January 29th, 2019 at 11:16 AM ^
Why is the guy mad in the picture?
January 29th, 2019 at 11:19 AM ^
I believe the kids call that "mean-mugging" these days, though my old ass could definitely be wrong.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:08 PM ^
He's just collecting what he's owed. See also Barry Sanders scoring a touchdown.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:32 AM ^
This ain’t his first rodeo. He’s been here before...
January 29th, 2019 at 12:32 PM ^
He's got his defensive face on.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:15 AM ^
During that late stretch of non conference games it felt like they weren't as intense on defense. You can see it now, their intensity is back and they mean business.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:15 AM ^
Also noteworthy: if the season ended today, Virginia would be the highest ranked Kenpom team since the rankings begin in 2002, passing 2015 Kentucky and 2008 Kansas.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:46 AM ^
Yeah, I noticed that. There are four teams with 30+ efficiency margin this year and there were only three in the last three years combined.
It kind of feels like coaches are running up the scores more this year since it is now being rewarded by the NET rankings. Gonzaga beat Santa Clara 98-39 in their last game. 98-39!!! In a conference game in men's college basketball. Talk about running up the score. It'll be interesting to see if this is a legitimate statistical trend and if the NCAA changes the NET formula as a result (the way they required BCS computer formulas to not include margin).
January 29th, 2019 at 11:54 AM ^
KenPom looked for this and couldn't find any evidence of teams running up the score more (it was in an article in the Athletic).
As for the high efficiency margins -- it's an effect of teams not getting deep into conference play yet. On 1/29/18 there were 3 teams with 30+ efficiency ratings (Villanova, UVa, and Purdue); on 1/28/17 there were four (Gonzaga, Kentucky, WVU, and UVa). I'd go back further, but 2017 was the first year of the adjusted efficiency margins instead of the pythagorean value.
January 29th, 2019 at 4:10 PM ^
As always, J comes through spitting the analytics truth.
I had considered the timing of the margins but the odd thing about this year so far is that all four teams with a 30+ EM have dramatically increased their EM since conference play started/in the past month. So it's not like they built that up in the non-conference schedule and are in decline since conference play started as one would expect based on the theory that these are high because teams aren't deep into conference play yet.
I would be really curious to see the methodology kenpom used. I doubt this would show up systematically across CBB because only a few teams would 1) have the incentive to manipulate NET since most teams are not even close to tournament teams and 2) have the opportunity to run up scores since most teams that care about seeding are playing in big conferences just fighting to win games and aren't faced with decisions about taking their feet of the pedal midway through a second half.
Gonzaga does, however, have a lot of incentive to run up the score and has lots of opportunities. It's really the only way they can impress the various ranking systems that are included on the score sheet. It's probably their only chance of getting a 1 seed.
Maybe I'm just being cynical, and it is absolutely just a musing on my part.
Additional counters to my theory include the 2015 season in which four teams finished the season with 32+ EM, one of which also had a super high EM like UVA does this year (UK) and six had higher than 30.
So it's happened before that there have just been several elite teams such that CBB was top heavy. This very could be one of those years.
Not surprisingly, that tournament was pretty predictable with three 1 seeds making the final four. I think this season could be similar. You have UVA which has a really good blend of talent, coaching and experience like the 2015 Wisconsin team, you have an insanely talented Duke team like that Kentucky team and maybe Kentucky and Duke will trade roles and UK will be the "darkhorse" team with insane talent that will win it all (but please no).
January 29th, 2019 at 4:29 PM ^
Aw, shucks; you're making me blush. :)
The thing is, the teams at the top have gotten there in part by sequencing. Last year, Michigan finished #7 (+24.20) in KenPom, but they were at #24 at this point in the season (+18.63). Suppose Michigan had played the Nebraska, LSU, and UNC games in March instead of November and January. Their January AdjEM would have been higher just because they hadn't had their poorest performances yet.
