After today's double-double, Sam Dekker has now surpassed Frank Kaminsky as the Badgers' leading scorer and extended his lead in the rebounding department.
Under Bo Ryan, the only players to lead the team in both scoring and rebounding are Alando Tucker, Brian Butch, and Jon Leuer.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Friday, December 20, 2013
Greek Freak Update
Giannis made his first NBA start last night against the Knicks. I did not think Giannis would start a game this year, and maybe not next year either. His learning curve has been accelerated by the injuries to small forwards ahead of him on the depth chart, Carlos Defino and Caron Butler. It also has helped that the Bucks have had to play small with more injuries to starting and backup centers Larry Sanders and Zaza Pachulia. The Bucks have the worst record in the NBA, and since this is a season for tanking there is little reason not to play the young Buck and try to develop him.
Giannis played 42 minutes before fouling out against the Knicks in a game that extended into 2 overtimes before the Bucks lost yet again. Giannis scored 10 points on 2-3FG and 6-7FT with 7reb, 2assists, 2steals, 1block, 3turnovers. On the season he has played in 20 of 25 games averaging 19.4 minutes, 6.2 points, 4.1reb, 1.1 assists, 0.6steals, 0.7blocks, 1.0turnovers and 2.0fouls. He is shooting 49.4%FG, and 28.6%3ptFG. He has been put in a role to limit his inexperience and allow his athleticism to work for him. In the preseason Giannis was given more free reign and the result was tons of turnovers and fouls along with a few spectacular plays that caught the attention of NBA coaches and executives. During the regular season he is usually posted on the wing where he is not really a part of the offense, but he gets an open shot now and then. More importantly it limits his turnovers and allows him to go the glass on the move from the wing where he has made some impressive put backs.
The Bucks try (mostly unsuccessfully) to run because their offense is so bad, and Giannis has shown his ability to finish in transition and make a spectacular pass. For every big dunk or nice pass there are many more lapses. Against the Knicks he was caught guarding Andrea Bargnani on the perimeter who cannot do anything out there but shoot. Giannis got caught looking and Bargnani drained a 3 as Giannis realized he was late on the close out. These mistakes are quite common, but not unforgiveable for a kid that just turned 19. Hopefully he will learn from these mistakes. Even with all the mistakes Giannis is way ahead of where I figured he would be at this point in his career. He is already an acceptable NBA player. A long way from a great NBA player, a good NBA player, or even decent NBA player, but still not bad for a kid that never played against college basketball talent let alone the likes of Carmelo Anthony who he guarded at times against the Knicks.
I have given up rooting for the Bucks this year, or even just trying to enjoy some good basketball (unless I am watching the Spurs fundamentally destroy the Bucks). I still watch the games, but I'm not really watching the Bucks. I'm just watching Giannis and Henson to see how they play, and how they develop. Sadly this is far more interesting than watching the Bucks. Tonight Giannis got the ball on the wing, took a couple dribbles to create space and calmly drained a step back 3 as the shot clock was winding down. The splash plays like that give me hope that I could be watching him as an All-Star caliber player some day. For now I'll just have to settle for watching a young kid learn.
The Bucks try (mostly unsuccessfully) to run because their offense is so bad, and Giannis has shown his ability to finish in transition and make a spectacular pass. For every big dunk or nice pass there are many more lapses. Against the Knicks he was caught guarding Andrea Bargnani on the perimeter who cannot do anything out there but shoot. Giannis got caught looking and Bargnani drained a 3 as Giannis realized he was late on the close out. These mistakes are quite common, but not unforgiveable for a kid that just turned 19. Hopefully he will learn from these mistakes. Even with all the mistakes Giannis is way ahead of where I figured he would be at this point in his career. He is already an acceptable NBA player. A long way from a great NBA player, a good NBA player, or even decent NBA player, but still not bad for a kid that never played against college basketball talent let alone the likes of Carmelo Anthony who he guarded at times against the Knicks.
I have given up rooting for the Bucks this year, or even just trying to enjoy some good basketball (unless I am watching the Spurs fundamentally destroy the Bucks). I still watch the games, but I'm not really watching the Bucks. I'm just watching Giannis and Henson to see how they play, and how they develop. Sadly this is far more interesting than watching the Bucks. Tonight Giannis got the ball on the wing, took a couple dribbles to create space and calmly drained a step back 3 as the shot clock was winding down. The splash plays like that give me hope that I could be watching him as an All-Star caliber player some day. For now I'll just have to settle for watching a young kid learn.
Weekend College Basketball Picks
No Badger game again this weekend, but there are some interesting games. I noticed that the hoops writers at cbssports.com made picks against the spread for 10 of the more interesting games this weekend, so I thought I'd make my picks for those games as well. To be clear: I would never gamble on basketball, because the point spread is so fickle. But this is a way to maybe make my life a little more interesting and fun, so screw you. Chorlton, I dare you to beat me. You too, Osterholm (who is in danger of having his new posting rights revoked on the basis of inactivity.)
Notre Dame at Ohio State -8
This is what I'm talking about with point spreads in college basketball. I know Ohio State will win, but by how much? It's likely to come down to: (1) does Notre Dame make a couple of late three-pointers? and (2) does Ohio State make its low-leverage free throws?
Notre Dame is coming off a neutral court win over mediocre Indiana, but they've got a couple of bad losses. Ohio State has won every game by double digits, though Delaware hung close with them the other night.
Notre Dame can score, and this should be a low-pace affair. So I like Notre Dame to cover but lose. (This follows my first rule of thumb: if all three CBS guys picked the favorite to cover, I'm going the other way.)
UPDATE: This game is actually in Nee York, which makes it semi-home for Notre Dame if anything, and I therefore withdraw my statement that "I know OSU will win."
Michigan State at Texas +3
Michigan State still has injury problems, and Texas is coming off a shocking victory at North Carolina. If Texas wins this game, they will have cobbled together a tourney-worthy non-conference resume. But that seems unlikely, as they just squeaked by Mercer, UT-San Antonio, Vandy, and Temple (all sub-100 teams in the Kenpom ratings).
One thing that makes me want to pick Texas is that they had a preseason T-Rank of 43, and a preseason Kenpom rating of 80. So they are moving in the right direction, and I want it to be the case that my algorithm saw something Kenpom's didn't. I root for the T-Rank.
But it's just hard to imagine that Michigan State loses this game, and three points doesn't seem like enough. So I'm taking MSU to win and cover.
Oklahoma St. at Colorado +7
This is a battle between two teams the T-Rank underrated. It had Oklahoma State at 19 and Colorado at 66, compared to Kenpom preseason ratings of 4 and 39. I'd rather have it been wrong about Colorado, since that was a bigger outlier, so I'll take Oklahoma State to win and cover.
BYU at Oregon -10
Here's a T-Rank special: BYU was 64 and Oregon was 22 compared to Kenpom 48 and 56. Oregon has no moved up to 20 and BYU is still at 47, so I'm rooting for a big Oregon win.
But 10 points? That's tough. It will be a high-pace game between two teams who don't play defense. So Oregon could certainly run away things late. Still, it's just so easy for a team to make even a blow-out look close with some late buckets by scrubs. And I wouldn't be shocked by a BYU outright win here.
But I'll go with my rooting interest: Oregon to win and cover.
Georgetown at Kansas -8
I will take the points in this one, but Kansas wins. Kansas has played a brutal schedule, and it continues here. There has been some foolish talk about Kansas given their schedule. Talk like about how Tyler Ennis has been more impressive than Andrew Wiggins (his fellow Canadian). That's nonsense. Kansas has lost to three really good teams away from home. They aren't going to lose at home. But T-Rank tells me G'Town has underachieved, so I'll root for them to keep it close in the loss.
Belmont at Kentucky -17
Ah, who the hell knows. Belmont did win at North Carolina, but they aren't very good this year. They've lost 3 of their last 4, including not-so-good losses to South Dakota St. and Denver on the road. They might well be due to just lay an egg. But this game is a random number generator, so I will go with my heart: Belmont covers in a loss.
Gonzaga at Kansas St. +6
A home underdog in college basketball is a powerful force, but this game is actually in Wichita, not the little apple. Despite my first rule of thumb, I will take Gonzaga to win and cover.
UMass at Florida St. +2
Obviously I'm rooting for the Seminoles in this game. Upset special! Bonus rooting interest is to eliminate Umass from the "ranks of the unbeaten."
Missouri at Illinois +1
It's a pick 'em game on a neutral court. Missouri is undefeated and therefore due for a loss. But Missouri was a T-Rank outlier at 27th (compared to 49 in Kenpom preseason and 45 now). So I'll take Missouri. A push here wouldn't surprise me.
UConn at Washington +5
Previously undefeated UConn just lost a shocker at home to Stanford, and now faces another PAC-12 opponent for its first road game. This is Washington's only chance for an impressive non-conference win, but they are not a good team.
UConn was #10 in the T-Rank, so on that basis I should be cheering for them. On the other hand, I essentially called their home loss to Stanford, despite a certain writer's claim that they didn't face any "possible" losses until their game at SMU. It would be pretty sweet if they lost two of these unlosable games. For that reason, I will take Washington to win outright.
If I do well, I'll brag about these picks next week. If I don't, I will delete this post.
Notre Dame at Ohio State -8
This is what I'm talking about with point spreads in college basketball. I know Ohio State will win, but by how much? It's likely to come down to: (1) does Notre Dame make a couple of late three-pointers? and (2) does Ohio State make its low-leverage free throws?
Notre Dame is coming off a neutral court win over mediocre Indiana, but they've got a couple of bad losses. Ohio State has won every game by double digits, though Delaware hung close with them the other night.
Notre Dame can score, and this should be a low-pace affair. So I like Notre Dame to cover but lose. (This follows my first rule of thumb: if all three CBS guys picked the favorite to cover, I'm going the other way.)
UPDATE: This game is actually in Nee York, which makes it semi-home for Notre Dame if anything, and I therefore withdraw my statement that "I know OSU will win."
Michigan State at Texas +3
Michigan State still has injury problems, and Texas is coming off a shocking victory at North Carolina. If Texas wins this game, they will have cobbled together a tourney-worthy non-conference resume. But that seems unlikely, as they just squeaked by Mercer, UT-San Antonio, Vandy, and Temple (all sub-100 teams in the Kenpom ratings).
One thing that makes me want to pick Texas is that they had a preseason T-Rank of 43, and a preseason Kenpom rating of 80. So they are moving in the right direction, and I want it to be the case that my algorithm saw something Kenpom's didn't. I root for the T-Rank.
But it's just hard to imagine that Michigan State loses this game, and three points doesn't seem like enough. So I'm taking MSU to win and cover.
Oklahoma St. at Colorado +7
This is a battle between two teams the T-Rank underrated. It had Oklahoma State at 19 and Colorado at 66, compared to Kenpom preseason ratings of 4 and 39. I'd rather have it been wrong about Colorado, since that was a bigger outlier, so I'll take Oklahoma State to win and cover.
BYU at Oregon -10
Here's a T-Rank special: BYU was 64 and Oregon was 22 compared to Kenpom 48 and 56. Oregon has no moved up to 20 and BYU is still at 47, so I'm rooting for a big Oregon win.
But 10 points? That's tough. It will be a high-pace game between two teams who don't play defense. So Oregon could certainly run away things late. Still, it's just so easy for a team to make even a blow-out look close with some late buckets by scrubs. And I wouldn't be shocked by a BYU outright win here.
But I'll go with my rooting interest: Oregon to win and cover.
Georgetown at Kansas -8
I will take the points in this one, but Kansas wins. Kansas has played a brutal schedule, and it continues here. There has been some foolish talk about Kansas given their schedule. Talk like about how Tyler Ennis has been more impressive than Andrew Wiggins (his fellow Canadian). That's nonsense. Kansas has lost to three really good teams away from home. They aren't going to lose at home. But T-Rank tells me G'Town has underachieved, so I'll root for them to keep it close in the loss.
