Home
i'm an actor, not a reactor

Primary links

  • About
    • $upport (lol)
    • Ethics
    • FAQ
    • Glossary
    • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • MGoStore
    • Hail to Old Blue
  • MGoBoard
    • MGoBoard FAQ
    • Michigan bar locator
    • Moderator Action Sticky
  • Useful Stuff
    • Depth Chart By Class
    • Hoops Depth Chart by Class
    • 2017 Recruiting Board
    • Unofficial Two Deep
    • MGoFlickr
    • Diaries, Windows Live Writer, And You
    • User-Curated HOF
    • Where To Eat In Ann Arbor
  • Schedule/Tix
    • Future Schedules (wiki)
    • Ticket spreadsheet
Home Forums MGoBoard

Navigation

  • Forums
  • Recent posts

User login

  • Create new account
  • Request new password

MGoElsewhere

  • @MGoBlog (Brian)
  • @aceanbender
  • @Misopogon (Seth)
  • @Aeschnepp (Adam)
  • @BISB
  • @EUpchurchPhoto
  • @FullOfTwitt (Fuller)
  • Hail to the Victors 2016
  • MGoFacebook
  • MGoPodcast
  • WTKA
  • Instagram

Michigan Blogs

  • Big House Blog
  • Burgeoning Wolverine Star
  • Genuinely Sarcastic
  • Go Blue Michigan Wolverine
  • Holdin' The Rope
  • MVictors
  • Maize 'n' Blue Nation
  • Maize 'n' Brew
  • Maize And Go Blue
  • Michigan Hockey Net
  • MMMGoBlueBBQ
  • The Blog That Yost Built
  • The Hoover Street Rag
  • The M Zone
  • Touch The Banner
  • UMGoBlog
  • UMHoops
  • UMTailgate
  • Wolverine Liberation Army

M On The Net

  • mgovideo
  • MGoBlue.com
  • Mike DeSimone
  • Recruiting Planet
  • The Wolverine
  • Go Blue Wolverine
  • Winged Helmet
  • UMGoBlue.com
  • MaizeRage.org
  • Puckhead
  • The M Den
  • True Blue Fan Forum

Big Ten Blogs

  • Illinois
    • Illinois Loyalty
    • Illinois Baseball Report
  • Indiana
    • Inside The Hall
    • The Crimson Quarry
  • Iowa
    • Black Heart, Gold Pants
    • Fight For Iowa
  • Michigan State
    • The Only Colors
  • Minnesota
    • GopherHole.com
    • The Daily Gopher
  • Nebraska
    • Corn Nation
    • Husker Max
    • Husker Mike's Blasphemy
    • Husker Gameday
  • Northwestern
    • Sippin' On Purple
    • Lake The Posts
  • Notre Dame
    • The House Rock Built
    • One Foot Down
  • Ohio State
    • Eleven Warriors
    • Buckeye Commentary
    • Men of the Scarlet and Gray
    • Our Honor Defend
    • The Buckeye Nine
  • Penn State
    • Slow States
    • Black Shoe Diaries
    • Happy Valley Hardball
    • Penn State Clips
    • Linebacker U
    • Nittany White Out
  • Purdue
    • Boiled Sports
    • Hammer and Rails
  • Wisconsin
    • Bruce Ciskie

Links of Note

  • Baseball
    • College Baseball Today
    • The College Baseball Blog
  • Basketball
    • Ken Pomeroy
    • Hoop Math
    • John Gasaway
    • Luke Winn/Sports Illustrated
  • College Hockey
    • Chris Heisenberg (Class of 2016)
    • College Hockey Stats
    • Michigan College Hockey
    • Hockey's Future
    • Sioux Sports
    • USCHO
  • Football
    • Smart Football
    • Every Day Should Be Saturday
    • Matt Hinton/Grantland
    • Football Study Hall
    • Football Outsiders
    • Harold Stassen
    • NCAA D-I Stats Page
    • The Wizard Of Odds
    • CFB Stats
  • General
    • Sports Central
  • Local Interest
    • The Ann Arbor Chronicle
    • Arborwiki
    • Arbor Update
    • Ann Arbor Observer
    • Teeter Talk
    • Vacuum
  • Teams Of The D
    • Lions
      • Pride of Detroit
    • Pistons
      • Detroit Bad Boys
      • Need4Sheed
    • Tigers
      • Roar Of The Tigers
      • Bless You Boys
      • The Daily Fungo
      • The Detroit Tigers Weblog
    • Red Wings
      • Winging It In Motown
      • On The Wings
    • Michigan Sports Forum