Nearly everyone at the top of the current KenPom leaderboard has played above their true talent level; that's why they're there. Regression to the mean suggests that this will correct itself by year's end. For Virginia to keep up its lofty place in the rankings, they'd essentially need to sweep the remainder of their schedule while winning by an average of about 10 points. That's not impossible, but it's also not likely.
January 29th, 2019 at 6:16 PM ^
Taking a snapshot of the top 6 teams a month ago, you would certainly introduce selection bias by choosing teams that have outperformed their "true" quality. So you'd expect some of them to regress to the mean and be replaced by other "hot" teams. The fact that only one of the six (Kansas, which has injury issues) has regressed since then, and five of the six have further increased their EMs (UVA, Gonzaga and MSU by an astounding 6+ ppg), seems to be an anomaly for sure.
I will say, those three teams are all experienced, talented, well-coached (yes, MSU is well-coached), and probably out for vengeance after bowing out earlier than any of them expected in the tournament last year so I buy that they're all just really good. Will interesting to see how the year plays out and how far they come back to earth.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:10 PM ^
There's no evidence this is happening, and in this particular game, I'm not sure what Gonzaga could have done short of purposely taking shot clock violations and letting Santa Clara score.
January 29th, 2019 at 4:37 PM ^
They could have played their walkons more. That's what most teams would do up 50 with 10 minutes to go.
Jack Beach, a walk-on, only played the last 2 minutes of this game.
Michigan played Luke Wilson and CJ Baird longer than that in 20-30 point games earlier this year.
I'm not blaming Gonzaga if this is a conscious decision, and I admit they're probably not even thinking about this. It would be understandable, though, given that the NCAA basically invited them to do this with the NET formula and that's really their only way to impress the rankings as they play tomato cans. They don't have the opporunity to rack up quality wins like most tournament teams. They can now crush bad teams and move up the primary ranking system used on the team sheets.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:47 AM ^
I still can't take UVA seriously as a real national title threat. They beat everyone up in the regular season, and then always underperform vs. their seed in the tournament
January 29th, 2019 at 12:14 PM ^
Disagree. This year's Virginia team is a legit title contender.
The Virginia teams that normally flop in the early rounds are elite defensive teams that have good at best offenses. Last year was a great example, #1 defense to KP but the #30 offense and they didn't have one of their best players.
The only Tony Bennett Virginia team to make it to the Elite 8 was the 2016 tournament team, a 1 seed with the #7 KP defense but the #8 offense. The only time he's had a top 10 offense and defense to KP, he made the Elite 8.
This year's team has the #2 offense and #2 defense to KP. If this holds come tournament time I think this is a Final 4 team.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:52 PM ^
You may be right, and I like Tony Bennett... but Virginia basketball remains unwatchable on the offensive end. Too many players walking. (Not traveling: literally walking).
January 29th, 2019 at 2:55 PM ^
I don't really understand that. "Unwatchable" is such an extreme term when their offense isn't very different in structure or philosophy from Michigan's or Wisconsin's. It's predicated on finding the best open shot each time down the floor. It's a motion offense not dissimilar to Wisconsin's. Lots of cutting and off-ball screening, re-screening and a ton of Beilein-like reads within a flowing open scheme.
They have savvy upperclass guards that probe, score in the mid range or at the rim and come off off-ball screens to hit from deep just like Purdue does. Their best next-level player Deandre Hunter is basically Charles Mathews but with a silky smooth stroke (hitting 42/57 vs 32/38 on same usage), better FT% (79 vs 61) and less turnovers (9% vs 15%). Plus guards all 5 positions.
If you meant they walk it up the floor (instead of pushing) after taking possession, sure they tend to do that more often than most because they don't have rim runners like Mathews or Wilkins, and prefer the efficiency of their half-court game. If you've watched them after they've built up a 20+ point lead in the first half then sure maybe they've slowed it down. I'm biased but "unwatchable" is a bridge too far. You can say the same things about Michigan, because their using similar formulas.