Belmont at Kentucky -17
Ah, who the hell knows. Belmont did win at North Carolina, but they aren't very good this year. They've lost 3 of their last 4, including not-so-good losses to South Dakota St. and Denver on the road. They might well be due to just lay an egg. But this game is a random number generator, so I will go with my heart: Belmont covers in a loss.
Gonzaga at Kansas St. +6
A home underdog in college basketball is a powerful force, but this game is actually in Wichita, not the little apple. Despite my first rule of thumb, I will take Gonzaga to win and cover.
UMass at Florida St. +2
Obviously I'm rooting for the Seminoles in this game. Upset special! Bonus rooting interest is to eliminate Umass from the "ranks of the unbeaten."
Missouri at Illinois +1
It's a pick 'em game on a neutral court. Missouri is undefeated and therefore due for a loss. But Missouri was a T-Rank outlier at 27th (compared to 49 in Kenpom preseason and 45 now). So I'll take Missouri. A push here wouldn't surprise me.
UConn at Washington +5
Previously undefeated UConn just lost a shocker at home to Stanford, and now faces another PAC-12 opponent for its first road game. This is Washington's only chance for an impressive non-conference win, but they are not a good team.
UConn was #10 in the T-Rank, so on that basis I should be cheering for them. On the other hand, I essentially called their home loss to Stanford, despite a certain writer's claim that they didn't face any "possible" losses until their game at SMU. It would be pretty sweet if they lost two of these unlosable games. For that reason, I will take Washington to win outright.
If I do well, I'll brag about these picks next week. If I don't, I will delete this post.
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Surprise team: Florida State
Last night, Florida State destroyed Charlotte, 106-62. Charlotte is an okay team that upset Michigan on a neutral court (although they have some bad losses as well). Florida State also has a nice win over VCU, and its only losses are close ones to Michigan (OT, neutral court), @Florida (67-66), and @Minnesota (71-66).
As a result, they've risen from 105th to 34th in the Kenpom ratings, and they are the only team in the current top 50 that I didn't bother to rate in my own T-Rank preseason ratings. I didn't bother to rank them because they finished 121st in last year's Kenpom ratings, and didn't turn up in the top 75 of any of the other preseason rating systems. Since I was just trying to get a top 40 or 50, this seemed like a safe margin.
But the nice thing about T-Rank is that I can go back and retroactively rank teams since it is all based on historical data and projected rosters. When I did this, I got a nice surprise: turns out, Florida State would have been ranked number 36 in the T-Rank. Nailed it! (Sort of.)
Why was Florida State rated so highly in the T-Rank? Well, they returned four starters from last year's team, including three freshmen. My system expects players who play as freshmen to take a big leap as sophomores. They also returned a good amount of their minutes, about 70%. Third, last year was an aberration for Leonard Hamilton, who had been to the previous four NCAA tournaments; my system uses data from the previous three seasons to come up with the T-Rank, so the effect of one bad season can be deemphasized.
Why was Florida State so underrated by the pundits and other rating systems? Well, Florida State wasn't bringing in any top recruits or transfers. In fact, two players transferred out (Terrance Shannon and Terry Whisnant), though neither was a major contributor on last year's team. Most importantly, they lost by far their best player from last year's team, Michael Snaer. So there were big question marks surrounding this team.
For the record, here are the other teams currently in the Kenpom top-75 that I did not rate for the preseason T-Rank:
52: SMU
56: Drexel
61: West Virginia
64: Geo. Washington
67: Indiana St.
68: Princeton
70: New Mex. St.
72: UC Santa Barbara
74: Toledo
If any of these teams makes a run toward the bubble, I will retroactively T-Rank them as well. Hopefully next year I will have time to rank every D-1 team before the season so we can avoid these kinds of surprises.
As a result, they've risen from 105th to 34th in the Kenpom ratings, and they are the only team in the current top 50 that I didn't bother to rate in my own T-Rank preseason ratings. I didn't bother to rank them because they finished 121st in last year's Kenpom ratings, and didn't turn up in the top 75 of any of the other preseason rating systems. Since I was just trying to get a top 40 or 50, this seemed like a safe margin.
But the nice thing about T-Rank is that I can go back and retroactively rank teams since it is all based on historical data and projected rosters. When I did this, I got a nice surprise: turns out, Florida State would have been ranked number 36 in the T-Rank. Nailed it! (Sort of.)
Why was Florida State rated so highly in the T-Rank? Well, they returned four starters from last year's team, including three freshmen. My system expects players who play as freshmen to take a big leap as sophomores. They also returned a good amount of their minutes, about 70%. Third, last year was an aberration for Leonard Hamilton, who had been to the previous four NCAA tournaments; my system uses data from the previous three seasons to come up with the T-Rank, so the effect of one bad season can be deemphasized.
Why was Florida State so underrated by the pundits and other rating systems? Well, Florida State wasn't bringing in any top recruits or transfers. In fact, two players transferred out (Terrance Shannon and Terry Whisnant), though neither was a major contributor on last year's team. Most importantly, they lost by far their best player from last year's team, Michael Snaer. So there were big question marks surrounding this team.
For the record, here are the other teams currently in the Kenpom top-75 that I did not rate for the preseason T-Rank:
52: SMU
56: Drexel
61: West Virginia
64: Geo. Washington
67: Indiana St.
68: Princeton
70: New Mex. St.
72: UC Santa Barbara
74: Toledo
If any of these teams makes a run toward the bubble, I will retroactively T-Rank them as well. Hopefully next year I will have time to rank every D-1 team before the season so we can avoid these kinds of surprises.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Another Ben Brust StatWatch™: Leading the conference in 3-pointers
As I've already detailed, Ben Brust is hunting down his own single-season mark and the Badgers' career record for most three-pointers made. After hitting five threes against EKU, Brust now just needs to average 2.6 threes per game over the Badgers' 21 remaining games (19 regular season and at least 2 post-season) to break Locum's career mark. This could come down to how many post-season wins the Badgers get. Hopefully it will be a bunch.
But Brust has one more three-related milestone in target: leading the Big Ten. His 34 threes currently leads the Big Ten. Yogi Ferrell is second with 29, and Nik Stauskus has 25 in just nine games. Brust has a narrow lead over Stauskus in threes per game (2.83 to 2.77). So, something else to keep an eye on.
As far as I can tell, the last time the Badgers had a player lead the league in three-pointers was 1992-93, when Michael Finley made 63, three more than Shawn "The Truth" Respert.
But Brust has one more three-related milestone in target: leading the Big Ten. His 34 threes currently leads the Big Ten. Yogi Ferrell is second with 29, and Nik Stauskus has 25 in just nine games. Brust has a narrow lead over Stauskus in threes per game (2.83 to 2.77). So, something else to keep an eye on.
As far as I can tell, the last time the Badgers had a player lead the league in three-pointers was 1992-93, when Michael Finley made 63, three more than Shawn "The Truth" Respert.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Badgers' Ball Screen Defense
Eastern Kentucky's coach had an interesting comment after his team got blown out by Wisconsin yesterday:
Coach Ryan is obviously incredibly well respected for a great reason. His ball-screen defense is so unique and it caused us to try some different things. And they weren’t very effective.What is unique about Wisconsin's ball screen defense? It's a little beyond my ken, frankly. But I know this is a special interest of yours, Chorlton, so I thought I'd ask.
Indiana: On the Bubble
Indiana lost to Notre Dame at home in Indianapolis yesterday, dropping them to 8-3 with other losses to UConn (neutral) and at Syracuse. The losses aren't terrible, but they have no good wins. Their two remaining non-conference games are cupcakes, so they won't be getting any good wins before the Big Ten season. A neutral court win over middling Washington (5-4, #133 Kenpom) will be their best non-con win.
Their current profile is certainly that of a bubble team. They have an RPI of 90 due to a fairly weak schedule. Obviously, it's too early to take the RPI seriously. But their projected RPI is 49th. And they've dropped to 39th in the Kenpom ratings, which projects them to go 9-9 in the Big Ten.
Will 9-9 get Indiana in the tournament? That would be a 19-12 record going into the Big Ten tournament, so they'd probably have to win their first-round game. Of course, it also depends on who they beat; they'll have to collect some scalps. They'll have opportunities, as they get 6 games against UW, MSU, and Michigan. They get Ohio State and Iowa just once, but at home. They'll probably need to win at least four of those eight games.
Two of their first four Big Ten games are home games against MSU (Jan. 4) and Wisconsin (Jan. 14). If they lose to MSU, the game against Wisconsin will be something like a must-win.
It would be hard to imagine a more satisfying victory than one that bursts Indiana's bubble.
Their current profile is certainly that of a bubble team. They have an RPI of 90 due to a fairly weak schedule. Obviously, it's too early to take the RPI seriously. But their projected RPI is 49th. And they've dropped to 39th in the Kenpom ratings, which projects them to go 9-9 in the Big Ten.
Will 9-9 get Indiana in the tournament? That would be a 19-12 record going into the Big Ten tournament, so they'd probably have to win their first-round game. Of course, it also depends on who they beat; they'll have to collect some scalps. They'll have opportunities, as they get 6 games against UW, MSU, and Michigan. They get Ohio State and Iowa just once, but at home. They'll probably need to win at least four of those eight games.
Two of their first four Big Ten games are home games against MSU (Jan. 4) and Wisconsin (Jan. 14). If they lose to MSU, the game against Wisconsin will be something like a must-win.
It would be hard to imagine a more satisfying victory than one that bursts Indiana's bubble.
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Big Ten over rated?
Big day for the Big Ten today. While UW has had a great non-conference season and will now coast into the Big Ten Season with a couple cupcakes in the next couple weeks, the rest of the Big Ten cannot say the same. The Big Ten has struggled against non-cupcakes this year and by my quick and unofficial count has just 2 wins against teams currently ranked in the top 25 (MSU vs. Kentucky, and UW vs. Florida). It's not for lack of opportunities. By my unofficial count the Big Ten is 2-11 against teams currently ranked in the top 25. There are also just not a lot of good wins in general.
Here's a quick list of mostly major conference opponents:
OSU beat Maryland and Marquette, still has Notre Dame
MSU beat Kentucky and Oklahoma, lost to UNC, still has @Texas
Iowa beat Notre Dame, lost @ISU and Villanova, no more big games
Minn beat FSU and lost to Arkansas, Cuse, no more big games
Indiana beat Washington, lost to UConn and @Cuse, still plays Notre Dame
Purdue beat BC, lost to Washington St and OKST, still has @West Virginia
PSU beat St Johns, lost to Ole Miss and @Pitt, no more big games
Mich beat FSU, lost to ISU, Charlotte and @Duke, still has AZ and Stanford
Nebraska beat Georgia and Miami, lost to UAB, UMass, @Creighton, no more big games
Northwestern lost @Stanford, @NCST, UCLA and Mizzu, no more big games
Much has been made about the poor strength of schedule in the Big Ten. The Big Ten had better start racking up some wins. There are 3 major conference opponents today, plus Purdue gets Butler.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Wisconsin Sports Person of the Year
The prestigious Bart Torvik Wisconsin Sports Person of the year for 2013 is:
Bo Ryan.
He has now won the award 12 years in a row.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Court storming time?
Looks like the Badgers will finish their non-conference season undefeated with only 3 home games remaining against lesser competition. The first 3 Big Ten games are @Northwestern, Iowa, and IL. If Northwestern pulled the upset I would imagine there will be a court storming, and deservedly so. Although I'm not sure there are enough Northwestern fans at their home games to actually fill the court.
The 4th Big Ten game is @Indiana. If UW is undefeated they will likely be a top 3 team when they play Indiana. On top of that, IU has a 12 game losing streak vs. UW. Under normal circumstances I would say any time an unranked team (as IU will likely be) beats a top 3 team a court storming is acceptable. When you throw in the long losing streak against UW, a court storming seems inevitable if IU were to win at home. The last time IU beat UW was in 2007, and you will probably remember this scene:
IU fans storming the court after beating UW was as big a sign that UW was now a part of the college basketball elite as anything I've seen. Maybe I'm just old. I grew up watching Bobby Knight win 31 consecutive games against UW from 1980-1997. I was a college Junior before I got to see UW beat IU (I didn't watch much basketball when I was under 4). It may be undignified for fans at schools like IU, Kentucky, Duke, UNC, etc. to storm the court, but for fans of UW it sure makes a loss a little more tolerable when it happens.
