Saturday, September 26, 2015

28 March 2015 - Connecticut 105, Texas 54



Why am I writing about this game?  Opportunity.  In March I taped some women's basketball games that I hoped to watch but never got around to seeing.  My wife asked me to clear up some space on the DVR so I told myself that this weekend I'd watch at least one of those games.

This was a Sweet Sixteen game in Albany, New York.  Texas was supposed to be this big tall team that would give Connecticut trouble; you can see from the score that it became a laugher.  Connecticut extended its lead throughout the game all the way to the end.

My thoughts.

* It really makes a team look good on offense when the defense can't get to the ball.  When most teams have the ball, one person holds the ball and the other players move like chess pieces to try to position themselves to be in the best position to take a pass or threaten to take a pass. 

Not UConn.  If you forced both teams to play in the same color, you'd never be able to tell which players were the defensive players whenever Connecticut had possession.  Connecticut's defense seems to be less like chess pieces and more like those little linemen in those "electronic football" games from the 1950s where the metal board jiggles the pieces around.  Basically, the Huskies defensive players are clearing space, foot by foot, for the offensive player to make the best shot, while at the same time trying to be ready to receive the pass just in case.

This is the opposite philosophy that a lot of teams have during their possessions.  The offensive players without the ball are more worried about catching the pass than overcoming the defense.  When they say that the Huskies are unselfish, they mean just that.  When a Connecticut player has the ball, the other offensive players are looking to help her score first and foremost.

* Part of that help comes from off-the-ball screens.  I don't think I've seen so many off-the-ball screens in my life.  "Unselfish play" is almost a platitude in women's basketball, but you'll really see those things that prove that Connecticut players care more about winning than individual glory.

* Watch the Huskies players move their feet when they play defense.  They are on the balls of their feet pretty much the entire game.  Watch the Longhorns. They are flat-footed a lot of the time.

* Kiah Stokes is out there getting blocks.  I don't recall how many them she had this game but it was a lot.  I'm starting to come around to the fact that steals and blocks are much more important than a lot of people realize because those stats can't be cheapened - the player has to actually do something by herself to get the block; for the most part no one else can give it to her.  Rebounds are a different story.  Breanna Stewart was all alone after a missed shot and the ball went off the backboard and right to her; David O'Brien exclaimed "Another rebound for Breanna Stewart!" as if she fought off three Texas post players to get it and it wasn't a sub-ordinary rebound that a semi-alert grade schooler would have caught.

* Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis was also a senior for this game.  I don't know if she has the defensive lapses that people claim she has but I saw at least one occasion where I questioned if she was making good decisions on defense.  She hit a few threes.

* Breanna Stewart scored close to 30 points before Auriemma sat her down and the Huskies lead ballooned to ridiculous proportions.  Is she the real thing?  Oh yeah.  Tall, can play the perimeter, good shot blocker, ridiculously good shooter. 

* Moriah Jefferson was less impressive to me even though she put up good numbers.

* What put the game away was a 26-5 run just before the end of the first half that saw the Connecticut lead go from seven to twenty-eight.

I think what happens against UConn is not that teams stop trying as it is they really don't know what to do when they're down by 20 points.  And not "down by 20 points against UConn", I mean down by 20 points in any game.  The teams that make it to the NCAA tournament are used to winning and certainly don't fall into the kind of deep ditches that UConn loves to create.  The players have no emotional plan for that situation - indeed, they block it out of their minds completely because to think about losing doesn't betray "the mindset of a winner" or some bullship phrase. 

Everyone panics.  The coaches panic, the players panic, and Connecticut just pours it on.

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

The WNBA needs to work with Europe and not against it



The WNBA is setting up for two exciting conference finals.  If you like grit, the New York Liberty and the Indiana Fever, helmed respectively by one of the NBA's Bad Boys and a rookie coach, will be playing for WNBA title hopes in the Eastern Conference.  If you like flash, you have the Minnesota Lynx and Maya Moore and the Phoenix Mercury and Brittney Griner playing in the West.  Shots vs. Blocks!

But after the Finals...then what?  The WNBA loses its audience, which goes back to watching women's college basketball.  The logo lady puts down her basketball and takes a deep nap which lasts approximately seven or eight months.  There is no year-long news cycle in the league; the league has to recreate itself every April.

This has been a perplexing problem for the league.  Its players scatter to the corners of the earth, playing for the various pro teams with deep pockets.  (Ekaterinburg's pockets were so deep they paid Diana Taurasi NOT to play in WNBA this season, protecting their investment.)  With the NCAA dominating the women's basketball landscape, the W is reduce to a meek, "us too" in the off-season.

My opinion is that the answer to the problem of off-season interest is right in the league's face. Instead of trying to pretend that European women's basketball doesn't exist, they should embrace it.

There are lots of reasons that fans don't follow European women's basketball.  It requires its own learning curve.  A team from one of the power countries - Russia or Turkey - might have three or four names you recognize (all American) and ten names that you don't.  You need some knowledge of regulation, of promotion, of Euroleague, of Eurocup, and in some cases about who holds what passport.

To top that off, when the games are broadcast - usually on YouTube or some domestic league website - the picture is grainy and small.  You can't identify the players.  There are no announcers.  The games look like they're being broadcast in some high school gym.  (In some countries, the high school gym would be an upgrade.)

Statistics are hard to come by.  The reporting is in foreign languages.  The hurdles appear to be too great to jump.

But what the WNBA needs to learn is that the strength of the league is in its players.  Certainly, we want to know who they are and what they do.  More importantly, we want to watch them on the court playing basketball.  All of the human interest stories in the world won't help the league do that; you can only whet someone's whistle for so long before they want to eat.

The NBA's off-season is so short that they don't have this problem.  College basketball has the drama of recruiting and player evaluation to keep its fans interested.  The WNBA, however, needs to have something to draw attention to itself in the off-season that the NBA and NCAA women's basketball.

And they have it.  The players.  The players don't stop playing basketball in the off-season.  They keep playing it!  The season isn't over after the WNBA Finals!  A new one is starting!
So why doesn't the league show the players playing basketball?  There needs to be dedicated content at least involving the major countries :  Russia, Turkey, Spain, France, maybe Poland.  We need to know what the players are doing in each of those countries, and that involves video. 

How much would it cost to send an announcer to Russia to do an English-language broadcast of a Superleague game? (Available on WNBA Live Access!)  Or (almost) live action from the Liga Femenina, brought to you by LaChina Robinson?  I know she'd love to go to Spain!

Perhaps a "European Game of the Week" placed on the WNBA's website itself.  Want to see Diana Taurasi and Angel McCoughtry battle it out in December?  If not, maybe a WCBA game in China with Maya Moore's team making on Brittney Griner's?

For fifteen years, European women's basketball has benefited from the WNBA's free advertising.  The WNBA is the best women's league in the world and the European powers know that.  They watch our league with great interest, and they use the WNBA as their litmus test for a good player.  You might not like how Samantha Logic is playing, but her French Calais team know that she played in the WNBA, and that's good enough for them.

