Analyzing The 140 Offensive Oafs Club Of NCAA Basketball Betting

Joe Gavazzi

Tuesday, February 16, 2016 5:22 PM GMT

Our statistical journey into the NCAAB landscape began in early January when we found that the team had to rebound, take care of, and work for good shots with the basketball.

These qualities are represented by the statistical categories of rebound margin, TO/assist ratio, and TO margin. Later in our journey, exclusive of statistical evidence, we looked at a group of Towel Tossers. These were teams who, on the basis of their record, had decided that they had enough of the season and were ready to toss the towel until their rivalry games, or the CCTs (College Conference Tournaments).

This week, we combine many of those Towel Tossers with our “140” concept to come up with a group of the nation’s least efficient offensive team in terms of points scored and offensive efficiency. To confirm that these teams are “Offensive Oafs”, we require that our team score 70 or less PPG, the combination of their offensive PPG, along with their offensive shooting percentage, and their offensive three point percentage, is 140 or less. When the sum of their rebound margin, their TO margin, and their TO/assist ratio is in minus numbers (that is they have weak fundamentals to back their weak scoring ability), we then have a qualified Offensive Oaf.

The columns in the chart are well familiar to you from previous weeks. I will summate the conclusions at the end of the chart. All offensive numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number for simplicity and ease of presentation.

 

Team

SU

ATS

ATS

Fav    

Off

PPG    

Off

FG%   

Off

3pt%    

Off

Sum    

Rbd

Mgn   

 

A/TO

Ratio   

TO

Mgn   

Total

Mgn   

Boston C

7-18

3-16

2-2

62

41

34

137

-5.2

-0.8

-1.9

-7.9

Bradley

4-23

10-15

-

55

37

28

120

-2.2

-8.0

-4.9

-15.1

Cleveland St     

8-18

9-15

1-3

62

42

31

135

-2.0

-3.0

-0.1

-5.1

Delaware

6-19

8-14

3-0

67

40

33

140

+1.3

-1.1

-2.4

-2.2

Drexel

3-22

10-14

0-4

62

38

31

131

-3.2

-

+0.7

-2.5

Fla Atl

7-19

9-14

1-3

66

41

32

139

-6.1

-0.2

-0.3

-6.6

G Mason

9-16

10-12

2-3

66

41

30

137

+6.8

-2.1

-5.4

-0.7

Illinois Chi

5-19

9-14

-

67

39

31

137

+1.9

-2.9

-3.0

-4.0

La Salle

5-18

6-15

1-3

63

41

34

138

-8.0

-1.0

-0.4

-9.4

Miami Oh

9-16

9-13

2-4

62

40

30

132

-2.3

-3.4

-1.4

-7.1

Missouri

9-16

11-10

5-0

68

42

30

140

-1.5

-0.6

-0.5

-2.6

Niagara

6-21

12-11

0-2

63

40

28

131

-0.6

-4.0

-2.8

-7.4

Penn St

12-13

12-12

5-4

65

41

29

135

-1.0

-2.6

-0.6

-4.2

Quinnipiac

8-16

6-10

2-2

67

36

35

138

+7.2

-2.8

-3.1

+1.3

S Florida

5-21

11-10

0-2

63

42

28

133

+3.2

-5.1

-6.1

-8.0

St Louis

8-16

5-15

1-4

65

41

31

137

-4.1

-0.1

-0.7

-4.9

San Diego

8-17

10-13

1-3

61

39

28

128

-2.3

-2.3

-1.1

-5.7

SEMO St

5-21

9-13

0-1

67

41

30

138

-3.3

-1.5

-0.2

-5.0

SIU Edwards

5-20

13-10

1-2

66

40

31

137

+1.0

-3.0

-1.8

-3.8

S Mississippi

7-16

10-9

2-0

62

40

34

136

-3.4

-2.0

-2.1

-7.5

St Johns

7-19

9-15

1-6

67

40

33

140

-4.1

-2.5

-0.6

-7.2

Tulane

11-15

9-10

3-2

67

40

30

137

+2.3

-2.8

-1.6

-2.1

VMI

7-17

4-13

0-0

67

40

33

140

-4.6

-2.7

-0.5

-7.8

As you can see, our premise that lack of offensive efficiency in terms of rebounds, assists, and turnovers, which lead to low shooting and scoring numbers, has been proven to be true. It is a clear way to point out teams who lack offensive efficiency, as well as are considerable losers, both SU and ATS. The SU record of these teams is a combined 161-416 (27.9%), while the ATS record of the teams is 204-293 (just 41%). It is even worse (39.6%) if our team is favored. To wager on teams such as these for the balance of the season, one must find clear reasons in terms of situational evidence and point spread value to pull the trigger. If that evidence is not there, I advise that you consider playing against any of our Offensive Oafs.