Jump to content

Massive topic on why the B1G sucks, why defense is overrated, why you should give Crean more credit, and some potential red flags with Archie. 


Recommended Posts

Yes this is a sensationalist title but it's also all true. This is just food for thought and not a dreadful woe is me post about Archie or the program moving forward. First I should tell you why and how I've gotten to this point. Born in the mid 80's and I grew up on the peak IU hype train. Obviously things are magnified when you're young and excited and we all know how poorly it turned out after the early 90's. 25 years of my trying to piece together why we haven't turned a major corner has led me here. Passion turned into agitation, into frustration, stress, anger, blow ups, and ultimately a much needed nap from it all last season. I'm sure you've seen me post about my total disrespect for the big 10 and at times my lack of enthusiasm for the program. I've mentioned countless times that if the goal is to win a title then things need to change drastically. You've got to do something extremely special to beat out 350 teams and win a championship. I've defended Crean on occasion because he saw the big picture. People want steady consistency and that isn't the answer at all. A steady consistent team will continue falling up short. Making elite 8 runs every few years is cute but there's another two levels after that. Just ask Few, Beilein, Izzo, Mata, Ryan, Bennett, Marshall, Sean Miller, Alford, and even Self who very close to being 0-3.

 

Take a look at the Data that I've accumulated. It's a little ugly in setup but you can scroll down to get the points. 

Winner / Final offensive ranking / final defensive ranking (points per game - points allowed). Betting Favorite in title game. 

2018 - Nova 1 / 11 (87-70). Michigan 35 / 3 (74-63). -6.5 won by 17.

2017 - UNC 9 / 11 (84-71). Gonzaga 16 / 1 (83-62). -1 won by 6.

2016 - Nova 3 / 5 (78-64). UNC 1 / 21 (83-70). +2 won by 3.

2015 - Duke 3 / 11 (79-64). Wisc 1 / 35 (73-58) +1 won by 5.

2014 - UConn 39 / 10 (72-63). UK 14 / 32 (75-67) +2.5 won by 6.

2013 - UL 7 / 1  (75-59). Michigan 1 / 37 (75-63)  -4 won by 6.

2012 - UK 2 / 7  (77-61). Kansas 23 / 3 (74-62) -6.5 won by 8.

2011 - UConn 19 / 15 (72-65). Butler 43 / 46 (71-64) -3 won by 12. 

2010 - Duke 1 / 5  (77-61). Butler 49 / 7 (69-59)  -7 won by 2.

2009 - UNC 1 / 18  (90-72). MSU 26 / 6 (72-64)  -7.5 won by 17.

2008 - Kansas 2 / 1  (81-62). Memphis 6 / 2 (80-62) +2 won by 7.

2007 - FLA 1 / 13 (80-63). Ohio St 4 / 11 (75-62) -4 won by 9.

2006 - FLA 3 / 7 (78-64). UCLA 31 / 4 (68-59) -1 won by 16.

2005 - UNC 2 / 5 (88-70). Illinois 3 / 4 (77-61) -2 won by 5.

2004 - UConn 9 / 6 (79-64). Ga Tech 28 / 4 (77-67) -5 won by 9. 

2003 - Syr 17 / 14 (80-70). Kansas 12 / 3 (83-67) +5.5 won by 3.

2002 - Mary 4 / 7 (85-71). Indiana 26 / 5 (71-63) -7.5 won by 12.

 

The favorite won 12/17 times.

11/12 times they also covered the spread. That shows you just how great the eventual champions are. 

The Underdogs won 5 at a spread +5.5, +2, +2.5, +1, and +2. So only the real upset was from Carmelo.

The higher scoring teams went 12-1-3.

14 of the 17 champions were in the top 10 in offense. 11 in the top 3.

7 of the 17 were out of the top ten.

Winning teams had a higher offensive rating than defense 11 out of the 17 times.

The losing team was defensively oriented 10 out of the 17 times.

The two 'outlier' championships from UCONN benefited from very weak opponents. 

The average PPG for the winners is 80.

It doesn't matter how elite your defense is if you don't have a top 10 offense to match it.

You'll notice that the only time a team lost a final while being in the top 10 in both offense and defense is when they matched up vs another..

There's a reason why the B1G lost 7 straight games and why they'll continue to keep losing them (it's not just the B1G, look at the numbers on all of the losers).

Adding up Offensive rank + Defensive rank totals and comparing gives you a 14-3 record for the lower score (20-17, 49-47, 31-15 only gives you one true upset. Again showing you need to be levels above everyone else)

 

Another post incoming shortly that talks about Crean having the right idea, the B1G,  offense,  Sean Miller, and some other things to keep an eye out on with Archie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Just killed a few hours in between study breaks trying to figure out what seems to be winning, why, and how. I wanted to figure out if I could come up with a 'mean' or optimal approach to a title because I've got it in my head that certain styles won't work and I wanted the data to either prove me right or wrong. Just a little learning experience / observations that I could pass along. I'm trying to figure out what archies going for here and comparing similar teams over the last 20 years. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

Not sure where you're going with all of this, but I'm entertained by your title.

