 (75.9) | 72.0 (71.7) | 74.1 (74.9) | 76.4 (77.0) | 75.6 (75.2) | 77.2 |
| TPG | 15.4 (15.5) | 16.1 (16.8) | 16.5 (16.7) | 13.8 (14.1) | 14.4 (14.9) | 12.4 (13.4) | 16.9 |
| TO % | 20.3 (20.3) | 21.0 (22.1) | 22.9 (23.2) | 18.6 (18.7) | 18.7 (19.3) | 16.4 (17.9) | 21.9 |
| opp. SPG | 8.2 (8.2) | 8.9 (9.2) | 9.1 (8.6) | 7.5 (8.6) | 7.9 (8.1) | 7.0 (7.5) | 9.6 |
| Steal % | 53.2 (52.9) | 55.3 (54.8) | 55.2 (51.5) | 54.3 (60.1) | 54.8 (54.4) | 56.6 (55.9) | 56.8 |
- TO %: the percentage of a teams’ possessions that are ended via a turnover.
- Steal %: the percentage of teams’ turnovers that result from the opponent stealing the ball.
In looking at these data, two things really surprised me. The first thing was the fact that there really is not much of a difference between the total numbers, and the numbers that result from competition within the ACC. While there has traditionally been an increase in TPG and TO % in ACC games, it is not to the extent that I would have thought. The second thing that jumped out at me was the fact that UNC was playing faster this year than they ever have under Roy, and I have to admit that the first thing that popped into my mind was, “Are they playing too fast?” Based on their T0 %, it would appear that the answer is no, but still, I wonder…
Getting the task at hand of comparing this year’s turnover stats to those of previous years, you basically end up with a comparison of two different “eras”: the “Ty Lawson Era” and the “Non-Ty Lawson Era.” With Ty Lawson at the helm, UNC just did not turn the ball over and there is really no comparison between those teams and this year’s squad. Flat out, we were spoiled. However, this year’s turnover numbers (TPG and TO %) are quite similar to the turnover numbers of Roy’s first three teams at UNC, though this team is giving up a larger percentage of steals, which can lead to more easy baskets for the opponent.
The Tar Heels have 44 turnovers in their first two ACC games. To state that which is completely obvious, if they continue to throw the ball away at that rate, it will be a tough ACC season. However, the last 6 seasons seem to indicate that what you see in the non-conference schedule (in terms of pace and turnovers) is pretty close to what you will get in the ACC schedule. If this proves true again, then UNC will probably be okay.
![[Bloglines]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
The only stat that tells much of anything this year is point differential and point differential by halves squared. Except for somewhat poorer free throw shooting, nothing else really jumps out as being terribly out of whack.
The discrepancy between those numbers and my perception of our play is surprising wide. I think the explanation is, and there is no way to measure this, but the number of “embarrassing turnovers” is way up this year. Which is really what makes us feel nauseous. Ginyard throwing it into the 4th row. Thompson losing it between his legs. Thompson throwing long to Ginyard to break the press, but he’s running the opposite direction. I would also blame Ginyard for Drew’s pass that went into the Clemson bench, because he inexplicably cut away from Drew’s penetration leaving him with no outlet pass.
Another thing: after this team makes a great play, there is no show of emotion. No chestbumps, or fistpumps, or even a freaking smile. They don’t look like they are having fun.
Thanks C. Michael, that’s enlightening. So, the team isn’t turning it over so much more than recent squads? The problem is a multi-headed dragon of shortcomings leading to unnecessary Tar Heel defeats.
Speaking to the question of whether the team is playing too fast, I would say that they’re playing too fast for their current ability.
And william, anytime your differential is in a sling, it’s time to leave the car in the shop for some time, yes?
The stats may be telling us that this year’s team is not as bad as we might have thought. However, this team just doesn’t pass the “eye test”. I can handle TO’s made through aggressive attacking play within reason. But our problem is unforced, bone-head, lack of physicality TO’s that are driving me (and Roy and the fans) nuts!
C.Michael, do you know what the home and road splits are on the turnover numbers?
I think you have to look at points per game also. (How does this year compare to previous years?). I think this is important because its an indicator of how many mistakes you can get away with and still win. Of course you can also get away with a lot of turnovers if your own defense is forcing a lot of turnovers, but I get the impression this year’s team aint so great at that either.
