Czech Republic
Regular Season Round 30: Usti n/Labem - CEZ Nymburk 67-112
Date: February 5, 2016
Bottom-ranked CEZ Nymburk managed to get a fifth victory. This time defending champion outleveled ninth-ranked BK Usti nad Labem 112-67. It's especially surprising that the victory came too easily and 45-point difference suggests that CEZ Nymburk is in a good shape to leave the bottom place. The game was mostly controlled by CEZ Nymburk. BK Usti nad Labem was better in second period 23-17. But it was not enough to take a lead and get a victory that evening. CEZ Nymburk dominated down low during the game scoring 56 of its points in the paint compared to BK Usti nad Labem's 34. CEZ Nymburk forced 22 BK Usti nad Labem turnovers and outrebounded them 40-28 including 28 on the defensive glass. Their players were unselfish on offense dishing 23 assists comparing to just 10 passes made by BK Usti nad Labem's players. It was a good game for American point guard Chasson Randle (187-93, college: Stanford) who led his team to a victory with 24 points. Forward Matej Svoboda (200-96) contributed with 18 points for the winners. Forward Ladislav Pecka (197-91) replied with a double-double by scoring 14 points and 11 rebounds and American guard Drew Barham (198-89, college: Gonzaga) added 19 points and 7 rebounds in the effort for BK Usti nad Labem. Both teams had four players each who scored in double figures. The winner was already known earlier in the game, so both coaches allowed to play the bench players saving starting five for next games. Defending champion maintains twelfth position with 5-1 record. BK Usti nad Labem at the other side keeps the ninth place with 19 games lost. CEZ Nymburk will have a break next round.
Terms:
Field Goals : 2PM-A (2 point Field Goal made-attempts) 3PM-A (3 point Field Goal made-attempts) FTM-A (free throws made-attempt)
Rebounds : OFF (Offensive) DEF (Defensive) TOT (total)
Fouls : CM (Committed) RV (received)
Blocks : FV (In Favor) AG (Against)
Other terms : MIN (minutes) AST (assists) ST (steals) TO (Turnovers) PTS (points) RNK (ranking)
Regular Season Round 30: Usti n/Labem - CEZ Nymburk 67-112
Date: February 5, 2016
Bottom-ranked CEZ Nymburk managed to get a fifth victory. This time defending champion outleveled ninth-ranked BK Usti nad Labem 112-67. It's especially surprising that the victory came too easily and 45-point difference suggests that CEZ Nymburk is in a good shape to leave the bottom place. The game was mostly controlled by CEZ Nymburk. BK Usti nad Labem was better in second period 23-17. But it was not enough to take a lead and get a victory that evening. CEZ Nymburk dominated down low during the game scoring 56 of its points in the paint compared to BK Usti nad Labem's 34. CEZ Nymburk forced 22 BK Usti nad Labem turnovers and outrebounded them 40-28 including 28 on the defensive glass. Their players were unselfish on offense dishing 23 assists comparing to just 10 passes made by BK Usti nad Labem's players. It was a good game for American point guard Chasson Randle (187-93, college: Stanford) who led his team to a victory with 24 points. Forward Matej Svoboda (200-96) contributed with 18 points for the winners. Forward Ladislav Pecka (197-91) replied with a double-double by scoring 14 points and 11 rebounds and American guard Drew Barham (198-89, college: Gonzaga) added 19 points and 7 rebounds in the effort for BK Usti nad Labem. Both teams had four players each who scored in double figures. The winner was already known earlier in the game, so both coaches allowed to play the bench players saving starting five for next games. Defending champion maintains twelfth position with 5-1 record. BK Usti nad Labem at the other side keeps the ninth place with 19 games lost. CEZ Nymburk will have a break next round.