Goofing off and having a little fun with it.

I'll tie Crean, B1G, Archie, and Sean into it all in an hour or two and come up with my little conclusion here. Study some / clown around on this / doing a little bit of work in between. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've done very similar things using Pomeroy stats, and I had come to the same conclusions as you about offense. It reminds me of the early days of Pythagorean in baseball sabermetrics when everything revolved around pitching/defense winning championships and then Bill James came out and said it's about 50/50 between offense/defense. I'm simplifying the argument, but you get the picture. 

Another interesting thing I've done is getting an overall team "talent" level by weighting minutes based on how many stars a player had coming in. It obviously correlates exceptionally well although it's rare that the highest team wins the championship given that it's usually Kentucky & Calipari has only one title in Lexington. 

Something else I looked at with Pomeroy stats is pace. I found that you can't be Virginia and win although playing at a break neck pace isn't always optimal either. 

I'm not sure where you are going either, but it sounds pretty fun so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, hoosiermd said:

I've done very similar things using Pomeroy stats, and I had come to the same conclusions as you about offense. It reminds me of the early days of Pythagorean in baseball sabermetrics when everything revolved around pitching/defense winning championships and then Bill James came out and said it's about 50/50 between offense/defense. I'm simplifying the argument, but you get the picture. 

Another interesting thing I've done is getting an overall team "talent" level by weighting minutes based on how many stars a player had coming in. It obviously correlates exceptionally well although it's rare that the highest team wins the championship given that it's usually Kentucky & Calipari has only one title in Lexington. 

Something else I looked at with Pomeroy stats is pace. I found that you can't be Virginia and win although playing at a break neck pace isn't always optimal either. 

I'm not sure where you are going either, but it sounds pretty fun so far.

Hey somebody gets it! I actually used to play too believe it or not! I love this type of stuff. It's crazy what the data can show you about how the game is played, what your opponents are doing, what youre doing, what their leaks are, what your leaks are, and then the fun begins in exploiting theirs and plugging yours. This rabbit hole goes deep if you're willing to follow it. What's beautiful about it is what's optimal today could be a mistake tomorrow. 

I got my work, dinner, and school stuff done so I'll be able to get closer to clearing up where I'm going with this sometime tonight I think if the dogs will leave me alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's take a brief look at Sean Miller. The knock on him was that he couldn't get past the elite 8...well...

2011: Took a 12/67 vs 19/15. Standard loss. Solid job getting that far.

2014: 20 / 1st!! defense! Lost to 4th/35th. That's pretty much a dream scenario for a Sean Miller system and got beat by a better offense.

2015: He had a monster squad at 7/3 and lost to the best offense in the country. 1/35th. More evidence that defense is overrated. 

 

Let's take a gander at Self and his 8 Elite 8's.

2004: 38 / 13 vs 28 / 4. Standard loss.

2007: 29/1 vs  27/2. Lost a coin flip.

2008: 2/1 won it all.

2011: 6/6 vs 47/78. Shit the bed.

2012: 23/3 vs 2/7. Standard loss.

2016: 10/3 vs 3/5. Standard loss.

2017: 5/24 vs 17/17. Bad loss but not surprising.

2018:  5/47 vs 1/11. Standard loss, destroyed vs Nova.

 

Let's slander Izzo! He's right up there near the top of my favorites to slander. 8 elite 8's as well!

His teams always score in the low 70's. I already explained why that won't work so I should just stop there but there's fun ahead!

Lets take a look at his final 4's

2005: 87 - 71

2009: 89 - 72! Battered again but they make the finals at least.

2010: 52 - 50! 33rd offense, 32nd defense. I told you that's the trap zone!

2015: 81-61!!!!! 

There's 19 elite 8's for three defensive minded coaches who have stocked piled elite talent for decades and done for the most part **** all with it! If not for a lucky Chalmers three and two massive bracket breaks for Izzo and they've have 0 titles combined!

 

I think I've explained why defense is overrated. 

I've explained why the B1G sucks and it's not a fluke that they keep getting battered in the finals / final fours (they can't score).

Take a look at Gonzaga, UVA, Wichita St, and Michigan State if you want stable consistency.  

As far as Crean and Archie goes... I'll get to that in a final post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say, my major hang up with archie is defense. He seems very rigid in his defensive game i.e isu and fort wayne.

