|
|
MIAMI TEMPLE |
|
| 138 | 60 Final 57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NIT - Semifinals - Madison Square Garden - New York, NY |
|
| | |
769 | MIAMI | -1 | 139 | 770 | TEMPLE | 141.5 | -1 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 24-12 | -9.8 | 16-17 | 13-14 | 68.6 | 30.4 | 43.1% | 34.2 | 63.4 | 28.2 | 42.7% | 33.3 | Road Games | 12-6 | +7.2 | 11-7 | 9-6 | 69.8 | 30.7 | 44.0% | 33.1 | 64.2 | 29.6 | 44.3% | 32.3 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +3.4 | 2-3 | 2-3 | 66.6 | 26.4 | 39.5% | 36.4 | 63.4 | 30.2 | 43.6% | 28.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 68.6 | 30.4 | 23-54 | 43.1% | 8-22 | 36.0% | 14-19 | 74.7% | 34 | 8 | 13 | 16 | 6 | 10 | 3 | vs opponents surrendering | 65 | 29.7 | 23-54 | 42.1% | 6-18 | 33.2% | 13-19 | 69.3% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 13 | 3 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 69.8 | 30.7 | 24-55 | 44.0% | 8-21 | 38.8% | 13-18 | 74.8% | 33 | 8 | 13 | 15 | 6 | 10 | 3 | Stats Against (All Games) | 63.4 | 28.2 | 23-55 | 42.7% | 6-19 | 33.2% | 10-16 | 65.2% | 33 | 8 | 12 | 17 | 5 | 11 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 67.9 | 31.6 | 24-54 | 44.4% | 6-18 | 34.0% | 14-20 | 68.3% | 34 | 9 | 13 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 64.2 | 29.6 | 24-54 | 44.3% | 6-19 | 34.1% | 10-15 | 64.3% | 32 | 8 | 13 | 16 | 5 | 11 | 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 26-10 | +15.5 | 17-15 | 11-18 | 66.1 | 31.1 | 39.0% | 38.0 | 61.2 | 27.1 | 39.4% | 36.7 | Road Games | 9-8 | +3.5 | 8-9 | 6-10 | 61.6 | 29.1 | 36.5% | 36.6 | 63.4 | 28.4 | 41.6% | 37.9 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +3 | 3-2 | 2-3 | 75.2 | 34.6 | 42.6% | 38.4 | 69.4 | 31.2 | 40.7% | 38.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 66.1 | 31.1 | 23-58 | 39.0% | 6-21 | 30.9% | 14-21 | 69.7% | 38 | 10 | 12 | 17 | 7 | 10 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 64.3 | 29.5 | 23-55 | 41.7% | 6-19 | 33.3% | 12-18 | 67.9% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 4 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 61.6 | 29.1 | 21-58 | 36.5% | 6-19 | 32.1% | 13-20 | 68.5% | 37 | 10 | 11 | 18 | 7 | 10 | 3 | Stats Against (All Games) | 61.2 | 27.1 | 22-55 | 39.4% | 6-18 | 31.5% | 12-19 | 65.3% | 37 | 9 | 11 | 17 | 5 | 12 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 66.3 | 30.5 | 23-54 | 43.5% | 6-18 | 34.3% | 13-20 | 67.7% | 35 | 9 | 13 | 17 | 6 | 12 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 63.4 | 28.4 | 23-55 | 41.6% | 5-16 | 32.0% | 13-20 | 63.6% | 38 | 9 | 12 | 17 | 5 | 12 | 5 |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: MIAMI 77.6, TEMPLE 76.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