Now, we need to do to the Europeans what they do to us.  We can broadcast their games, look at their players more closely.  We are still the best league in the world.  Perhaps if we concentrate on a handful of countries, the five mentioned above, we can make ourselves a power.  Laurel Richie would get to ask, "You want us to add more Chinese games, WCBA?  Okay.  But what can you do for us in return?"

The WNBA is not dead when the last whistle sounds at the WNBA Finals. On the contrary, it exports itself to a waiting planet.  The problem is getting people to believe that - the fans, the players, and hopefully the league itself.


Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Random thoughts


Some random thoughts....

* Chicago had about as much chance as anyone to not just beat Indiana but to march to a WNBA Championship.  There isn't a dominating team this season; as a matter of fact, the last time the best team in the league was this "non-dominant" was that first 1997 season.

* Good lord, if your best scorer/MVP knocks down 40 and you can't win?  Pokey Chatman said near the beginning of the season that the team was better offensively without Fowles and worse defensively.  Selah.

* The Dream front office is looking pretty good in dealing away Erika de Souza.  I love Erika; she didn't help the Sky that much.

* There are some loud Chicago fans that want to fire Pokey Chatman.  Good.  Atlanta will take her as a general manager any day of the week.

* Yes, New York has the best record in the league.  But even with Bill Laimbeer and all of his rings, it's one thing to be a good team and another to win a championship.  I just have an instinct that New York isn't going to win a championship and that they'll fall sometime this season.  This team needs one more year under its belt to really start cooking. I won't be surprised if they do win, though, there, I've covered all my bases.

* New York filled the (lower part of the) Garden when they lost Game 1; I expect the same for Game 3. 

* Meanwhile, Tulsa and Chicago's 3000+ reported attendances at home as they were rolled out of their respective series concern me.  Tulsa's is understandable - season ticket holders unable to bear saying goodbye (losing by 30 to Phoenix in Game 1 didn't help).
As for Chicago, a Monday night game is hard going.  I just hope the Sky can hang in there.

* No GM named yet in Atlanta.  I suspect that my beloved Dream will take its time in filling that position.  Maybe Chi-town will let Pokey go and she'll fall into our laps.  

Monday, September 21, 2015

Hang in there, Adam



I have NBA-TV. I'm sure the bean counters over at the NBA and WNBA would be surprised to know that the only reason I have NBA-TV is because they show WNBA games.  Period.

I have no interest in the Hardwood Classics.
No interest in the NBA.  (I'm not anti-NBA, I just can't afford to devote time to another sport outside the WNBA.)
"Shaqtin a Fool" goes unwatched.

If something happened where NBA-TV stopped carrying WNBA games, I'd call my local cable provider and tell them to drop the channel.

In short, I'm a pretty hardcore follower of the WNBA.  I watched every single Atlanta Dream game this year.  Many of them in person, and the ones I couldn't watch I watched either on SportSouth or WNBA Live Access, the WNBA's webcast.  And I'm not even the most hardcore WNBA fan out there. There are fans that watch games over multiple teams.  Richard Cohen/WNBAlien watched every single WNBA game in 2014 from his mountain redoubt somewhere in the United Kingdom.  I envied the man for having the time and resources to do it.

Now that you have that background, many WNBA fans were surprised by NBA commissioner Adam Silver's comments about the WNBA.  Oddly enough, not only did he decide to sound off just before the WNBA playoffs but brought up the fact that the WNBA is almost 20 years old.

"We thought we would have broken through by now", he said.
"We thought ratings and attendance would be higher,” he said.
"I think we might have been ahead of ourselves 20 years ago in terms of what we were doing," he said.
"Leading into the playoffs that begin tonight, there’s virtually no coverage," he said.

He sounded almost regretful.  My theory is that he wanted to hit even harder against the fact that local media in the many WNBA cities with few exceptions seems to have turned their back on the WNBA teams.  The gatekeepers - and they are gatekeepers; don't listen to that jazz about how they 'merely reflect public demand' - have kept the door shut on the WNBA for almost two decades, leaving the legion of fans like myself to do our best to promote the league in an intelligent way without the help of the jockocracy that runs most sports media.  Silver was there at the league's creation and I suspect he knew that if he swung harder at the local Joe Smiths and Bob Jones (always a Joe or a Bob) that write for the newspapers and run the morning sports radio programs, they would have struck back with how they 'merely reflect public demand'.

It's a story that he's heard before.
It's a story that we've heard before.

But no one every said that this WNBA thing would be easy. Oh, I'm sure a lot of people hoped it would be easy, back in 1997.  They hoped that women's basketball could finally step up to the rank of a major sport.  The crowds were big at first, due to the novelty. 

The lack of press coverage, however, starved the infant of oxygen. Despite that, the fact that the WNBA is as healthy as it is is a miracle in itself.  If the true story of the WNBA is ever written, it won't be like that written about the WPBL in Mad Seasons, a story where you can almost guess the end before the beginning.  The true story of the WNBA will be about how it survived even though many people strongly wished it would go away. that a legion of fans kept it alive, that there were forward thinking owners that devoted their time and money to the long run against the voices of naysayers.

There is an old saying:  "Power yields nothing without a struggle.  It never has, and it never will."  Adam Silver might have forgotten that. He is the owner and operator of a billion dollar industry; he's a man used to getting his way.  And still, so many fans are surprised and shocked that on some matters, not even he can get his way when it comes to the WNBA.

That's okay, Adam.  Hang in there with us.  We'll hang in there with you.  Why do fans follow losing teams for decades?  Because the victory will taste so much sweeter when they win it all, it will be more succulent, more effervescent than the dollar-store wine guzzled by the frontrunner fans of the world, a vintage well worth the wait.  Maybe we never win at all, but at least if we go down - we go down on our own terms, and not someone else's.  We WNBA fans know that the fight is worth it.

Friday, September 18, 2015

2015 Atlanta Dream overseas : an update


Here's what I've been able to find out about Atlanta Dream players playing overseas in 2015-16.

Matee Ajavon: Energa Torun, Poland
Carla Cortijo:  unknown
Cierra Burdick:  unknown
Sydney Carter:  unknown
Damiris Dantas:  unknown
Reshanda Gray:  Techmania Bettipaglia, Italy
Tiffany Hayes: Yakin Dogu University, Turkey
Aneika Henry:  Mersin, Turkey
Roneeka Hodges:  unknown
Sancho Lyttle:  rumored destination is UMMC (Ekaterinburg), Russia
Ariel Massengale:  unknown
Angel McCoughtry:  unknown
DeLisha Milton-Jones:  unknown
Shoni Schimmel:  expected to play overseas after spending last off-season stateside

Top Ten College Seniors Using Morris Points



Now that we're looking at the upcoming college season, in light of the last post it might be interesting to look at the college juniors that ranked the highest in Morris Points. 