For reference the adjusted tempos of Michigan, Virginia and Wisconsin are rankings wise- 316, 353 and 332 - about a 1-2 possession difference.
January 29th, 2019 at 5:22 PM ^
I normally only turn to Virginia games when the score is close, and I still see them dribbling the air out of the ball -- the point guard seems to cross the time line with 21 on the clock as a matter of course. Now, maybe I've just turned on the wrong games -- statistically, this seems to be a much more potent Virginia offense than the past few years -- but it just wasn't fun. Deathly effective, but not enjoyable to watch. :)
Michigan has always seemed faster to me than the pace indicates, whereas Wisconsin and Virginia have always seemed slower. Perhaps I'll have to make it a point to watch a UVa game from the tip. :) I wasn't in much of a mood to watch basketball by the time they played Duke.. :/
January 29th, 2019 at 3:41 PM ^
The only time he's had a top 10 offense and defense to KP, he made the Elite 8.
Yes, and they were a 1 seed that year, so making the Elite 8 isn't an incredible achievement. UVA's had a bunch of 'title contender' teams in recent years without a Final Four to show for it. I'm going to expect them to underperform until they don't for once
January 29th, 2019 at 12:14 PM ^
Also noteworthy: if the season ended today, Virginia would be the highest ranked Kenpom team since the rankings begin in 2002, passing 2015 Kentucky and 2008 Kansas.
So this year they make it out of the first day of the tournament?
January 29th, 2019 at 12:26 PM ^
Maybe yes, maybe no.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:30 AM ^
They've been stifling teams for a decent chunk of the month. Glad to see them get back to the top.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:30 AM ^
Does anyone know what "NCSOS" is? (and why ours is so bad?)
January 29th, 2019 at 11:34 AM ^
I believe it's non-conference strength of schedule.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:45 AM ^
Ah, gotcha.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:34 AM ^
Assume it is non-con strength of schedule. I guess the cupcakes we play are REALLY bad, even though we still have the Nova and UNC wins...
January 29th, 2019 at 11:40 AM ^
Don't think that's the case; people in a position to know seemed happier with the non-con slate this year. Also, it's not necessarily the case that MSU's early losses helped them. M got a ton of publicity and arguably confidence with the way things unfolded this year.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:48 AM ^
And yet, it is, hence the low NCSOS.
Binghamton was never expected to be good, nor was Norfolk State. Western and George Washington have both underperformed what people probably expected; so has Providence, for that matter. The rest of the schedule is meh (ETA: excepting Villanova and UNC, of course). It's not as bad as it has been, but the low ranking is deserved.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:58 AM ^
This. The Western Michigan game is an example of performance really hurting us. We only beat them by single digits. Eastern Michigan just beat them by 26 on Western's home floor.
Offense will need to improve if we want to make a title run. No team outside the top 25 in kenpom offense has every won the national championship. Almost none have ever made the final four.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:36 AM ^
Because we still schedule cupcakes in our non conference schedule, and don't play the kenpom scheduling game. I'm sure if you've been on this blog long, you have read the incessant complaining about how MSU loses more but gets ranked higher than us...
January 29th, 2019 at 11:44 AM ^
That's much less of an issue in KenPom than it is with other systems -- notably, the RPI (RIP!). KenPom is harder to game because it's not nearly as dependent upon schedule strength. In the RPI, it was literally three times as important to schedule good opponents as it was to win your own games. (Strength of schedule was 75% of the formula).
January 29th, 2019 at 11:44 AM ^
Oh yes, Ive seen it and participated. Its kind of stupid really, if we had a neutral NCSOS, we are #2 in Kenpom. Thats like scheduling a bunch of South Carolinas, or even a little worse than them.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:51 AM ^
That's not how kenpom works.