Beveled Guilt

Site Search

Diaries

  • New
  • Popular
  • Hot
  • Thirteen unlucky minutes (TL;DNR-This is a bit of rant about the refs)
    docwhoblocked - 2 weeks ago
  • Fan Satisfaction Index End of Season Bball Survey
    OneFootIn - 2 weeks ago
  • How likely are we to revert to the mean?
    Bo Glue - 2 weeks ago
  • It's time to avenge Villanova's 1985 NCAA tourney upset over Michigan
    Communist Football - 2 weeks ago
  • 14 Months Ago: The Fire Beilein Threads.
    stephenrjking - 3 weeks ago
  •  
  • 1 of 2
  • ››
more
  • This Month in MGoBlog History - March 2008: Pryor isn't coming, Boren has left, and some academic fraud allegations sprinkled in
    Maize.Blue Wagner - 215 comments
  • The Ballad of Jordan Poole
    k.o.k.Law - 176 comments
  • PreSpring Football updates from Sam Webb
    AZBlue - 90 comments
  • 14 Months Ago: The Fire Beilein Threads.
    stephenrjking - 90 comments
  • Fan Satisfaction Index End of Season Bball Survey
    OneFootIn - 19 comments

MGoBoard

  • New
  • Recent
  • Hot
  • HELP WANTED! I'm moving to Chicago for school and I need good haunts to watch football/basketball games. Recommendations?
    6 replies
  • Angelique on Patterson Transfer
    13 replies
  • CBS Sports: Shea Patterson details scope of Ole Miss deception in lengthy letter to Michigan
    20 replies
  • OT: NFL Schedule Release
    7 replies
  • OT: Gregg Popovich's wife Erin dead at 67
    18 replies
  • Belleville coach Jermain Crowell mad at UM again
    198 replies
  • Q&A with FB Ben VanSumeren--Video
    8 replies
  • "Being Not-Rich at UM" Guide
    146 replies
  • Apparently, the NCAA has already received a response from MSU about Nassar
    58 replies
  • No additional protest of Shea Patterson appeal by Ole Miss
    112 replies
  • OT: RIP Bruno Sammartino
    15 replies
  • OT: MSU digs hole deeper, Engler adviser: Nassar survivor's claims of payout 'fake news'
    103 replies
  • OT: Sparty considering bringing back Reschke...
    74 replies
  • Potential basketball transfers. Out of the running for Matt Mooney, but in for Dachon Burke?
    46 replies
  • Way OT: NYC poop sitting on a train in Alabama
    77 replies
  •  
  • 1 of 7
  • ››
  • HELP WANTED! I'm moving to Chicago for school and I need good haunts to watch football/basketball games. Recommendations?
    5 replies
  • Belleville coach Jermain Crowell mad at UM again
    198 replies
  • CBS Sports: Shea Patterson details scope of Ole Miss deception in lengthy letter to Michigan
    19 replies
  • OT: Gregg Popovich's wife Erin dead at 67
    18 replies
  • OT: MSU digs hole deeper, Engler adviser: Nassar survivor's claims of payout 'fake news'
    103 replies
  • Angelique on Patterson Transfer
    13 replies
  • OT: NFL Schedule Release
    7 replies
  • "Being Not-Rich at UM" Guide
    146 replies
  • OT: Sparty considering bringing back Reschke...
    74 replies
  • No additional protest of Shea Patterson appeal by Ole Miss
    112 replies
  • Apparently, the NCAA has already received a response from MSU about Nassar
    58 replies
  • Whats the Best Way to Make Flight Arrangements?
    149 replies
  • Way OT: NYC poop sitting on a train in Alabama
    77 replies
  • Q&A with FB Ben VanSumeren--Video
    8 replies
  • OT: RIP Bruno Sammartino
    15 replies
  •  
  • 1 of 7
  • ››
  • Why should we be optimistic about 2018 M football?
    273 replies
  • Police investigating Elysee Mbem-Bosse for death threat against Harbaugh
    224 replies
  • Belleville coach Jermain Crowell mad at UM again
    197 replies
  • Speight to UCLA
    172 replies
  • How Many Football Games Will Michigan Win This Year? (Poll)
    166 replies
  • Comcast to Drop BTN
    162 replies
  • Buckle Up
    159 replies
  • Scouting the Enemy: Ohio State QBs are Good
    158 replies
  • Semi-OT: What sports would you fix?
    158 replies
  • Elysee Mbem-Bosse disturbing tweets
    157 replies
  • Whats the Best Way to Make Flight Arrangements?
    149 replies
  • "Being Not-Rich at UM" Guide
    146 replies
  • Wagner to NBA
    141 replies
  • Urban Meyer throws more shade at Michigan
    141 replies
  • FB new Nutrition plan under Herbert is well received by players
    132 replies
  •  
  • 1 of 7
  • ››

Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon

How Teams With Top 30 Offenses and Sub 100 Defenses Have Fared NCAA Tournament

60 posts / 0 new
Login or register to post comments
Last post
March 17th, 2014 at 9:50 PM
#1
Soulfire21
Soulfire21's picture
Joined: 03/18/2010
MGoPoints: 14525
How Teams With Top 30 Offenses and Sub 100 Defenses Have Fared NCAA Tournament

/u/LOLmodel on Reddit compiled a list of how teams with top 30 offenses and sub-100 defenses have performed in the tournament (using Kenpom's adjO and adjD numbers).  This year, Michigan enters the tournament with the 3rd best offense and 104th best defense.

The results were not incredibly encouraging, but I found it a highly interesting examination.  Click the image below to open a full-sized (i.e. legible) version in a new window.

Sorry I couldn't fit more words in the title...

The reverse (top 30 adjD and sub-100 adjO is also available here).

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
Tags:
  • MGoBoard
  • 2014 NCAA tournament
  • basketball
  • kenpom

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
March 17th, 2014 at 9:55 PM
#2
Don
Don's picture
Joined: 06/30/2008
MGoPoints: 70239
These are not happy numbers

I'll be a bit surprised if we make it to the Sweet Sixteen.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:15 PM
(Reply to #2) #3
Michigan4Life
Joined: 07/29/2010
MGoPoints: 16369
I'll be surprised if

Michigan does not make the Sweet 16. The first two rounds, Michigan should be a big favorite to win both. Duke and Michigan have the exact same profile. Great shooting team but suspect defense.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:24 PM
(Reply to #7) #4
BlueKoj
BlueKoj's picture
Joined: 01/10/2014
MGoPoints: 4087
Agreed. ASU is a great

Agreed. ASU is a great matchup. The Longhorns would need to play their best to give us a 50/50 game. I definitely think we see the 2nd weekend. Its the E8 and F4 that give me pause.

I like the article, but was hoping it was the Mathlete. I just trust him. Plus top-3 O is way different than top-30.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 9:25 AM
(Reply to #34) #5
Michigan4Life
Joined: 07/29/2010
MGoPoints: 16369
Especially when you consider

Creighton, Duke and Michigan are heads and shoulders above everybody else in terms of offense. They really make up a lot for their defensive deficiencies which is why they were so successful in their conference with all three of them falling in the conference championship.  When their offense is playing their usual game, there's no one who can match them shot for shot which is why they're a very difficult play for anybody to deal with even with a bad defense like they are fielding right now.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 9:56 PM
#6
allezbleu
Joined: 11/02/2008
MGoPoints: 373
Pretty cool

Though I wish whoever compiled the data would've shown how these kinds of teams perform relative to their seed and how that compares to teams with an equal offense/defense balance and those with subpar offenses and superb defences.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:25 PM
(Reply to #3) #7
MichiganG
MichiganG's picture
Joined: 05/20/2012
MGoPoints: 332
If you just look at the

If you just look at the overall numbers, they don't look terrible though probably a little below average. Since half of teams lose in each round, if this were a random sample you'd expect to see half lose in each round. Except they seem to be losing at about a 60% rate each round. That said, the sample size is pretty small, especially in later rounds. When you look at the seeds there are some weird things going on, but can't really draw any conclusions with such small sample sizes. Just eyeballing them, they look reasonably appropriately distributed (though, again, losing a little more than average), with weird things sticking out like great success of 12-seeds and ineptitude of 5- and 6-seeds).