Common sense tells me that UW will lose a game at some point this year. If that loss occurs on the road, then there will likely be a court storming. I sure hope IU doesn't get to do it, as I so enjoy watching Crean pout.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Seattle
I was surprised to notice as I was looking at stats tonight that the Seahawks are the 2nd highest scoring team in the NFL (not including the Monday/Sunday night games). They also have the 2nd best scoring defense, but everyone knows they have a great defense. It's not like they have been playing slouches all season either. They have already played several of the top defenses in the league, Carolina (1st), San Francisco twice (3rd), New Orleans (6th), Arizona (8th), Tennessee (11th), Indy (12th), and St Louis (14th). They still have to play St Louis and AZ again in the last 3 games. That's 10 of 16 games vs. top 14 defenses, so their scoring is no joke.
These guys are good.
StatWatch™: Ben Brust and Three-Pointers -- UPDATED
Last year Ben Brust set the record for most three-pointers made in a season by a Badger (79). The world was first alerted that this might happen by a perceptive StatWatch™ piece by a certain blogger.
Brust has25 28 threes already this season, so he is on pace to challenge that record. Which brings to mind the question: is the career record in jeopardy?
Yes. Tim Locum has the career record for the Badgers, at 227 career three-pointers made. Brust currently has made a total of161 164, so he needs another 63. At his current pace, he'd need another 27 games to get it. That's six post-season games. So it's unlikely, but worth tracking.
UPDATE:
I think the career numbers I was using for Brust didn't include the Marquette game, so he had 3 more threes than I gave him credit for. I've corrected the numbers above to correspond to what they should have been at the time of the original post. As it stands now, on December 12th, he has 168 threes in his career, meaning he needs 60 more to break Locum's record. That's 2.5 a game over 24 games (meaning two post-season wins). Should be a barn-burner.
Brust has
Yes. Tim Locum has the career record for the Badgers, at 227 career three-pointers made. Brust currently has made a total of
UPDATE:
I think the career numbers I was using for Brust didn't include the Marquette game, so he had 3 more threes than I gave him credit for. I've corrected the numbers above to correspond to what they should have been at the time of the original post. As it stands now, on December 12th, he has 168 threes in his career, meaning he needs 60 more to break Locum's record. That's 2.5 a game over 24 games (meaning two post-season wins). Should be a barn-burner.
StatWatch™: Jackson's assists
After 10 games, Traevon Jackson has 48 assists. I put those numbers into a spreadsheet and it informed me that he is averaging 4.8 assists per game. His assist rate (the tempo-neutral assist stat) is 30.1%.
To put those numbers in perspective, Jordan Taylor averaged 4.7 assists per game and had an assist rate of 30.4% in his great year (2010-11). Devin Harris averaged 4.4 APG his junior year.
I doubt Jackson will keep this rate up, but if he does he's got some even more impressive feats within striking distance. The Wisconsin record for assists in a season is 179, by Tracy Webster in 1992-93. At his current rate, Jackson would break that record in 38 games. The Badgers will play 31 regular season games, so this would require a bunch of post-season games—but not outside the realm of possibility.
Jackson is also averaging 5.3 apg in his last 7 games. If he keeps that pace up, he'd break the record in the Badgers' 35th game. I'd be very surprised if the Badgers don't get 35 games this year.
So I'll be keeping an eye on Jackson's assists.
To put those numbers in perspective, Jordan Taylor averaged 4.7 assists per game and had an assist rate of 30.4% in his great year (2010-11). Devin Harris averaged 4.4 APG his junior year.
I doubt Jackson will keep this rate up, but if he does he's got some even more impressive feats within striking distance. The Wisconsin record for assists in a season is 179, by Tracy Webster in 1992-93. At his current rate, Jackson would break that record in 38 games. The Badgers will play 31 regular season games, so this would require a bunch of post-season games—but not outside the realm of possibility.
Jackson is also averaging 5.3 apg in his last 7 games. If he keeps that pace up, he'd break the record in the Badgers' 35th game. I'd be very surprised if the Badgers don't get 35 games this year.
So I'll be keeping an eye on Jackson's assists.
Utah State update; Missouri on the radar
Well, it looks like I put the hex on Utah State. A while ago I noted that they were off to a good start, but had a test coming up with BYU. They played a good game with BYU, but ended up losing. Then yesterday they got upset at home by Pacific. So much for all that.
But another T-Rank outlier has come to the forefront: Missouri. They were one of the top upside outliers, ranking #27 in the T-Rank while languishing down at 49 and 52 in Pomeroy and Hanner's preseason ratings. Well, all they've done is win their first nine games, including a big win yesterday over UCLA. They're only up to 40 in the Kenpom ratings, but that still incorporates some his preseason bias.
They've got a couple more non-conference tests coming up against NC State and Illinois. We'll see if this is another hex.
But another T-Rank outlier has come to the forefront: Missouri. They were one of the top upside outliers, ranking #27 in the T-Rank while languishing down at 49 and 52 in Pomeroy and Hanner's preseason ratings. Well, all they've done is win their first nine games, including a big win yesterday over UCLA. They're only up to 40 in the Kenpom ratings, but that still incorporates some his preseason bias.
They've got a couple more non-conference tests coming up against NC State and Illinois. We'll see if this is another hex.
Saturday, December 7, 2013
10-0
Most seasons in most sports end in disappointment. So as a fan you have to enjoy the ride, and savor the highlights and accomplishments along the way.
The Badgers are 10-0 against the toughest schedule that any major conference team has played. This season has been a triumph so far. I am enjoying it.
The Badgers are 10-0 against the toughest schedule that any major conference team has played. This season has been a triumph so far. I am enjoying it.
Marshall's transfer
News broke today that George Marshall will transfer.
This is understandable, but disappointing. Koenig had passed Marshall on the depth chart, so Marshall's minutes were likely to be sparse for the rest of the season barring an injury. But that proviso is important: Marshall provided a great insurance policy in case of an injury or serious foul trouble. He is the kind of guy who could come off the bench and explode for 20 points out of the blue.
But the handwriting was on the wall for George. With Gasser's injury leading to an unexpected redshirt last year, the pathway to playing time for Marshall got extended yet another year. I think he would have gotten serious minutes here as a senior, at least, but it seems unlikely he was ever going to start at point guard with Koenig in front of him.
This is understandable, but disappointing. Koenig had passed Marshall on the depth chart, so Marshall's minutes were likely to be sparse for the rest of the season barring an injury. But that proviso is important: Marshall provided a great insurance policy in case of an injury or serious foul trouble. He is the kind of guy who could come off the bench and explode for 20 points out of the blue.
But the handwriting was on the wall for George. With Gasser's injury leading to an unexpected redshirt last year, the pathway to playing time for Marshall got extended yet another year. I think he would have gotten serious minutes here as a senior, at least, but it seems unlikely he was ever going to start at point guard with Koenig in front of him.
Friday, December 6, 2013
Torvik's Big Ten Preview
Chorlton is the master at in-depth previews of every Big Ten team. I can only pretend to have his depth of knowledge. And I will do so now.
Chorlton put things in terms of top and bottom. Instead of an upper and lower division, I think there are really four pretty clear divisions this year, and I'm going to predict that none of the teams in my four divisions will finish more than one division above or below the slot I assign them to. Put it in the book. Here we go.
Division #1:
Michigan State
Ohio State
Wisconsin
One of these three teams will win the Big Ten. (Keep in mind that there might be like a five-way tie for the Big Ten title.)
MSU was the clear pre-season favorite, and rightfully so. But though they've been ranked #1 for three weeks, they've gone through a few of their typical early season woes. A close game at home to Columbia was disturbing. Then they got destroyed at home by North Carolina, as usual. WTF, MSU? Thankfully, they've got an easy excuse: they aren't 100%. Star Gary Harris has a gimpy ankle, and Adreian Payne apparently has plantar fasciitis, which I believe is the sudden emergence of a third big toe (usually somewhere on the foot). Unfortunately, there's no guarantee these injury problems are going to resolve. Gary Harris seems a little ... fragile. And who knows how many more toes Payne might grow. Still, even at 90% this team has the talent and experience to contend nationally. I have begun to doubt whether they've got the balls to win the Big Ten, but they'll be in the mix.
Last year I made the mistake of underestimating Ohio State. Never again! Matta is a master, and Ohio State is doing its thang™ again. They are going to be great on defense, the only question is whether they can score enough. Luckily for them, scoring is often optional in B1G conference play.
As I've documented, Wisconsin has already had probably the best non-conference season in the history of the program. The win over Virginia was the most impressive of all, as it showed they could get down 'n dirty. I've had some concerns about their defense, but as time goes on these are dissipating. Indeed, their weakest defensive performance have come against lesser foes and their best defensive performances have come in their toughest games. Look at this picture:
On the y-axis is the Kenpom win probability for each of Wisconsin's games. (To put it in terms Chorlton can understand: The higher it is, the more likely they were to win that game.) On the x-axis is the Badgers' corresponding defensive performance in that game. For example, in the lower left you've got the Virginia game, where they had a 30% chance of winning but held Virginia to .67 points per possession. On the upper right is the North Dakota game—they were 96% likely to win, but gave up 1.15 PPP.
So this chart shows a very clear trend, but it is exactly backwards. You'd expect the Badgers to allow more points to the better teams, but the opposite is true. It's a mystery. But here's my thought: these guys rise to the occasion.
Division #2:
Michigan
Iowa
Indiana
Chorlton wrote the book on these teams already, and we agree they'll finish 4-6. So just a few brief notes:
Michigan misses Trey Burke a lot, as any team would. He was a three-star recruit who became national player of the year as a sophomore. No one appreciates how good he really was, and thus Michigan is overrated. This is a big year for Beilein. If they revert to pre-Burke semi-mediocrity, my old opinion that he's more of a Tubby Smith than a Bo Ryan will be redeemed.
Iowa is definitely on the rise, and I actually think they're the most likely of these Division #2 teams to win the Big Ten. But they have serious flaws as well. In particular, they still struggle in the half court on offense. As we know, running won't get it done in the Big Ten, so you have to figure out a way to scrounge up baskets. Iowa lost a lot of close games last year because they just couldn't score at the end of games when things got tight. They've got all the same players, and could have the same problems.
Indiana does have some good freshmen. From what I've seen, Vonleh could be really good. I hope he leaves after this year. But this is a team that will struggle in the Big Ten. They're more likely to fall into the NIT than win the Big Ten.
Division #3:
Purdue
Illinois
Minnesota
One of these three teams will surprise us, but I'm not sure which one. Purdue has looked terrible at times this season, but I refuse to believe they won't improve. Illinois has a bunch of freshman, as Chorlton noted, and maybe they'll get good this year (but I doubt it). Minnesota has Austin Hollins (or maybe it's Andre who's good) and a bunch of other guys, and they'll get some wins at home. Which one of these teams will put together a lucky season? My bet is on Purdue because they have the best coach.
Division #4:
Penn State
Nebraska
Northwestern
I actually disagree with Chorlton, and have observed some improvement in his beloved "bottom." Well, not in Northwestern. But Penn State and Nebraska could win some big games at home.
Okay, I've run out of gas. Prediction time.
OSU, 14-4
WI, 13-5
MSU, 13-5
Mich., 11-7
Iowa, 11-7
Ind., 10-8
Ill., 8-10
Minn., 8-10
Purd., 8-10
PSU, 5-13
Neb., 4-14
NW, 3-15
Chorlton put things in terms of top and bottom. Instead of an upper and lower division, I think there are really four pretty clear divisions this year, and I'm going to predict that none of the teams in my four divisions will finish more than one division above or below the slot I assign them to. Put it in the book. Here we go.
Division #1:
Michigan State
Ohio State
Wisconsin
One of these three teams will win the Big Ten. (Keep in mind that there might be like a five-way tie for the Big Ten title.)