We will only be looking at players from the power conferences...and Connecticut, which is a power conference team in a non-power conference.  If we were to expand this list to all players, Ruvanna Campbell at Illinois-Chicago would be the leader with +44.46.

1.  Breanna Stewart, F, 6-4, Connecticut:  + 43.35
2.  Brittney Martin, G, 6-0, Oklahoma State: + 38.67
3.  Lia Galdiera, G, 5-11, Washington State:  + 38.07 (will forego senior year to play in Europe)
4.  Ruth Hamblin, C, 6-6, Oregon State:  + 35.01
5.  Jillian Alleyne, F, 6-3, Oregon:  +32.57
6.  Moriah Jefferson, G, 5-7, Connecticut:  +29.32
7.  Niya Johnson, G, 5-8, Baylor:  +25.56
8.  Jamee Swan, F, 6-2, Colorado:  +21.63
9.  Talia Walton, F, 6-2, Washington:  +21.25
10.  Adut Bulgak, C, 6-4, Florida State: +21.23

Thursday, September 17, 2015

2015 WNBA Players Evaluated Using the Morris Points System



There's an article at FiveThirtyEight.com that had me thinking.  It was written about a year ago and it was called "The Hidden Value of the NBA Steal."  The point the writer makes is that if you want the best indicator of value a player has to a game, it's to look at how many steals he has.

Through his math, he concluded that with all other box score stats being equal

* an extra rebound is worth 1.7 points
* an extra assist is worth 2.2 points
* (one less) turnover is worth 5.4 points
* an extra block is worth 6.1 points
* a extra steal is worth 9.1 points.

For example, if a player averages 16 points and two steals per game, this player has the same impact - all else being equal - as a player that averages 25 points per game but just one steal.  If the first player and the second player are both missing from their teams, we expect the two teams to decline similarly.

The writer has no explanation for why an extra steal is worth 9.1 extra points.  You can come up with all kinds of theories.  Maybe a player who has more steals plays a lot better defense.  Maybe they're just smarter.  Maybe it's because that unlike rebounds, a certain number of which will go to a player because they happened to be in the right place in the right time, players have to make steals happen.  Steals can't be "replaced".

So even though the results of this NBA study might not be transferable to the WNBA, I figured what the hell.  Let's create an "average" WNBA player who has

8 points
3 rebounds
2 assists
1 turnovers
0 blocks
1 steal

This player will earn zero points in the system.  This is the per/game amount scored by the average WNBA player, aggregated over all games.

For every rebound past 3 rebounds, we'll give the player 1.7 points
For every assist past 2 assists, we'll give the player 2.2 points

...

and so on.

So a player that had the same statline as above but one extra rebound would score a +1.7.  A player who had one extra rebound and one extra assists would score a +4.1. (1.7 + 2.2.)  If the player has the same stateline as above but one few rebound, she would score a -1.7.

Let's call these points Morris Points after the author of the article above, Benjamin Morris.  So under this system, who are the highest ranking players per game and the lowest ranking?

(See table at bottom of post for results.)

The next question becomes, "Do the numbers pass the smell test? IF I were to present the first five or first ten players on this list as the WNBA's best players in 2015, would you believe it?"

It seems believable.

* It gives Candace Parker the highest rating at +44.22.  Note that this is a "per game" rating, so it doesn't imply that Parker is the MVP, merely that the Sparks are hurt more missing Parker than Chicago is hurt missing Delle Donne.  The second half of the season certainly proved that.

* At #2 is Delle Donne with +35.24.  Delle Donne is the MVP.

* We see some familiar names - Griner, Moore, CAtchings, McCoughtry - that we think of when we think of the best players.

* It has Sancho Lyttle ranked as #5 on a per-game basis, which explains the tailspin the Dream went in when she was off the roster.

* It puts Skylar Diggins at #10, which explains how much Tulsa was hurt by not having her.

* It puts Kiah Stokes at #21, and Jewell Loyd at #72.  The Morris Points system values Ramu Tokashiki over Jewell Loyd.  It gives both Tokashiki and Loyd negative value.  Loyd's turnovers and lack of steals really hurt her.

Does this "prove" anything?  I don't know. But it is good to talk about during the off-season.



