Notre Dame15-18

ACCCoach: Micah Shrewsberry

15-18NET#101

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

Tae Davis	1,610	517	75.7%	+2.962	+6.382	+3.430	+1.364	+3.280	−0.762	+6.786	+1.928	+4.188	−1.724	+3.630
Braeden Shrewsberry	1,412	716	66.4%	+1.456	+9.090	+7.714	+3.384	+3.682	−0.862	−4.228	+5.36	−2.030	+2.990	+3.728
Markus Burton	1,388	740	65.2%	+0.854	−0.946	−1.758	−0.546	−3.322	−2.180	+0.152	+1.632	+2.676	+1.272	−5.780
Matt Allocco	1,343	785	63.1%	+12.390	+11.696	−0.752	+5.194	−3.422	−4.394	+2.566	−2.978	−1.536	−2.218	−1.056
Kebba Njie	1,126	1,001	52.9%	+10.286	+3.370	−6.982	−1.436	+2.170	−2.382	+1.260	−0.656	+3.986	+0.764	−10.092
Julian Roper II	849	1,279	39.9%	+5.974	+0.856	−5.276	+1.972	+1.060	+1.922	+1.058	+0.048	+1.566	+2.888	−3.870
J.R. Konieczny	818	1,310	38.4%	−1.046	+1.158	+2.038	+1.162	−3.224	−1.268	−0.052	−2.576	+0.758	−3.110	+12.64
Nikita Konstantynovskyi	537	1,591	25.2%	−7.226	−10.88	−3.568	+0.050	+0.254	+6.10	−11.26	−1.060	+3.884	−2.218	−12.996
Sir Mohammed	474	1,653	22.3%	−22.84	−18.52	+4.326	−7.94	−0.150	+4.14	−1.842	+2.324	+1.162	−0.740	−4.674
Logan Imes	376	1,752	17.7%	−12.014	−9.212	+2.834	−5.78	+4.486	+4.06	−0.550	−1.970	−5.88	−1.428	+5.422
Garrett Sundra	319	1,809	15.0%	−5.232	+0.554	+5.720	+1.972	−1.240	+0.738	+3.170	+1.632	−13.12	+4.998	+5.620
Cole Certa	228	1,900	10.7%	−3.538	+1.660	+5.122	−1.732	−0.746	−1.978	+15.698	−1.464	−2.924	−0.738	+22.70
Burke Chebuhar	131	1,996	6.2%	+4.368	−2.538	−6.882	−0.446	−4.514	−1.572	−10.96	−3.584	+1.666	−1.428	−2.060

Player ON

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

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Tae Davis	1,610	517	75.7%	2.452	112.056	109.642	52.4%54	32.0%56	16.5%50	33.6%60	51.7%44	73.0%68	14.9%34	29.8%48
Braeden Shrewsberry	1,412	716	66.4%	2.150	113.560	111.438	53.2%58	32.4%56	16.4%52	30.7%52	53.1%38	71.2%60	16.3%44	30.2%46
Markus Burton	1,388	740	65.2%	2.050	110.252	108.246	51.9%52	30.0%46	15.9%56	32.1%56	51.8%44	72.9%68	15.8%40	26.8%58
Matt Allocco	1,343	785	63.1%	6.258	114.864	108.546	53.9%62	30.0%46	15.0%62	32.9%58	50.2%50	71.5%62	14.5%32	28.5%52
Kebba Njie	1,126	1,001	52.9%	6.458	112.056	105.654	51.5%50	32.2%56	15.5%58	32.6%58	50.9%50	73.8%72	15.7%40	24.3%66
Julian Roper II	849	1,279	39.9%	5.256	110.954	105.852	53.3%58	31.9%54	17.8%40	32.6%58	51.3%48	72.9%68	17.0%48	26.6%58
J.R. Konieczny	818	1,310	38.4%	1.148	111.154	110.142	52.8%56	29.3%44	15.9%56	32.0%56	49.7%56	72.4%66	13.4%24	36.7%30
Nikita Konstantynovskyi	537	1,591	25.2%	-3.740	102.434	106.152	52.1%54	31.4%52	21.2%20	23.6%30	50.5%50	74.7%76	13.7%26	19.4%80
Sir Mohammed	474	1,653	22.3%	-16.122	96.120	112.236	45.9%26	31.1%52	19.8%26	30.6%52	53.0%38	72.9%68	14.8%34	25.3%62
Logan Imes	376	1,752	17.7%	-8.232	102.934	111.138	47.4%30	34.7%66	19.9%26	31.6%54	49.7%56	67.3%42	14.2%30	33.2%38
Garrett Sundra	319	1,809	15.0%	-2.842	110.954	113.732	53.7%62	30.2%48	17.2%44	34.7%64	52.6%40	60.8%20	19.5%68	33.7%38
Cole Certa	228	1,900	10.7%	-1.544	111.956	113.434	50.5%46	30.6%50	14.9%62	46.0%82	50.0%54	69.4%52	14.7%32	49.4%12
Burke Chebuhar	131	1,996	6.2%	5.756	108.146	102.462	51.7%52	27.0%34	15.2%60	21.8%26	48.0%62	73.4%70	14.0%28	27.0%56