MSU was the clear pre-season favorite, and rightfully so. But though they've been ranked #1 for three weeks, they've gone through a few of their typical early season woes. A close game at home to Columbia was disturbing. Then they got destroyed at home by North Carolina, as usual. WTF, MSU? Thankfully, they've got an easy excuse: they aren't 100%. Star Gary Harris has a gimpy ankle, and Adreian Payne apparently has plantar fasciitis, which I believe is the sudden emergence of a third big toe (usually somewhere on the foot). Unfortunately, there's no guarantee these injury problems are going to resolve. Gary Harris seems a little ... fragile. And who knows how many more toes Payne might grow. Still, even at 90% this team has the talent and experience to contend nationally. I have begun to doubt whether they've got the balls to win the Big Ten, but they'll be in the mix.
Last year I made the mistake of underestimating Ohio State. Never again! Matta is a master, and Ohio State is doing its thang™ again. They are going to be great on defense, the only question is whether they can score enough. Luckily for them, scoring is often optional in B1G conference play.
As I've documented, Wisconsin has already had probably the best non-conference season in the history of the program. The win over Virginia was the most impressive of all, as it showed they could get down 'n dirty. I've had some concerns about their defense, but as time goes on these are dissipating. Indeed, their weakest defensive performance have come against lesser foes and their best defensive performances have come in their toughest games. Look at this picture:
On the y-axis is the Kenpom win probability for each of Wisconsin's games. (To put it in terms Chorlton can understand: The higher it is, the more likely they were to win that game.) On the x-axis is the Badgers' corresponding defensive performance in that game. For example, in the lower left you've got the Virginia game, where they had a 30% chance of winning but held Virginia to .67 points per possession. On the upper right is the North Dakota game—they were 96% likely to win, but gave up 1.15 PPP.
So this chart shows a very clear trend, but it is exactly backwards. You'd expect the Badgers to allow more points to the better teams, but the opposite is true. It's a mystery. But here's my thought: these guys rise to the occasion.
Division #2:
Michigan
Iowa
Indiana
Chorlton wrote the book on these teams already, and we agree they'll finish 4-6. So just a few brief notes:
Michigan misses Trey Burke a lot, as any team would. He was a three-star recruit who became national player of the year as a sophomore. No one appreciates how good he really was, and thus Michigan is overrated. This is a big year for Beilein. If they revert to pre-Burke semi-mediocrity, my old opinion that he's more of a Tubby Smith than a Bo Ryan will be redeemed.
Iowa is definitely on the rise, and I actually think they're the most likely of these Division #2 teams to win the Big Ten. But they have serious flaws as well. In particular, they still struggle in the half court on offense. As we know, running won't get it done in the Big Ten, so you have to figure out a way to scrounge up baskets. Iowa lost a lot of close games last year because they just couldn't score at the end of games when things got tight. They've got all the same players, and could have the same problems.
Indiana does have some good freshmen. From what I've seen, Vonleh could be really good. I hope he leaves after this year. But this is a team that will struggle in the Big Ten. They're more likely to fall into the NIT than win the Big Ten.
Division #3:
Purdue
Illinois
Minnesota
One of these three teams will surprise us, but I'm not sure which one. Purdue has looked terrible at times this season, but I refuse to believe they won't improve. Illinois has a bunch of freshman, as Chorlton noted, and maybe they'll get good this year (but I doubt it). Minnesota has Austin Hollins (or maybe it's Andre who's good) and a bunch of other guys, and they'll get some wins at home. Which one of these teams will put together a lucky season? My bet is on Purdue because they have the best coach.
Division #4:
Penn State
Nebraska
Northwestern
I actually disagree with Chorlton, and have observed some improvement in his beloved "bottom." Well, not in Northwestern. But Penn State and Nebraska could win some big games at home.
Okay, I've run out of gas. Prediction time.
OSU, 14-4
WI, 13-5
MSU, 13-5
Mich., 11-7
Iowa, 11-7
Ind., 10-8
Ill., 8-10
Minn., 8-10
Purd., 8-10
PSU, 5-13
Neb., 4-14
NW, 3-15
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Big Ten bottom
Some people think the Big Ten will be tougher than last year because the bottom teams will be better. This is largely based on an bunch of players returning from last year after having some success, some others returning from injury, and several transfers. I am not one of these people. I see only 2 teams that have a chance at to make the NCAA in the bottom of the Big Ten, and that chance is slim. The 4 other teams look pretty bad, and only one looks good enough to make a run to the NIT.
Illinois
After a spectacular non-conference season last year IL came back down to earth and finished 8-10 in Big Ten play. They still made the tourney largely because of those non-conference wins. Of the 8 players that played in 35 games for IL last season, 5 are gone (Paul, Richardson, Griffey, McLaurin graduated, Henry transferred). With a spectacular recruiting class coming in this year I expected IL to go young, and end up looking a lot like Purdue last season. Instead IL has an experienced starting 5 of 2 seniors and 3 juniors including the 3 holdovers from last season (Abrams, Bertrand, Egwu) and 2 transfers (Rice and Ekey). The 5 freshman come off the bench, but only Tate gets major minutes. He is getting about 20 min/game and averaging about 4ppg, and 4 assists. This group should mature as the season goes on and let IL compete in future years to get back to the top of the conference.
Does IL make the tourney? Maybe, but if so it will be just barely. IL has a very tough conference schedule so they will have plenty of chances to get quality wins. IL has 11 games against the top 6, and just 7 against the bottom. They get MI and Purdue only once at home, and Northwestern and Minn once on the road. If they can pull off a few upsets at home I think they will have done enough with a very tough strength of schedule to get in, probably with a losing conference record for the second year in a row.
Purdue
Last year Purdue struggled early while a bunch of talented freshman got their feet wet, but finished strong going 8-10 in conference play. I figured this team would make a jump this season with all those guys coming back, but now I'm not so sure. The top 3 scorers return, (Johnson, Johnson and Hammonds) but the 4th Byrd graduated and he was the only perimeter threat on the team last year. This team may be effected by the rules changes more than any team in the Big Ten. Purdue's lack of shooters on the perimeter won't allow them to take advantage off all the open looks available with no hand checking allowed. Against Oklahoma State's pack it in zone they looked lost on offense. Purdue also suffers defensively as Painter has always taught a half court defense heavy on ball pressure that is very hard to do with the hand check rules. Painter likes to pressure the ball handler which makes it hard for that player to get up a shot or make an entry pass into the post. Think of Chris Kramer all over the opponents point guard, harassing them into bad passes and getting steals. Look for Purdue to have trouble sending teams to the foul stripe all season.
Last year Purdue struggled early while a bunch of talented freshman got their feet wet, but finished strong going 8-10 in conference play. I figured this team would make a jump this season with all those guys coming back, but now I'm not so sure. The top 3 scorers return, (Johnson, Johnson and Hammonds) but the 4th Byrd graduated and he was the only perimeter threat on the team last year. This team may be effected by the rules changes more than any team in the Big Ten. Purdue's lack of shooters on the perimeter won't allow them to take advantage off all the open looks available with no hand checking allowed. Against Oklahoma State's pack it in zone they looked lost on offense. Purdue also suffers defensively as Painter has always taught a half court defense heavy on ball pressure that is very hard to do with the hand check rules. Painter likes to pressure the ball handler which makes it hard for that player to get up a shot or make an entry pass into the post. Think of Chris Kramer all over the opponents point guard, harassing them into bad passes and getting steals. Look for Purdue to have trouble sending teams to the foul stripe all season.
Is Purdue tournament worthy? I don't think so. If Purdue makes a run it will be because Hammonds gets them there. He is talented enough that he may play in the NBA someday, but he has not been on the court enough this year. He was suspended for the first game, and Purdue almost lost without him to a horrible Northern Kentucky team. In the 4 games he played, in he is only averaging 17.5 minutes/game, and he got into early foul trouble again against Oklahoma State. Purdue is playing 11 guys in every game this year so far. Purdue has probably the easiest conference schedule of any team as they only face Indiana and MSU once at home, and IL and Iowa once on the road. The record may be about the same, but I think this team takes a step back and not forward this year.
Minnesota
Minnesota is in a major transition year. Out is Tubby Smith and the consistently mediocre teams he produced. In is Richard Pitino and a bunch of transfers. Tubby's teams had made the tournament 3 of the last 5 years, and he won his first tournament game with Minnesota right before he got fired. No small feat as Minnesota has only made the tournament 12 times in their history. Minnesota fans must remember the recent success of the Clem Haskins era, and think Minnesota basketball is capable of bigger things. Minnesota lost a lot of minutes and production from last year with Mbakwe, Williams, Coleman, Ingram and Welch gone, however the Hollins brothers return. Minnesota didn't bring in any impact freshman, but they have 3 transfers (Matheiu, Smith and King) that will contribute right away. Andre Hollins is a terrific player and should have a huge season. He should be able to carry this team to a win by himself in a few games this year. The rest of the returning cast is unimpressive to say the least.
Minnesota is in a major transition year. Out is Tubby Smith and the consistently mediocre teams he produced. In is Richard Pitino and a bunch of transfers. Tubby's teams had made the tournament 3 of the last 5 years, and he won his first tournament game with Minnesota right before he got fired. No small feat as Minnesota has only made the tournament 12 times in their history. Minnesota fans must remember the recent success of the Clem Haskins era, and think Minnesota basketball is capable of bigger things. Minnesota lost a lot of minutes and production from last year with Mbakwe, Williams, Coleman, Ingram and Welch gone, however the Hollins brothers return. Minnesota didn't bring in any impact freshman, but they have 3 transfers (Matheiu, Smith and King) that will contribute right away. Andre Hollins is a terrific player and should have a huge season. He should be able to carry this team to a win by himself in a few games this year. The rest of the returning cast is unimpressive to say the least.
Can Minnesota surprise everyone and match their 8-10 record of last year? Nope. This will be a bad basketball team. I think they will struggle just to get into the NIT. They have a fairly favorable schedule getting MSU and Nebraska once on the road, and Indiana and Illinois once at home. Minnesota will probably stay bad for a couple years unless Pitino can bring in some more impact transfers or freshman. Look for Minnesota to remain fertile recruiting ground for Bo to steal talent from over a crappy home state program.
Penn State
The three bottom teams are all pretty terrible. I think PSU will be the best of the three because of the return of Frazier. He is an all around good offensive player and should benefit a great deal from the new rules. This team's defense should be terrible as usual. They don't have much size (their two forwards Taylor and Travis are 6-7 and 6-6) so rebounding will be an issue and shot blocking a non-factor. Newbill gives PSU a 2nd scoring option if teams focus on Frazier, so this team should have what it takes to shoot their way to a few wins.
The three bottom teams are all pretty terrible. I think PSU will be the best of the three because of the return of Frazier. He is an all around good offensive player and should benefit a great deal from the new rules. This team's defense should be terrible as usual. They don't have much size (their two forwards Taylor and Travis are 6-7 and 6-6) so rebounding will be an issue and shot blocking a non-factor. Newbill gives PSU a 2nd scoring option if teams focus on Frazier, so this team should have what it takes to shoot their way to a few wins.
Can Frazier carry PSU to the post season? I doubt it. PSU has an easy schedule getting Iowa, UW, and MI only once. The other single matchup is Northwestern. With only 9 games against the top of the Big Ten PSU should get enough wins to look like they aren't as terrible as they are.
Northwestern
Northwestern also is in a major transition after firing Carmody who was probably the most successful basketball coach in team history. Like PSU, Northwestern is also hoping the return of a very good player (Crawford) will help them make a jump from last season. Also like PSU, Northwestern has a 2nd scorer in Cobb, who can complement Crawford and take some pressure off. Broken record here, but Northwestern is also terrible defensively and will have to shoot well to beat decent teams. Northwestern has a little more size than PSU with Olah, but they may not be any better defensively.
