West Liberty Hilltopper Basketball

[Columbuseer]

FYI

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU vs Davis & Elkins 2/4/26
WLU 111 – D&E 74

Davis & Elkins (DE) Preview
DE has 683 students (as of 2023). DE comes into the WLU game with a 7-13 record and 4-7 in MEC. They have lost some games recently due to injured players. DE seemed to be using one of the common recruiting templates to challenge WLU – tall, long, and/or quick athletic players who can shoot the three and attack the rim in transition. They have depth, as 8 players play >= 18 minutes a game. Okoroji and Starks both shoot >=40% from three. Evans (6-7 15.5 ppg), Gray (6-7 16.5 ppg) and Adamczyk (6-0 11.8 ppg) are double figure scorers, with Roach (6-2) and Okoroji (6-5) at least 8 ppg. They have the potential to be a dangerous team in March.

Davis & Elkins (DE) Game Plan
The DE strategy seemed to be:

• PASSED – Shoot their average. They shot slightly above their average, helped by some hot shooting in the last 5 minutes of the game, when they were down by almost 40 points.

Stat	Season Avg	WLU Game Stat
FG %	46%	46.7%
3 FG %	33.7%	35.3%
FT %	73.3%	75%

• PASSED– Use their height and athletic ability to get the ball inside and attack the WLU defense in the half-court offense. They had 40 points in the paint.
• PASSED – Refrain from attacking the rim unless a layup were available; instead, set up the offense.
• FAILED – Limit the turnover margin. DE had 25 turnovers while forcing 10 WLU turnovers.
• FAILED – Limit fatigue by subbing frequently. DE players play far too long before a sub, especially given that they were playing their 3^rd game in 5 days. In the first half, there were 7 instances where a player played > 5.5 minutes before getting a rest. There were instances of players playing 10.8 and 12.5 minutes before a sub in the first half. They were physically exhausted by the 15-minute mark of the second half and had to sub more players.
• FAILED – control the boards. WLU outrebounded DE 37-32. WLU won offensive rebounds 11-3.

Keys to the WLU Game
WLU’s offensive rating was an elite 120 (points per 100 possessions) compared to poor 83 for DE (D1 90^th percentile is 113).'

WLU forced 25 turnovers, while committing only 10 turnovers. WLU scored 26 points off turnover to just 4 for DE. It illustrated how extreme fatigure affects cognition and decision-making. Some D&E passes were bizarre passes to no one in particular.

WLU played with great effort, subbing frequently, and putting severe mental stress on DE. DE fatigue made them a step slow on defense, allowing easy scores by WLU.

A key factor was bench scoring. WLU had 66 bench points to just 36 for DE. In addition, WLU had an outstanding 59.2% True Shooting %, compared to 55% for DE. 90^th percentile in D1 is 58.9%.

WLU only had assists on 48% on the FGs. However, this is misleading, for WLU was intercepting the ball and scoring layups on turnovers. They were sharing the bell extremely well.

Areas for Improvement for WLU
Like Charleston, DE was quick to exploit size mismatches inside. However, WLU has improved in this aspect since the Charleston game.

[Columbuseer]

Former Hilltopper Dalton Bolon just set a new world record for most 3-point shots made in 24 hours - 10,703!
He made 73% of his shots, so he actually attempted over 14,700 shots, which is one shot approximately every 6.8 seconds.
He did it to raise money for his WLU friend Trevor Cherry, who is battling stage 4 cancer. Dalton raised $23k to date.
The attached instagram link shows how you can donate.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUMqdoBjMbU/

[boatcapt]

It was extra-frustrating the year IUP pulled it off with WLU's own Shawn Dyer at the helm.

Dyer always seemed a bit to concerned with his game and scoring for my liking. He could shoot, no doubt about that...but as they say, his hands where a bit sticky. If he got the ball, pretty good chance he was going to jack up a shot. That's probably why he only started about a quarter of the games he play d on the Hilltop.

But when he was hot, he was a sight to be hold!

[IUPbigINDIANS]

It was extra-frustrating the year IUP pulled it off with WLU's own Shawn Dyer at the helm.

The team that beat WL that night would beat this year's IUP team by 40 points. They are on different planets, roster-wise and mentality-wise. Daddy would put up 40 and 20 against IUP this year.

Consider Brandon Norfleet was the 4th or 5th option on that team, and they were nasty defensively.

That was a great game. I was there. Two great teams. And, yes, IUP had them visibly frustrated that night. Most teams cannot do that to WL or modern Gannon.

[boatcapt]

This really the best philosophy to beat that system.

1) Inbound the ball as quickly as possible after WL/Gannon/etc. score.
2) Get it over half court as quickly as possible.
3) If an easy lay up is given, you take it.
4) If no easy lay up then you peal out and set up the half court offense.
5) By no means do you ever get in a rat race with this system. That's what this system wants.