2/11/2015 | @ WAKE FOREST | 70-72 | L | -2.5 | L | 135 | O | 24-53 | 45.3% | 29 | 8 | 26-56 | 46.4% | 37 | 14 | 2/16/2015 | @ BOSTON COLLEGE | 89-86 | W | -4 | L | 124.5 | O | 24-57 | 42.1% | 37 | 11 | 30-66 | 45.5% | 36 | 11 | 2/18/2015 | VIRGINIA TECH | 76-52 | W | -11.5 | W | 130.5 | U | 26-51 | 51.0% | 40 | 12 | 16-46 | 34.8% | 19 | 11 | 2/21/2015 | @ LOUISVILLE | 53-55 | L | 9 | W | 129.5 | U | 21-56 | 37.5% | 34 | 13 | 19-56 | 33.9% | 41 | 10 | 2/25/2015 | FLORIDA ST | 81-77 | W | -8.5 | L | 130.5 | O | 23-48 | 47.9% | 37 | 9 | 24-50 | 48.0% | 23 | 11 | 2/28/2015 | N CAROLINA | 64-73 | L | 1.5 | L | 141 | U | 24-57 | 42.1% | 28 | 13 | 26-57 | 45.6% | 42 | 15 | 3/4/2015 | @ PITTSBURGH | 67-63 | W | 4.5 | W | 130 | P | 23-54 | 42.6% | 33 | 7 | 25-54 | 46.3% | 30 | 8 | 3/7/2015 | @ VIRGINIA TECH | 82-61 | W | -5.5 | W | 132.5 | O | 26-56 | 46.4% | 31 | 7 | 22-48 | 45.8% | 27 | 12 | 3/11/2015 | *VIRGINIA TECH | 59-49 | W | -11.5 | L | 134.5 | U | 20-47 | 42.6% | 33 | 8 | 21-52 | 40.4% | 26 | 9 | 3/12/2015 | *NOTRE DAME | 63-70 | L | 4.5 | L | 138.5 | U | 20-55 | 36.4% | 33 | 8 | 21-43 | 48.8% | 31 | 12 | 3/17/2015 | NC CENTRAL | 75-71 | W | -8.5 | L | 128 | O | 22-44 | 50.0% | 25 | 12 | 26-49 | 53.1% | 21 | 9 | 3/21/2015 | ALABAMA | 73-66 | W | -5 | W | 135.5 | O | 22-54 | 40.7% | 44 | 11 | 24-61 | 39.3% | 33 | 6 | 3/24/2015 | @ RICHMOND | 63-61 | W | 3 | W | 133 | U | 19-61 | 31.1% | 47 | 7 | 21-54 | 38.9% | 32 | 7 | 3/31/2015 | *TEMPLE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2/10/2015 | CINCINNATI | 75-59 | W | -3 | W | 116 | O | 28-56 | 50.0% | 30 | 8 | 22-42 | 52.4% | 25 | 17 | 2/14/2015 | E CAROLINA | 66-53 | W | -13 | T | 118.5 | O | 21-57 | 36.8% | 49 | 9 | 19-54 | 35.2% | 26 | 7 | 2/19/2015 | @ SMU | 58-67 | L | 7.5 | L | 124.5 | O | 22-54 | 40.7% | 30 | 15 | 21-43 | 48.8% | 31 | 11 | 2/22/2015 | @ TULSA | 39-55 | L | 1.5 | L | 120 | U | 14-57 | 24.6% | 47 | 12 | 18-48 | 37.5% | 41 | 11 | 2/26/2015 | HOUSTON | 66-54 | W | -14 | L | 121 | U | 27-60 | 45.0% | 40 | 8 | 22-55 | 40.0% | 31 | 10 | 3/5/2015 | @ E CAROLINA | 70-56 | W | -6 | W | 120 | O | 27-65 | 41.5% | 41 | 10 | 21-51 | 41.2% | 34 | 12 | 3/7/2015 | CONNECTICUT | 75-63 | W | -3.5 | W | 122 | O | 22-55 | 40.0% | 31 | 4 | 20-44 | 45.5% | 27 | 14 | 3/13/2015 | *MEMPHIS | 80-75 | W | -3.5 | W | 126 | O | 25-55 | 45.5% | 42 | 10 | 31-73 | 42.5% | 37 | 6 | 3/14/2015 | *SMU | 56-69 | L | 4 | L | 126.5 | U | 17-58 | 29.3% | 32 | 7 | 25-53 | 47.2% | 45 | 11 | 3/18/2015 | BUCKNELL | 73-67 | W | -12.5 | L | 144 | U | 23-59 | 39.0% | 41 | 5 | 24-71 | 33.8% | 51 | 11 | 3/22/2015 | GEORGE WASHINGTON | 90-77 | W | -4.5 | W | 128.5 | O | 31-62 | 50.0% | 38 | 8 | 25-55 | 45.5% | 26 | 8 | 3/25/2015 | LOUISIANA TECH | 77-59 | W | -4 | W | 147.5 | U | 27-55 | 49.1% | 39 | 5 | 22-60 | 36.7% | 32 | 6 | 3/31/2015 | *MIAMI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| MIAMI: Miami is a team people do not know about yet, but the backcourt of transfers SG Sheldon McClellan and PG Angel Rodriguez has a chance to be one of the best in the ACC. McClellan was a very talented player at Texas two seasons ago, while Rodriguez was the starting point guard at Kansas State. Rodriguez does a great job of running the show for the offense, while McClellan is a superb athlete, who can be an elite perimeter defender. C Tonye Jeriki (4.2 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 0.9 BPG) is the lone returning starter on the team, but he is known more as a defensive player. For this team to make a run at the NCAA Tournament, it will need big performances from freshmen SG Ja'Quan Newton and James Palmer. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 3/29/2024 12:19:20 PM EST. |
|
|