Northwestern also is in a major transition after firing Carmody who was probably the most successful basketball coach in team history. Like PSU, Northwestern is also hoping the return of a very good player (Crawford) will help them make a jump from last season. Also like PSU, Northwestern has a 2nd scorer in Cobb, who can complement Crawford and take some pressure off. Broken record here, but Northwestern is also terrible defensively and will have to shoot well to beat decent teams. Northwestern has a little more size than PSU with Olah, but they may not be any better defensively.
Can Northwestern get to 5 wins? I'm taking the under. They get MI and OSU once, but they also get IL and PSU just once.
Nebraska
I'm having trouble finding much to like about Nebraska. They are really lacking in talent. They don't even have the middling stars like Northwestern and PSU who might carry them to some shoot out wins. They do get 4 games against Northwestern and PSU, and only play UW, Iowa, MSU and Minn once. They should get a win or two, so I don't think they get shut out in Big Ten play.
I'm having trouble finding much to like about Nebraska. They are really lacking in talent. They don't even have the middling stars like Northwestern and PSU who might carry them to some shoot out wins. They do get 4 games against Northwestern and PSU, and only play UW, Iowa, MSU and Minn once. They should get a win or two, so I don't think they get shut out in Big Ten play.
Bottom predictions:
IL- 8-10
Pur- 8-10
Minn- 7-11
PSU- 5-13
NW- 4-14
Neb- 3-15
Monday, December 2, 2013
Picks recap
With the regular season complete it's time to recap my picks. I'll update the final tally after the bowl game prediction. Last season I went 5-5-2 (4-1-1 on picks and 1-4-1 on the o/u) After starting out strong this season on the o/u I fell apart at the end, but I stayed strong on the picks just like last year. Overall this season I'm 10-8, 6-3 on picks, and 4-5 on the o/u. The lesson here is the same as last year, stick with the picks and leave the over/under. Over 2 years I'm 10-4-1 vs. the spread, and 5-9-1 vs. the o/u.
Should be a fun bowl game vs. a fun SEC opponent on Jan 1st
Saturday, November 30, 2013
uw psu
Short post today. I'm taking PSU and the points and the under. Badgers are 24.5 point favorites. O/u is 49.5.
Thursday, November 28, 2013
Badgers are getting it done away from home -- UPDATED
UPDATE:
With their win over Virginia, the Badgers wrapped up their most impressive away-from-home non-conference performance ever: 5-0, with all five wins over Kenpom top 100 teams. By comparison, Bo Ryan has never had more than 5 road/neutral non-conference wins over any three-year period combined. The only Badger team with a comparable showing was the 98-99 Badgers (see below) who won six games away from home against good competition. But that team is disqualified by virtue of their showing against SW Missouri State in the NCAA tournament.
ORIGINAL POST:
The Badgers are 8-0, something no other team in the country can say right now. There are a bunch of undefeated teams, but none that have played eight games. The other three teams currently 7-0 have losable games coming up next:
With their win over Virginia, the Badgers wrapped up their most impressive away-from-home non-conference performance ever: 5-0, with all five wins over Kenpom top 100 teams. By comparison, Bo Ryan has never had more than 5 road/neutral non-conference wins over any three-year period combined. The only Badger team with a comparable showing was the 98-99 Badgers (see below) who won six games away from home against good competition. But that team is disqualified by virtue of their showing against SW Missouri State in the NCAA tournament.
ORIGINAL POST:
The Badgers are 8-0, something no other team in the country can say right now. There are a bunch of undefeated teams, but none that have played eight games. The other three teams currently 7-0 have losable games coming up next:
Wichita State travels to St. Louis on Sunday.
UConn plays Florida on Monday.
Syracuse plays Indiana on Tuesday.
I will be surprised if Wisconsin makes it to 9-0, as their next game is at Virginia next Wednesday. But even assuming they lose that game, this has already been the most impressive non-conference performance by the Badgers under Bo Ryan in at least one respect: four wins away from home against Kenpom top-100 teams (St. John's, Green Bay, St. Louis, and West Virginia). By comparison, the Badgers had a total of four such wins over the last three non-conference seasons combined, and just 14 total in the Bo Ryan era (about one per year, on overage):
Non-Con Road/Neutral top 100 wins [UPDATED after win over Virginia]:
2013-14: 5 (St. John's, Green Bay, St. Louis, West Virginia, Virginia)
2012-13: 1 (Arkansas)
2011-12: 1 (BYU)
2010-11: 2 (BC, Marquette)
2009-10: 2 (Ariz., Maryland)
2008-09: 1 (Va. Tech)
2007-08: 1 (Texas)
2006-07: 3 (Auburn, Marquette, Georgia)
2005-06: 1 (Old Dominion)
2004-05: 0
2003-04: 1 (Penn)
2002-03: 1 (Temple)
2001-02: 0
Prior to the Ryan era (using basketball-reference SRS ratings):
2000-01: 2 (Temple, Marquette)
1999-00: 1 (Missouri)
1998-99: 6 (Virginia, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Illinois St., Temple, Texas)
1997-98: 2 (Oklahoma, Fresno St.)
1996-97: 4 (Memphis, St. Bonaventure, Temple, Marquette)
1995-96: 0
1994-95: 0
1993-94: 0
1992-93: 1 (Marquette)
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Big Win for Utah State
I've been keeping track of the performances of various "outliers" in my preseason top 50 T-Rankings. One of the more notable outliers was Utah State, which at first I didn't even rate but eventually came in at 34, putting them in consideration for an at-large berth. By comparison, Utah State was ranked 78th in the preseason Kenpom ratings, and 58th in Hanner's preseason rankings.
Well, so far Utah State is performing up to its T-Rank. It is 5-0, and last night had a big win at Weber State. Previously they had beaten USC at home, @UC Santa Barbara (kenpom top 100), and Miss. State at home. The real test, though, will come Saturday when it plays BYU on a neutral court. After that, they'll be heavily favored in their next ten games, so they have a realistic shot at being 16-0 and I suspect they'd start getting some national pub. At which point you could say that you heard it here first.
Go Aggies!
Well, so far Utah State is performing up to its T-Rank. It is 5-0, and last night had a big win at Weber State. Previously they had beaten USC at home, @UC Santa Barbara (kenpom top 100), and Miss. State at home. The real test, though, will come Saturday when it plays BYU on a neutral court. After that, they'll be heavily favored in their next ten games, so they have a realistic shot at being 16-0 and I suspect they'd start getting some national pub. At which point you could say that you heard it here first.
Go Aggies!
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
More parity
I noticed that there seemed to be fewer blow outs than normal as I looked over the top 25 scores. I didn't know if this was just my imagination or if there was something to it, so I had my co-blogger Bart pull some data for me from Kenpom. Turns out I am not imagining things.
Here are the stats on games between top 30 and sub 200 Kenpom teams from this year and from last year through the same point in the season:
Bart pointed out to me that:
Bart added:
Here are the stats on games between top 30 and sub 200 Kenpom teams from this year and from last year through the same point in the season:
| 2014 | 2013 | Change | |
| t30/s200 Margin | 26.7 | 31.3 | -14.7% |
| t30/s200 Blow | 71% | 79% | |
| t30/s200 Close | 19% | 5% |
Bart pointed out to me that:
So there is some support for your impression. Last year the average margin in these games was 31.3, and this year it's 26.7. There have also been fewer blowouts (20 pts or more) and almost 4 times as many close games (10 pts or less).
We both had some ideas about what may be causing this, and the new rules seem to be the most likely culprit. The new rules should help kids get off shots without being hand checked. They could also force more collapsing to the lane to help since guys just can maul drivers with their hands, which could lead to more open perimeter shots. I think there will eventually be more teams playing zone too.
Teams that recruit players who are phenomenal athletes but not great shooters could end up being "punished" as these players' once-dominating defense is now marginalized. I feel like there are probably more upper-level teams that recruit these types of athletes, and more small/crappy schools that just bring in shooters. This might lead to more upsets, or at least closer games amongst the haves and have nots until teams adjust recruiting or the rules are adjusted.
Teams that recruit players who are phenomenal athletes but not great shooters could end up being "punished" as these players' once-dominating defense is now marginalized. I feel like there are probably more upper-level teams that recruit these types of athletes, and more small/crappy schools that just bring in shooters. This might lead to more upsets, or at least closer games amongst the haves and have nots until teams adjust recruiting or the rules are adjusted.
Bart added:
Another way in which the new rules might help the Davids is that you tend to see quick undersized guards at the mid majors. In other words, they are just as good at basketball, and speedy, but don't get recruited to the major conference teams because they can't stand up to the beating and can't get their shot off over big defenders. Now we might see these little guys just going around the bigger slower defenders.
We'll have to look at this more as the season goes on.
How good is Wisconsin's offense? We may find out tonight.
So far, the Badgers basketball team this year is very good on offense and suspect on defense. This was an expected development, as they lost three senior starters from last year's team, two of whom were essentially defensive specialists and one of whom just had a disappointing year on the offensive side.
With Frank Kaminsky's 43-point explosion confirming suspicions that he has elite offensive ability; with Sam Dekker's exceptional talent continuing to blossom into refined skill; with three very solid, sharpshooting guards starting and two more coming off the bench—it appears the sky is the limit for the Badgers on offense.
How good has it been so far? Very good. Here's a telling stat: Wisconsin has scored more points per possession against each of its opponents than any other team has scored against them. In other words, each of the Badgers' opponents has had their worst defensive game so far against Wisconsin. That's the column of "ones" at right below:
The Badgers did have two relatively poor offensive games (against Florida and Green Bay), but those were still the best anyone has done against those teams. The caveat there is that Green Bay has played literally no one else in D1, and Florida hasn't really been otherwise tested.
But, on the flip side, the explosion against St. John's is looking better and better. I was amused by some of the commentary I saw on message boards after that game deriding St. John's poor defense. In fact they have a good defense, as expected—Wisconsin just picked it apart. St. John's has gone on to perform very well in on defense, holding Wagner, Bucknell, and Monmouth to 80.6, 102, and 82.4 PPP, respectively. That's not exactly a murderer's row, but Bucknell's offense appears to be excellent even without Mike Muscala: they are shooting almost 50% from three and have a team eFG% of nearly 60%; overall they rank 32nd in adjusted offensive efficiency. That performance against St. John's was their worst of the year.
Tonight, however, the Badgers play a truly elite defense in St. Louis—currently ranked 5th in defensive efficiency—so this will be a test for the Wisconsin offense. St. Louis continues to adhere to Rick Majerus's defensive principles. Like the Badgers, they limit three-point attempts and try to force teams into tough two-point jumpers: opponents score just 13.4% of their points on three-pointers (345th in D1) while scoring 65.3% of their points on twos (6th). Not only do they limit three-point attempts, but so far they've limited three-point makes, as opponents are shooting just 20% from three against them.
If the Badgers shoot 20% from three tonight, they almost certainly will lose. The Badgers score 35% of their points on threes, and they shoot a sizzling 45% from beyond the arc. They are a jump-shooting team, as usual, but this year at least they are actually a good jump-shooting team. If they go cold against St. Louis, say goodnight. But if the Badgers manage to fill it up against the Billikens, I think we'll know that they are definitively elite on offense
One mystery about St. Louis is why they are getting no love. They return four starters from last year's A-10 champs, all of whom are seniors now. They were very good last year: a 5-seed in the tourney, and 16th in the final Pomeroy ratings. They came in at 13th in my T-Rank preseason ratings, and have worked their way up to 17th in the current Pomeroy ratings. Yet they got zero votes in the most recent AP poll, despite being undefeated, so they are flying under the radar. But make no mistake: this is a top-25 team that will likely be fighting for a protected seed come March. This is a huge game for them.
In other words, we'll find out a lot about the Badgers tonight.
With Frank Kaminsky's 43-point explosion confirming suspicions that he has elite offensive ability; with Sam Dekker's exceptional talent continuing to blossom into refined skill; with three very solid, sharpshooting guards starting and two more coming off the bench—it appears the sky is the limit for the Badgers on offense.
