January Non-Conference Report

The time is drawing near when our non-conference opponents really matter. It's hard to believe the regular season is nearly 75% complete and that Selection Sunday is less than 6 weeks away, but that's just where we are. As Marquette moves into the final month before March Madness, let's take another look at what our non-con opponents have done in the past month, and where their RPI projects courtesy of RealTimeRPI.com.

Mount St. Mary's: The Mount went 3-5, by far their best month of the year. It was punctuated by a great win against Sacred Heart in which they fell behind, came back to take control of the game, fell behind again, came back to force overtime, fell behind, came back to force a second overtime, and fell behind again before finally winning 81-80 in double overtime. Let's hope the Mountaineers can carry that into February, where they will be favored in 4 of their 8 games. Their current RPI is 287, but their projected RPI is 272.

Norfolk State: The Spartans matched their January expectations with a 7-2 record. But losses in 2 of their last 3 has dropped them out of the top-100 RPI. There are a few upsides. First, there is virtually no chance NSU finishes outside the top-200 RPI. My preseason prediction was 275, so two wins over them, even if they aren't classed as "quality wins" will still be far more valuable than the RPI drag they were expected to be. Second, kenpom.com has NSU favored in all 8 of their remaining games this season. If they win those games, they should return to the top-100 RPI. Currently they are at 115 and projected to finish at 130. But if they win out, they'll be back in the top-100 and be a great boost for Marquette going into Selection Sunday, especially if they earn the MEAC's automatic bid.

Winthrop: The Eagles had more wins in January than they did in November and December combined. They tallied a 5-4 record and are in the middle of the Big South pack. They are only favored in 2 of 7 February games before the conference tournament kicks off. Right now Winthrop is at 276 in the RPI and projects to finish at 284.

Mississippi: The Rebels went 5-3 in January, but it could have been so much better. They dropped a double-overtime game at Auburn and squandered a double-digit halftime lead against Florida. That Ole Miss is still (barely) on the tournament bubble, however, is a good thing for Marquette. They will be underdogs in 5 of 7 in February, and probably need to win at least 4 of those (while tallying another quality win) if they want to be in the mix in March. But what's really important is that Ole Miss is currently ranked 42 in the RPI and projects to finish at 44. Ole Miss is potentially a very nice top-50 non-con win for the Warriors.

Jacksonville: After dropping all 6 games in December, the Dolphins lost their first 5 in January to extend their losing streak to 13. A short two-game winning streak was undone by losing their last 3 of the month to drop their record to 4-18. Looking ahead, however, the Dolphins will be favorites in 3 of 7 games in February. Their RPI is currently at 282 and projects to 288. What's nice is that if they (along with MSM and Winthrop) stay on course, Marquette will have zero sub-300 wins come Selection Sunday.

Wisconsin: The Badgers were much-maligned after dropping their first two of the month to drop their Big Ten record to 1-3, but have quietly won 6 straight to move into sole possession of second place in the Big Ten. Bucky is favored in 4 of 7 in February and faces some stern tests as they play Ohio State twice and Michigan State once. If they can manage to win 5 or 6 games this month, they stand a good chance of holding on for a second place league finish. This is also Marquette's best non-conference win as UW's RPI is 23 and they are projected to finish at 25.

Washington: The Huskies seem to have shaken off their early-season funk and managed to go 6-2 in January to move into a first-place tie in the Pac-12, and included a couple solid wins over Stanford and Arizona amongst their scalps. The Huskies are favored in 4 of 7 in February, but it wouldn't be unthinkable for them to win 5, 6, or even all 7 games. If they do, they can get back in the at-large picture. UW's RPI is currently 73 and projected to finish at 80. That won't be good enough, so their recent success will need to continue, or they'll need to win the Pac-12 Tournament if they want to be dancing.

Green Bay: The Phoenix went 3-4 on the month, and closed with 2 solid wins over Valpo and Butler, avenging earlier season defeats. Their RPI is currently at 160 but they'll need to keep getting some wins to keep from finishing at their projected 213. They are favored in 4 of 8 games in February, if they can manage those wins, they should remain as a top-200 team.

Northern Colorado: The Bears went 3-5 in January, which is a major disappointment for a team that was favored 7 times. The Bears are only favored twice in February, and with their RPI currently at 248 and projected at 259, MU fans will have to hope they win more than that to stay out of the sub-250 range that becomes a bit of a ding on the non-con resume.

LSU: The Tigers had a woeful January, going 2-6 while squandering chances at wins against likely tourney teams in Virginia and Mississippi State. LSU will be favored in 4 of 8 February games, though to have any chance at playing in the Big Dance they probably need to win 6 or 7 of those. They do still look like a solid NIT team, and with a current RPI of 78 that projects out to 81, shouldn't be a bad loss on the resume come Selection Sunday.