 CEZ NYMBURK (coach: Oren Amiel)112 |
| FIELD GOALS | REBOUNDS | FOULS | BLOCKS | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | NAME | MIN | 2PM-A | 3PM-A | FTM-A | OFF | DEF | RB | AS | F | RV | ST | FV | AG | TO | PT | RNK | +/- |
| 88 | ALIMIdi, biURn | 86 | 4-1 (05%) | 3-0 (25%) | 5-5 (5%) | 8 | 8 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 62 | 60 | 5 |
| 66 | gaxIj, baZhiRl | 85 | 8-4 (11.9%) | 6-0 (85%) | 8-4 (11.9%) | 5 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 61 | 5 |
| 84 | AijU-eIIs, HITiQd | 85 | 6-6 (655%) | 6-6 (655%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 66 | 5 |
| 63 | gR cRRuT, bixaBR | 67 | 4-4 (655%) | 8-1 (44.4%) | 8-8 (655%) | 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 63 | 60 | 5 |
| 3 | mRjdi, ORUQ | 69 | 0-2 (18.0%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5-8 (5%) | 1 | 8 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 65 | 61 | 5 |
| 0 | eijdlR, ChissIj | 69 | 8-3 (05%) | 1-9 (20.9%) | 8-4 (11.9%) | 5 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 83 | 86 | 5 |
| 7 | WRlsZh, zaQa | 69 | 4-0 (15%) | 5-8 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 6 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 68 | 5 |
| 46 | KQaJ, biQUaj | 61 | 6-6 (655%) | 5-6 (5%) | 8-8 (655%) | 6 | 6 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| 65 | HIusVi, OiLRl | 60 | 4-0 (15%) | 5-6 (5%) | 4-4 (655%) | 6 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 65 | 5 |
| 85 | ziDIdaZ KuQadJi, biQVI | 63 | 8-3 (05%) | 5-5 (5%) | 4-4 (655%) | 6 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 60 | 5 |
| 64 | ORURQVi, biQUaj | 64 | 6-8 (05%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 5 |
| 9 | HQuMij, kInURZh | 1 | 8-4 (11.9%) | 5-6 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 3 | -6 | 5 |
| wIUil | 82-30 (18.8%) | 63-87 (32.4%) | 63-62 (99.2%) | 68 | 82 | 35 | 84 | 86 | 86 | 66 | 6 | 5 | 60 | 668 | 641 | |||
 USTI N/LABEM (coach: Tomas Reimer)67 |
| FIELD GOALS | REBOUNDS | FOULS | BLOCKS | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | NAME | MIN | 2PM-A | 3PM-A | FTM-A | OFF | DEF | RB | AS | F | RV | ST | FV | AG | TO | PT | RNK | +/- |
| 04 | miQhiB, gQRT | 41 | 6-2 (68.0%) | 0-7 (00.1%) | 8-8 (655%) | 5 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 67 | 68 | 5 |
| 83 | SMRQZQIBMaR, CIQF | 87 | 0-7 (00.1%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5-6 (5%) | 6 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 65 | 3 | 5 |
| 33 | ORZVi, vidasliL | 82 | 1-9 (20.9%) | 5-6 (5%) | 8-3 (05%) | 3 | 9 | 66 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 63 | 62 | 5 |
| 0 | CiQjRZVF, baZhil | 82 | 5-5 (5%) | 5-8 (5%) | 4-1 (05%) | 5 | 6 | 6 | 9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 5 |
| 66 | zaQaZRV, zij | 80 | 8-1 (44.4%) | 6-6 (655%) | 5-5 (5%) | 6 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 9 | 2 | 5 |
| 1 | SjUhIjF, KRjdill | 67 | 4-9 (38.7%) | 5-5 (5%) | 0-1 (24.4%) | 5 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 66 | 1 | 5 |
| 84 | qBRQsIj, SusUaj | 64 | 5-6 (5%) | 6-3 (80%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| 44 | kIUQIuMRV, AUijasliL | 2 | 5-5 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | -6 | 5 |
| 64 | baViliusVis, viuQFjis | 9 | 5-6 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | -8 | 5 |
| 69 | OIVIQjF, giLad | 6 | 5-5 (5%) | 5-6 (5%) | 5-5 (5%) | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | -6 | 5 |
| 60 | HRnl, klidaBaQ | gXO - CIiZh's gRZasaIj | ||||||||||||||||
| wIUil | 69-47 (34.1%) | 9-62 (42.7%) | 68-67 (14.8%) | 1 | 88 | 82 | 65 | 86 | 86 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 88 | 19 | 06 | |||
Terms:
Field Goals : 2PM-A (2 point Field Goal made-attempts) 3PM-A (3 point Field Goal made-attempts) FTM-A (free throws made-attempt)
Rebounds : OFF (Offensive) DEF (Defensive) TOT (total)
Fouls : CM (Committed) RV (received)
Blocks : FV (In Favor) AG (Against)
Other terms : MIN (minutes) AST (assists) ST (steals) TO (Turnovers) PTS (points) RNK (ranking)