SOS is irrelevant. It is 100% how you perform against the teams you play relative to how other teams perform against the same teams. So you could play the worst 30 teams in basketball, beat them all by 100 and you'd be number 1.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:59 AM ^
Correct. The NCSOS AdjEM is actually the strength that you'd need to have to be expected to go .500 against the non-conference schedule (see here). So, what they're saying is that Little Rock, the #206 team in the country -- who happens to have an AdjEM of -4.23, exactly the same as Michigan's NCSOS AdjEM -- would be expected to go .500 against Michigan's schedule. It's not an adjustment that's added to the raw value.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:16 PM ^
The incessant complaining about MSU losses is deserved because, you know, they were losses. And our games were not. WHO GIVES A SHIT IF MSU PLAYED A TOUGHER SCHEDULE WHEN THE TOUGHER SCHEDULE RESULTED IN LOSSES??
College basketball is the only sport that rewards losses. It's mind-bottling.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:29 PM ^
Last sentence correction "mind boggling":
Prior sentence addition "except at NCAA tournament play time"
January 29th, 2019 at 2:08 PM ^
"Mind-bottling" was intentional. A malaprop, if you will.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:48 PM ^
College basketball is also the only sport with 353 teams in the "top division," some of which are at such differing levels of aptitude that the outcome is a virtual certainty ahead of time, and where scores like 106-37 happen. (Nebraska's season opener vs. Mississippi Valley State).
I prefer interesting basketball, even if it means Michigan can't win every game. Give me Kansas's non-conference schedule: neutral vs. MSU, vs. Vermont, vs. Louisiana, neutral vs. Marquette, neutral vs. Tennessee, vs. Stanford, vs. Wofford, vs. New Mexico State in KC, vs. Villanova, vs. South Dakota State, at Arizona State, vs. Eastern Michigan, and at Kentucky.
Looking at nothing besides wins and losses tells you little.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:59 PM ^
You understand that someone has to lose, right?
If they were blowouts then that's one thing, but they were not blowouts.
If we valued a win against Binghamton (ranked near last in Kenpom) way more than a close loss against a top 10 or so opponent, then the top teams will play more Binghamtons than good teams. It's bad for the sport.
January 29th, 2019 at 2:10 PM ^
1) We beat good teams.
2) Michigan State did not beat good teams. I'll wait while you look those up.
3) Congrats to MSU for beating not bad teams.
January 29th, 2019 at 2:28 PM ^
That's not really what I was saying.
Also, at this point, it's pretty irrelevant. I just looked at Kenpom and MSU has played 11 games in the KenPom top 35. We have played 4. They are 8-3 in those games, and we are 3-1.
Of course this will all change and is fluid. But I just can't stand the incessant whining about MSU on these threads. Who cares what they are ranked? Some people on here seem to care more about what MSU is doing than what our own basketball team is doing, which is the exact thing we hate about them regarding football
January 29th, 2019 at 4:36 PM ^
We should schedule good teams and lose to them.
Got it.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:38 AM ^
What. A. Time. To. Be. Alive.
Who would have ever guessed that a Beilein team would be hyper-elite defensively (much less #1) given his history?
January 29th, 2019 at 12:15 PM ^
Even so, the complainers still complain that the wins don't look good enough and the recruits aren't as highly ranked as other skools. Our program is much better the way John runs it than any other. Kudos to Michigan and John Beilein.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:40 PM ^
I’m sorry, are there still actual complainers who aren’t Sparty concern-trolls? And if so, do you believe they actually know anything about basketball? This is our best team since the 1992-1993 Fab Five squad. Ignore the trolls, don’t feed them.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:06 PM ^
Funny, you don't seem to be new here. ;)
Yes, there are actual complainers here who, IMO, are not concern trolls, but who are certain the sky is falling at all times, and for whom the only acceptable outcome seems to be one where Michigan scores on every possession and holds their opponent scoreless.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:09 PM ^
This is a very good team but I am not even sure they are as good of a team as last year, let alone the 2013 national runner up and/or the 2014 Elite 8 team. We have had a lot of really good basketball teams during Beilein's tenure with a lot of legit NBA talent.