Milwaukee: On January 20, the Panthers woke up winners of 3 straight and alone atop the Horizon League. Since then, Rob Jeter's team has dropped 4 of 5 to fall to 4th place. They can turn it around as they are favored in 5 of 7 in February before the conference tournament. Even still, their RPI has fallen to 137 and is projected to drop to 144. It's highly unlikely, barring a perfect month and still probably needing a win or two in the conference tournament, that the Panthers get back into the top-100 RPI.

Vanderbilt: Vandy continued their solid close to 2011 by winning their first 5 games in 2012. They finished January with a 7-2 mark and look like they are back in the mix for the SEC crown. That will largely be determined in February. Vandy is favored in only 4 of 8 games, but the only teams they are underdogs against are Florida and Kentucky, twice each. Win 2 or more of those games and they'll be league title contenders. Regardless, their current RPI is 25 and predicted to finish at 23. No matter what, they are an acceptable loss when you're talking about the resume.

	Jan. W-L	Total W-L	RPI	Proj. RPI	SOS	OOC SOS	kenpom
Mt St Mary's	3-5	5-16	287	272	241	167	297
Norfolk St	7-2	15-6	115	130	248	91	183
Winthrop	5-4	7-14	276	284	270	104	262
Mississippi	5-3	14-7	42	44	36	114	111
Norfolk St	7-2	15-6	115	130	248	91	183
Jacksonville	2-8	4-18	282	188	179	101	245
Wisconsin	6-2	18-5	23	25	21	76	3
Washington	6-2	14-7	73	80	64	67	77
Green Bay	3-4	7-12	160	213	62	5	193
N Colorado	3-5	6-12	248	259	190	8	247
LSU	2-6	12-9	78	81	50	208	88
Milwaukee	4-5	12-10	137	144	144	130	123
Vanderbilt	7-2	16-6	25	23	10	9	31
Marquette	8-2	19-4	9	12	18	82	17

Bracketology: Jan 30

This week's bracket was especially difficult, and really got tough starting around the 6-line. Mainly because most of the teams I wanted to consider have been losing lately. Most of them multiple times. And as I went further down the bracket, the worse the teams looked. Most of the teams near the bubble don't really deserve to be anywhere close to it, but the expanded field has made this a reality. Teams like Iowa State and Colorado State both in the field essentially on the basis of one good win. Teams like Notre Dame and UCF warranting consideration despite having as many sub-100 losses as they do top-50 wins. Anyway...let's look at the bracket:





The Big Ten has the most bids with 8, and again the Big East is on their heels with 7. Northwestern and Cincinnati dropped out of the field, respectively. Behind them, the SEC has 6, the Big 12 and A-10 each have 5, the ACC and Mountain West have 4 each, the West Coast has 3, and C-USA, the Pac-12, and the Missouri Valley have 2 each.

The last four byes went to Purdue, Xavier, BYU, and Dayton. The last four teams in the field were St. Louis, Iowa State, Colorado State, and Arkansas. The lowest RPI team to earn an at-large bid was #66 Arkansas while the lowest KenPom team in was #107 Colorado State.

The first four teams out were Notre Dame, NC State, Mississippi, and Oklahoma. The next four out were UCF, Texas, Northwestern, and Cincinnati. The highest snubbed RPI team was #48 Texas while the highest snubbed KenPom team was also Texas, rated #20.

From a Marquette perspective, my biggest fear would be overlooking a solid Davidson team. I feel that both Memphis and BYU are dangerous but beatable, and wouldn't fear either Duke or Illinois, though I'd expect a tough game. What surprised me the most was simply that MU has played their way up to the 3-line. But with virtually everyone crashing around them while Buzz Williams' team continues to simply win, it's hard not to have them up there. The field really starts to fall off in a hurry.

Buzz Williams for Big East Coach of the Year? Without a doubt in the first half

The Big East conference season is only half over, but if it ended today Buzz Williams should be your runaway winner of the Big East Coach of the Year award for 2012. His team sits in 2nd place with a top 15 national ranking despite a season ending injury to his starting center, Chris Otule. The team's only two losses were on the road to league leading Syracuse and a heartbreaking loss at Georgetown.

The only other coaches with an outside shot might be Mike Brey, who has taken a Notre Dame team thought to be undermanned to 3rd in the standings. South Florida's Stan Heath has also raised a few eyebrows with the performance of his Bulls, but do they have the staying power to remain in the upper half of the league the balance of the season?

Offensively Buzz has the team running very efficiently. The Warriors currently are in the top 5 in the conference for Free Throw Attempts per game (3rd), Turnover % (5th), FG % (5th), Effective FG % (2nd), Assists per FG made (1st), scoring offense (2nd), Scoring margin (2nd), 3-PT FG % (1st), Assists (1st), Turnover margin (4th), Assist to Turnover ratio (3rd), and 3-Pt FGs made (4th).

