Harvard11-15

IvyCoach: Tommy Amaker

11-15NET#248

Net Rtg, on the floor minus off it. Players with 100 possessions each way

Players

Columns

ON/OFF Difference

How the team's numbers change with each player on the floor. Ranked against every qualifying player in Division I.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Chandler Pigge	1,377	290	82.6%	−2.142	+0.352	+2.436	−0.150	+7.698	+1.330	−5.920	+1.632	−5.112	+1.474	−23.998
Thomas Batties III	1,352	315	81.1%	+12.690	+7.988	−4.774	+3.988	−2.826	+1.034	+12.396	−3.180	+0.658	−1.134	−8.990
Robert Hinton	1,287	380	77.2%	−8.622	+1.158	+9.68	−2.228	−0.446	−2.382	+5.480	+6.04	+1.264	−0.346	−1.960
Evan Nelson	1,167	500	70.0%	−11.516	+0.052	+11.64	+1.364	+0.152	+0.246	−4.826	+8.40	+0.456	+0.662	−7.886
Louis Lesmond	988	679	59.3%	+3.564	−0.350	−3.870	−0.842	−2.430	−1.166	+0.254	+0.642	+1.466	+1.880	−4.674
Tey Barbour	649	1,018	38.9%	+9.182	+1.158	−8.086	+0.354	−1.438	−2.684	−10.18	−7.596	−1.536	+0.356	+11.96
Austin Hunt	603	1,064	36.2%	+10.786	+8.690	−2.160	+4.590	−0.546	−0.354	+7.388	−0.556	+1.262	+0.052	+5.222
Ben Eisendrath	342	1,325	20.5%	+9.884	+1.158	−8.788	−0.644	+2.272	−1.674	−4.228	−7.596	−0.050	−1.822	+0.944
Dutch Dowdell	197	1,470	11.8%	−25.04	−11.68	+13.32	−5.68	+1.464	+3.210	+7.388	+7.62	+2.272	−3.48	+7.514
Xavier Nesbitt	178	1,489	10.7%	−1.844	−8.314	−6.582	−1.536	−1.934	+3.210	+1.662	−6.596	−2.032	+0.254	+19.40
Luca Ace-Nasteski	133	1,535	7.9%	−15.010	−12.76	+2.336	−1.932	−3.620	+5.90	−5.522	+2.126	+0.252	−0.640	+3.330

Player ON

What the team did while each player was on the floor.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Chandler Pigge	1,377	290	82.6%	-7.134	101.532	108.746	50.3%46	26.5%32	18.2%38	22.9%28	52.5%40	68.6%48	17.5%54	20.8%76
Thomas Batties III	1,352	315	81.1%	-4.440	103.034	107.448	51.1%48	24.6%26	18.1%38	26.4%38	51.7%46	69.5%52	17.1%50	22.8%70
Robert Hinton	1,287	380	77.2%	-8.732	101.732	110.540	49.8%40	25.1%28	17.4%44	25.2%36	53.6%36	69.7%54	17.2%50	24.0%66
Evan Nelson	1,167	500	70.0%	-10.430	101.532	111.936	50.7%46	25.2%28	18.0%40	22.5%28	54.9%30	69.5%52	17.5%52	22.0%72
Louis Lesmond	988	679	59.3%	-5.438	101.432	106.750	50.0%40	24.2%24	17.5%42	24.0%30	52.5%40	70.0%56	18.0%56	22.6%70
Tey Barbour	649	1,018	38.9%	-1.246	102.232	103.358	50.5%46	24.3%26	16.3%52	17.9%16	47.6%64	68.5%48	17.5%52	31.9%42
Austin Hunt	603	1,064	36.2%	0.046	107.044	107.050	53.2%58	24.8%26	17.7%42	28.7%46	51.9%44	70.2%56	17.3%52	27.8%54
Ben Eisendrath	342	1,325	20.5%	0.948	102.434	101.464	49.8%40	26.9%34	16.7%48	20.7%22	46.4%70	69.4%52	15.9%42	25.2%62
Dutch Dowdell	197	1,470	11.8%	-28.810	91.214	120.120	45.3%24	26.4%32	20.8%22	30.4%52	59.0%16	71.4%60	14.3%30	31.1%44
Xavier Nesbitt	178	1,489	10.7%	-8.532	94.018	102.562	49.0%38	23.5%22	20.8%22	25.3%36	46.4%70	67.7%44	17.4%52	41.8%20
Luca Ace-Nasteski	133	1,535	7.9%	-20.618	89.812	110.440	48.6%36	21.9%18	23.4%12	18.9%18	54.2%34	69.6%52	16.7%46	27.5%56