1
LAS Candace Parker 44.22
2
CHI Elena Delle Donne 35.24
3
PHO Brittney Griner 26.33
4
MIN Maya Moore 25.86
5
ATL Sancho Lyttle 23.41
6
IND Tamika Catchings 21.45
7
ATL Angel McCoughtry 19.54
8
PHO DeWanna Bonner 19.05
9
MIN Sylvia Fowles 18.26
10
TUL Skylar Diggins 17.50
11
NYL Epiphanny Prince 16.86
12
WAS Emma Meesseman 14.05
13
CON Alex Bentley 13.92
14
TUL Riquna Williams 13.76
15
LAS Nneka Ogwumike 13.60
16
NYL Tina Charles 13.16
17
CHI Courtney Vandersloot 12.77
18
WAS LaToya Sanders 12.03
19
LAS Jantel Lavender 11.00
20
MIN Rebekkah Brunson 10.86
21
NYL Kiah Stokes 9.79
22
SAS Jia Perkins 9.61
23
TUL Courtney Paris 9.22
24
PHO Candice Dupree 8.95
25
CHI Cappie Pondexter 7.04
26
CON Kelsey Bone 6.58
27
TUL Karima Christmas 6.33
28
CHI Jessica Breland 6.08
29
SAS Sophia Young 5.93
30
IND Shenise Johnson 4.88
31
ATL Tiffany Hayes 4.39
32
TUL Plenette Pierson 4.21
33
TUL Odyssey Sims 4.11
34
TOT Erika de Souza 3.70
35
MIN Seimone Augustus 3.48
36
SAS Jayne Appel 3.24
37
CON Jasmine Thomas 3.19
38
WAS Stefanie Dolson 3.15
39
SEA Crystal Langhorne 2.99
40
SAS Kayla McBride 2.94
41
LAS Alana Beard 2.47
42
CON Alyssa Thomas 2.32
43
IND Marissa Coleman 1.76
44
WAS Kara Lawson 1.39
45
NYL Rebecca Allen 1.10
46
SEA Sue Bird 0.38
47
CON Camille Little -0.10
48
IND Shavonte Zellous -0.22
49
PHO Monique Currie -0.77
50
LAS Kristi Toliver -1.24
51
LAS Erin Phillips -1.31
52
IND Erlana Larkins -1.57
53
ATL Cierra Burdick -1.65
54
ATL Matee Ajavon -1.73
55
WAS Tierra Ruffin-Pratt -1.78
56
MIN Anna Cruz -1.85
57
PHO Mistie Bass -2.16
58
WAS Ivory Latta -2.24
59
SEA Abby Bishop -2.48
60
NYL Brittany Boyd -2.49
61
PHO Leilani Mitchell -2.54
62
SEA Ramu Tokashiki -2.75
63
TOT Damiris Dantas -2.97
64
MIN Lindsay Whalen -3.11
65
NYL Sugar Rodgers -3.61
66
IND Briann January -3.63
67
SAS Danielle Robinson -3.87
68
SEA Alysha Clark -3.93
69
CHI Clarissa Dos Santos -4.28
70
TOT Kalana Greene -4.30
71
CHI Allie Quigley -4.37
72
SEA Jewell Loyd -4.55
73
ATL Carla Cortijo -4.75
74
WAS Natasha Cloud -4.87
75
NYL Carolyn Swords -5.16
76
MIN Asjha Jones -5.36
77
WAS Tayler Hill -5.40
78
CON Shekinna Stricklen -5.55
79
SAS Alex Montgomery -5.58
80
NYL Tanisha Wright -5.66
81
IND Natalie Achonwa -5.76
82
LAS Ana Dabovic -5.80
83
LAS Marianna Tolo -5.82
84
LAS Temeka Johnson -6.08
85
PHO Cayla Francis -6.09
86
TOT Renee Montgomery -6.23
87
CON Elizabeth Williams -6.23
88
SEA Jenna O'Hea -6.34
89
CHI Tamera Young -6.49
90
CON Kayla Pedersen -6.62
91
IND Lynetta Kizer -6.83
92
SAS Sydney Colson -6.99
93
CON Chelsea Gray -7.02
94
TUL Vicki Baugh -7.38
95
PHO Noelle Quinn -7.42
96
SEA Markeisha Gatling -7.43
97
ATL Shoni Schimmel -7.51
98
ATL Aneika Henry -7.58
99
WAS Kia Vaughn -7.59
100
SAS Danielle Adams -7.66
101
TOT Jennifer Lacy -7.69
102
MIN Devereaux Peters -8.03
103
IND Layshia Clarendon -8.12
104
TUL Tiffany Jackson -8.53
105
NYL Essence Carson -8.62
106
SAS Dearica Hamby -8.92
107
TUL Brianna Kiesel -9.19
108
SEA Angel Goodrich -9.38
109
SAS Kayla Alexander -9.40
110
IND Natasha Howard -10.06
111
PHO Alex Harden -10.58
112
TUL Amanda Zahui B. -10.68
113
CHI Betnijah Laney -10.69
114
TUL Jordan Hooper -10.71
115
CHI Cheyenne Parker -10.85
116
ATL Roneeka Hodges -11.00
117
WAS Bria Hartley -11.28
118
SAS Valeriane Ayayi -11.67
119
IND Maggie Lucas -11.68
120
CON Kelly Faris -11.76
121
WAS Armintie Herrington -12.37
122
LAS Jennifer Hamson -12.37
123
NYL Swin Cash -12.46
124
PHO Tess Madgen -12.48
125
LAS Crystal Bradford -12.52
126
TOT Reshanda Gray -12.67
127
SEA Quanitra Hollingsworth -12.82
128
TUL Theresa Plaisance -12.89
129
CHI Jamierra Faulkner -12.90
130
LAS Farhiya Abdi -13.12
131
WAS Kayla Thornton -13.35
132
MIN Tricia Liston -13.45
133
IND Jeanette Pohlen -13.48
134
TOT Erica Wheeler -13.86
135
CON Nikki Greene -14.15
136
SEA Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis -14.25
137
NYL Candice Wiggins -14.58
138
ATL DeLisha Milton-Jones -14.68
139
ATL Sydney Carter -14.69
140
CHI Sasha Goodlett -14.88
141
TOT Samantha Logic -15.23
142
PHO Marta Xargay -15.38
143
ATL Nadia Colhado -15.48
144
NYL Avery Warley -15.97
145
IND Briana Gilbreath-Butler -16.13
146
LAS Andrea Hoover -16.17
147
PHO Shameka Christon -16.21
148
CHI Victoria Macaulay -16.48
149
MIN Jennifer O'Neill -16.62
150
WAS Ally Malott -16.89
151
MIN Monica Wright -17.01
152
CHI Jacki Gemelos -17.06
153
LAS Jasmine Lister -17.70
154
PHO Tiffany Bias -18.44
155
LAS Courtney Clements -19.50
156
MIN Shae Kelley -19.70
157
TOT Brittany Hrynko -21.37
158
CON Inga Orekhova -22.13
159
LAS Michelle Snow -23.40

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Thoughts on the potential Tulsa Shock relocation to Dallas


1.  The first thing that Tulsa Shock fans should realize - nothing is done yet.  Forget about the announcements on the Tulsa Shock website.  Forget about Bill Cameron and forget about the Tulsa World.  Until the moving vans are headed out of Tulsa, nothing is a done deal yet.  There are very few "hard and fast" rules in the universe and the (potential) relocation of a basketball team isn't physics.  We're just in the negotiations stage.

2.  Tulsa has already lost the 66ers, the D-league affiliate of the Oklahoma City Thunder.  According to John Klein - that guy at the Tulsa World that never wrote about the Shock except to say "good riddance" - the BOK Center wasn't an option for the Thunder because they only averaged 2,020 ticket sold during the 2013-14 season.  Losing the Shock will be the last tie of any sort between Tulsa and professional basketball.  Arena football moved out of Tulsa in 2012 and the replacement team shut down in 2014.

3.  Many Tulsans on the internet talk about Tulsa being a bad sports town, but the examples are hard to find.  Maybe the perception is more important than the reality.

4.  The Shock still have half a season to play at the BOK Center.  Perhaps the plan is for Bill Cameron and David Box to take a tax write-off.  The news that the team is moving certainly won't help the team move any tickets.

Really, Cameron/Box win either way.  If there's a fan resurgence, they pocket the increase in ticket sales.  If the fans turn their backs on the shock and it shows at the turnstile, it becomes, "See?  Told you we had to move."

5.  John Klein writes that it will be hard for the Shock to command the attention in the Dallas media market than they could in Tulsa.  However, he fails to write two numbers:

Tulsa population:  400,000
Dallas population:  1,300,000

By sheer numbers, it will be easier to draw fans in Dallas than Tulsa.  Interested Dallasites are already planning their season ticket purchases.  If Cameron/Box rent out the American Airlines Center, that could mean synergy with the Mavericks. 

6.  These numbers might be the most important ones to look at:

2012 Election Results


in Tulsa:  Romney 64 percent, Obama 36 percent
in Dallas:  Obama 57 percent, Romney 42 percent

The WNBA fanbase in probably the most liberal fanbase in any professional sport.  And Tulsa simply isn't a liberal city. It's a majority-white red city in a very red state.  Dallas is a minority-white blue city.  A WNBA team is simply more likely to find an audience in Dallas than it is in Tulsa.

When the Detroit Shock moved to Tulsa, four players decided not to travel with the team. Liz Cambage played a while in Tulsa, and then decided to stay in Australia.  I doubt the same will happen if Tulsa moves to Dallas.

7.  If Tulsa wants to save their team, the time is now and Tulsa will have to play hardball to do it.  Klein in his article in the Tulsa World mentioned that Tulsa could at least offer the WNBA civic pride and stability.  Having Tulsa be the Green Bay Packers of the WNBA is not out of the question.