Though his teams can sometimes get off to agonizing slow starts, Buzz hasn't panicked this season. The team has maintained their composure and found a way to comeback in virtually every one of their slow starts (sans Vanderbilt). He has successfully manipulated his lineup to incorporate talent sets that seem to fit the situation without disruption to the team or flow of the game. Specifically the use of Vander Blue, Todd Mayo and Junior Cadougan to maximize efficiency on offense and defense has been key of late.

MU has nine games to go with what looks like five sure fire wins and four others that are winnable, but will be tossups. Is 14-4 realistic? The recent injury to Davante Gardner will force Buzz to be even more creative during the second half stretch if they hope to hit that record. MU finishing with 14-4 would virtually guarantee Buzz as Big East Coach of the Year for 2012.

Yarou and Nova’s offensive rebounding makes it toughest challenge of 8-game stretch; MU tries to break 4-game losing streak at Nova

Three down and five to go in the 8-game stretch of winnable games that gives MU the inside track on heading into UConn Feb. 18 at least in 2nd place in the Big East. Perhaps more importantly, the 0.71 points allowed per trip vs. South Florida culminated a 6-game stretch of excellent defense that put in MU in the top 20 of all defensive teams, which Rob pointed out Wednesday is the average for an Elite 8 team.



But can the much improved defense beat a team that is great at the one thing MU has been unable to stop since Otule's injury - offensive rebounding? While Maalik Wayns is the 15th best player in the league statistically, it is 6-foot-10 Mouphtaou Yarou (33rd best) and his back-up 6-foot-9 freshman Markus Kennedy have helped make Nova the 23rd best offensive rebounding team in the country and 11th best among BCS teams according to Pomeroy.

While MU is clearly the better team Saturday (11 a.m. tip-off), MU has been the much better team in all three games against teams ranked 23rd or higher in offensive rebounding (Nova first game, Pitt and Washington) and has barely survived all three games. This is the first time we go up against a dominant offensive rebounding team ON THE ROAD. MU seems to either be unable to keep these teams off the glass (45.7% offensive rebounding first game vs. Nova), or have to crash the defensive boards so hard that the offense can't get going in transition (vs. Pitt).

Since Chris Otule was injured MU has plunged to 279th in the country (35.4% offensive rebounding allowed). Put that together with Nova's offensive rebounding, and Nova projects to grab a scary 41.9% of their own misses. (You multiply the deviances of the offense and defense from the national average then multiply that figure back by the national average if anyone cares).

	Vil OffR	Mar DefR
	38.3	35.4
Natl Ave	32.5	32.5	Proj below
Deviance	1.18	1.09	41.72

In Milwaukee, Nova only fell short by 4 points because they hit only 3 of 17 three-pointers. With the average 8-point swing from one home court to another, that gives Nova a 4-point edge, while Pomeroy projects a 4-point Marquette win.

The good news (again, pointed out by Rob Wednesday) is that MU is coming off its best defensive performance ever in Big East play under Buzz. As the chart above shows, the 0.71 adjusted points allowed per trip against South Florida was even better than the incredible defense played against Wisconsin (0.77) and UW-Green Bay (0.79), though not as good as the manhandling of Mt. St. Mary’s to start the season (an 0.59 even after adjusting for Mt. St. Mary’s well below average offense).

If MU can win this one, then we project to win three of the next four – and the projected standings heading into the February 18 game at UConn would be:

Syracuse 12-2
Marquette 10-3
Georgetown 9-4
West Virginia 9-5
Cincinnati 8-5

It gets tougher after that, but if the defense keeps playing well, the final few weeks could be fun. Here is the game-by-game defense for the season.

Opponent	PtAll	Poss	Raw D	Adj D
Mt. St. Mary's	37	72	0.51	0.590
Norfolk St.	68	84	0.81	0.826
Winthrop	73	71	1.03	1.102
Mississippi	66	80	0.83	0.845
Norfolk St.	57	64	0.89	0.909
Jacksonville	56	68	0.82	0.851
Wisconsin	54	63	0.86	0.768
w/ Otule	59	72	0.82	0.840
Washington	77	72	1.07	0.999
UW Green Bay	61	77	0.79	0.845
N. Colorado	72	74	0.97	0.940
Louisiana St.	67	65	1.03	1.025
UWM	50	65	0.77	0.786
Vanderbilt	74	70	1.06	0.965
Villanova	77	73	1.05	0.963
Georgetown	73	66	1.11	0.996
1st 8 no Otule	69	70	0.98	0.942
Syracuse	73	74	0.99	0.840
St. John's	64	70	0.91	0.917
Pittsburgh	57	59	0.97	0.870
Louisville	63	72	0.88	0.845
Providence	72	65	1.11	1.051
South Florida	47	64	0.73	0.713
Last 6	63	67	0.93	0.872

For perspective, below are the Top 5 defenses in the land. With Otule, MUs 0.840 was better than any defense except Ohio State and Wisconsin. The first 8 games adjusting to Otule's absense, MU was only as good defensively as the 59th best defense (Indiana). In the past 6 games, MU's defense has been as good as the 8th best in the land - UNC.

