Rhode island Rams (Round 2)

Preview

Date/Time: Saturday February 19th @ 6:00 PM ET at The Charles E. Smith Center in Washington, DC.
TV: NBC Sports Washington / ESPN+
2021-22 Projected Record: 16-13, 7-10 (9th in A10)

Offensive Efficiency: 235th (KenPom), 251st (Bart Torvik)
Defensive Efficiency: 43rd (KenPom), 38th (Bart Torvik)
Offensive Shot Quality Rank: 153rd
Defensive Shot Quality Rank: 71st
Rim & 3 Rate: 79% (240th in country)
Pace: 210th (KenPom), 213th (Bart Torvik)

Projected Starting Rotation:
Makhel Mitchell (Sophomore; Baltimore, MD) 11 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 1.4 APG, 2.7 BPG; 55% FG, 55% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 11 points, 7 rebounds, 2 assists, 6 blocks; 5-6 FG, 1-4 FT in 30 minutes.

Jeremy Sheppard (RS Senior; Richmond, VA) 10.6 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 3.1 APG, 1.4 SPG; 38% FG, 36% 3-PT, 82% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 12 points, 2 assists, 2 steals; 4-9 FG, 0-4 3-PT, 4-6 FT in 29 minutes.

Makhi Mitchell (Sophomore; Baltimore, MD) 9.7 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 1.6 APG, 1 SPG, 1.3 BPG; 52% FG, 31% 3-PT, 52% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 4 points, 10 rebounds, 2 steals; 1-3 FG, 0-1 3-PT, 2-12 FT in 24 minutes.

Ishmael Leggett (Freshman; Washington, DC) 8.5 PPG, 3 RPG, 1.8 APG, 1.3 SPG; 37% FG, 33% 3-PT, 70% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 11 points, 9 rebounds; 2-9 FG, 0-4 3-PT, 7-8 FT in 32 minutes.

Ishmael El-Amin (Senior; Minneapolis, MN) 6.6 PPG, 1.6 RPG, 1.2 APG; 43% FG, 44% 3-PT, 93% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 7 points, 2 steals; 3-8 FG, 1-4 3-PT in 31 minutes.

Projected Off the Bench Rotation:
Antwan Walker (RS Junior; Washington, DC) 8.1 PPG, 4.7 RPG, 1.3 APG; 59% FG, 46% 3-PT, 52% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 8 points, 5 rebounds; 4-9 FG, 0-2 3-PT in 26 minutes.

Malik Martin (Junior; Staten Island, NY) 6.7 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 1.1 APG; 46% FG, 23% 3-PT, 72% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: DNP (Right Knee Injury)

Jalen Carey (RS Sophomore; Harlem, NY) 5.8 PPG, 1.8 RPG, 1.1 APG; 46% FG, 56% 3-PT, 78% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 3 points; 1-5 FG, 1-3 3-PT in 12 minutes.

Sebastian Thomas (Freshman; Providence, RI) 2.7 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 2.1 APG; 38% FG, 22% 3-PT, 27% FT
       Game 1 @ URI: 5 points, 2 assists; 2-2 FG, 1-1 FT in 11 minutes.

Team Conference Stats (in A10 play):
Blocked Shots Per Game: 5.67 (1st in A10)
Opponent Field Goal Percentage: 39.9% (2nd in A10)
Combined Team Rebounds Per Game: 35.8 RPG (3rd in A10)
Scoring Defense: 65.3 PPG (3rd in A10)
Opponent 3-Point FG Percentage: 32.2% (4th in A10)
Team Defensive Rebounds Per Game: 26.3 (T-4th in A10)
Steals Per Game: 6.67 (5th in A10)
Assists Per Game: 14.08 (T-6th in A10)
Turnover Margin: 0 (6th in A10)
Opponent FT Percentage: 70.8% (7th in A10)
Scoring Margin: -1.2 PPG (8th in A10)
Team 3-Point FG Percentage: 34.1% (T-8th in A10)
Team Field Goal Percentage: 43.4% (T-8th in A10)
Team Offensive Rebounds Per Game: 9.5 (8th in A10)
Rebounding Margin: -1.1 RPG (9th in A10)
Assist/Turnover Ratio: 1.03 (10th in A10)
Combined Opponent Team Rebounds Per Game: 36.8 RPG (11th in A10)
Scoring Offense: 64.2 PPG (12th in A10)
3-Point FGs Made Per Game: 5 (14th in A10)
Team FT Percentage: 58.4% (14th in A10)

The above stats reveal (as expected) that URI's strengths lean heavily on the defensive end. They don't put up a ton of points - the Rams have hit 70 points just 3 times during conference play. It's worth noting that they are 3-0 in those contests so a definite goal going into tomorrow is keeping them in the 60s. Expect them to pound it inside with the Mitchell twins whenever they get the chance. URI is by no means a poor 3 point shooting team, but they are definitely low volume, making the fewest per game in the league. They are obviously atrocious from the line as we saw in the last game (345th nationally) and having Noel/Ricky back will be a big difference as that gives us 10 more fouls to work with.