If the city really wants WNBA basketball, it will have to show it.  The fans will have to make the effort because no one else is going to make it.  This will involve getting the #saveourshock hashtag in social media, this will involve networking the patrons of the arts and business in Tulsa, this will involve the city government, this will have to involve everyone, including John Klein and the Tulsa World.  

This should involve, at the very least:

a) a 2016 season ticket drive, so that Shock fans can show some hard numbers to the WNBA, and
b) a new owner to step up, one that has deep enough pockets so that the team can succeed there.

8. Unfortunately, Cameron and Box still own the team.  They can move it wherever they want.  Does Tulsa really want a replacement team, one that is guaranteed to be awful for another four years, one without the media drawing power of a Skylar Diggins?  That's a tough question with no easy answer.

9.  I wonder how much the staph infections that hit the team in 2010 and 2012 had to do with this move.

10.  Just remember:  hope isn't over.  The Dream have gone through not one, but two changes of franchise ownership.  And like I said, the team isn't moved until the moving vans head out.  As we learned with the Sparks, a month in basketball can be an eternity.










Friday, July 17, 2015

Some people take the threat of the Shock moving seriously

See those people up there wearing what look like yellow shirts?

Those are members of the Tulsa City Council.  The yellow shirts are "Save Our Shock" t-shirts.

I don't know whether or not there's any real intent to move the Shock out of Tulsa, but the Save our Shock movement is taking on momentum of its own.  Whether it's just to support the Shock or to prevent an actual move, it's a good thing to see people giving high priority to the Tulsa Shock.

.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Connecticut Sun gets marquee sponsorship


Remember how in an earlier post I claimed that Connecticut didn't have a jersey sponsorship because the team is named after the resort they played in?  Guess I was wrong!

The Sun just announced a marquee sponsorship with Frontier Communications.  The new agreement will "be prominently positioned on the front of Connecticut Sun home and road jerseys" according to the agreement.  The brand will be placed on the basketball stanchions as well.  (I always wanted to know what those things were that held up the goal.)

This leaves Atlanta, Seattle, and Washington as the only teams that do not have a jersey sponsorship - I believe that nine jersey sponsorships are the most the league has ever had.  The only team that has never had a jersey sponsorship is Atlanta.


Rumors of Tulsa relocating to Dallas?



A blog posted in the Tulsa World discussed the possibility that the 2015 season might be the Shock's final season in Tulsa.  According to Dillon Holingsworth:

"A persistent rumor is circulating: At least a portion of the Shock’s ownership is interested in moving the team to Dallas."

He doesn't say where the rumor is coming from, just that it exists. Dillon Hollingsworth decided to reach out to Shock ownership, but aside from one minority owner who stated that such plans were "erroneous", he was unable to reach majority owner Bill Cameron.

That shouldn't be a surprise.  Majority owners of WNBA clubs tend to be very busy people and they tend not to sit down with reporters as a general rule.  (Else, the media requests would never end.)  I also don't agree with the statement "If the rumor was false, one might think the owners would want to squash it publicly."  As anyone who has read a newspaper knows, a squashed rumor is often used to stoke a fire - "hey, there must be some credence to the rumor; else why the push to deny it?"

More interesting is the target of this rumored move - Dallas.  Dallas hasn't generally been connected with the WNBA or WNBA moves in the past.  You'd think the owner of a prospective Dallas franchise might be Mark Cuban, but he's shown no interest in owning one. (At least he's not negative about it.)  It could be that he might be interested in having an existing WNBA team rent his arena over the summer, so why not Tulsa?

Dallas does have some women's basketball background.  It was the previous home of the Dallas Diamonds back in the last 1970s, when the Women's Pro Basketball League existed.  The Diamonds were the first pro team of Nancy Lieberman.  Dallas never did draw well, but none of the old WBL teams drew well.

If a team in the WNBA were to relocate, wouldn't San Francisco be the natural target?  Joe Lacob showed interest in acquiring the Los Angeles Sparks, the longer-standing rumor is that he's in line for the next WNBA team to relocate.  That rumor might be as true as the Tulsa to Dallas rule.   San Francisco with its lesbian and forward-thinking population would be the natural target for a WNBA team.

How likely is this rumor to be true?  Hard to say.  No one would have thought that the Los Angeles Sparks would have an ownership crisis at the end of the 2013, but that happened. If such a thing does happen, it will appropriately hit like the lightning bolt in the Shock logo.


Wednesday, July 8, 2015

A brief history of jersey sponsorships in the WNBA


June 1, 2009:  Phoenix announces the very first WNBA jersey sponsorship.  LifeLock, an internet identity-theft protection company, enters a deal with Phoenix which will replace the Mercury logo across the jersey with the LifeLock brand.  The sponsorship gets a lot of media attention.  The announcement is made just before the start of the 2009 WNBA regular season.  It would work out well for LifeLock in 2009 as the Mercury would win the WNBA Championship that year.

June 5, 2009:  Not to be outdone, the Los Angeles Sparks enter a jersey sponsorship with Farmers Insurance.  The Farmers Insurance name and logo will appear across the jersey.  The deal is announced one day before the start of the regular season on June 6.

April 21, 2010:  The Seattle Storm enter an agreement with Microsoft for a jersey sponsorship.  Rather than the Microsoft name and logo, the sponsorship deal places the logo for the search engine Bing across the front of the jersey.

June 2, 2010:  With the 2010 WNBA season already underway, the New York Liberty enter a jersey sponsorship with the Foxwoods Casino.  The Foxwoods name and logo will appear across the jersey, bringing the number of WNBA teams with jersey sponsors to four. (*)

April 7, 2011:  The Washington Mystics move the total number of teams having jersey sponsors to five, signing a long-term deal with Inova Health System that is described as "the largest deal in the club's 13-year history".  The Inova logo will be substituted for the team name.

August 22, 2011:  The WNBA signs a long term deal with Boost Mobile.  This is a league-wide jersey sponsorship which places the Boost Mobile logo on every jersey.  Initially, the logo is placed on 10 team jerseys, the only exceptions being Phoenix and San Antonio which have existing business relationships with other long-distance providers.  As of this writing, the jersey sponsorship is still in place.

October 19, 2012:  The Indiana Fever announces a partnership with athletic retailer Finish Line for prominent logo placement similar to other deals across the wNBA.

End 2012:  The deals with Farmers Insurance and Foxwoods Casino expire.  The loss of the deal with Farmers Insurance is a major reason why Paula Madison would turn the Sparks over to the league at the end of the 2013 regular season.  (The Sparks would soon find new ownership.) At the beginning of the 2013 season, the team names will reappear in the front of Sparks and Liberty jerseys.

January 31, 2013:  The Tulsa Shock enter a partnership where the Osage Casino logo will appear across the Shock jerseys.  Five teams - Indiana, Phoenix, Seattle, Tulsa, and Washington - will have jersey sponsorships over the 2013 season.