You have to beat them with advanced stats! ;-) If you didn't have a higher Effective Shooting Percentage or a higher Layups Over Replacements Replacement but you scored more than WLU, can you REALLY claim victory??!! I mean, if your team is not in the 90th Percentile of D1 teams, do you really even deserve to win??!! Hahahaha

Seriously though, that's a good list. I would add that the HC needs to be willing to sub early and often. A WLU game is a game of attrition where they are trying to exhaust you for the last 2 mins of the game. Coach needs to realize that and keep his top players as fresh as possible for that late game push. I've seen more than one WLU opponent "win" the first 3/4 if the game only to run out of gas down the stretch and loose a squeeker.

[IUPalum]

It was extra-frustrating the year IUP pulled it off with WLU's own Shawn Dyer at the helm.

2015

[Scrub]

IUP had success a few times earlier in Joe's career and even had success 3 years ago in the region final but unfortunately, that IUP team couldn't make a shot and Brice Butler couldn't miss on that night.

It was extra-frustrating the year IUP pulled it off with WLU's own Shawn Dyer at the helm.

[IUPalum]

Absolutely. When teams smartly pull it out and start to set up an offense, it's so frustrating to the system (the players, coaches, and even fans). Drives us crazy.

The problem is that takes unbelievable discipline from the players, and many can't stick with the game plan. But the teams that have been able to exercise that discipline have definitely been rewarded with wins. Dwaine Osborne's UC teams were very good at this and pulled off multiple wins against the system (just ran into a buzzsaw in Gannon in the tourney is Osborne's last year). And the Glen Abram iteration of WV State was good at it too. Abram was so smart with the basketball, and it frustrated WLU to no end.

IUP had success a few times earlier in Joe's career and even had success 3 years ago in the region final but unfortunately, that IUP team couldn't make a shot and Brice Butler couldn't miss on that night.

You are very correct it takes great discipline. IUP's current team has zero chance. Joe insists on taking their time on the inbound and that rat race once the ball is in. Total opposite of what they should do. This is why Gannon has thumped the last couple years.

[Scrub]

This really the best philosophy to beat that system.

1) Inbound the ball as quickly as possible after WL/Gannon/etc. score.
2) Get it over half court as quickly as possible.
3) If an easy lay up is given, you take it.
4) If no easy lay up then you peal out and set up the half court offense.
5) By no means do you ever get in a rat race with this system. That's what this system wants.

Absolutely. When teams smartly pull it out and start to set up an offense, it's so frustrating to the system (the players, coaches, and even fans). Drives us crazy.

The problem is that takes unbelievable discipline from the players, and many can't stick with the game plan. But the teams that have been able to exercise that discipline have definitely been rewarded with wins. Dwaine Osborne's UC teams were very good at this and pulled off multiple wins against the system (just ran into a buzzsaw in Gannon in the tourney is Osborne's last year). And the Glen Abram iteration of WV State was good at it too. Abram was so smart with the basketball, and it frustrated WLU to no end.

[IUPalum]

This really the best philosophy to beat that system.

1) Inbound the ball as quickly as possible after WL/Gannon/etc. score.
2) Get it over half court as quickly as possible.
3) If an easy lay up is given, you take it.
4) If no easy lay up then you peal out and set up the half court offense.
5) By no means do you ever get in a rat race with this system. That's what this system wants.

[Scrub]

You're right, Columbus. That was a heck of a basketball game. And UC really came in with a solid gameplan and nice blueprint to get out with a win. They did not attack after breaking the press (which almost always frustrates a WLU team that wants to keep the pace going up-and-down). They rebounded very strongly. And in a departure from their first meeting, they chose to sub 5-for-5 to match WLU's depth. A few teams have tried that years ago (I recall Glenville trying it once, and I feel like maybe D&E did once). But typically when teams try it, the deficit builds when the "second team" is on the floor. Most teams just aren't prepared to go 10 deep on their benches at this level. In the second half, it honestly felt like UC's second unit was more effective than their first. Clearly they have the depth to pull it off.

Great game plan and a really game effort from the Golden Eagles. Hats off to their new coach who really had them ready for this one. Heck of a basketball game to watch, and could be scary if a third (or 4th) meeting were to materialize.