While putting up enough points and neutralizing the rebounding battle the best we can are the two biggest concerns, it's worth noting from the above that URI gives up basically as many rebounds as they come down with per game. We saw that in the previous matchup, as the Rams outrebounded us by just 1 and that was without Ricky. Defensive boards are of course less concerning than offensive ones. URI ranks middle of the pack in offensive rebounding, and we conceded just 10 in the last matchup. If we can keep that number in the 5-10 range, our chances certainly go up (assuming they aren't hitting a ridiculous percentage of shots).

Individual Conference Stats (in A10 play):

Scoring:
None in the top 25. URI doesn't score a ton per game.

Rebounding:
Makhi Mitchell - 7.8 rpg (T-5th in A10)
Makhel Mitchell - 6.1 rpg (20th in A10)

Field Goal Percentage:
Antwan Walker - 55.3% (9th in A10) -> Walker has been pretty efficient overall. I don't know why URI doesn't play him more minutes personally. I think the Mitchell twins take up too much space down low at times and Walker is more mobile.
Makhel Mitchell - 54.5% (10th in A10)

3-PT Field Goal Percentage:
Ishmael El-Amin - 40% (T-17th in A10)

Free Throw Percentage:
Jeremy Sheppard - 74.2% (22nd in A10) -> despite being bad from the line overall as a team, URI has a few decent FT shooters. We should avoid Sheppard/El-Amin late in the game if it comes down to the wire.

3-PT Field Goals Per Game:
None. Not unexpected given they are a low volume 3-PT shooting team. JB squared combined nearly average the same number of made threes per game as the entirety of URI in conference play.

Assists:
Jeremy Sheppard - 3.4 apg (14th in A10)
Sebastian Thomas - 2.3 apg (T-23rd in A10)

Blocked Shots:
Makhel Mitchell - 2.6 bpg (3rd in A10)
Makhi Mitchell - 1.6 bpg (T-7th in A10)
Malik Martin - 0.5 bpg (T-24th in A10)

Steals:
Jeremy Sheppard - 1.4 spg (T-13th in A10)
Makhi Mitchell - 1.3 spg (T-16th in A10)

Haslametrics Preview:

URI IN POSSESSION:
The G. Washington defense appears to have a small advantage on the URI offense at this end of the court. G. Washington is currently 167th in the country in defensive efficiency, while URI nationally comes in at #251 in offensive efficiency.

SHOT SELECTION: These two units prefer similar shot locations on this end of the court. The URI offense leans strongly in favor of an inside attack, while the G. Washington defense similarly tends to allow more chances from inside the paint. Against the G. Washington defense, this site projects that the shot makeup of the URI offense will be 25.7% three-pointers (11.7% below the D1 average), 25.3% mid-range jumpers (2.9% below the D1 average), and 49.0% near-proximity twos (14.6% above the D1 average).

SHOOTING PERCENTAGE: URI has been a bit above the D1 average in floor shooting this year and is rated our #110 team in overall field goal percentage. Meanwhile, the G. Washington defense rates as somewhat average in defensive field goal conversion rate (ranked #166 nationally in that category). On this end of the court, the URI offense has a notable advantage in near-proximity shooting, while the G. Washington defense has the edge in both three-point shooting and mid-range shooting. This site expects URI to shoot 30.5% from three (3.9% below the D1 average), 27.6% from the mid-range (10.6% below the D1 average), 59.5% from near-proximity locations (1.0% above the D1 average), and 44.0% overall (0.2% above the D1 average).

REBOUNDING: URI may have a modest rebounding edge on this end of the floor. URI seems to be a bit better than the D1 norm when it comes to offensive rebounding. They are also somewhat above-average at turning second-chance opportunities into points (rated 80th nationally in second-chance conversion percentage). The opposition here, G. Washington, has the look of a team that is pretty mediocre on the defensive boards, and they're similarly so-so in defensive second-chance conversion rate (ranked #174 in the country in that department).

TURNOVERS: URI may struggle with turnovers against this G. Washington defense. On offense, URI will typically have well more than an average amount of ball-control issues. Their ratings for field goal attempt rate (ranked 343rd in the country) and potential quick points allowed off of steals (337th) are both unquestionably shameful. Meanwhile, the G. Washington D is neither aggressive nor conservative from a turnovers perspective.

FREE THROWS: There's a bit of a push here in this category. URI is a team that likes to get to the charity stripe frequently (30th in the country in free throw attempt rate), though they're absolutely pitiful marksmen from the line (64.8%, 347th in the country). Meanwhile, the G. Washington D does a solid job keeping foes off the foul line and ranks 116th in the country in defensive free throw attempt rate.

G. WASHINGTON IN POSSESSION:
The URI defense will very likely have a solid upper hand on the G. Washington offense in this particular matchup. This site rates URI to be 56th in the nation in defensive efficiency, while G. Washington is currently our #241 squad in offensive efficiency.