End 2013:  The deal between Phoenix and LifeLock is not renewed.

January 14, 2014:  The San Antonio Silver Stars make two announcements.  The first is that they will shortening the team name to the Stars.  The second is a sponsorship with locally based grocer H-E-B where the business logo replaces the team name.

February 3, 2014:  The Phoenix Mercury enter into an exclusive partnership with Casino Arizona and Talking Stick Resort including branding on the Mercury home and away jerseys.

March 17, 2014:  The Mayo Clinic enters an expanded partnership with the Minnesota Lynx.  WNBA President Laurel Richie announces the partnership as "the biggest partnership of this sort that we have ever had."  Six WNBA teams will wear logos in the coming 2014 seasons.

May 7, 2014: It is announced that Microsoft/Bing will no longer be a jersey sponsor of the Seattle Storm, ending a four year deal.

End 2014:  The deal between Washington and Inova Healthcare runs out. In the 2015 season, the team name will return to the front of Mystics jerseys.

May 14, 2015:  The Chicago Sky gets its first jersey sponsor.  It is announced as the biggest corporate sponsorship in the team's 10-year history, a expanded relationship with Deerfield-based specialty steel distributor Magellan.  However, in a difference from other sponsorship deals, the Magellan name will not replace the team's name on the jerseys - the Magellan logo is located on the jersey's upper left shoulder.

May 21, 2015:  EquiTrust Insurance enters a partnership with the Los Angeles Sparks for a jersey sponsorship.  The EquiTrust logo will replace the team name on Sparks jerseys.

June 4, 2015:  It is announced one day before the start of the 2015 regular season that DraftKings.com will be a marquee partner of the New York Liberty.  This includes a logo substitution for the team name on the jersey.  Eight teams now have jersey sponsorships in the WNBA.

June 20, 2015:  The Indiana Fever renew their deal with Finish Line.

---

(*)  Technically, the Connecticut Sun's jersey is sponsored - or rather, the very "Sun" name itself represents a sponsorship as the team is owned by the Mohegan Indian tribe and plays in the Mohegan Sun Casino Resort, thus the name.

Excluding Connecticut, the only WNBA team not to have had a jersey sponsorship at some time in its history is Atlanta.

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Are there women's basketball programs that outdraw men's programs? (2015 edition)



When I was writing for SA, I posted an article about women's basketball programs that had higher average attendance than men's programs.  Now, with new data from the NCAA, I have updated the data to the end of the 2014-15 season!

So which women's basketball programs over the past five years have been more popular than the men's basketball programs at the same school over the same five years?  As it turns out, there are six schools where the women outdraw the men.

Lowest Ratio of Men's Average Attendance to Women's Average Attendance, 2010-15


  Marist 0.73
  Delaware 0.88
  Tenn-Martin 0.90
  Baylor 0.90
  Notre Dame 0.93
  Maine 0.94
  Hartford 1.05
  Bowling Green 1.09
  McNeese St. 1.11
  North Dakota 1.12


Marist, Delaware, Tennessee-Martin, Baylor and Notre Dame all have programs where the women outdraw the men.  (Apologists arriving in three...two...one....).  However, there is greater variance in men's basketball attendance than women's basketball attendance and when men's schools have good years they can eclipse any women's basketball program out there. 

Of course, if there are programs where the women consistently outdraw the men, there must be programs at the bottom of the list where the women's program is eclipsed by the men's.  And as you can tell from the numbers posted, the scale is much greater.



Highest Ratio of Men's Average Attendance to Women's Average Attendance, 2010-15


  Saint Louis 12.17
  Georgetown 13.03
  UNLV 13.10
  Memphis 14.03
  Utah St. 14.82
  Creighton 15.59
  Providence 17.39
  San Diego St. 17.88
  Brigham Young 19.75
  Syracuse 28.51


Note that there are programs where the women's program is segregated to an older gymnasium with a reduced seating capacity.  Georgetown, Providence, and Creighton are all guilty of that.  But would those programs be any better off playing in the men's arenas?  Look at poor Syracuse at the bottom.  The men can fill their cavernous dome; the women are almost an afterthought.

Some other numbers of interest:

There is only one women's basketball school that has increased its attendance every year from 2009 to 2015.  That's Furman.  In 2009-10, they averaged 257 students per game, and have steadily increased to 312, 372, 422, 428, 461 and 561.  Furthermore, they are the only school that has increased its attendance from 2010 to 2015.

There are other schools, besides Furman that have increased their attendance over the last four seasons.  Long Beach State and Longwood have shown increases in attendance each season from 2011 to 2015.

But the big winner from 2011-2015 is South Carolina.  The numbers have ballooned under Dawn Staley's program, moving from 3139 per game to 3952, then 6171, then 12293 per game.  The numbers in 2014-15 were good enough to make South Carolina the #1 program in women's average attendance for 2014-15.

Of course, there are programs that moving in the other direction.  What follows are the schools where average attendance has decreased over each of the last four seasons.

Boston University
Connecticut
Georgetown
Loyola (Md.)
Murray State
New Mexico
Seattle
Texas Christian
Texas Tech
Texas-San Antonio
UC-Riverside
Vanderbilt

There are some big names on this list.  There's no name bigger than that of Connecticut.  It would take Connecticut fans to explain why the most successful women's basketball program in the United States has been decreasing in attendance since 2011.

For your amusement, the entire list follows.  We use a "sum of averages" method to derive the final ratio.