How good has it been so far? Very good. Here's a telling stat: Wisconsin has scored more points per possession against each of its opponents than any other team has scored against them. In other words, each of the Badgers' opponents has had their worst defensive game so far against Wisconsin. That's the column of "ones" at right below:
(From kenpom.com)
But, on the flip side, the explosion against St. John's is looking better and better. I was amused by some of the commentary I saw on message boards after that game deriding St. John's poor defense. In fact they have a good defense, as expected—Wisconsin just picked it apart. St. John's has gone on to perform very well in on defense, holding Wagner, Bucknell, and Monmouth to 80.6, 102, and 82.4 PPP, respectively. That's not exactly a murderer's row, but Bucknell's offense appears to be excellent even without Mike Muscala: they are shooting almost 50% from three and have a team eFG% of nearly 60%; overall they rank 32nd in adjusted offensive efficiency. That performance against St. John's was their worst of the year.
Tonight, however, the Badgers play a truly elite defense in St. Louis—currently ranked 5th in defensive efficiency—so this will be a test for the Wisconsin offense. St. Louis continues to adhere to Rick Majerus's defensive principles. Like the Badgers, they limit three-point attempts and try to force teams into tough two-point jumpers: opponents score just 13.4% of their points on three-pointers (345th in D1) while scoring 65.3% of their points on twos (6th). Not only do they limit three-point attempts, but so far they've limited three-point makes, as opponents are shooting just 20% from three against them.
If the Badgers shoot 20% from three tonight, they almost certainly will lose. The Badgers score 35% of their points on threes, and they shoot a sizzling 45% from beyond the arc. They are a jump-shooting team, as usual, but this year at least they are actually a good jump-shooting team. If they go cold against St. Louis, say goodnight. But if the Badgers manage to fill it up against the Billikens, I think we'll know that they are definitively elite on offense
One mystery about St. Louis is why they are getting no love. They return four starters from last year's A-10 champs, all of whom are seniors now. They were very good last year: a 5-seed in the tourney, and 16th in the final Pomeroy ratings. They came in at 13th in my T-Rank preseason ratings, and have worked their way up to 17th in the current Pomeroy ratings. Yet they got zero votes in the most recent AP poll, despite being undefeated, so they are flying under the radar. But make no mistake: this is a top-25 team that will likely be fighting for a protected seed come March. This is a huge game for them.
In other words, we'll find out a lot about the Badgers tonight.
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Big Ten Top
Time for basketball predictions. I feel like I have neglected this blog a bit. With the football season coming to a close soon, the Buck's sucking, and UW hoops set for a long break during the holidays that may not change much. We'll see. I haven't even got a chance to see every Big Ten team play yet, so here is my semi-informed projections. First the top half, and I'll do the remaining 6 in another post.
Michigan State
Everyone's favorite to win the Big Ten this year and it's easy to see why. This team has talent. Harris will be a lottery pick, and Payne should get a shot at the NBA too. This team has experience. 5 of the 8 players in the rotation are upperclassmen, and the other 3 are sophomores who played extensively last year. This team has quality guard play. Appling and Harris are among the best starting backcourts in America and Trice off the bench is like a 6th starter. They can go 3 guards easily and both Trice and Appling can run the point. They aren't huge, but they have enough size. Payne played next to Nix last year but he is the man at center now. Costello and Gauna give them some bulk to dominate the boards as Izzo teams do. Valentine and Dawson are versatile wings that can play the 3, but are good enough rebounders that they can play the 4 if Izzo wants to play small.
Everyone's favorite to win the Big Ten this year and it's easy to see why. This team has talent. Harris will be a lottery pick, and Payne should get a shot at the NBA too. This team has experience. 5 of the 8 players in the rotation are upperclassmen, and the other 3 are sophomores who played extensively last year. This team has quality guard play. Appling and Harris are among the best starting backcourts in America and Trice off the bench is like a 6th starter. They can go 3 guards easily and both Trice and Appling can run the point. They aren't huge, but they have enough size. Payne played next to Nix last year but he is the man at center now. Costello and Gauna give them some bulk to dominate the boards as Izzo teams do. Valentine and Dawson are versatile wings that can play the 3, but are good enough rebounders that they can play the 4 if Izzo wants to play small.
So how does this team not win the Big Ten? They have a very tough league schedule. MSU plays IN, MI, Iowa, and OSU twice. They get UW only once but on the road, and the other single road game is at Purdue which is not an easy place to win. They're 2 single matchup home games are Nebraska and Minnesota, 2 teams that you have a good chance to get a Big Ten road win against. MSU also has the habit of dropping the weird road game against PSU or Northwestern when no one expects it. Last season MSU struggled a bit when early injuries limited Trice and Harris. While no one wants to see college kids get hurt, MSU is no more immune to injuries than any other team and it would only take one for this team to look more ordinary.
Wisconsin
I am predictably higher on UW than most people. I think the 3 guard rotation will serve this team well offensively with the new rule changes. Bo will have what he always wants at UW, a starting 5 where every player can hit the 3. UW should bomb away from deep this year and open up enough driving lanes to let the guards drive. The dribble drive has not been a big part of Bo's teams in the past, but with no hand checking and less risk of getting a charge, Bo will use this more. It also helps to play Dekker at the 4, giving UW 4 guys that can dribble to the rim. This team will be bad defensively. It is obvious against even the lesser competition they have played that no one is afraid of going into the lane against UW. By playing 3 guards and Dekker at the 4 they are also too small to rebound effectively against big teams.
I am predictably higher on UW than most people. I think the 3 guard rotation will serve this team well offensively with the new rule changes. Bo will have what he always wants at UW, a starting 5 where every player can hit the 3. UW should bomb away from deep this year and open up enough driving lanes to let the guards drive. The dribble drive has not been a big part of Bo's teams in the past, but with no hand checking and less risk of getting a charge, Bo will use this more. It also helps to play Dekker at the 4, giving UW 4 guys that can dribble to the rim. This team will be bad defensively. It is obvious against even the lesser competition they have played that no one is afraid of going into the lane against UW. By playing 3 guards and Dekker at the 4 they are also too small to rebound effectively against big teams.
How does this team win the Big Ten? Start with an easy league schedule. UW only plays Iowa, MI, and IN twice. They play MSU and OSU only once and get them both at home. The 2 single road games are Nebraska and PSU. If UW defends the Kohl Center as they usually do, and gets a bunch of road wins against the 2nd division Big Ten teams they can find their way to a Big Ten Championship. Dekker will have to become the 1st round pick that early draft boards have him listed at if this team is to reach such lofty goals. Freshman will have to play a big role on this team, as both Hayes and Koenig will need to play key roles, and even Brown may find his way into meaningful minutes as the season goes on.
Ohio State
OSU was a very good team last year that fell just a game short of a share for the regular season title before taking the tournament championship. They lost the offense of Deshaun Thomas, and the size and defense of Ravenel. They bring back 6 very good and experienced players in Craft, Scott, Smith Jr, Ross, Thompson and Williams. They don't have the ridiculous talent of the Oden, or Sullinger teams Matta had in the past, but these guys are no slouches. The question is can these guys step it up and become something better than they were last year. Thomas dominated the offense last year, so there will be opportunities for others to step up their offense, but so far no one really has. All 6 guys are averaging between 7 and 12.5 points. Matta's best teams have a single post player that can get them easy buckets and open up shots and driving lanes for all the wings he recruits. I just don't see Williams developing into that player. He is just not aggressive enough and not good enough in the post.
OSU was a very good team last year that fell just a game short of a share for the regular season title before taking the tournament championship. They lost the offense of Deshaun Thomas, and the size and defense of Ravenel. They bring back 6 very good and experienced players in Craft, Scott, Smith Jr, Ross, Thompson and Williams. They don't have the ridiculous talent of the Oden, or Sullinger teams Matta had in the past, but these guys are no slouches. The question is can these guys step it up and become something better than they were last year. Thomas dominated the offense last year, so there will be opportunities for others to step up their offense, but so far no one really has. All 6 guys are averaging between 7 and 12.5 points. Matta's best teams have a single post player that can get them easy buckets and open up shots and driving lanes for all the wings he recruits. I just don't see Williams developing into that player. He is just not aggressive enough and not good enough in the post.
Where does OSU end up? OSU has as easy a league schedule as any of any of the contenders. They get Iowa and MSU twice, and have UW, IU, and MI only once. They get single home games against MI and Northwestern, and play OSU and UW on the road. That leaves 11 of 18 games against the 2nd division teams, compared to MSU who has 9. Williams will anchor what could be the best defense in the country, so I don't see this team finishing out of the top 3.
Michigan
I was in love with Trey Burke last year. I picked this team to win the Big Ten and the Big Ten tourney, and they let me down on both. In the end they made a run to the NCAA championship and proved I wasn't that off about them (thankfully I didn't give up on them so I made some money in one of my pools). This year there is no Burke, so we will see if it was Burke making everyone better, or if these guys can stand on their own. MI will fill Burke's spot with freshman Walton Jr, and sophomore Albrecht, but neither looks to be able to replace the play making ability of Burke. MI also lost Hardaway Jr who was 2nd in scoring and assists on the team. That's a lot of ball handling to replace. So far Stauskas appears to be the guy they are going with. Late in the game against FSU, MI ran the pick and roll consistently with Stauskas and McGary. He may be their best option, but Stauskas is miscast as a point wing. He is a great spot up shooter and very good driving the ball when he gets it open on a wing, so forcing him into a point role makes him less effective. Robinson Jr looks to be about what he was last year (very good shooter and great in transition, but doesn't make plays for others in the half court) but with more shooting opportunities. Lavert has continued to blossom since about mid season last year. He keeps getting better and does most everything well. Horford and Morgan give them some competent rebounders and post defense.
I was in love with Trey Burke last year. I picked this team to win the Big Ten and the Big Ten tourney, and they let me down on both. In the end they made a run to the NCAA championship and proved I wasn't that off about them (thankfully I didn't give up on them so I made some money in one of my pools). This year there is no Burke, so we will see if it was Burke making everyone better, or if these guys can stand on their own. MI will fill Burke's spot with freshman Walton Jr, and sophomore Albrecht, but neither looks to be able to replace the play making ability of Burke. MI also lost Hardaway Jr who was 2nd in scoring and assists on the team. That's a lot of ball handling to replace. So far Stauskas appears to be the guy they are going with. Late in the game against FSU, MI ran the pick and roll consistently with Stauskas and McGary. He may be their best option, but Stauskas is miscast as a point wing. He is a great spot up shooter and very good driving the ball when he gets it open on a wing, so forcing him into a point role makes him less effective. Robinson Jr looks to be about what he was last year (very good shooter and great in transition, but doesn't make plays for others in the half court) but with more shooting opportunities. Lavert has continued to blossom since about mid season last year. He keeps getting better and does most everything well. Horford and Morgan give them some competent rebounders and post defense.
Will MI win the championship a year late for me? They will have to fight through a schedule as tough as MSUs. They get UW, MSU, IU, and Iowa twice. They get OSU once but on the road, and the other road single is IL. They get PSU and Northwestern only once and both at home. If McGary can stay healthy then they should be OK, but this is the 2nd year in a row with early season injury problems for him. If it were an ankle or something I wouldn't worry, but a back injury for a 20 year old big man is a little concerning. This team has the talent to compete with any team in the country, and so their ceiling is pretty high.
Indiana
This is where the predictions get tough. I feel pretty confident about the other 4. When you take the 4 best coaches in the league (Ryan, Izzo, Matta, and Beilein) and give them talent, they will win. IU has talent, but that talent is sooooo young. This team has 0 juniors, and just 1 senior (Sheehey) who played on the team last year (Evan Gordon is a senior but is a transfer). I know in this day and age Major programs live on young talent and one and doners, but this IU team plays like a young team. They remind me of the Kentucky team last year that was loaded with young NBA talent but lost in the NIT. I don't think IU is bad enough to miss the NCAA, but I think they will struggle. Vonleh is a beast and looks like one of those one and doners. Williams may not be one and done, but he looks like a kid that could play in the NBA someday. Yogi has made a huge jump from last year, but he is the only player on this team that can shoot. He has jacked up 40 3s in the first 6 games and is hitting 40%, but Sheehey is the only other player to attempt more than 10 3s and he's only hitting 25%. A big change from a team that was one of the best shooting teams in the country last season. Hollowell has been a disappointment to date. He was expected to play off guard and play some point. He is only shooting 36%, with 0.7apg to 3.0 turnovers.