Player OFF

What the team did while each player sat.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Tae Davis	1,610	517	75.7%	-0.546	105.740	106.252	51.1%48	28.8%42	17.2%46	26.9%40	49.8%54	68.9%50	16.6%46	26.2%60
Braeden Shrewsberry	1,412	716	66.4%	0.748	104.538	103.858	49.8%40	28.8%42	17.2%46	34.8%64	47.8%64	73.2%70	13.5%24	26.5%58
Markus Burton	1,388	740	65.2%	1.248	111.154	109.942	52.4%54	33.3%62	18.0%40	31.9%56	50.2%50	70.3%56	14.6%32	32.6%40
Matt Allocco	1,343	785	63.1%	-6.136	103.234	109.344	48.9%38	33.4%62	19.4%30	30.4%52	53.1%38	72.9%68	16.8%46	29.5%48
Kebba Njie	1,126	1,001	52.9%	-3.740	108.748	112.536	52.8%56	30.1%48	17.9%40	31.4%54	51.6%46	69.9%54	15.0%34	34.3%36
Julian Roper II	849	1,279	39.9%	-0.846	110.252	110.940	51.3%50	30.8%50	15.9%56	31.6%54	51.2%48	71.4%60	14.2%30	30.5%46
J.R. Konieczny	818	1,310	38.4%	2.150	110.152	108.048	51.7%52	32.4%56	17.1%46	32.0%56	52.2%42	71.7%62	16.6%46	24.1%66
Nikita Konstantynovskyi	537	1,591	25.2%	3.554	113.260	109.742	52.1%54	31.2%52	15.1%62	34.8%64	51.5%46	71.0%60	15.9%42	32.2%42
Sir Mohammed	474	1,653	22.3%	6.858	114.662	107.948	53.8%62	31.3%52	15.7%56	32.4%56	50.7%50	71.7%62	15.5%38	29.9%48
Logan Imes	376	1,752	17.7%	3.854	112.156	108.346	53.1%58	30.4%48	15.9%56	32.1%56	51.6%46	73.1%70	15.6%40	27.9%54
Garrett Sundra	319	1,809	15.0%	2.552	110.452	108.048	51.8%52	31.4%52	16.5%50	31.6%54	51.0%48	73.8%72	14.6%32	28.1%54
Cole Certa	228	1,900	10.7%	2.050	110.352	108.346	52.3%54	31.3%52	16.8%48	30.4%52	51.4%46	72.3%66	15.4%38	26.7%58
Burke Chebuhar	131	1,996	6.2%	1.450	110.654	109.244	52.1%54	31.5%52	16.7%48	32.7%58	51.5%46	71.9%64	15.4%38	29.0%50

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.