[Columbuseer]

FYI
Team Single Game Advanced Stats

• Red cell indicates 20% below D1 median value, green cell is above 90^th percentile D1 value (where D1 data available)

WVU vs Charleston 1/31/26 Game 20
Statistic	Charleston	WLU	WLU Season Avg	WLU Season Totals	2024 D1 Median Value For Comparison
FGM	31	26	34	681	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
FGA	71	52	70	1394	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
FTM	9	26	31	364	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
FTA	12	31	24	486	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
Three Point FGM	13	11	11	210	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
three Point FGA	34	27	30	602	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
Off REB	13	3	12	231	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
Def REB	23	23	25	506	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
Total REB	36	26	37	737	N/A - sensitive to number of possessions
Personal Fouls	25	17	20	399
Assists	17	18	19	371	d1 median 13.7 90th percentile 16.5
Turnovers	14	10	13	250	d1 median 11.6 90th percentile 10.2
Blocks	2	4	2	46	d1 median 3.4 90th percentile 4.7
Steals	6	10	12	244	d1 median 7.0 90th percentile 8.7
Turnovers Forced	10	14	20	405	d1 median 12.4 90th pctile 14.6
Points off Turnovers	15	15	N/A		N/A
Points in the Paint	36	28	N/A		N/A
Second Chance Points	16	6	N/A		N/A
Fast Break Points	12	21	N/A		N/A
Bench Points	22	42	65		N/A
Points	84	89	96.8	1936	D1 median 74.9 90th pctile 81
Games Played	19	20	20	20
Number of Possessions	77	73	81	1627	median 70.7 90th pctile 74.6
Pts per Possession	1.09	1.23	1.19	1.19	median 1.034 90th pctile 1.134
Effective Possession Ratio EPR =(Possessions + Off. Rebounds - Turnovers) / Possessions	0.99	0.904	0.988	0.988	median .953 90th pctile .994
Offensive Rating - pts/100 possessions	109	123	119	119	median 103.4 90th pctile 113.4
Shooting Efficiency (FGM +0.5*3ptFGM) /FGA	52.8%	60.6%	56%	56%	median 50.5% 90th pctile 55.4%
True Shooting % (0.5*(PTS*(FGA+(0.44*FTA)))	55.1%	67.8%	60%	60%	median 54.2% 90th pctile 58.9%
FT %	75.0%	83.9%	75%	75%	median 71.9% 90th pctile 77.9%
FG%	43.7%	50.0%	49%	49%	median 44.1% 90th pctile 47.9%
3PT%	38.2%	40.7%	35%	35%	median 33.3% 90th pctile 37.4%
2PT%	48.6%	60.0%	59%	59%	median is about 47.8% 90th pctile 50.8%
Turnovers Per Game	14	10	13	13	median 12.1 90th pctile 10.4
Turnover Margin (+ is good)	-4	4	20	7.8	D1 median 0.6 90th percentile 3
Turnover %	18.1%	13.8%	15%	15%	typicall D1 is 15% to 20%
Forced Live Ball Turnovers % of total Forced Turnovers	60.0%	71.4%	60%	60%	estimate: median(steals)/median(turnovers)
Points per Opponent Turnover	1.50	1.07	N/A	N/A	N/A
Assists % of FG Made	54.8%	69.2%	54%	54%	median 51.6% 90th pctile 59.8%
Assist to Turnover Ratio	1.21	1.80	1.48	1.48	median 1.087 90th pctile 1.487
Defensive Rebound %	88.5%	63.9%	69%	69%	median 72.3% 90th pctile 75.9%
Offensive Rebound %	36.1%	11.5%	32%	32%	median 28.1% 90th pctile 33.7%
Scoring Margin	-5	5	16	-322	Median 3 pts, 90th pctile 11 pts.

[Columbuseer]

FYI

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU vs Charleston 1/31/26
WLU 89 – UC 84

Univ. Charleston (UC) Preview

The University of Charleston (UC) in West Virginia is a private institution with a total enrollment of approximately 3,000 to 3,032 students as of Fall 2024–2025.
UC comes into the WLU game at 12-5 (8-4 in MEC), with an 8-gme winning streak and victories over Fairmont and Concord. They are the best shooting team in D2, with an effective FG % of 61.3%. They are 2^nd in D2 at 52.2% FG. They are 2^nd in D2 in 3FG % at 41.38%. They have 5 players who are elite 3FG shooters – #01 Robertson 54.4%, #11 Rivens 50%, #33 Davis 44%, #14 Nicol 41.3%, and #02 Campbell 40%, along with 4 other players who shoot over 36% from three. They share the ball, ranked 9^TH in D2 in assists at 18.2. They average 82 points a game. This season they have won the rebounding battle. Their vulnerability appears to be turnovers, as they average 16.2 turnovers a game. They have very balanced scoring with 5 players averaging between 9.7 and 12.4 points per game. They have a deep bench, with 10 players averaging over 11 minutes and no one playing more than 28 minutes. UC seems to have built a team roster that has the depth and firepower to defeat WLU. In their first matchup, UC could not protect the ball, committing 30 turnovers.

