The amount of information you can get from basketball statistics is great. Though the NESCAC is not part of the advanced statistics revolution that has helped change the way the NBA is played (I don’t think NESCAC gyms are capable of having the advanced SportsVU cameras that are in NBA arenas), old school statistics like rebounds, blocks and points still are really helpful. Some of these stats you are probably generally aware of, while others might surprise you.
1. Lucas Hausman ’16 (Bowdoin): 25.6 PPG
Lucas Hausman’s 24.8 points per game deserves enormous praise. Nobody has averaged over 22.8 as far as the NESCAC archives go back (02-03).
— Panther Nation (@MiddPantherBlog) January 28, 2016
The defending NESCAC Player of the Year has taken it to a whole other level this season. Hausman is the only player this season averaging above 20.0 PPG, and Hausman is managing to do it while having shooting percentages of 47.8/42.5/87.5. He makes 6.8 free throws per game, nearly two whole free throws more than the next guy. While I don’t have official numbers on it, I would guess that Hausman also leads the NESCAC by a MILE in number of free throws off of three pointers, a fact that I know drives opposing coaches absolutely bonkers. The biggest difference in his game from a year ago is his three point shooting. He is making 2.2 threes per game this season, up from 1.0 per game last season while also upping his percentage of threes made from 31.8 percent to 42.5 percent.
2. FG% Defense of Wesleyan (37.5 percent) and (Trinity 37.7 percent)
Those marks put Wesleyan third and Trinity sixth in the country. Pretty impressive for the NESCAC to have two teams in the Top 10. I was a little surprised to see how highly these two ranked, honestly. I feel like both have taken a step back from their defense last season, but it might just be that both are playing at a faster pace. When these two met earlier in the year, Trinity shot 41.3 percent on the way to beating Wesleyan who shot just 32.1 percent.
3. 3PT FG% Defense of Amherst (26.3 percent)
That number for the No Mascots is the best in the country, and I think I know the reason why. All of that length on the perimeter, from Johnny McCarthy ’18 to Michael Riopel ’18 to Jeff Racy ’17, bothers shooters who can’t shake free. That Amherst is tied for fourth overall in the NESCAC in field goal percentage is a problem, though.
4. Ed Ogundeko ’17 (Trinity): 19.8 Rebounds per 40 Minutes
Ogundeko is a veritable vacuum on the boards, combining the width to box anybody out with a knack for the ball. He is blowing everybody else out of the water in terms of rebounds per 40 minutes. Matt Daley ’16 is second with 14.8 rebounds per 40 minutes, a far far cry from Ogundeko. He grabs 26.4 percent of Trinity’s total rebounds, and I would love to be able to isolate just when he is on the floor in order to fully get the picture of how good he is on the boards.
5. Matt St. Amour ’17 (Middlebury): NESCAC 2PT FG%: 34.0 percent
St. Amour is the second leading scorer in NESCAC play, but he is doing it mostly because of his three point shooting ability. He is shooting 47.4 percent from three while making half of his shots from the field there in NESCAC games. That St. Amour is making the harder (at least ostensibly harder) shots at a much higher rate probably says more about his ability to finish at the rim than anything. Though he’s obviously healthy, St. Amour still lacks explosiveness because of his ACL injury, and he often shoots floaters instead of trying to attack big men at the rim. Many of those floaters aren’t going in.
6. Jack Dwyer ’18 (Hamilton): FT%: 84.8 percent
This one is notable because Dwyer has struggled mightily to shoot the ball from three (26.3 percent) but not from the free throw line. Also notable is that Dwyer isn’t the only point guard with such a big chasm between those two percentages. Tyler Rowe ’19 is shooting 85.7 percent on FTs and 31.7 percent on 3PTs. I’m not sure the reason for the huge disparity, though if I was to guess it would be because Rowe and Dwyer are shooting threes off the dribble since they are point guards with the ball in their hands a lot.
7. Amherst Point Differential: +13.9 PPG
That number is the best in the NESCAC with Trinity the second best at +11.0 PPG. I don’t put that much weight into point differentials because of the disparity of non-conference schedules and the ability for one or two blowouts to warp the statistic given the low amount of games NESCAC teams have.
8. NESCAC Winning Percentage: .745
For the season, NESCAC teams are 102-35 in non-conference games (I excluded all non-conference CBB and Little 3 games in my calculations), a pretty darn good mark overall. However, it is in line with past seasons for the NESCAC. The winning percentage for the NESCAC against non-NESCAC teams last season was a lofty .769, which is probably a big reason why the league ended up getting four bids. In 2013-2014, NESCAC teams had a winning percentage of .718. Note, I also excluded NCAA tournament games in those calculations. I wanted to do more years, but I knew that I needed to get some sleep, also. Bottom line, the NESCAC is doing very well once again in their non-conference games.