Player OFF

What the team did while each player sat.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Chandler Pigge	1,377	290	82.6%	-5.038	101.332	106.352	50.4%46	18.9%12	16.9%48	28.8%46	50.9%50	73.7%72	16.1%42	44.7%16
Thomas Batties III	1,352	315	81.1%	-17.022	95.120	112.136	47.2%30	27.4%36	17.1%46	14.1%10	54.8%30	68.9%50	18.2%58	31.7%42
Robert Hinton	1,287	380	77.2%	-0.246	100.730	100.866	52.0%54	25.5%30	19.7%28	19.8%20	47.6%64	68.5%48	17.6%54	25.9%60
Evan Nelson	1,167	500	70.0%	1.148	101.532	100.466	49.4%40	25.1%28	17.8%40	27.3%42	46.5%68	69.1%50	16.9%48	29.8%48
Louis Lesmond	988	679	59.3%	-8.932	101.732	110.640	50.8%46	26.6%32	18.6%36	23.8%30	51.9%44	68.6%48	16.2%44	27.2%56
Tey Barbour	649	1,018	38.9%	-10.330	101.130	111.438	50.2%46	25.7%30	19.0%32	28.0%44	55.1%28	70.0%56	17.2%50	20.0%78
Austin Hunt	603	1,064	36.2%	-10.730	98.426	109.044	48.7%36	25.4%28	18.0%40	21.4%24	52.5%40	69.0%50	17.3%52	22.6%70
Ben Eisendrath	342	1,325	20.5%	-8.932	101.332	110.142	50.4%46	24.7%26	18.3%38	24.8%34	53.9%34	69.4%52	17.7%54	24.3%66
Dutch Dowdell	197	1,470	11.8%	-3.840	102.934	106.750	51.0%48	25.0%26	17.6%42	23.1%28	51.4%46	69.2%50	17.7%54	23.6%68
Xavier Nesbitt	178	1,489	10.7%	-6.636	102.434	109.044	50.5%46	25.4%28	17.6%42	23.8%30	52.9%38	69.6%54	17.3%52	22.4%72
Luca Ace-Nasteski	133	1,535	7.9%	-5.638	102.534	108.146	50.5%46	25.5%28	17.5%44	24.3%32	52.1%42	69.4%52	17.4%52	24.2%66

How to read this

An on/off split is not a rating of the player. It is what the team did with him on the floor and with him off it, which also carries whoever replaced him, whoever he played alongside, and who the opponent had out there at the time. Two players on the same team can trade the same minutes and both look good, or both look bad, for reasons neither controls.

Players need 100 possessions both on and off the floor to appear. Both sides, not either: a starter who never sits has no off-court sample, and his difference would be the team measured against nothing.

In ON/OFF Difference, percentage columns are shown as points of difference, and each row is ranked against every qualifying player in Division I (3,990 of them) rather than against team ratings: a +7 net rating is a good lineup, a +7 net swing is an enormous one. Player ON and Player OFF are ranked against Division I five-man units instead, because those are ordinary team rates.

Sorting any of the three tables reorders all three, so a player stays on the same line throughout.