Scheduleballin' Basketball's 2012 Lineup Comment Count

Brian

binghamton1[1]Michigans-Burke-looking-into-NBA-draft-UM16B21A-x-large[1]

Trey Burke does not approve

I made some disapproving noises last year around tourney time about Michigan's nonconference schedule, not because it was easy but because it was decent to good but RPI and Kenpom didn't think so:

Each of these teams went 9-3 in the twelve games listed. Losses are in italics. Tourney teams are in bold with their seed in parens after:

DREXEL

 

IONA

 

MICHIGAN

KP

Team

 

KP

Team

 

KP

Team

26 Virginia (10)   24 Purdue (10)   9 Memphis (8)
65 Saint Joseph's   65 Saint Joseph's   17 Duke (2)
82 Cleveland St.   74 Marshall   26 Virginia (10)
89 Princeton   78 Denver   30 Iowa St. (8)
104 Fairfield   105 Richmond   48 UCLA
202 Rider   112 Nevada   133 Arkansas
213 Norfolk St. (15)   120 Vermont   156 Oakland
237 Niagara   124 Maryland   174 Western Illinois
257 Winthrop   165 Long Island   268 Bradley
268 Bradley   181 Western Michigan   327 Arkansas Pine Bluff
308 St. Francis PA   221 Hofstra   338 Towson
343 Binghamton   287 William & Mary   340 Alabama A&M

Which of these teams has by far the strongest nonconference schedule? Michigan. Drexel and Iona played one team capable of acquiring an at-large bid each; Michigan played four plus a middling Pac-12 team and not so good SEC team. From the perspective of the good teams that expect to get in the tournament, any differences at the bottom are meaningless.

Is Michigan's nonconference SOS a lot better than both these teams? No.

Is it better than Drexel's atrocious number? Barely. Michigan has the #181 nonconference strength of schedule to Kenpom, #173 to the NCAA($).

From the perspective of a tourney aspirant, that schedule was much more difficult than either Drexel or Iona—last year's big "team X got screwed" controversy—but was judged far worse than Iona and barely better than Drexel. The reason for this was the end of the schedule. Michigan played five teams in the Kenpom top 50 and five in the bottom 100; Iona played one and one. In both Kenpom and RPI the results were bad.

I thought of this Friday when Luke Winn posted an analysis of the folks doing the best job of exploiting the RPI's quirks. Because the RPI overvalues teams with excellent records against iffy competition, teams like Pitt have been able to get nice seeds even when their resumes are lacking:

But in 2010, when Pitt earned a No. 3 seed despite having zero marquee wins outside the Big East, it was in part due to Dixon's manipulation of the 158th-best efficiency NCSOS into the 49th-best RPI NCSOS.

What Dixon likes to do for his home guarantee games, he says, "is play the teams that we think are the best picks to win the non-BCS conferences." These are the best "gap" teams, because they're beatable despite having high RPI returns. In 2010, Dixon beat five of them in Wofford (69 RPI), Wichita State (43), Kent State (47), Ohio (95) and Robert Morris (129). He only had one 250-plus RPI opponent (Youngstown State, at 271), either, and so it didn't matter that he played just one marquee game (against Texas) and lost it; the Panthers were in good standing due to their choices of non-BCS opponents. Despite their efficiency profile suggesting they were the quality of a 7-8 seed, they were a No. 3 on the strength of their RPI.

How does Michigan's schedule stack up?

Slippery Rock

Not D-I so is essentially another exhibition.

Preseason NIT

IUPUI was a 14-18 Summit team that loses a guy who took almost 35% of their shots. Thumbs down. The second round against Cleveland State or Bowling Green will probably be much the same. CSU was pretty good last year(22-9, 12-6 Horizon, NIT bid) but loses their three most important players and is projected sixth in the league by SBN. BG was 16-16 last year, 9-7 in the MAC. They do return their top two usage guys.

