Harvard16-12

IvyCoach: Tommy Amaker

16-12NET#145

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

Tey Barbour	1,509	277	84.5%	+11.990	+21.0100	+9.18	+11.4100	−1.042	−3.392	+1.962	+2.126	−5.310	−2.316	+0.546
Robert Hinton	1,494	292	83.7%	−7.624	−10.88	−3.166	−6.86	−7.16	−2.686	−8.312	+3.714	+6.296	+1.880	−18.698
Chandler Pigge	1,488	298	83.3%	+4.568	+3.872	−0.754	+0.962	+2.272	−1.370	−5.124	−0.150	+3.080	+0.254	−1.258
Thomas Batties III	1,485	301	83.1%	+7.880	+16.8100	+9.08	+9.2100	−7.54	−5.098	+3.270	+2.424	−5.510	−1.922	−2.866
Ben Eisendrath	1,268	517	71.0%	−12.612	+2.062	+14.62	+2.576	−0.448	+0.834	−5.622	+7.92	−4.912	+1.778	+1.740
Austin Hunt	479	1,307	26.8%	+5.070	+0.152	−4.876	−0.842	+5.090	−0.150	−5.722	−3.180	+0.556	−1.032	+0.248
Frankie Mannino	347	1,439	19.4%	+4.668	+3.068	−1.658	−0.348	+3.382	+0.934	+15.8100	−2.878	−1.040	+0.358	+5.620
Xavier Nesbitt	209	1,577	11.7%	+17.998	−5.424	−23.398	−1.832	−1.340	−0.760	−6.418	−11.998	+2.878	+1.372	−1.560
Ryan Sullivan	206	1,580	11.5%	−11.016	−14.24	−3.268	−6.06	+2.676	+5.60	+2.868	−3.280	+8.3100	−4.24	+13.92
Kenan Parrish	161	1,624	9.0%	−6.926	−9.412	−2.564	−1.832	+5.392	+8.80	+9.994	+2.028	+0.758	+0.866	−6.180
Luca Ace-Nasteski	156	1,630	8.7%	−7.524	−9.612	−2.160	−4.016	+1.768	+2.712	−0.848	+1.730	−4.912	+5.9100	+0.844

Player ON

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

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Tey Barbour	1,509	277	84.5%	6.858	111.652	104.856	55.0%62	26.9%38	16.9%40	26.2%30	50.6%52	70.7%52	16.9%56	26.6%64
Robert Hinton	1,494	292	83.7%	3.752	106.540	102.962	52.2%50	26.0%34	17.0%40	24.6%26	50.9%50	72.7%62	17.5%60	23.5%74
Chandler Pigge	1,488	298	83.3%	5.756	108.946	103.360	53.4%54	27.4%40	17.2%38	25.1%28	50.3%52	72.1%60	17.2%58	26.3%66
Thomas Batties III	1,485	301	83.1%	6.256	111.152	105.056	54.9%62	25.6%32	16.6%44	26.4%32	50.7%52	70.5%52	16.9%56	26.0%66
Ben Eisendrath	1,268	517	71.0%	1.448	108.946	107.450	54.0%58	26.9%38	17.7%34	24.3%26	52.5%42	70.0%50	17.7%62	27.0%64
Austin Hunt	479	1,307	26.8%	8.660	108.444	99.868	52.7%52	30.7%52	17.3%38	21.7%20	48.0%64	71.9%58	16.5%52	26.7%64
Frankie Mannino	347	1,439	19.4%	8.760	110.750	102.164	53.0%54	29.7%50	18.2%32	38.8%64	48.0%64	70.7%52	17.5%60	31.0%52
Xavier Nesbitt	209	1,577	11.7%	20.878	103.532	82.792	51.6%46	26.0%34	16.8%42	20.2%16	39.7%90	73.9%68	18.3%66	25.1%68
Ryan Sullivan	206	1,580	11.5%	-4.838	95.718	100.666	47.9%30	29.4%48	22.4%10	28.4%38	47.5%66	78.8%84	13.5%30	38.8%32
Kenan Parrish	161	1,624	9.0%	-1.342	99.726	101.166	51.6%46	31.9%58	25.4%4	35.0%54	52.1%44	72.2%60	18.0%64	21.0%80
Luca Ace-Nasteski	156	1,630	8.7%	-1.942	99.626	101.564	49.6%36	28.6%46	19.9%22	25.2%28	51.8%46	67.1%38	22.6%86	27.2%64

Player OFF

What the team did while each player sat.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Tey Barbour	1,509	277	84.5%	-5.236	90.612	95.776	43.6%16	27.9%42	20.2%20	24.3%26	48.5%62	76.0%74	19.1%72	26.1%66
Robert Hinton	1,494	292	83.7%	11.364	117.366	106.054	59.0%78	33.1%62	19.6%24	32.9%48	47.2%68	66.5%32	15.7%46	42.1%26
Chandler Pigge	1,488	298	83.3%	1.248	105.136	104.058	52.5%52	25.2%32	18.5%30	30.2%42	50.4%52	69.0%46	17.0%56	27.5%62
Thomas Batties III	1,485	301	83.1%	-1.642	94.416	96.076	45.6%22	33.1%62	21.6%14	23.3%22	48.3%64	76.0%74	18.8%68	28.8%58
Ben Eisendrath	1,268	517	71.0%	14.170	106.940	92.982	51.5%46	27.3%40	16.8%42	29.8%40	44.6%78	74.9%70	16.0%48	25.3%68
Austin Hunt	479	1,307	26.8%	3.652	108.344	104.656	53.5%56	25.7%32	17.4%36	27.5%34	51.1%50	71.4%56	17.5%60	26.4%66
Frankie Mannino	347	1,439	19.4%	4.052	107.742	103.760	53.3%54	26.4%36	17.2%38	23.0%22	50.8%50	71.8%58	17.1%58	25.4%68
Xavier Nesbitt	209	1,577	11.7%	2.950	108.946	106.054	53.5%56	27.2%38	17.5%36	26.7%32	51.6%48	71.2%54	17.1%58	26.7%64
Ryan Sullivan	206	1,580	11.5%	6.256	109.948	103.858	53.9%58	26.7%38	16.8%42	25.6%28	50.7%52	70.5%52	17.7%62	24.9%70
Kenan Parrish	161	1,624	9.0%	5.554	109.246	103.660	53.4%54	26.6%36	16.6%42	25.1%28	50.1%52	71.5%58	17.1%58	27.1%64
Luca Ace-Nasteski	156	1,630	8.7%	5.654	109.146	103.660	53.6%56	26.9%38	17.2%38	26.0%30	50.1%52	72.0%58	16.7%54	26.4%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 (4,026 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.