|
|
TEXAS TECH TCU |
|
| 120.5 | 54 Final 71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
761 | TEXAS TECH | 120.5 | 120.5 | 762 | TCU | -10 | -9 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 12-16 | -3.3 | 10-13 | 5-12 | 60.9 | 28.1 | 40.0% | 34.2 | 63.7 | 30.1 | 42.1% | 32.5 | Road Games | 0-10 | -7.5 | 3-7 | 1-7 | 49.8 | 24.2 | 32.9% | 33.8 | 70.9 | 33.1 | 46.6% | 35.9 | Last 5 Games | 0-5 | -3 | 3-2 | 1-4 | 50.8 | 22.6 | 37.8% | 28.0 | 67.4 | 31.0 | 47.3% | 33.0 | Conference Games | 2-13 | -1.8 | 6-9 | 5-10 | 53.9 | 24.3 | 36.2% | 31.3 | 68.8 | 31.1 | 46.0% | 34.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 60.9 | 28.1 | 20-51 | 40.0% | 5-17 | 30.4% | 15-24 | 65.1% | 34 | 10 | 11 | 17 | 6 | 14 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 65.4 | 30.2 | 23-54 | 42.0% | 6-18 | 33.5% | 14-20 | 67.4% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 14 | 4 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 49.8 | 24.2 | 17-52 | 32.9% | 4-18 | 24.3% | 11-17 | 64.6% | 34 | 10 | 8 | 18 | 5 | 14 | 4 | Stats Against (All Games) | 63.7 | 30.1 | 22-52 | 42.1% | 7-20 | 33.8% | 13-19 | 67.0% | 33 | 9 | 11 | 20 | 7 | 13 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 68.5 | 32.1 | 24-55 | 43.3% | 6-18 | 34.1% | 14-21 | 68.3% | 35 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 70.9 | 33.1 | 25-53 | 46.6% | 7-20 | 37.6% | 14-21 | 67.8% | 36 | 9 | 15 | 17 | 8 | 11 | 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 16-11 | -3.1 | 10-11 | 8-9 | 68.4 | 32.3 | 43.8% | 37.5 | 60.5 | 26.4 | 38.8% | 34.1 | Home Games | 12-5 | -2.1 | 5-6 | 4-3 | 72.0 | 35.2 | 45.4% | 39.8 | 58.0 | 25.5 | 37.1% | 33.5 | Last 5 Games | 2-3 | -0.6 | 3-2 | 3-2 | 62.0 | 26.8 | 40.1% | 32.2 | 65.0 | 28.0 | 46.5% | 34.8 | Conference Games | 3-11 | -8 | 6-8 | 8-6 | 62.0 | 27.4 | 39.4% | 34.6 | 67.5 | 29.4 | 43.3% | 38.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 68.4 | 32.3 | 24-55 | 43.8% | 5-14 | 32.6% | 16-26 | 60.7% | 37 | 12 | 14 | 21 | 6 | 12 | 5 | vs opponents surrendering | 66.3 | 31 | 23-54 | 42.7% | 6-19 | 33.5% | 14-20 | 66.8% | 34 | 9 | 13 | 19 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 72.0 | 35.2 | 26-57 | 45.4% | 5-14 | 34.1% | 16-26 | 60.0% | 40 | 13 | 15 | 20 | 7 | 12 | 7 | Stats Against (All Games) | 60.5 | 26.4 | 20-52 | 38.8% | 4-13 | 32.4% | 16-25 | 66.5% | 34 | 10 | 10 | 22 | 6 | 13 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 67.5 | 31.6 | 23-55 | 42.7% | 6-18 | 33.7% | 15-22 | 68.4% | 35 | 10 | 12 | 19 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 58.0 | 25.5 | 19-52 | 37.1% | 4-12 | 31.3% | 15-24 | 64.0% | 34 | 9 | 9 | 23 | 6 | 14 | 5 |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: TEXAS TECH 75.9, TCU 73.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
1/10/2015 | @ KANSAS | 54-86 | L | 15 | L | 133 | O | 18-55 | 32.7% | 34 | 15 | 32-61 | 52.5% | 43 | 11 | 1/14/2015 | @ KANSAS ST | 51-58 | L | 9.5 | W | 124 | U | 19-56 | 33.9% | 38 | 13 | 17-44 | 38.6% | 30 | 11 | 1/17/2015 | TCU | 42-62 | L | 2.5 | L | 125.5 | U | 11-48 | 22.9% | 31 | 12 | 19-42 | 45.2% | 36 | 11 | 1/21/2015 | @ OKLAHOMA ST | 43-63 | L | 14 | L | 126.5 | U | 15-54 | 27.8% | 32 | 10 | 21-47 | 44.7% | 36 | 13 | 1/24/2015 | IOWA ST | 78-73 | W | 10 | W | 136 | O | 22-53 | 41.5% | 35 | 13 | 27-63 | 42.9% | 35 | 10 | 1/28/2015 | @ OKLAHOMA | 36-81 | L | 16 | L | 128 | U | 11-52 | 21.2% | 35 | 17 | 32-61 | 52.5% | 39 | 9 | 1/31/2015 | @ W VIRGINIA | 58-77 | L | 17.5 | L | 137.5 | U | 16-38 | 42.1% | 34 | 26 | 26-54 | 48.1% | 26 | 11 | 2/4/2015 | KANSAS ST | 64-47 | W | 3.5 | W | 119 | U | 22-41 | 53.7% | 27 | 9 | 19-49 | 38.8% | 26 | 9 | 2/7/2015 | @ IOWA ST | 38-75 | L | 17 | L | 144.5 | U | 17-55 | 30.9% | 29 | 15 | 28-50 | 56.0% | 37 | 10 | 2/10/2015 | KANSAS | 51-73 | L | 10.5 | L | 