Good example, RMK shut down Jordan in 84 because knight knew Jordan couldn't shoot a jump shot. So basically knight adjusted and played essentialy a pack line defense to force jordan to shoot outside.

Archie didnt make any adjustment when isu and fort Wayne were draining threes. 

I think archie needs to be more flexible on defense.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll start with Crean. He put together 4 top 10 offenses. The 2012 team could have made the elite 8 had we not run into that insane kentucky team that played out of their minds (4th/72nd for us) The 2013 team with Vic/Zeller should have made the final four (2nd/19th). The 2016 team got hosed with a bogus 5th seed and ran into the UNC juggernaut and definitely could have made it(6th/59th). The 2017 team is a long shot but they did shoot up to third early on and completely gave up. Those four teams put up 77, 78, 83, and 80. That's a good enough system to win it all and a fantastic over achievement on Creans part. He got the occasional low ranked 5 star that had some of the tools but wasn't complete (barring Zeller), rarely any 20-35 ranked players, the occasional 40ish guy and made the post out of the athletic three star players like OG, Will, and Vic. Had he been better at his job and able to pull in players that we're just a littttle bit better, a little bit faster, a little bit more athletic then I've no doubt he would have made a few final fours.

Don't get me wrong here...it was time for him to leave. A couple bad recruiting breaks, a weird personality, being off putting and focusing on the offense over the defense obsessively cost him his job. I think he saw the types of players and types of talent that he could get and developed a system that actually gave him a legit shot at winning a title if things bounced his way. None of this balanced stuff. 1st and 20th might win a title but 30th and 60th year in and year out is worthless and won't win you a title.

 

As far as Archie goes. The defense absolutely needs to improve to a top 15 level but if he's mimicking Sean here and prioritizing defense in a huge way while neglecting the offense then I think that's a mistake. His philosophy doesn't really make a lot of sense to me at the moment. The modern game is based on pace, space, and boming 3's with lock down shooters everywhere who can pass while playing outside in (nova style). You've got the hectic super athletic style with length, experience, and good talent everywhere that wears you down and stacks up over the years (unc style). You've got the stacking up a super team of the best young players that will be more talented, longer, and faster than you (uk style). You also have the throw a bunch of top talent and hope it eventually works out style even though you have no idea what you're doing  (duke style). You could do the goofy press style like pitino or the goofy gimmick style like syracuse. You could hope to get lucky with a super scoring PG like kemba/napier. Those styles all have high ceilings. This balanced style like Arizona doesn't do it for me. The balanced and play hard defense with goon rapists while always having a couple of low level NBA talent on the roster that racks up wins but won't get you a title style (MSU) is weak too. The one that really makes me laugh though is the pay for the shady 5 star players style (kansas) while also stacking up the 'disgruntled talented' player with a chip on his shoulder that seems like he's there for 6 years style. I'm not sure any Kansas squad has blown me away but their always in the elite 8.

I don't know what his long term plan and philosophy will be but I imagine it'll be similar to Seans. I'm not sure that a slower tempo with a heavy focus on attacking the rim, and a big insistence on playing inside out will take you very far. Especially without two high level scoring guards and little shooting. I'll let him build the roster but it's looking pretty odd to me at the moment. 

Like I said at the very beginning of this thread though that this is just food for thought, with some of my opinions sprinkled in, and with some facts to back up my line of thinking here. I'm not sure what his overall long term philosophy is but I'm sure it's aligned closely with what most of the fan base wants and that's tough defense, minimal turnovers, good ball movement, establishing the inside, attacking the glass, and high IQ players. I hope it works.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Times on our side anyway here in a big way. I’m just going to enjoy the process. We’ve got a young + hard working coach who’s dedicated. I’m sure he’s not even remotely close to as rigid as Ive painted him there. He’s levels and levels above whatever level that I think that I’m at and I’m sure he’s fully aware of any potential leaks to his philosophy. As much as I’d like him to set the world on fire with unique and game changing ideas from the jump I suppose it’s best to take the safer route and get settled with what you know works very well and build up from there.

I suppose the only fear that I really have is that the money could block his ultimate ambition and willingness to step out of his comfort zone. He’s got the coaching ability, staff, recruiting ability and the past results that clearly show that he could turn this into a 22/27 win program year in and out without hardly any risks and little push from the base. It’d be awfully tempting to keep collecting those massive checks....Painter does it. Mata did it. Izzo did it forever until the past few seasons. he’s finally gone after the top young players and altered his control of the team and let the kids have the keys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we will see a different team this year.  I suspect  the transition from Crean to Archie was harder on the players than we sometimes think.  Not saying one way was better than the other, but it was different and the results show that as Newkirk, definitely, and sometimes Johnson, struggled with that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that a slower tempo