This is where the predictions get tough. I feel pretty confident about the other 4. When you take the 4 best coaches in the league (Ryan, Izzo, Matta, and Beilein) and give them talent, they will win. IU has talent, but that talent is sooooo young. This team has 0 juniors, and just 1 senior (Sheehey) who played on the team last year (Evan Gordon is a senior but is a transfer). I know in this day and age Major programs live on young talent and one and doners, but this IU team plays like a young team. They remind me of the Kentucky team last year that was loaded with young NBA talent but lost in the NIT. I don't think IU is bad enough to miss the NCAA, but I think they will struggle. Vonleh is a beast and looks like one of those one and doners. Williams may not be one and done, but he looks like a kid that could play in the NBA someday. Yogi has made a huge jump from last year, but he is the only player on this team that can shoot. He has jacked up 40 3s in the first 6 games and is hitting 40%, but Sheehey is the only other player to attempt more than 10 3s and he's only hitting 25%. A big change from a team that was one of the best shooting teams in the country last season. Hollowell has been a disappointment to date. He was expected to play off guard and play some point. He is only shooting 36%, with 0.7apg to 3.0 turnovers.
Does Indiana miss the Tourney? Probably not. That would take a pretty epic collapse. Not beyond Tom Crean, but not likely. IU has an easy league schedule. They play MSU, UW, and MI twice. They play Iowa and OSU just once and get both at home. The 2 single road games are Purdue and Minn. That means they get 6 games against PSU, Northwestern, and Nebraska. The ceiling on this team is admittedly high, but I don't think they reach it. If the freshman keep getting better and the sophomores step up this team could be very dangerous come tourney time, but my guess is they struggle with inconsistency through the season and are a first round out.
Iowa
Iowa was my surprise team last year, and I even picked their league record right at 9-9. I still ended up being wrong about them making the tourney because they failed to beat anyone good outside of Big Ten play. They have a similar non-conference schedule this year, so it will be league play before we know how good this team really is. Iowa is probably the deepest team in the league. Through 5 games they are running 10 guys that average between 17.6 and 23.4 minutes per game. The high scorer is at 14.6 and the 10th guy still gets 5.0ppg, and this is without injured Oglesby who was a contributor last year. Iowa is currently 11th in the country in scoring at 92.6 ppg, but that is largely because they are playing such terrible competition. Woodbury is a solid 5 man, and White is a scoring stretch 4. Iowa has a bunch of Guards that can play, and Basabe and former badger Uthoff give them some versatile forwards.
Iowa was my surprise team last year, and I even picked their league record right at 9-9. I still ended up being wrong about them making the tourney because they failed to beat anyone good outside of Big Ten play. They have a similar non-conference schedule this year, so it will be league play before we know how good this team really is. Iowa is probably the deepest team in the league. Through 5 games they are running 10 guys that average between 17.6 and 23.4 minutes per game. The high scorer is at 14.6 and the 10th guy still gets 5.0ppg, and this is without injured Oglesby who was a contributor last year. Iowa is currently 11th in the country in scoring at 92.6 ppg, but that is largely because they are playing such terrible competition. Woodbury is a solid 5 man, and White is a scoring stretch 4. Iowa has a bunch of Guards that can play, and Basabe and former badger Uthoff give them some versatile forwards.
Can Iowa challenge for the title yet? No, but maybe next year. This team has a very tough league schedule, so they will have a chance to prove themselves there even if they don't in non-conference play. They play OSU, UW, MSU, and MI twice and they play Indiana once but on the road. The other road single is PSU, and the 2 home singles are Purdue and Nebraska. That's 9 games against the top tier teams and only 4 against Northwestern, PSU and Nebraska. This team should return to the NCAA this year, and with one more year of development this team could contend next season.
Here are my predictions for the top teams finish:
MSU 14-4
UW 14-4
OSU 13-5
MI 12-6
Ind 10-8
Iowa 10-8
Saturday, November 23, 2013
UW Minn
Bucky is a road favorite of -16.5, and the o/u is 49.5.
Shouldn't have got off the Badger bandwagon last week as they just keep covering spreads. 2 losses drops me to 8-6 (4-3 vs spread and 4-3 vs o/u). Did I learn anything from last week? Apparently not, as I'm taking Minnesota and the points at home. Vegas doesn't have much respect for a 8-2 and ranked #25 Minnesota team and neither do I. I think Minnesota will do enough to keep it close though so I'm taking the dog and the points.
Minnesota has had trouble stopping good teams so I think Bucky will score so I'm taking the over. Final UW 35-Minn 20.
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Kenpom 1.0 v. Kenpom 2.0 and the Badgers
I have a post up at Bucky's Fifth Quarter that follows up on my old "Overrated or Underseeded?" post using Kenpom's revised algorithm. Enjoy.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
"So I thought about Frank's folks. I'm serious. I thought about his folks. I thought about his friends. And it wasn’t like it was a 40-point game. So one more possession."
--Bo Ryan, on giving Frank Kaminsky a shot to break the single-game scoring record.
Saturday, November 16, 2013
StatWatch™: Update on the new rules
We've played a full week of college basketball now (not including this Friday's games), for a total of about 319 games between D1 teams. I've been keeping track of how the new rules have been affecting scoring as compared to the same time-period last year, and I will continue to do so until I get bored with it.
After the first weekend, overall scoring was about about 6.9%. Now it's up even more—9.1%. The increase is even large in certain subsets of games: close games (10 points or less), games that top 10 in Ken Pomeroy's "FanMatch" (that is, games expected to be competitive and quality basketball), and games between teams ranked in the top 100 of the Kenpom ratings:
After the first weekend, overall scoring was about about 6.9%. Now it's up even more—9.1%. The increase is even large in certain subsets of games: close games (10 points or less), games that top 10 in Ken Pomeroy's "FanMatch" (that is, games expected to be competitive and quality basketball), and games between teams ranked in the top 100 of the Kenpom ratings:
| D1 v D1 | 2014 | 2013 | Change |
| All Scoring | 73.5 | 67.4 | 9.1% |
| Close Games | 74.4 | 66.2 | 12.4% |
| Top 10 FM | 75.3 | 67.2 | 12.1% |
| Top 10 Close | 76.1 | 66.9 | 13.8% |
| Top 100 | 76.1 | 68.0 | 11.9% |
| #OT | 15 | 18 |
(Hey, look at that, I finally figured out how to embed an excel table into a blog post all pretty-like.)
Of course, for each of these subsets there is a small number problem, so the difference could just be a mirage. It's fun to speculate, though. I speculate that scoring is up in the games between good teams because the games between good teams are on television, so the officials are especially motivated to make a show of enforcing the new rules.
That the increase also seems to be accelerating could be a sign that the rule changes are actually working to open up the offense, rather than just creating more free throws. But we shall see.
Friday, November 15, 2013
UW Indiana
Will this finally be the week UW doesn't cover the spread?
UW is a 28.5 point favorite and the over/under is 69. After last week I am 8-4 overall, 4-2 against the spread and against the o/u.
IU has given up at least 35 points in all but 2 games this year, so I think Bucky probably scores at will. The question is how much can IU score, as they do score. Even against a stout MSU defense they put up 28 points.
UW just keeps covering spreads, so it's hard to pick against them, but 28.5 is a lot of points. IU has played 4 quality opponents this season and lost all 4 games (Minnesota, Missouri, at MSU, at Michigan), but they have not lost by more than 17 points in any of them. UW may be the best team they have played, and Camp Randle is a hard place to play.
I may be over thinking this one, but I think IU gets a garbage time score or 2 to cover so I'm going to take IU and the points. I think Bucky scores all day long to win 49-24 to cover the over
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
How Does Wisconsin Get to the BCS?
The other day I expressed near certainty that the Badgers will get into the top 14 of the BCS. The argument is simple: every other major conference, two-loss team in similar circumstances, except for perhaps one, has finished in the top 14. (And even that one outlier got into the top 14 before falling back out.)
But apparently I haven't been very convincing. People look at all the teams in front of Wisconsin and wonder how the Badgers can move in front of eight of them. Here's how: a bunch of those teams are going to lose games. This is a true certainty, since there are (at least) five games left between teams currently ranked between 8 and 21 in the standings:
1) LSU v. Texas A&M
2) ASU v. UCLA
3) Oklahoma State v. Oklahoma
4) Clemson v. South Carolina
5) Texas A&M v. Missouri
So at least four teams (not five, because Texas A&M could lose twice) currently ranked between 8 and 21 will lose. It's a lock that Wisconsin would move past LSU, Oklahoma, UCLA, ASU, Texas A&M, or South Carolina if they lost, as they would all have three losses or more. I think it's very likely they move ahead of a two-loss Clemson team as well, particularly if they get waxed by South Carolina. So you can mentally move Wisconsin up to 19th just by virtue of these five games, because they will move past the loser of games 1 and 2 for sure, and will almost certainly move past the losers of at least one of 3, 4, and 5.
Once you do that, it doesn't look so daunting. The other teams they'd be behind are teams like Fresno St., Northern Illinois, Central Florida and Michigan State. I think Wisconsin would move ahead of those non-majors organically, even if they don't lose, and I think Michigan State will almost certainly lose again (possibly twice). Then there's Louisville, currently at #20, which is another team I think Wisconsin will just move past if it finishes with three more wins.
Anyhow, here's a bunch of plausible occurrences that could all occur, each of which would move Wisconsin up a spot for sure:
1) Clemson over SCar
2) Oklahoma State over Oklahoma
3) Baylor and Texas over Oklahoma State
4) USC over UCLA
5) Missouri over Texas A&M
6) Houston over Louisville
7) Rutgers or S. Florida over UCF
8) Georgia and Alabama over Auburn
9) Ball State or Toledo over NIU
10) Nebraska or Northwestern or Minnesota over MSU
11) New Mex. or San Jose State over Fresno.
12) UCLA over ASU
13) Texas A&M over LSU
14) USC and Notre Dame over Stanford
Now, not all of these things are probable, but many of them are more likely to happen than not. And if eight of these 14 outcomes happen, the Badgers almost certainly get to the top 14. If fewer than eight of them happen, there are still many, many ways that the Badgers move up (e.g., by moving up organically over Louisville, NIU, Fresno, and/or UCF).
Here's my prediction: if the Badgers win out, they'll finished ranked 13th in the BCS standings.
For the sake of completeness, here's the remaining schedule of the teams currently ranked 21 to 7 (current losses in parentheses):
21) LSU (3): Texas A&M, Ark.
20) Louisville (1): Houston, Memphis, @Cincy
19) ASU (2): Ore. St., @UCLA, Az.
18) Oklahoma (2): Iowa St., @K State, Oklahoma State
17) UCF (1): @Temple, Rutgers, South FLorida, @SMU
16) MSU (1): @Nebraska, @Northwestern, Minnesota
15) NIU (0): Ball ST., @Toledo, W. MIch.
14) Fresno St. (0): New Mex., @SJS
13) UCLA (2) Washington, ASU, @USC
12) Ok. ST. (1): @Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma
11) Texas A&M (2): @LSU, Missouri
10) S. Carolina (2): Florida, Coast. Car., Clemson
9) Missouri(1): @Ole Miss, Tex. A&M
8) Clemson (1): Ga Tech, Citadel, @South Carolina
7) Auburn (1): Georgia, Alabama
But apparently I haven't been very convincing. People look at all the teams in front of Wisconsin and wonder how the Badgers can move in front of eight of them. Here's how: a bunch of those teams are going to lose games. This is a true certainty, since there are (at least) five games left between teams currently ranked between 8 and 21 in the standings:
1) LSU v. Texas A&M
2) ASU v. UCLA
3) Oklahoma State v. Oklahoma
4) Clemson v. South Carolina
5) Texas A&M v. Missouri
So at least four teams (not five, because Texas A&M could lose twice) currently ranked between 8 and 21 will lose. It's a lock that Wisconsin would move past LSU, Oklahoma, UCLA, ASU, Texas A&M, or South Carolina if they lost, as they would all have three losses or more. I think it's very likely they move ahead of a two-loss Clemson team as well, particularly if they get waxed by South Carolina. So you can mentally move Wisconsin up to 19th just by virtue of these five games, because they will move past the loser of games 1 and 2 for sure, and will almost certainly move past the losers of at least one of 3, 4, and 5.