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 9:52 AM
(Reply to #3) #8
michclub19
Joined: 01/12/2013
MGoPoints: 782
Seeds indicated

There is a column that shows team seed, I had to do a doubletake but its there.  So you can evaluate based on seed and where each team lost how they performed relative to expectations*.  It would be really interesting to see what type of teams most of these teams lost to.  Whether there is a theme that Top 30/100+ teams lose to teams that are fast-paced, post-oriented, experienced, etc.

*expectations on seed only, not based on opponents or public opinion.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 9:56 PM
#9
LesMilesismyhero
Joined: 11/04/2009
MGoPoints: 268
2003 Texas made the final four

1st in offense and 80th in defense.

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:03 PM
(Reply to #4) #10
MichiganG
MichiganG's picture
Joined: 05/20/2012
MGoPoints: 332
In this case, "sub-100" means

In this case, "sub-100" means "100+", not "less than 100".

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:31 PM
(Reply to #5) #11
LesMilesismyhero
Joined: 11/04/2009
MGoPoints: 268
Thanks

I was bringin up a team that was more comprable to Michigan than most of those included above.  Michigan is 104 in defense, much closer to a 1 seed Texas that was 80th in defense than a 7th seeded DePaul that was 142nd.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:10 PM
(Reply to #18) #12
funkywolve
Joined: 10/08/2008
MGoPoints: 15747
UM last year

I want to say the UM last year was similiar to Texas in regards to the their offense and defense.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:10 PM
#13
GoBlueSimon
Joined: 04/15/2013
MGoPoints: 928
2014 Michigan and Duke are on

2014 Michigan and Duke are on that list.  Likely meeting in the Sweet 16.  Interesting to see how that turns out.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:17 PM
#14
LordGrantham
LordGrantham's picture
Joined: 01/01/2014
MGoPoints: 15404
So of the teams seeded 4 or

So of the teams seeded 4 or higher, 4/9 of them went to the sweet 16 or farther.  That seems...about right.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:25 PM
(Reply to #8) #15
Soulfire21
Soulfire21's picture
Joined: 03/18/2010
MGoPoints: 14525
For a comparison, since 1985

For a comparison, since 1985 (field expanded to 64 teams), the teams seeded #1-4 are 287-128 in the round of 32, good for  a win pct of 0.615 (whereas 4/9 is 0.444)

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:30 PM
(Reply to #13) #16
LordGrantham
LordGrantham's picture
Joined: 01/01/2014
MGoPoints: 15404
And in the round of 32, these

And in the round of 32, these 1-4 seeds are 4-3, good for a .570 winning percentage.  Seems about right.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:37 PM
(Reply to #13) #17
snarling wolverine
snarling wolverine's picture
Joined: 12/14/2011
MGoPoints: 42997
287-128 is actually a winning

287-128 is actually a winning percentage of .692.

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:50 PM
(Reply to #20) #18
aplatypus
Joined: 11/02/2013
MGoPoints: 1735
In other words

significantly better than 4/9

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 7:41 AM
(Reply to #20) #19
mfan_in_ohio
Joined: 01/26/2009
MGoPoints: 4461
He was close, kind of.

There have been 464 1-4 seeds in the 29 years since the tournament expanded. If 287 of them reached the round of 16, that's 61.9%. Also, the 4/9 should come with a +/- of 3 due to sample size.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:21 PM
#20
snarling wolverine
snarling wolverine's picture
Joined: 12/14/2011
MGoPoints: 42997
I only see one

I only see one Beilein-coached team on there (not counting this year's) and it's the 2005 WVU team that went to the Elite Eight.  

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:25 PM
(Reply to #9) #21
Gulogulo37
Gulogulo37's picture
Joined: 03/16/2010
MGoPoints: 11534
Yeah, I think it's comforting

Yeah, I think it's comforting that the 2nd best outcome on there had Beilein as the coach. It's not like this is some freakish year for a Beilein team. It's just how he does things. I'll be satisfied making it to the sweet 16.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:53 PM
(Reply to #9) #22
aplatypus
Joined: 11/02/2013
MGoPoints: 1735
Who interestingly enough

was ousted by Louisville. That was a great game. I think WVU set or tied the record for 3 pointers made in a tournament game but lost in overtime. If Beilein returns to the Elite 8 this year, the likely matchup is Louisville again; who as we know will probably have to beat Wichita State to get there. Their path to the final 4 would include last year's final four for them. 