Michigan of course had little control over who their initial opponents were going to be in a preseason tournament.

If Michigan reaches the finals at MSG, they are likely to play Pitt in the semi followed by either Kansas State or Virginia. Pitt was terrible last year; they add a couple of big recruits. K-State and Virginia are probably going to be middling members of their Big Six conferences. Those games should be properly evaluated by RPI.

NC State

If NC State lives up to their elite billing this is a necessary showcase game for any team hoping to get a one or two seed.

Arkansas, WVU @ Brooklyn

Arkansas is poised for a major leap forward as they were extremely young last year—316th of 345 in experience—and return everyone except a backup post. It's hard to predict what will happen with WVU after they lost efficient minute vacuums in Darrly Bryant and Kevin Jones, but they'll at least be a bubble team. You might get a slight RPI boost from Arkansas relative to their quality since the SEC is not too good at basketball.

@ Bradley

A terrible idea from a competition standpoint as the Braves were 7-25 last year and 12-20 before that, but this is a favor Beilein is paying Geno Ford for hiring his son. Also it's a road game, which helps mitigate the RPI hit.

Western/Eastern/Central Michigan

These are the wrong MAC teams and the wrong Michigan teams. Western loses their top three usage guys from a team that went 6-10 in the league; Central just fired Ernie Zeigler and lost the star player off a 5-11 MAC team. Eastern managed a winning MAC record at 9-7 but was 14-18 overall.

To maximize the return from playing these guarantee games, Michigan should be squaring up against Oakland and Detroit, who will be pursuing bids in their leagues and figure to have relatively shiny overall records.

At least these games are better than last year's double SWAC/Towson binge. There's only one team on the docket this year like that…

Kornheiser_Why[1]Binghamton

The one really bad idea on the schedule. Binghamton was 2-29 last year, the third-worst team in the country according to Kenpom. They are one of the anchors that kept Drexel out of the tournament last year. Michigan would be much better off playing a D-II team instead of this collection of Tony Kornheisers. (They are literally all clones of Tony Kornheiser grown in a lab.)

Overall

It's an improvement. Michigan's not going to look at their schedule at the end of the year and see three teams in the 300s of the Kenpom rankings, and I doubt any of their major opponents end up 6-10 in their league like Arkansas was last year. Their Preseason NIT opponents are probably out of their hands.

Downers: You'd still like to see them schedule some of the local small schools that project to be good and the Bradley thing is pretty weird. There is absolutely no upside to scheduling a Binghamton.

Michigan's nonconference schedule should be more helpful to them than last year's as long as they make the NIT final. Five power teams is a lot to go with an 18-game league schedule, and they don't have as many anchors as last year.

Comments

SalvatoreQuattro

October 1st, 2012 at 12:06 PM ^

They also are getting a major infusion of talent in transfers.Glenn Bryant,(Arkansas), James Still(Providence), Mike Talley(Duquesne.He is Michael Talley's son.)  Daylen Harrison(Wyoming) are the transfers.They also have quite a bit of height. They have a 7 -footer in Syracuse transfer Da'Shonte Riley, Still is 6'10, Matt Balkema is 6'10, Bryant is 6'8, and Jamell Harris is 6'9. EMU plays Syracuse's matchup zone defense. Coach Rob Murphy did an incredible job getting a team with far less talent to win their division in Year One. Save for a dalliance with the Orlando Magic, every move Murphy made was the correct one.

If all goes to plan EMU will be every bit as good as Oakland and UD. EMU has the talent to be that good.

MH20

October 1st, 2012 at 12:21 PM ^

I'll never understand the point of playing D2 (or in the case of Concordia in 2010, NAIA) teams as an actual game.  Isn't that why you play an exhibition game?

mpbear14

October 1st, 2012 at 12:28 PM ^

If there was ever a year to have a weak non-conference schedule, this would be it. 

We play in the toughest conference in the nation.  There is no need to load up on tough non conference opponents.  We are not a SEC team whose conference is dog crap scrambled. 