MBB WBB



2010-15 2010-15







  Marist
7111 9742
0.73
  Delaware
12473 14102
0.88
  Tenn-Martin
8894 9905
0.90
  Baylor
35069 38878
0.90
  Notre Dame
40107 43341
0.93
  Maine
6680 7115
0.94
  Hartford
7977 7630
1.05
  Bowling Green
9510 8736
1.09
  McNeese St.
5417 4892
1.11
  North Dakota
8929 7988
1.12
  Middle Tenn. St. 22881 20386
1.12
  Stanford
24606 21213
1.16
  Gonzaga
30537 25973
1.18
  Texas A&M
34857 28762
1.21
  Toledo
22378 18406
1.22
  AR Little Rock
14542 11696
1.24
  Connecticut
55758 44462
1.25
  Dartmouth
4487 3502
1.28
  Tennessee Tech 8999 7013
1.28
  Central Arkansas 6387 4946
1.29
  Montana
19856 14985
1.33
  James Madison
17535 13066
1.34
  South Dakota
8542 6334
1.35
  Miss. Valley St.
11590 8492
1.36
  Lehigh
6228 4548
1.37
  Army
6292 4590
1.37
  Abilene Christian 1241 905
1.37
  Tennessee
82669 59816
1.38
  Hampton
16647 12028
1.38
  Canisius
7406 5350
1.38
  Iowa St.
67005 48350
1.39
  Umass Lowell
933 661
1.41
  Texas Tech
39310 27843
1.41
  Wisc. Green Bay 16715 11833
1.41
  Alcorn St.
5210 3640
1.43
  SE Louisiana
3434 2390
1.44
  South Dakota St 15102 10441
1.45
  Fla Gulf Coast
14346 9900
1.45
  Grambling St.
6632 4543
1.46
  Cent. Michigan
10217 6921
1.48
  Texas St.
9687 6561
1.48
  Louisiana Tech
17293 11706
1.48
  Penn St.
36367 24454
1.49
  South Alabama
11040 7410
1.49
  Chattanooga
16253 10740
1.51
  Portland St.
4305 2839
1.52
  Navy
10950 7059
1.55
  Wyoming
26377 16996
1.55
  Stetson
5459 3517
1.55
  Sam Houston St. 5649 3636
1.55
  Binghamton
14210 9120
1.56
  MD Eastern Shore 10948 7011
1.56
  N.J.I.T.
3009 1914
1.57
  New Orleans
2914 1842
1.58
  Eastern Illinois
6031 3802
1.59
  SIU-Edwardsville 8178 5103
1.60
  Texas A&M C.C. 6897 4302
1.60
  Prairie View A&M 9931 6153
1.61
  St. Francis (PA)
5018 3093
1.62
  Colgate
3243 1969
1.65
  Drake
19270 11586
1.66
  Oklahoma
49066 29350
1.67
  Nicholls St.
3551 2114
1.68
  Purdue
63358 37615
1.68
  E. Tennessee St. 14425 8523
1.69
  Sacred Heart
3202 1883
1.70
  Florida A&M
5612 3292
1.70
  Georgia Southern 8320 4873
1.71
  South Carolina
49492 28751
1.72
  LA Monroe
7670 4410
1.74
  Texas Pan Amer. 4261 2433
1.75
  Idaho St.
9383 5332
1.76
  New Hampshire 3685 2086
1.77
  Montana St.
12597 7128
1.77
  Houston Baptist 3370 1898
1.78
  MD Baltimore Cty. 6609 3685
1.79
  TX San Antonio
6321 3517
1.80
  Jackson St.
6574 3635
1.81
  Youngstown St.
11562 6348
1.82
  Bethune-Cookman 4823 2616
1.84
  Arkansas St.
13894 7499
1.85
  Southern U.
6361 3413
1.86
  Duke
46570 24939
1.87
  Campbell
8277 4432
1.87
  Alabama A&M
7471 3981
1.88
  East. Michigan
4913 2611
1.88
  Presbyterian
4339 2301
1.89
  Indiana St.
27125 14271
1.90
  Tulane
9475 4895
1.94
  Sacramento St.
3619 1866
1.94
  South Carolina-Upstate 3434 1766
1.94
  North Florida
8746 4453
1.96
  TCU
22798 11599
1.97
  Central Conn. St. 8499 4209
2.02
  Holy Cross
7944 3898
2.04
  Drexel
9468 4638
2.04
  S. Carolina St.
3802 1858
2.05
  Fairleigh Dickinson 3681 1784
2.06
  N.C. Central
8461 4081
2.07
  Georgia
35184 16942
2.08
  Samford
5599 2690
2.08
  Howard
5578 2671
2.09
  Texas Southern
9717 4645
2.09
  Alabama St.
9510 4546
2.09
  Stephen F. Austin 13221 6308
2.10
  North Kentucky
10681 5086
2.10
  Lipscomb
9720 4568
2.13
  Michigan St.
73529 34509
2.13
  Missouri State
31242 14588
2.14
  Louisville
107574 49871
2.16
  Northwestern St. 7984 3698
2.16
  Delaware St.
5594 2576
2.17
  Charleston S.
4277 1935
2.21
  Liberty
10756 4819
2.23
  Coppin St.
4970 2223
2.24
  Rutgers
26081 11657
2.24
  High Point
7003 3125
2.24
  Boston U.
4212 1877
2.24
  Northern Illinois 5511 2452
2.25
  Incarnate Word
966 428
2.26
  Georgia St.
7796 3432
2.27
  Nebraska
60754 26551
2.29
  Loyola (MD)
5299 2313
2.29
  New Mexico
73829 31972
2.31
  UC Davis
9727 4166
2.33
  Kennesaw St.
6500 2736
2.38
  Oregon St.
24651 10372
2.38
  LSU
41274 17354
2.38
  AR Pine Bluff
16388 6857
2.39
  Mercer
12820 5364
2.39
  Princeton
12480 5205
2.40
  Eastern Wash.
7661 3176
2.41
  Norfolk St.
10542 4365
2.42
  TX Arlington
8833 3647
2.42
  Morehead St.
12885 5305
2.43
  Northern Colorado 7816 3203
2.44
  Harvard
9151 3750
2.44
  Fresno St.
33861 13658
2.48
  Brown
5024 2016
2.49
  Old Dominion
34277 13651
2.51
  CSU Northridge
5088 2025
2.51
  N.C. A&T
10112 4003
2.53
  DePaul
35698 14110
2.53
  Western Ill.
7207 2834
2.54
  Radford
6629 2599
2.55
  UC Riverside
4278 1674
2.56
  Maryland
65833 25748
2.56
  Arizona St.
30998 11983
2.59
  St. Peter's
4375 1686
2.59
  IUPUI
5330 2040
2.61
  Gardner-Webb
7468 2829
2.64
  Albany
13613 5154
2.64
  Tennessee St.
9959 3768
2.64
  Savannah St.
8110 3065
2.65
  San Jose St.
8342 3149
2.65
  Iowa
66206 24932
2.66
  Lamar
13017 4842
2.69
  Bryant
5339 1961
2.72
  Northern Iowa
23285 8490
2.74
  Auburn
32731 11910
2.75
  Chicago St.
3833 1392
2.75
  Longwood
5791 2100
2.76
  Idaho
6560 2375
2.76
  Iona
11646 4189
2.78
  Vanderbilt
56533 20178
2.80
  Miami (OH)
7732 2752
2.81
  N.C. Asheville
8308 2944
2.82
  Buffalo
15139 5362
2.82
  Columbia
7414 2610
2.84
  Mizzou KC
7144 2492
2.87
  Wagner
7892 2738
2.88
  Elon
6579 2272
2.90
  Rider
7568 2601
2.91
  South Florida
21275 7258
2.93
  Florida St.
38393 13006