This is a weird bracket.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:20 PM
#23
Yeoman
Joined: 06/08/2011
MGoPoints: 13242
Is this list complete?

I can't find RR's 2010 team on here and I know they fit the criteria.

<ducks>

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:22 PM
#24
Gulogulo37
Gulogulo37's picture
Joined: 03/16/2010
MGoPoints: 11534
This is really misleading for

This is really misleading for the reasons Brian talked about it. The difference between the 1st and 2nd best offense vs. the 9th and 10th best offenses aren't the same. Michigan is ELITE on offense, not just a top-30 decent offensive team. Also, we are borderline sub-100. Just tooking a quick look, it seems the really elite offenses often made it to the sweet 16, and a lot of those teams have defenses at a far worse rank than Michigan's.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:21 PM
#25
SF Wolverine
SF Wolverine's picture
Joined: 10/04/2010
MGoPoints: 9079
This seems to be a banner year

For teams in this category. Just eyeballing it, nine this year. Don't see any other close years.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:28 PM
#26
Gustavo Fring
Gustavo Fring's picture
Joined: 09/29/2009
MGoPoints: 1733
That Marquette team had Dwyane Wade...

I don't think we have a Dwyane Wade on this team (as much as I love LeVert and Stauskas)

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:36 PM
#27
RobM_24
RobM_24's picture
Joined: 01/27/2014
MGoPoints: 16209
I really thought we defended better than we have

I really thought we defended better than we have all year against Ohio State and Michigan State. We just couldn't rebound against MSU. We forced misses, but they just rebounded them and got more opportunities.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:40 PM
(Reply to #19) #28
CRISPed in the DIAG
CRISPed in the DIAG's picture
Joined: 11/08/2010
MGoPoints: 23366
It looked like we we over

It looked like we we over playing our transition defense after we put up shots. In other words we weren't sending anyone at the boards in favor of getting back early to avoid the post make/miss transition runs that Staee got in the last few matchups.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:24 PM
(Reply to #22) #29
samdrussBLUE
samdrussBLUE's picture
Joined: 01/21/2012
MGoPoints: 15350
That doesn't explain poor

That doesn't explain poor defensive rebounding

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:40 PM
#30
Gustavo Fring
Gustavo Fring's picture
Joined: 09/29/2009
MGoPoints: 1733
Interesting

Chris Paul and Dwyane Wade's teams are both on the list.  As is the team of KEVIN PITTSNOGGLE

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 9:09 AM
(Reply to #21) #31
Mgotri
Mgotri's picture
Joined: 03/04/2013
MGoPoints: 5015
And when we are going through

And when we are going through this again in 5 years we will be talking about the team of NMFS that won it all.

It's sunny and I'm feeling good.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:50 PM
#32
LSAClassOf2000
LSAClassOf2000's picture
Joined: 01/07/2011
MGoPoints: 81216
Even So...

Even so, I do like our chances of getting to the Sweet Sixteen bracket - currently estimated at about 62%. While Wofford and the other two potential opponents in the way (Texas and Arizona State) all have better defensive efficiency numbers than us, our offensive efficiency is far above all of them. We defenitely have this going for us, and that being said, there is not a lot of separation between teams even dozens of spots apart. At least to the point where we might very well meet Duke should we survive, we match up well enough all the same with those who might be in our way. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 10:55 PM
#33
jblaze
jblaze's picture
Joined: 08/29/2008
MGoPoints: 14098
When this happens, I think it

When this happens, I think it means that either teams bomb from 3 or have a King James type player who scores a ton, but doesn't play much D.Over the course of the year, making a bunch of 3s is obviously high variation, but averages out.

Just curious, where was last year's Michigan ranked in this?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:03 PM
#34
KyleMac
Joined: 07/20/2010
MGoPoints: 311
Wait... 9?

There are 9 such teams in 2014, compared to 5 in 2013?  Seems like 2014 is already breaking some trends.