UC Game Plan
IMHO, UC had a great game plan. The UC strategy seemed to be:

• PASSED – In the half-court offense, attack WLU on the dribble drive or in the post. If help defense comes, kick the ball out for an open three by their deadly shooters. They played an isolation game in the block with Hailey. When a WLU guard dropped down to double him to make him pick up his dribble, he would pass back to the guard for an open three.
• PASSED – Dominate the boards. UC won the rebounding battle 36-26 and won offensive rebounds 13-3. Their blocking out on rebounds was a thing of beauty.
• PASSED – Substitute frequently to mitigate effects of fatigue –They were doing platoon subs at the same time at WLU. No one for UC played more than 4.15 minutes before getting a rest. However, 4 UC players played 25 minutes. This was the best fatigue mitigation strategy that I have seen against WLU. Few teams have the quality depth of UC to allow this subbing frequency. I do question whether UC allowed a long enough rest for their players to fully recover in the second half from the cumulative effects of fatigue. Some of the players looked totally exhausted when they came out of the game, even in the first half!
• PASSED – Play tight half-court defense. However, fatigue ultimately caused them to get a step slow on their defense in the second half.
• PASSED– Avoid an up-and-down game with WLU. When they broke the press, they did not attack the rim when they had numbers, deciding instead to set up the offense or take a wide-open three from the corner.
• PASSED – Limit turnovers. Although turnovers have been an issue with UC in their previous game with WLU, UC did a good job of committing only 14 turnovers.
• FAILED – Shoot their average FG% and 3FG %. After shooting 53% 3FG in the first half, UC was 38.2% 3FG for the game, below their 41.38% season average. They only shot 43.7 % FG, far below their 52.2% average.
• FAILED –Keep the WLU score under 80 as UC averages 82 ppg. In the first half, they succeeded with WLU leading only 41-40. However, WLU scored 48 in the second half, as the mental fatigue affected UC.

Keys to the WLU Game
This was a high-quality basketball game, matching two teams with great shooters and quality depth. From the opening tip, it was apparent that WLU was playing with great intensity. WLU played with great effort, subbing frequently and putting severe mental stress on UC, even though UC was keeping pace with the subbing.

• IMHO, the difference in the game was WLU creating mental fatigue and physical fatigue in UC, even though UC was subbing frequently. Recognizing that UC was getting a step slow on defense, WLU attacked the rim, drawing numerous fouls on UC.
• WLU won at the FT line, shooting shot an outstanding 84% on 28-31 FTs to UC’s 9-12 and 75%. WLU did a great job in avoiding low-value fouls, that result in and-ones or foul trouble. WLU fouled out two of their great shooters late in the game.
• WLU shot 40.7% on 11-27 3FG, well above their 35% average.
• WLU performed at elite level offensively, at 123 points per 100 possessions (D1 90^th percentile in 113) while UC was outstanding at 109. WLU’s true shooting % bested UC 68% to 55% (90^th percentile D1 is 59%)

In summary, WLU won the game with great 3FG and FT shooting, while playing with incredible intensity on defense and attacking UC on offense to get fouls. Despite UC subbing, WLU got UC tired just enough for their shooting and defense to decline late in the game. The pressure also limited the time that UC had to run their offense.

Areas for Improvement for WLU

• WLU may need to work on a solution to size mismatches on switches. When UC saw a mismatch, they went to a low-post isolation scheme and either scored or kicked the ball out to the corner or wing for a wide-open three when WLU double-teamed the post player. Great strategy by UC. I expect other teams to copy the approach.

[Columbuseer]

We fans sometimes fret about 3PT %, FG%, FT %, etc.
An advanced metric for shooting efficiency is called True Shooting Percentage.
60% or higher is considered elite.
WLU has 6 players averaging over 60% for the season, ranging from 67.4% to 60.7%.

Here is definition, courtesy of https://www.breakthroughbasketball.c.../tsp_calc.html

In basketball, true shooting percentage is an APBRmetrics (Association for Professional Basketball Research Metrics) statistic that measures a player's efficiency at shooting the ball. It is intended to more accurately calculate a player's shooting than field goal percentage, free throw percentage, and three-point field goal percentage taken individually. Two- and three-point field goals and free throws are all considered in its calculation. It is abbreviated TS%.

It is calculated by using the formula:

Where:

• PTS = Points Scored
• FGA = field goal attempts
• FTA = free throw attempts

[Columbuseer]

The one thing you didn't mention about that game, Columbus, is that Spadafora reinjured the ankle that he originally sprained down at D&E (I think that was the game). He didn't return in the second half of the WVSU game. So if he's not healthy going forward, that's a pretty significant loss from an experience and leadership perspective.

Good point. Hope it is nothing serious for Dante.
Another item I forgot to mention was one of the best WLU "blackouts" of the season.
At 17:46 of the 2nd half, WLU led by 9, 56-47. In the next two minutes and 44 seconds, WLU went on a 15-0 run, to stretch their lead to 24 at 71-47 at the 15:02 mark. Very impressive.