2.95
  Nebraska Omaha 5283 1770
2.98
  Texas
57999 19353
3.00
  IPFW
7157 2376
3.01
  West. Kentucky
21868 7223
3.03
  Jacksonville St.
7552 2461
3.07
  East Carolina
23156 7522
3.08
  Florida Intl.
6259 2033
3.08
  Southern Miss
19800 6350
3.12
  Monmouth
8647 2770
3.12
  Lafayette
8673 2762
3.14
  Kansas St.
62637 19944
3.14
  SE Missouri St.
11147 3542
3.15
  West. Michigan
13623 4297
3.17
  Jacksonville
7025 2193
3.20
  Florida Atlantic
7657 2388
3.21
  Northern Arizona 5675 1767
3.21
  Furman
7243 2244
3.23
  Quinnipiac
9346 2894
3.23
  Pacific
11677 3598
3.25
  Virginia
55421 17052
3.25
  Troy
8821 2709
3.26
  Duquesne
15673 4783
3.28
  Morgan St.
9875 3008
3.28
  Appalachian St.
7787 2343
3.32
  Robert Morris
6381 1919
3.33
  Vermont
11981 3591
3.34
  Mississippi St.
33616 10024
3.35
  UTEP
41336 12268
3.37
  Oral Roberts
19988 5929
3.37
  Towson
9098 2693
3.38
  Yale
6780 2006
3.38
  Southern Utah
10485 3099
3.38
  North Dakota St 15187 4464
3.40
  Murray St.
23714 6947
3.41
  Stony Brook
9024 2640
3.42
  Cal Poly
11063 3230
3.43
  Ball St.
15999 4624
3.46
  Virginia Tech
34085 9835
3.47
  Colorado
43980 12465
3.53
  American U.
7644 2166
3.53
  California
40575 11417
3.55
  CSU Bakersfield
7004 1969
3.56
  Coastal Carolina 9157 2560
3.58
  Charlotte
27650 7711
3.59
  N.C. Wilmington 17564 4875
3.60
  Fordham
10710 2967
3.61
  Illinois St.
26285 7269
3.62
  Austin Peay
13399 3702
3.62
  Long Island
8066 2225
3.63
  North Texas
16135 4410
3.66
  Kentucky
116959 31896
3.67
  St. Joseph's
20730 5646
3.67
  Boise St.
27932 7518
3.72
  Minnesota
61058 16422
3.72
  Ohio St.
79282 21302
3.72
  Winthrop
8148 2183
3.73
  Colorado St.
23552 6265
3.76
  West Virginia
48994 13012
3.77
  Oklahoma St.
47794 12641
3.78
  Hofstra
10714 2824
3.79
  Hawaii
31344 8246
3.80
  Fairfield
11076 2913
3.80
  San Francisco
10000 2625
3.81
  Washington
39352 10302
3.82
  Belmont
11252 2930
3.84
  Temple
31739 8251
3.85
  Mount St. Mary's 6204 1596
3.89
  UCSB
13733 3514
3.91
  Wisconsin
85637 21887
3.91
  South. Methodist 20023 5110
3.92
  Rice
8457 2140
3.95
  Santa Clara
9755 2468
3.95
  Geo. Washington 13570 3399
3.99
  St. Francis (NY)
4033 975
4.14
  Oregon
37242 9003
4.14
  Niagara
7252 1743
4.16
  Western Carolina 9036 2163
4.18
  Pepperdine
6241 1478
4.22
  USC
20826 4923
4.23
  Miami (FL)
25401 5977
4.25
  San Diego
10949 2553
4.29
  UCLA
39508 9011
4.38
  Wichita St.
52669 11410
4.62
  Georgia Tech
31174 6697
4.65
  Long Beach St.
17152 3672
4.67
  Oakland
14369 3050
4.71
  UC Irvine
9385 1989
4.72
  Boston College
22760 4739
4.80
  Wisc. Milwaukee 16555 3417
4.84
  Washington St.
22783 4681
4.87
  Cornell
10430 2139
4.88
  CSU Fullerton
6130 1245
4.92
  Portland
10966 2222
4.94
  Wofford
7687 1533
5.01
  Manhattan
8059 1594
5.06
  Loyola Marymnt 11059 2177
5.08
  Illinois-Chicago
14843 2893
5.13
  Northwestern
31285 6089
5.14
  William & Mary
13106 2532
5.18
  Northeastern
8056 1547
5.21
  Akron
16866 3220
5.24
  Air Force
11066 2079
5.32
  Nevada
28462 5340
5.33
  Pittsburgh
50887 9488
5.36
  Rhode Island
22502 4194
5.37
  Dayton
62193 11560
5.38
  St. John's
38688 7079
5.47
  St. Bonaventure 19377 3529
5.49
  Pennsylvania
19831 3569
5.56
  Loyola (IL)
10656 1904
5.60
  Kent St.
15679 2765
5.67
  Michigan
59228 10424
5.68
  New Mexico St.
29743 5145
5.78
  Houston
17194 2880
5.97
  Mississippi
32725 5461
5.99
  George Mason
24617 4057
6.07
  Seattle
14536 2386
6.09
  Alabama
55557 9071
6.12
  Detroit
11991 1917
6.26
  Evansville
23278 3705
6.28
  Denver
17242 2711
6.36
  St. Mary's
14432 2247
6.42
  Missouri
51858 8051
6.44
  Valparaiso
15817 2422
6.53
  Eastern Kentucky 12478 1906
6.55
  La Salle
12478 1904
6.55
  Bucknell
15292 2320
6.59
  Kansas
82139 12356
6.65
  North Carolina
96260 14458
6.66
  Xavier
49922 7458
6.69
  N.C. St.
71715 10657
6.73
  Tulsa
23972 3503
6.84
  Arkansas
68272 9895
6.90
  Utah Valley
11551 1651
7.00
  Indiana
82780 11732
7.06
  UCF
26001 3535
7.36
  Florida
53338 7141
7.47
  Bradley
34978 4682
7.47
  LA Lafayette
17052 2273
7.50
  Ohio
31513 4072
7.74
  Weber St.
32584 4146
7.86
  UAB
21411 2679
7.99
  Richmond
29280 3621
8.09
  Marshall
27092 3313
8.18
  Arizona
70405 8496
8.29
  Grand Canyon
5413 644
8.41
  N.C. Greensboro 15728 1871
8.41
  Southern Ill.
22614 2690
8.41
  Cleveland St.
12771 1493
8.55
  Davidson
19819 2273
8.72
  Wright St.
21108 2400
8.80
  Charleston
18373 2071
8.87
  Clemson
38981 4317
9.03
  Illinois
75748 8190
9.25
  Siena
32445 3502
9.26
  Marquette
74741 7603
9.83
  Cincinnati
42567 4270
9.97
  Massachusetts
23931 2373
10.08
  Utah
47839 4321
11.07
  Wake Forest
46173 4157
11.11
  Seton Hall
35836 3192
11.23
  Villanova
46038 4054
11.36
  VA Commonwealth 37339 3223
11.59
  Butler
36837 3080
11.96
  Saint Louis
37189 3055
12.17
  Georgetown
53169 4082
13.03
  UNLV
67356 5143
13.10
  Memphis
79374 5658
14.03
  Utah St.
44062 2974
14.82
  Creighton
82271 5276
15.59
  Providence
39659 2281
17.39
  San Diego St.
61006 3412
17.88
  Brigham Young
82124 4159
19.75
  Syracuse
118476 4155
28.51






Abilene Christian, Grand Canyon, Incarnate Word and 
Umass Lowell only have one year of data, the 2014-15 year.