For whatever reason, this team can consistently light up any kind of defense on even an average night.  We only have to play average defense (i.e. 100ish ranking) to win a game by double digits.  I think a Final Four appearance would be a surprise, but its all about matchups.  We are unlikely to play a top 75 offense in the first two rounds, and our third round game is likely against a team with a 104 defensive efficiency and nearly identical offensive efficiency rating.  These stats don't matter until we get to Wichita State/Louisville... which will require a lights out game from 3 for us to advance.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:11 PM
#35
neoavatara
neoavatara's picture
Joined: 08/01/2009
MGoPoints: 1726
Just for the record

For the record, what was our stats last year?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:27 PM
(Reply to #27) #36
B-Nut-GoBlue
Joined: 09/30/2011
MGoPoints: 17129
#1 or #2 heading into the

#1 or #2 @ 120.Xppp heading into the tournament on offense and ~mid-40s on defense @ 94.Yppp.  Much higher than #103, for sure.

(If forget what X and Y really were but it's close enough)

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 10:12 AM
(Reply to #32) #37
Michigan4Life
Joined: 07/29/2010
MGoPoints: 16369
Actually Michigan was

mid 70s entering into tournament and rose up to mid 40s during their run. Safe to say their defense buckled down in the tourney coupled with the sudden rise of McGary.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 6:14 PM
(Reply to #52) #38
B-Nut-GoBlue
Joined: 09/30/2011
MGoPoints: 17129
Oh damn, good call.  That

Oh damn, good call.  That does seem right now that you bring that up.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:15 PM
#39
Mr. Yost
Mr. Yost's picture
Joined: 07/25/2011
MGoPoints: -9898289
This is pretty much what I'd expect...

We are not built for a deep tourney run in most years...this year the draw sets up nice for us, but usually teams like Kentucky or Oklahoma St. end up in the 7/10 game rather than the 8/9 game because they want to reward the #1 seed.

IMO, we lucked out and got a favorable draw...most agree that we should be in the Sweet 16 and I think we're an Elite 8 team because I think we play Duke similar to how MSU just played us...I think we just have an extra gear because of the redemption/revenge factor. After that, who knows who we draw and at that point you're going to play a very good team regardless of your draw or region. At that point it's just about who plays the better game because usually both teams are damn good.

That said, I think this team would've been a PRIME upset candidate if we had a tougher draw. We don't play defense, we're not a tough team and we struggle rebounding. If we shoot the ball well, we can literally beat any team in the country (including every 1-seed) by double figures. If we don't...we can lose to 90% of the teams in the tournament field.

And some of you may say "well isn't that every team?" No. And look no further than last year. We struggled shooting the ball in the first 3 games and found ways to win them all. It wasn't until the Florida game when we got hot and started hitting from everywhere. If I'm not mistaken, we shot better in the last 3 games than we did in the first 3. Obviously the last 3 had much tougher competition.

So you can win games when you don't shoot well. Especially when you're a solid defensive team.

One advantage that I think helps us more than most is we finally get out of conference and we're tough to prepare for. Teams aren't familiar with us or our style and they don't have anything to compare to in their league. Meanwhile, we face a million different styles so we can go from a VCU pressure to KU's height to UF's bulk to Syracuse's zone and still be okay.

One more thing...I also like us in the Duke game because Beilein has a week to prepare. We'll be ready.

So in short. In most years...I think this metric is accurate and it wouldn't shock me if this Michigan team wouldn't make it out of the 2nd round. THIS year, I think we lucked into a favorable draw and we make it to at least the Elite 8.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:49 PM
(Reply to #28) #40
Erik_in_Dayton
Erik_in_Dayton's picture
Joined: 12/03/2008
MGoPoints: 34173
Sweet 16 v. further advancement

It was a good draw in terms of being able to advance to the Sweet 16, but it would be better to be in the East - even as a lower seed - if you're looking beyond that. Duke and WSU (or Louisville) are collectively better than UVA and Nova. I would trade places with MSU in a heartbeat.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 12:17 AM
(Reply to #28) #41
BlueKoj
BlueKoj's picture
Joined: 01/10/2014
MGoPoints: 4087
UM won vs. Some decent teams

UM won vs. Some decent teams shooting below average. Awful shooting and maybe 90% in the field beat us. I just don't see awful shooting as likely.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:21 PM
#42
funkywolve
Joined: 10/08/2008
MGoPoints: 15747
Seeds are interesting

Of the 9 teams seeded 4th or higher, 4 of them were able to make the sweet 15. 