Finish 1st or 2nd in the B1G and there's no reason we don't have a 1-3 seed. 
 

readyourguard

October 1st, 2012 at 12:31 PM ^

I'm not the most hoops-savvy guy around, and you'll realize that as soon as you read my following statement:

(I dont mean this as some snarky rhetorical question, but...) Does it really matter? Whether we're the 11th seed, the 5th, or 3rd, we still have to go out and win the game. Did our Kenpom score have any relevance when it came to losing in the first round against Ohio (!!!)? Will any slightly better or worse OOC schedule do anything to get us closer to the Sweet 16 and beyond?

wile_e8

October 1st, 2012 at 12:47 PM ^

Yes. Not necessarily if you are talking about winning the tournament (you're still going to have to beat several very good teams to win it all), but it matters for an easier path to advance farther in the tourney. Last year for instance: the quailty of the automatic qualifiers drops off drastically after first few. If we had a better out-of-conference SOS last year, maybe we move up a few spots on the S-curve, and then get another AQ a few spots below OHIO, and we might be able to limp into the second round after an off day on the court. Same for getting to the Sweet 16 - slightly higher seed means slightly worse opponents which means slightly easier to make the Sweet 16 or beyond.

wile_e8

October 1st, 2012 at 1:03 PM ^

Yes, winning more games would be better. Obviously. This is about setting a schedule that gives you better numbers in the stats that the tourney selection committee cares about without significantly increasing the risk of a seed-killing loss. That way you get a better seed for the games you do win.

Raoul

October 1st, 2012 at 12:33 PM ^

Slippery Rock

Not D-I so is essentially another exhibition.

An odd note on this: Slippery Rock does consider this to be an exhibition game, but Michigan does not. The NCAA has a two-game limit on exhibition games, so maybe that's why. But it's strange to have one team call the game an exhibition, and the other, not.

To add to the confusion, the Michigan women are also hosting Slippery Rock in what both schools are terming an exhbition.

Mich Mash

October 1st, 2012 at 1:05 PM ^

Probably the most critical stretch of the schedule is 11 days in early February.  Between Feb. 2 and Feb. 12 we play @ Indiana, vs Ohio St., @ Wisconsin, and @ MSU.  If a B1G regular-season title is the goal, we'll need to come out of that 2-2 minimum.

Mich Mash

October 1st, 2012 at 2:05 PM ^

Actually, we've never* won there.

*The last (and only) time we beat Wisconsin at the Kohl Center was on 2/27/99 when we won 51-39.  However, this win was vacated due to sanctions against UM.  Louis Bullock led the way with 14pts while Brandon Smith and Robbie Reid each contributed 11pts.  Josh Asselin chipped in 12 rebounds.

The last time we beat Wisconsin on their home court was on 12/31/97 when we beat them at the UW Fieldhouse 76-63.  Louis Bullock again led the way with 22pts.  Maceo Baston added 16pts and 12 rebounds.

Other than the '99 game:

2/16/00 (L) 59-75

2/27/02 (L) 54-74

2/26/03 (L) 42-73

1/21/04 (L) 63-74

2/16/05 (L) 50-76

1/24/07 (L) 58-71

3/22/08 (L) 61-64

3/1/09 (L) 55-60

1/20/10 (L) 48-54

1/5/11 (L) 50-66

Hopefully better results this year.

mGrowOld

October 1st, 2012 at 1:30 PM ^

Don't get too down on the "returned favors" scheduling.  While a season ticket holder for football I dont get to too many BBall games because I live in Northern Ohio.  But on December 7th, 1991, I was in the Cleveland Convocation Center (now Wolstein Center) to watch the CSU Vikings take on Michigan and these much discussed Freshman class they were bringing in.  Michigan was paying back CSU for hiring longtime Frieder assistant Mike Boyd and I got to see the Fab Five when they were just getting started!