Back with another check of the numbers. First, a note on what to look for tonight/tomorrow as group play wraps up. Obviously, first place in Group A is on the line when Australia faces Russia at 8:15 p.m. Pacific. I’ll be watching on NBC’s webcast. I half suspect Russia won’t bring its A game, not caring about group positioning and preferring to play the U.S. in the semifinals anyway.
South Korea and Latvia follow them with a spot in the medal rounds on the line. Belarus has beaten both teams and will finish third in Group A even with a loss to Brazil.
In Group B, the four teams are set, but after the U.S. the order is a mess. If China beats the Czech Republic, the host country finishes second with Spain third and the Czech Republic fourth barring a wildly improbable Mali upset over Spain.
If the Czech Republic wins that game, again assuming Spain takes care of business, we have a three-way tie that can’t be resolved via head-to-head results. As best I can tell, that would be determined by point average (a misleading term which really would better be called “point ratio”) from head-to-head games.
Spain is in good shape, having beaten the Czech Republic by 19 points. Their point average is 1.131. To reach that, the Czechs would have to win by about double, or 38 points(bad math) about 34 points. To finish ahead of China, the Czech Republic would have to win by about 11 points or more.
Again, this is huge because the second-place team in Group B gets Belarus and a relatively clear path to the semifinals, while the third-place team has to face the loser of Australia-Russia and fourth place will play the winner of that game.
Anyways, here are the numbers.
Team Gr Diff ORating Rank DRating Rank PaceUnited States B 59.9 131.3 1 72.8 1 74.7Australia A 28.9 117.9 2 90.2 3 73.6Russia A 9.3 102.3 3 90.8 4 70.2Belarus A 2.3 90.4 9 87.8 2 75.1Czech Republic B 2.0 96.1 4 93.5 5 73.8Spain B 0.3 96.0 5 95.2 6 72.6China B -1.4 96.0 5 96.2 7 73.1Brazil A -11.4 92.3 7 105.3 9 69.9South Korea A -13.1 87.8 10 99.6 8 70.7Latvia A -17.0 92.2 8 109.6 10 72.0New Zealand B -22.5 87.5 11 109.8 11 74.4Mali B -39.1 70.2 12 110.3 12 73.6
The USA’s numbers remain impeccable, though I think Spain’s first-half challenge showed where the team could have some difficulty. When Sue Bird had a tough time with Nuria Martinez’s quickness, the U.S. struggled to fill in for her. Kara Lawson was too prone to turnovers, while Cappie Pondexter isn’t a true point guard. Having either another true point like Lindsay Whalen or a complementary player like Loree Moore available would have given Anne Donovan more options.
Offensive Four Factors:
Team Gr eFG% OR% FTM/FGA TO%Australia A 0.509 0.401 0.242 0.143Belarus A 0.419 0.307 0.238 0.218Brazil A 0.447 0.288 0.209 0.208China B 0.437 0.318 0.195 0.173Czech Republic B 0.491 0.307 0.232 0.241Latvia A 0.482 0.227 0.223 0.227Mali B 0.348 0.367 0.203 0.278New Zealand B 0.398 0.317 0.249 0.213Russia A 0.500 0.398 0.246 0.231South Korea A 0.442 0.157 0.141 0.171Spain B 0.485 0.295 0.223 0.225United States B 0.606 0.423 0.164 0.138
Australia has not shot the ball particularly well, but the Opals’ offense is still second only to the U.S. because the Aussies are doing everything else well on offense.
And defense:
Team eFG% DR% FTM/FGA TO%Australia 0.452 0.776 0.191 0.204Belarus 0.417 0.712 0.209 0.203Brazil 0.480 0.701 0.259 0.173China 0.433 0.680 0.126 0.147Czech Republic 0.461 0.651 0.213 0.231Latvia 0.483 0.616 0.223 0.162Mali 0.504 0.662 0.180 0.157New Zealand 0.545 0.617 0.325 0.230Russia 0.447 0.794 0.154 0.171South Korea 0.525 0.595 0.266 0.281Spain 0.475 0.641 0.225 0.232United States 0.372 0.714 0.212 0.272
Yeah, I’d say the U.S. commitment to defense has paid off so far.
E-mail feedback
RSS Feed