The teams seeded 5th or lower performed really bad.

I like UM's draw.  I think making the FF is a bit of a stretch, not that it's impossible, but I think they have a good chance to make the second weekend. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 12:37 AM
(Reply to #29) #43
Greg McMurtry
Greg McMurtry's picture
Joined: 02/25/2009
MGoPoints: 17241
Love that

Sweet 15.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 8:26 AM
(Reply to #29) #44
Mgotri
Mgotri's picture
Joined: 03/04/2013
MGoPoints: 5015
I think it is more

I think it is more interesting that in the entire group 8 made it to the sweet sixteen. To me this means that the group performed about as expected (9 teams should have made the sweet sixteen based on seeding) but the seeding was off in some cases.

It would also be interesting to look at how much better the top 100 offenses and defenses were than the mean. If the difference between the #30D and the #100D is 3ppp while the number 30O and number 100O are separated by 20ppp (i dont expect this to ever be the case), it would be more important to have a top 100 offense in that year.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:17 PM
#45
reanimator
Joined: 02/01/2014
MGoPoints: 826
Majority of the offense heavy

Majority of the offense heavy teams seem to be loaded on the West and Midwest side of the bracket, it seems. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:19 PM
#46
samdrussBLUE
samdrussBLUE's picture
Joined: 01/21/2012
MGoPoints: 15350
Just as I would suspect. A

Just as I would suspect. A lot of shitty outcomes

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 17th, 2014 at 11:39 PM
#47
KBLOW
KBLOW's picture
Joined: 06/30/2008
MGoPoints: 9763
If our shooting gets hot

If our shooting gets hot enough we could ride it all the way to the finals. If it doesn't, Texas could beat us with an extraordinary game of their own. I think we'll do well enough to get Duke and I'll take us in that rematch. After that, who knows?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 6:30 AM
(Reply to #41) #48
Yeoman
Joined: 06/08/2011
MGoPoints: 13242
No, probably not.

"using Kenpom's adjO and adjD numbers"

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 9:20 AM
#49
maize-blue
maize-blue's picture
Joined: 01/10/2013
MGoPoints: 30092
Teams can get into the paint

Teams can get into the paint on this team seemingly at will and they are not particulary big or physical. They have an incredible amount of talent but physical, pesky teams give them trouble.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 12:05 PM
(Reply to #47) #50
Blue Durham
Blue Durham's picture
Joined: 06/30/2008
MGoPoints: 5284
Our perimeter defenders have

Our perimeter defenders have great difficulty preventing drives. This ultimately puts more pressure on Morgan and Horford, both in trying to disrupt the drive and then trying to recover to rebound a potential miss.

Morgan and Horford often end up getting into foul trouble while the rest of the guys average something like 1 foul for the entire game. It would probably be well worth it if they each have to eat an additional foul or 2 in order to reduce the ease that other teams have in dribble penetration.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 9:53 AM
#51
HonoluluBlue
HonoluluBlue's picture
Joined: 06/24/2013
MGoPoints: 673
Flaw in your stats

I assume the numbers in your table for all non 2014 teams are KenPom's end of year rankings, meaning final numbers after the tournament has concluded. Look at the jump Michigan's defense made in KenPom's rankings last year before the tournament started and after it ended, almost 30 spots up if I remember correctly. I imagine that teams with a top 30 offense and 100+ defense entering the tournament that have gone on to make a tournament run ended with a top 100 defense. These teams will not be listed using your method. This data is potentially very misleading and cause for unnessecary concern. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 10:11 AM
(Reply to #50) #52
Soulfire21
Soulfire21's picture
Joined: 03/18/2010
MGoPoints: 14525
Not my data or analysis. I am

Not my data or analysis. I am but a messenger. These flaws you mentioned aren't the only ones.

For example, seeds 1-4 above, they performed roughly the same as all 1-4 seeds in the tournament.

There's also significant differences between the #3 offense and #30, basically between 'good' and 'elite', ours is elite and has consistently overshadowed defensive shortcomings all year.