Marcus,
Here are the splits for this year’s team:
Home: 16.2 TPG
Away: 17.8 TPG
Neutral: 19.0 TPG
The away TOs are skewed by the Clemson game. Against UK, UT, and CoC the Heels had 16, 16, and 13 turnovers, all acceptable totals.
gotta respectfully disagree with william: apparently small differences can also look very big.
eg–last year we ranked 10th in the country in turnover %; this year we currently rank 221st. (the fall in ranking for FT% is comparable (15th to 210th); the other offensive stats pretty much balance out–we are slightly worse or slightly better this year.)
given that those turnovers also lead to easy hoops (especially via steals) I think that we have a situation where stats and fan testimony actually are in clear harmony:
THE TURNOVERS ARE KILLING US.
Thanks for the info C.Michael. This isn’t stat related, but from watching, it looks like the offense gets hurt by the number of bobbles and mishandles of the ball also. I’m guessing there isn’t a stat that tracks that.
nick,
Don’t forget, that the 2005 team was ranked 149 in TO % and the 2006 team was ranked 239, so while there is obviously a significant drop from last year, UNC is not necessarily turning it over at a fatal rate.
As UNC RAJ hinted at, one thing that is separating this year’s team from teams in the past is their offensive efficiency. I’ll compile those stats in the next day or so.
nick,
Don’t forget that the 2005 team ranked 149 in TO% and the 2006 team was 239. UNC is certainly turning the ball over a lot more than last year, but I don’t believe they are doing it a level that is catastrophic, on its own.
cmichael–
Yup, good point. Of course those teams shot better than this team.
I think the other main distortion in the #s is that currently our strength of schedule, according to Pomeroy, ranks 64th in the country. Previous 6 yrs? 1,2,24,6,8,12.
So our #s don’t look that bad, but we’ve amassed them against relatively weak competition thus far…not sure if this counts against THF’s original point or not.
The problem is not just the number of turnovers. It’s that they tend to occur in small bunches of three or four in a five minute span or so, leading to what has become our signature this year: The Opponent’s Big Run.
The reason for all our unhappiness is not so much that we’ve lost more than we should have. Actually, we have lost only one more game than we should have (CoC, obviously). We’re just not as good as the first three teams we lost to (who is?), and losing to a ranked Clemson at Clemson had to be expected; down there, they too are better than we are.
What is making this season so irritating is the WAY we’re losing, and that is by getting embarrassed by the opponents’ spending seven to ten minutes blowing us out and making us look like we’re a poorly prepared high school team. It’s the bunched turnovers during those runs that are killing us. They seem more numerous this season not so much because they are (they are, although not by much as C.Michael notes), but because they’re more damaging, and thus more memorable.
This is why I’ve been suggesting replacing Drew as the No. 1 point guard. The PG is primarily responsible for ball handling. Drew’s numerous errors have had plenty of augmentation by freelance incompetence from Ginyard, Thompson and almost everyone else, but part of that is that Drew’s judgment about when to pass, where and to whom is so poor.
Strickland has better instincts, notwithstanding that he was not a PG in high school. But one way or another, we have to put a stop to these turnover-fueled Big Runs.
Thanks C.Michael. I am liking your posts. Puts things into perspectivce. I also think Rathskeller68 is dead on with his comments about when we turn it over. THE BIG RUN indeed. We typically dig that hole and can’t seem to get out of it. I hope we either quit digging the hole or we find a way to climb out of it. I think we will learn to come back before we stop the big runs.
I also think Deon needs to quit looking to shoot every time he touches the ball. Maybe it is me, but it seems like if he catches it on the block he tends to take his man one-on-one. Seldom will he pass out; he is shooting the rock.
^as i said in a previous thread, Deon is a worse passer than even Tyler was, and he’s far far worse than a guy like Trevor Booker.
if you arent going to pass, and youre going to have 5 turnovers a game, and youre going to shoot 40% against major competition, you are going to be the guy that ends many possessions. just like Deon was last year til 2/3 through the season.
i think whats missing from the equation is that we’re currently 72nd in points per possession, not 1st, like last year…and many years before that.