Once you do that, it doesn't look so daunting. The other teams they'd be behind are teams like Fresno St., Northern Illinois, Central Florida and Michigan State. I think Wisconsin would move ahead of those non-majors organically, even if they don't lose, and I think Michigan State will almost certainly lose again (possibly twice). Then there's Louisville, currently at #20, which is another team I think Wisconsin will just move past if it finishes with three more wins.
Anyhow, here's a bunch of plausible occurrences that could all occur, each of which would move Wisconsin up a spot for sure:
1) Clemson over SCar
2) Oklahoma State over Oklahoma
3) Baylor and Texas over Oklahoma State
4) USC over UCLA
5) Missouri over Texas A&M
6) Houston over Louisville
7) Rutgers or S. Florida over UCF
8) Georgia and Alabama over Auburn
9) Ball State or Toledo over NIU
10) Nebraska or Northwestern or Minnesota over MSU
11) New Mex. or San Jose State over Fresno.
12) UCLA over ASU
13) Texas A&M over LSU
14) USC and Notre Dame over Stanford
Now, not all of these things are probable, but many of them are more likely to happen than not. And if eight of these 14 outcomes happen, the Badgers almost certainly get to the top 14. If fewer than eight of them happen, there are still many, many ways that the Badgers move up (e.g., by moving up organically over Louisville, NIU, Fresno, and/or UCF).
Here's my prediction: if the Badgers win out, they'll finished ranked 13th in the BCS standings.
For the sake of completeness, here's the remaining schedule of the teams currently ranked 21 to 7 (current losses in parentheses):
21) LSU (3): Texas A&M, Ark.
20) Louisville (1): Houston, Memphis, @Cincy
19) ASU (2): Ore. St., @UCLA, Az.
18) Oklahoma (2): Iowa St., @K State, Oklahoma State
17) UCF (1): @Temple, Rutgers, South FLorida, @SMU
16) MSU (1): @Nebraska, @Northwestern, Minnesota
15) NIU (0): Ball ST., @Toledo, W. MIch.
14) Fresno St. (0): New Mex., @SJS
13) UCLA (2) Washington, ASU, @USC
12) Ok. ST. (1): @Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma
11) Texas A&M (2): @LSU, Missouri
10) S. Carolina (2): Florida, Coast. Car., Clemson
9) Missouri(1): @Ole Miss, Tex. A&M
8) Clemson (1): Ga Tech, Citadel, @South Carolina
7) Auburn (1): Georgia, Alabama
Monday, November 11, 2013
Scoring is way up ... so far
The biggest sub-plot in college basketball this season is the new rules preventing the use of hands on defense, and favoring the offense on the block/charge call. So far scoring is up, and in games we actually care about it is way up.
After three days of play, and 163 games involving D-1 teams playing other D-1 teams, scoring is up by about 4.7 points per team as compared to the first three days of last year, an increase of about 6.9%. Kevin Pauga breaks down the additional scoring and finds that it amounts to about one bucket and three FTs per team. In other words, so far about 60% of the scoring increase is due to more fouls, and 40% of it is perhaps due to freer play.
Other than a relatively small sample size, one problem with the data so far is that the opening weekend of college basketball season has a lot of mismatches, which lead to a lot of blowouts. One might think that the new rules wouldn't affect the blowouts much, or at least might affect them in weird ways.
So I looked at some subsets at the data. First, I excluded all games involving a non-D1 team. That made just a slight difference, but it weeded out a bunch of probably worthless data.
Second, I looked at games decided by ten points or less. In those games, scoring has increased from 66.6 points per team last year to 74.2 points per team this year. That's an 11.5% increase, which is huge. (The result is essentially the same if you account for overtime minutes.)
Third, I wanted to look at games between relatively good, relatively evenly matched teams. To determine this I used only the top ten games in Ken Pomeroy's daily Fan Match feature. The downside of this is that it decreases the sample to just 30 games each year so far. The upside is that we can be more confident that the samples are similar. Also, these are the games we really care about. The result: in those games, scoring has increased from 68 to 76.1 points per team—an 11.9% increase. Assuming Pauga's ratio holds true in those games, that's about three more buckets and ten more made free throws per game so far.
Fourth, I looked at the games that were both close and expected to be competitive. In those games, scoring increased from 66.8 to 77.1 points per team—a 15.4% increase.
Given the sample sizes, I'm not ready to declare these increases Torvistically significant, but it does seem like the people who think we need even more scoring in college basketball might be getting their wish this year.
After three days of play, and 163 games involving D-1 teams playing other D-1 teams, scoring is up by about 4.7 points per team as compared to the first three days of last year, an increase of about 6.9%. Kevin Pauga breaks down the additional scoring and finds that it amounts to about one bucket and three FTs per team. In other words, so far about 60% of the scoring increase is due to more fouls, and 40% of it is perhaps due to freer play.
Other than a relatively small sample size, one problem with the data so far is that the opening weekend of college basketball season has a lot of mismatches, which lead to a lot of blowouts. One might think that the new rules wouldn't affect the blowouts much, or at least might affect them in weird ways.
So I looked at some subsets at the data. First, I excluded all games involving a non-D1 team. That made just a slight difference, but it weeded out a bunch of probably worthless data.
Second, I looked at games decided by ten points or less. In those games, scoring has increased from 66.6 points per team last year to 74.2 points per team this year. That's an 11.5% increase, which is huge. (The result is essentially the same if you account for overtime minutes.)
Third, I wanted to look at games between relatively good, relatively evenly matched teams. To determine this I used only the top ten games in Ken Pomeroy's daily Fan Match feature. The downside of this is that it decreases the sample to just 30 games each year so far. The upside is that we can be more confident that the samples are similar. Also, these are the games we really care about. The result: in those games, scoring has increased from 68 to 76.1 points per team—an 11.9% increase. Assuming Pauga's ratio holds true in those games, that's about three more buckets and ten more made free throws per game so far.
Fourth, I looked at the games that were both close and expected to be competitive. In those games, scoring increased from 66.8 to 77.1 points per team—a 15.4% increase.
Given the sample sizes, I'm not ready to declare these increases Torvistically significant, but it does seem like the people who think we need even more scoring in college basketball might be getting their wish this year.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
Will the Badgers get into the BCS top-14?
After their nice win against BYU, the big question about the Badgers football team is whether they can fight their way back into position for a BCS bowl game. It is silly that this matters, and normally I don't concern myself with which consolation game my favorite teams qualify for. But I sense a lot of angst among Badger fans about whether Wisconsin will be screwed out of a BCS bowl even if they win out. This angst is misplaced. If the Badgers win out, they will almost certainly be invited to a BCS game.
The Badgers need to finish in the top 14 of the BCS standings to be eligible for an at-large berth. They will surely receive an at-large berth if they finish in the top-14. Currently, they are 24th, so they have to pass a bunch of teams. History tells us they will (if they keep winning).
In the BCS era, 99 teams from the major (or "automatic qualifier") conferences have finished the regular season with two losses, as the Badgers will if they win out. Of those 99 teams, 89 finished in the top 14 of the final BCS standings. If you narrow it to just the Big Ten, 13 out of 14 two-loss teams have finished in the top-14.
Almost all the 10 two-loss team that didn't finish in the top-14 had a lot of late-season losses. It is no secret that the most important thing in college football is to lose early. Late losses kill:
1998 Notre Dame, lost last game and finished outside BCS top 15.
1999 Miss. State, lost 2 of last 3, and finished outside BCS top 15.
2000 Clemson, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 15th.
2004 Wisconsin, lost last 2 and finished 17th.
2005 Texas Tech, lost 2 of last 5 and finished 15th.
2005 UCLA, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 16th.
2006 Rutgers, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 16th
2012 Louisville, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 21st but won conference and got AQ berth.
That leaves just two two-loss AQ-conference teams that finished the season strong and didn't make the top-14 of the final BCS standings. In other words, 97 of 99 two-loss teams that didn't tank finished in the BCS top 14.
Now let's look at the two outliers.
1) 2005 Louisville, won last five games, finished 19th. This is easily explained. In 2005, no one respected Louisville, which had just made the jump from Conference USA to the Big East. And the Big East was and is the little step-sister of AQ conferences. Actually, it isn't even an AQ conference anymore, at least not under that name. Louisville didn't win the Big East that year, and no one wanted the second-place Big East crashing the BCS.
2) 2006 Virginia Tech, won last six games, finished 15th. Here's your exception that proves the rule. Virginia Tech lost a couple games early to ranked opponents, then took care of business down the stretch. Incredibly, it actually did work its way up to 14th in the BCS standings in the second-to-last week, but was passed by two teams (West Virginia and Wake Forest) in the final week. So even this true outlier actually did get into the top 14, only to fall back one spot in the final tabulations.
So here's the stone-cold fact: no major conference two-loss team has ever won its last seven games and failed to finish in the top-14 of the final BCS standings. If the Badgers win out, they'll be a two-loss AQ-conference team on a seven-game winning streak. It would be shocking if they didn't make it up to the top 14 in that scenario.
The Badgers need to finish in the top 14 of the BCS standings to be eligible for an at-large berth. They will surely receive an at-large berth if they finish in the top-14. Currently, they are 24th, so they have to pass a bunch of teams. History tells us they will (if they keep winning).
In the BCS era, 99 teams from the major (or "automatic qualifier") conferences have finished the regular season with two losses, as the Badgers will if they win out. Of those 99 teams, 89 finished in the top 14 of the final BCS standings. If you narrow it to just the Big Ten, 13 out of 14 two-loss teams have finished in the top-14.
Almost all the 10 two-loss team that didn't finish in the top-14 had a lot of late-season losses. It is no secret that the most important thing in college football is to lose early. Late losses kill:
1998 Notre Dame, lost last game and finished outside BCS top 15.
1999 Miss. State, lost 2 of last 3, and finished outside BCS top 15.
2000 Clemson, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 15th.
2004 Wisconsin, lost last 2 and finished 17th.
2005 Texas Tech, lost 2 of last 5 and finished 15th.
2005 UCLA, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 16th.
2006 Rutgers, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 16th
2012 Louisville, lost 2 of last 3 and finished 21st but won conference and got AQ berth.
That leaves just two two-loss AQ-conference teams that finished the season strong and didn't make the top-14 of the final BCS standings. In other words, 97 of 99 two-loss teams that didn't tank finished in the BCS top 14.
Now let's look at the two outliers.
1) 2005 Louisville, won last five games, finished 19th. This is easily explained. In 2005, no one respected Louisville, which had just made the jump from Conference USA to the Big East. And the Big East was and is the little step-sister of AQ conferences. Actually, it isn't even an AQ conference anymore, at least not under that name. Louisville didn't win the Big East that year, and no one wanted the second-place Big East crashing the BCS.
2) 2006 Virginia Tech, won last six games, finished 15th. Here's your exception that proves the rule. Virginia Tech lost a couple games early to ranked opponents, then took care of business down the stretch. Incredibly, it actually did work its way up to 14th in the BCS standings in the second-to-last week, but was passed by two teams (West Virginia and Wake Forest) in the final week. So even this true outlier actually did get into the top 14, only to fall back one spot in the final tabulations.
So here's the stone-cold fact: no major conference two-loss team has ever won its last seven games and failed to finish in the top-14 of the final BCS standings. If the Badgers win out, they'll be a two-loss AQ-conference team on a seven-game winning streak. It would be shocking if they didn't make it up to the top 14 in that scenario.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)