131 | U | 18-54 | 33.3% | 29 | 10 | 26-49 | 53.1% | 36 | 14 | 2/14/2015 | @ TEXAS | 41-56 | L | 16.5 | W | 120.5 | U | 16-48 | 33.3% | 28 | 9 | 20-45 | 44.4% | 31 | 7 | 2/17/2015 | BAYLOR | 49-54 | L | 8.5 | W | 124.5 | U | 17-48 | 35.4% | 27 | 10 | 18-47 | 38.3% | 37 | 16 | 2/21/2015 | OKLAHOMA | 75-79 | L | 10 | W | 123 | O | 26-44 | 59.1% | 27 | 22 | 24-54 | 44.4% | 24 | 15 | 2/25/2015 | @ TCU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/28/2015 | OKLAHOMA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/6/2015 | @ BAYLOR | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/7/2015 | @ KANSAS ST | 53-58 | L | 4.5 | L | 123.5 | U | 19-46 | 41.3% | 27 | 14 | 16-42 | 38.1% | 33 | 15 | 1/10/2015 | BAYLOR | 59-66 | L | -2 | L | 119 | O | 21-56 | 37.5% | 41 | 11 | 17-57 | 29.8% | 49 | 12 | 1/17/2015 | @ TEXAS TECH | 62-42 | W | -2.5 | W | 125.5 | U | 19-42 | 45.2% | 36 | 11 | 11-48 | 22.9% | 31 | 12 | 1/19/2015 | TEXAS | 48-66 | L | 2.5 | L | 120.5 | U | 18-54 | 33.3% | 30 | 8 | 24-50 | 48.0% | 41 | 13 | 1/24/2015 | @ W VIRGINIA | 85-86 | L | 10.5 | W | 131.5 | O | 27-55 | 49.1% | 47 | 19 | 29-71 | 40.8% | 37 | 14 | 1/28/2015 | KANSAS | 61-64 | L | 4.5 | W | 135 | U | 22-72 | 30.6% | 50 | 10 | 24-52 | 46.2% | 40 | 14 | 1/31/2015 | @ IOWA ST | 66-83 | L | 10 | L | 144.5 | O | 28-69 | 40.6% | 30 | 6 | 31-55 | 56.4% | 44 | 13 | 2/4/2015 | @ BAYLOR | 57-77 | L | 8 | L | 125 | O | 20-56 | 35.7% | 29 | 12 | 26-53 | 49.1% | 43 | 13 | 2/7/2015 | OKLAHOMA | 56-68 | L | 3.5 | L | 129.5 | U | 23-73 | 31.5% | 43 | 14 | 24-52 | 46.2% | 47 | 17 | 2/11/2015 | @ TEXAS | 43-66 | L | 9.5 | L | 125.5 | U | 15-52 | 28.8% | 27 | 9 | 19-37 | 51.4% | 36 | 12 | 2/14/2015 | OKLAHOMA ST | 70-55 | W | 3 | W | 120 | O | 26-50 | 52.0% | 30 | 12 | 22-49 | 44.9% | 25 | 17 | 2/18/2015 | KANSAS ST | 69-55 | W | -4 | W | 120 | O | 23-43 | 53.5% | 28 | 11 | 19-55 | 34.5% | 37 | 13 | 2/21/2015 | @ KANSAS | 72-81 | L | 13 | W | 132 | O | 24-59 | 40.7% | 33 | 13 | 28-48 | 58.3% | 29 | 14 | 2/25/2015 | TEXAS TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/28/2015 | @ OKLAHOMA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/4/2015 | @ OKLAHOMA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/7/2015 | IOWA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| TEXAS TECH: The Red Raiders will look to their backcourt to get them back to the postseason for the first time since an NIT berth in 2010. Texas Tech was competitive in many games last season, as they defeated Baylor and Oklahoma State, while losing in the final minutes to Iowa State and Kansas. PG Robert Turner (9.3 PPG, 2.6 APG and 2.6 RPG) and SG Toddrick Gotcher (7.3 PPG, 2.9 RPG and 1.9 APG) are the only two starters back on the team, and they will be looked upon to take on the biggest chunks of the scoring load. But both players shot just 40% FG last season, and Tubby Smith will need to find somebody to rely on in a thin frontcourt. | | TCU: After going 2-16 in the Big 12 in their first year in conference, The Horned Frogs were winless last season (0-18), leaving them nowhere to go but up during the 2014-2015 campaign. SG Kyan Anderson (17 PPG, 4.5 APG, 41% threes) is one of the more underrated players in college basketball. Anderson can light it up at any given moment, despite the opponents knowing he is the No. 1 option. With other players around him getting another year under their belts, Anderson should be able to see more one-on-one opportunities. PF Amric Fields (13.1 PPG, 6.1 RPG) and C Karviar Shepherd (9.1 PPG, 6.8 RPG and 1.6 BPG) are both players capable of taking some of the scoring load off Anderson's back, but this school has a long ways to go before it reaches respectability in the Big 12. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 4/27/2024 12:38:10 AM EST. |
|
|