I searched for kenpoms numbers by week buy unfortunately that was fruitless. IIRC Michigan entered the tournament ranked around 97th and finished 53rd last year, so you are quite correct that teams that go on runs likely catapult up his rankings.

I also took solace in the fact that the elite eight WVU team had Beilein as coach. Its highly likely we make it to the second weekend.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 10:26 AM
#53
HipsterCat
HipsterCat's picture
Joined: 06/28/2011
MGoPoints: 2087
most of these are 1st or 2nd

most of these are 1st or 2nd round exits which is obviously the most common thing to happen in the tournament. I would assume a similar chart with elite defenses and awful offenses might be similar, perhaps a couple more that advance to the sweet 16/elite 8/etc but i'd think it be very similar as an overall percentage. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 10:44 AM
#54
ak47
Joined: 05/05/2011
MGoPoints: 14272
What scares me is a team like

What scares me is a team like mizzou from a couple years back that had the number one offense was seeded 2 and lost in the first round.  That is just the type of team that we are, wofford is better than charlotte and texas/asu is at least as good as the middle of the big ten and we lost to indiana and beat purdue by 1 with off shooting nights.  The biggest problem I see for us is not having a trey burke or jabari parker, a guy who when the threes are not falling can still take over a game and score 20.  Stauskas is great but won't break 20 if his jumpshot isn't falling. 

Also people comparing us to last year, it doesn't make sense, there will be no mitch mcgary this year, last years team loses to kansas without mcgary last year so looking at how the teams entered the tourney is going to give you a false sense of hope.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 11:37 AM
#55
alum96
alum96's picture
Joined: 04/28/2012
MGoPoints: 63601
What I am confused about is

What I am confused about is WHY we dont play good defense, or even average defense for a team with these sort of players - at least when our starters are playing. 

Walton should be a good on the ball defender, Caris should be, and GR3 should be (when not facing a physical opponent which is 60%+ of the time).  Morgan is a good defender.  I realize Nik is not great.  But of our starting 5, 4 should in theory be pretty darn good at what they do yet that 3 game display in the BTT was some of the worse defense of the year.   I do realize Irvin is not a good defender, Spike gets overpowered a bit, and Horford is... well Horford - but when our starters are out there, the defense should be adequate.  And before people say 100 out of 300 is adequate, I mean adequate versus BCS conference peers, which I'd put at 50-75.

That said the draw offers no excuses in the first 2 games.  They have to beat 1 team that is top 15 / not in a tailspin late in the season to get to the Elite 8.  If they do that it will help the chart out above but yes we saw with the OSU game (the only game we shot well of the 3 in the BTT) that even when we shot the lights out of the gym early, OSU was still within 12 because they got to the lane just about anytime they wanted and there are a lot better offensive minded teams than OSU out there and I believe that is where the eventual undoing should be. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 12:18 PM
(Reply to #55) #56
Erik_in_Dayton
Erik_in_Dayton's picture
Joined: 12/03/2008
MGoPoints: 34173
I think the answer is an oldie but a goodie: youth.

Very few kids are good defenders in their first year.  Those who are tend to be shot-blockers.  I think we'll see Walton, Irvin, and LeVert all become good defenders if/when they become upperclassmen.  Robinson is already a decent defender, and he will presumably improve if he returns next year. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 6:22 PM
(Reply to #55) #57
B-Nut-GoBlue
Joined: 09/30/2011
MGoPoints: 17129
Do you think there's

Do you think there's something to, once we get out of the Big Ten our defense in a way averages out?  A post was made after mine in a post from yesterday in regards to how we jumped froom mid-70s ranked defense on KenPom to mid-40s by the end of the Tournament.  We ended up at ~94.0ppp on defense but forget what the actual ppp jump was to go from 70s to 40s.  Anywho, our defense WAS better in the tournament.  Was it just because of McGary balling out and Trey doing some things well on defense or did we average out because of the officiating change in the Dance?

I personally likely lean more toward Mitch being a big body and stopper/rebounder but maybe there's something to the Tournament vs Big Ten officiating and we become not as bad is we seem.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
March 18th, 2014 at 1:07 PM
#58
Mgotri
Mgotri's picture
Joined: 03/04/2013
MGoPoints: 5015
Is there a spreadsheet

Is there a spreadsheet version of these?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system
Theme provided by Roopletheme; sidebars adapted from Chris Murphy.