SHOT SELECTION: The shot preferences of these two teams are somewhat similar on this end of the floor. Both schemes are relatively balanced, and neither the outside shot nor the inside shot will be consistently employed/allowed by either ball-club. Against the URI defense, this site forecasts that the shot breakdown of the G. Washington offense will be 39.8% three-pointers (2.4% above the D1 average), 22.1% mid-range jumpers (6.1% below the D1 average), and 38.1% near-proximity twos (3.7% above the D1 average).

SHOOTING PERCENTAGE: G. Washington rates in the middle of the Division I pack when it comes to floor shooting and is currently ranked #209 in overall field goal conversion rate. The URI defense, meanwhile, has done exceptional work to keep opponents' shooting percentages in check (nationally ranked #21 in defensive field goal conversion rate). The URI defense appears to have a noteworthy advantage at all three levels on this end. We expect G. Washington to shoot 31.3% from behind the arc (3.1% below the D1 average), 29.3% from mid-range locations (9.0% below the D1 average), 54.3% from near-proximity (4.1% below the D1 average), and 39.6% overall (4.2% below the D1 average).

REBOUNDING: URI may have a small rebounding edge on this end of the court. G. Washington is really nothing special on the offensive glass. When it comes to converting second-chance opportunities, they're similarly unremarkable, coming in at #126 nationally in our ratings there. Their opponent in this matchup, URI, appears a bit superior to the D1 average in the category of defensive rebounding, and they've likewise been proficient preventing foes from scoring via putbacks (ranked #61 in the NCAA in defensive second-chance conversion rate).

TURNOVERS: The URI defense has a small advantage over the G. Washington offense in the turnover battle on this end. When in possession, G. Washington has plenty of room for improvement when it comes to securing the basketball. Their rating for potential quick points allowed off steals is particularly inadequate, as the team places 303rd in the nation in that category. As for the opposition, the URI defense demonstrates fairly balanced pressure and shouldn't be considered overly conservative or aggressive.

FREE THROWS: This looks to be somewhat of a stalemate. G. Washington won't get to the charity stripe very often (nationally ranked #301 in free throw attempt rate), and they're a below-average unit at converting their foul shots (69.6%, ranked #236 in Division I). As for the opposition, the URI D appears to commit a bit too many fouls by NCAA standards and nationally ranks 271st in defensive free throw attempt rate.

THE X-FACTORS:
PACE: The projected tempo for this contest is fairly average by D1 standards. G. Washington (125th in the NCAA in game pace) favors a brisk tempo, while URI (145th) likes things at more of an average clip.

AWAY/HOME COURT: The analytics fail to reveal a significant advantage for either team in this category.

MOMENTUM: G. Washington appears to have a noteworthy momentum advantage. They come into this game playing above their norm (27th in the country in positive momentum), while URI (306th) has been more inefficient than normal in recent contests.

CONSISTENCY: URI is one of the NCAA's more consistent teams, ranking 16th nationally in consistency. G. Washington rates more in the middle of the pack.

Projected Score: Rhode Island 66, GW 64. 40% chance to win (Bart Torvik). ESPN gives us a 35.4% chance to go over .500 in A10 play. URI opens as a 3.5 point road favorite.
 

Mentzinger...DMVPiranha mentioned Rhode Island coach David Cox' ties to the area(played high school ball at St.John's, then starred at William & Mary) in his preview of Rhode Island before the 1st game against GW that he linked. I believe Cox also had a prominent role with the former AAU power D.C. Assault, I'm surprised that Rhode Island wasn't in the running for Darren Buchanan. He played with the Mitchell twins at Wilson High School.

Rhode Island went into a tailspin after they blew the 1st game against GW, they've lost 6 of 7 but the one win was against Davidson

I wonder what folks from other schools like Richmond (where a sponsor advertises "the biggest TV screen in Richmond), SLU (which runs ads that try to entice people to go to downtown St Louis by highlighting the amusement park) and URI (which runs ads for an oyster bar) think of GW´s commercial breaks with ads for investigative journalism, hand-tailored power suits and comprehensive health plans.

Wait, a final possession at the end of a half that ends with GW getting a big bucket? Cash in those insurance policies everyone!

An inspired defensive first half and efficient on offense. Nice!

Pretty good crowd, too. Hopefully they keep the momentum in the second half.

Hugh wrote:

probably the best offensive half of the season. seemed like every shot we took was open, nothing too forced. 

and just when I say this, of course bamisile takes a 30 ft contested three in the first two minutes of the 2nd half.

Call me old fashioned, but if a player gets a T for mouthing off at the ref, shouldn´t his coach pull him to calm him down?

OK, if might not help you get your NIL cha-ching, but on the scoreboard a lay-in is worth just as much as a slama-jamma highlight, Someone should tell JoeBam this...

gwstudent2024 wrote:

GW Alum Abroad wrote:

Call me old fashioned, but if a player gets a T for mouthing off at the ref, shouldn´t his coach pull him to calm him down?

I think it stemmed from him refusing to tuck his jersey in. What a ridiculous thing to get a technical foul for

As per Kerr, the T was not on the shooter with the untucked shirt but on his brother outside the arc for offering the official his opinion of it (which makes it an even more ridiculous thing to get a T for!)