De

8. Rebounds off opponent's backboard: Opponents recovered 40; Kansas recovered 78

 

9 Good passes and catches: Opponents, 607 good pa sses; 485 catches
Kansas, 1043 good passes; 998 catches

 

10. Wild passes: Opponents, 20; 6 out of bounds, 14 to an opponent
Kansas, 193; 6 out of bounds, 13 to an opponent

11. Fumbles: Opponents, 20; 9 out of bounds, 11 to an opponent
Kansas, 203; 10 out of bounds, 10 to an opponent

12. Tapped ball out of boumds: Opponents, 4 tines; Kansas, 4 tines

 

13. Held balls: Opponents obtained 17; Kansas obtained 16

14. Jump ball: Opponents tapped and recovered own jump ball 1 tine
Kansas tapped and recovered own jump ball no tincs

15. Jump ball: Opponents recovered tearmate's jump ball 32 tincs
Kansas recovered teammate's jump ball 23 times

16. Assists: Opponents made 54 assists; 29 immediate, 25 secondary
Kansas made 82 assists; 46 immediate, 36 sccondary

17. Evaluation points: Opponents, 1997 positives; 244 negative
Kansas, 3327 positive; 237 negative

 

 

 

 

18. Evaluation points per minute: Opponents, 1406 Kansas, 2568
19. Evaluation points per score: Opponents, 146 Kansas, 2202
20. Playing efficiency: Oppononts, 89.1% Kansas, 93.4%
21. Ball handling error rate: Opponents, 409% Kansas, 26%

 

(Totals are showne)

In comparing the totals one can see that the opponents made more attempts
at both field goals and free throws than did the Kansas team, Howevor, it should
be noted that the home team scored more goals (56 for 38<0%) than the opponents
(39 goals for 21.62%). This same thing is true of the free throws with Kansas making
27 free throws for 643% and the opponents making 24 free throws for 54e5%.

When one examines the personal fouls Kansas made less (27) than tho oppo-=
sition (36). However, the Kansas fouls yielded the greater number of free throws
(44) to the visiting tcams (42). It scoms that the Kansas personal fouls occurred ©
more often when 4 man was in the act of shooting than did the fouls of the opponents,
by the rate of 8 to 15, In this case the total is somewhat misleading, as the dise
crepancy occurred almost entirely in one game that Kansas won by 20 pointse The
most outstanding difference to be pointed out occurred in two places; in the recove
ery of rebounds and in ball handlinge

In the recovery of rebounds, one sees that the Kansas players recovered
70 rebounds off their own backboards, while the opponents recovered 45 off their
backboardse The same ratio holdé when one notes the rebounds of the opponent's