Here are the Tempo ranks for Archie's Dayton/Indiana teams

2012: 213
2013: 174
2014: 223
2015: 229
2016: 183
2017: 163
2018: 251
AVG: 205

Here are the Tempo rankings for the national champions over the same time period:

2012: 150 (Kentucky)
2013: 116 (Louisville)
2014: 254 (Connecticut)
2015: 104 (Duke)
2016: 274 (Villanova)
2017: 40 (North Carolina)
2018: 150 (Villanova)
AVG: 155

Archie isn't that far off and if you look at his Dayton teams from 2014-2017 his tempo start to pick up the pace and I wonder if that is more in line with what he wanted to do once his systems were in place & his players were there. If you go back and look at the Pomeroy stats the one thing I always think sticks out is how fast North Carolina plays on a year to year basis. It's very unlike the other elite level teams, but they've won 3 titles under Williams playing like that so it's hard to argue with the results. 

One thing I've never understood in regards to pace (and I'm not a basketball coach) but I would think you'd want to run as much as possible simply from a possession standpoint. If you look at it like this:

Good offense/Good defense: Run to gain more possessions. You score but your defense is so good then possessions don't matter for the other team
Good offense/Bad defense: Run to gain more possessions to maximize your scoring output. Hope the other team doesn't score as much on your bad D
Bad offense/Good defense: Run to gain more possessions to maximize your scoring output. Your good D should limit the other team's conversions
Bad offense/Bad defense: Run to maximize possessions and hope to score as much as possible while your opponent has a HUGE off game

Regardless of how your team stacks, I've always wondered why the answer isn't always maximize pace/possessions in order to score more points. I guess 2014 UConn and 2016 Villanova run contrary to this.

I think you are right though about Archie & tempo. If he keeps the team in that 200-275 range then I don't think he's maximizing Indiana's chances at winning a championship. If he, however, can get into that 130-180 range then I think he hits the sweet spot there as far as the average for most recent national champions. I guess we'll have to wait and see. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ADegenerate said:

Let's take a brief look at Sean Miller. The knock on him was that he couldn't get past the elite 8...well...

2011: Took a 12/67 vs 19/15. Standard loss. Solid job getting that far.

2014: 20 / 1st!! defense! Lost to 4th/35th. That's pretty much a dream scenario for a Sean Miller system and got beat by a better offense.

2015: He had a monster squad at 7/3 and lost to the best offense in the country. 1/35th. More evidence that defense is overrated. 

 

Let's take a gander at Self and his 8 Elite 8's.

2004: 38 / 13 vs 28 / 4. Standard loss.

2007: 29/1 vs  27/2. Lost a coin flip.

2008: 2/1 won it all.

2011: 6/6 vs 47/78. Shit the bed.

2012: 23/3 vs 2/7. Standard loss.

2016: 10/3 vs 3/5. Standard loss.

2017: 5/24 vs 17/17. Bad loss but not surprising.

2018:  5/47 vs 1/11. Standard loss, destroyed vs Nova.

 

Let's slander Izzo! He's right up there near the top of my favorites to slander. 8 elite 8's as well!

His teams always score in the low 70's. I already explained why that won't work so I should just stop there but there's fun ahead!

Lets take a look at his final 4's

2005: 87 - 71

2009: 89 - 72! Battered again but they make the finals at least.

2010: 52 - 50! 33rd offense, 32nd defense. I told you that's the trap zone!

2015: 81-61!!!!! 

There's 19 elite 8's for three defensive minded coaches who have stocked piled elite talent for decades and done for the most part **** all with it! If not for a lucky Chalmers three and two massive bracket breaks for Izzo and they've have 0 titles combined!

 

I think I've explained why defense is overrated. 

I've explained why the B1G sucks and it's not a fluke that they keep getting battered in the finals / final fours (they can't score).

Take a look at Gonzaga, UVA, Wichita St, and Michigan State if you want stable consistency.  

As far as Crean and Archie goes... I'll get to that in a final post.

One slight "flaw" in the #'s you are using are season end and account for the tournament run/championship game. For example, prior to the tourney in 2008 Kansas was 1/4 in RankOE/RankDE and 1/3 in AdjOE/DE. In this case didn't make a big difference since they already started so high in both, but for a lot of champions they move up the ranks quite a bit by winning 6 tournament games in AdjOE/DE. There is an option to choose pre-tourney data that generates to excel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I am to old school because I couldn't care less about all of these metrics that are used today.  The stats I care about is the winning percentage our shooting percentage and our defensive percentage.  To me I care about if we out rebound a team, have less turnovers and shoot more free throws.  All these other ways of looking at the game I have no desire to look at because I think my eyes can tell me the story better.  I have watched basketball for over 40 years and my eye test is really all I need to know if the team is going to be good or not.  I  don't need a bunch of stats to show me what I already know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...