Defenses	Adj D
1. Ohio State	0.777
2. Wisconsin	0.815
3. Kansas (same as MU with Otule)	0.841
4. Virginia	0.841
5. Florida St.	0.856
8. UNC (same as MU last 6 games)	0.872
20. Marquette	0.900
59. Indiana (same as MU 1st 8 without Otule)	0.940

Defense and Projections

Last year, in early January, I wrote an article wondering if Defense was Marquette's Achilles Heel.  It's worth re-reading, but here is an update.

Teams that are elite have good defenses.  In particular, over the past five years, here are the average defensive rankings of teams at each level of the NCAA tourney.

• Won their first game (#34)
• Sweet Sixteen (#26)
• Elite Eight (#20)
• Final Four (#17)

It was the exception rather than the norm for a team like Marquette (defensive rank of #61) to make the Sweet Sixteen last year.  In fact, over the last five years, only twelve teams with a defensive rank worse than 50 (15% of teams) make the Sweet Sixteen.  Only three teams with a defensive rank worse than 50 made the Elite Eight (8%), and one of them was VCU!  It happens, but the odds are against you.  This was a giant concern for Buzz's teams, which had never been better than a defensive rank of 50 over three years.  Tangent - it was a total freak that the 2003 team (defensive rank of #101) made the Final Four... helps that they were #1 offensively.

Not all aspects of defense are the same.  In particular, defensive eFG% is twice as important as forcing turnovers, three times as important as preventing offensive rebounds, and fourteen times more important than not letting your opponent get to the free throw line.  Marquette's defense under Buzz has been weakest in the most important area (eFG%) and strongest in the least important area (free throw rate)

Last night's result against South Florida was the best Big East defensive game in Buzz's tenure.  Marquette held the Bulls to 0.71 ppp on 40% eFG and a turnover rate of 37%.  More importantly, although this was a great result defensively, it wasn't a particularly unique result this year.  Here's where things currently stand defensively for Marquette, in comparison to the last three years.  

Marquette has turned their defense into the #24 overall unit.  In other words, MU's defense is playing somewhere between the average Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight defense for the first time under Buzz.  There's also a marked difference in the defensive priorities, with our strengths now in the two most important aspects of defense.  Note that at this time last year, Marquette's defense was ranked #70.  Finally, as Pudner wrote a week ago, the defense is ranked higher than the offense for the first time under Buzz.  

Should expectations be high for the remainder of the season?  Consider this, according to the Pomeroy projections (subscription required - but seriously, it's the best value on the Internets).

• Marquette has about a 93% chance of finishing with 11+ wins (5-5 down the stretch)
• About an 80% of finishing with 12+ wins (6-4)
• ~50% of finishing with 13+ wins
• and for you real optimists, about a 20% of finishing with 14 wins or more

A winnable road opportunity awaits this weekend at Villanova.  Saturday's game will prove an additional marker of how good Marquette can be this season, both overall and defensively.  Here's to continued defensive success for the rest of the season and beyond.

MU, Gtown, Syracuse and Seton Hall claim 14 of top 25 BE players as MU goes for sole possession of 3rd place tonight

No one would have predicted that Marquette and South Florida would be playing for sole possession of 3rd place in the Big East tonight. Marquette enters the Bradley Center tonight for a 7 p.m. start with three of the Top 25 players in the conference this year, a feat matched by Syracuse, Georgetown and Seton Hall that leaves the other 12 teams in the conference with only 11 between them.

Kevin Jones nudges out Jae Crowder in a two-way race for conference MVP in the Total Value Top 25 listed below, but if the Mountaineers are to stay near the top of the standings this year then Jones will have to carry them by himself as their next best two players barely crack the conference Top 50. West Virginia's Truck Bryant (39th) and freshman point guard Jaborie Hinds (47th) are having very good but not dominant seasons. The Top 25 most valuable players to date:

Rnk	Top 25 Big East Players	Team	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
1	Kevin Jones	West Virginia	6-foot-8	8.02	-2.20	10.21
2	Jae Crowder	Marquette	6-foot-6	5.44	-3.84	9.28
3	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	6-foot-5	6.02	-0.93	6.95
4	Jason Clark	Georgetown	6-foot-2	4.29	-2.37	6.66
5	Dion Waiters	Syracuse	6-foot-4	3.74	-2.61	6.36
6	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	6-foot-8	5.18	-1.10	6.28
7	Fuquan Edwin	Seton Hall	6-foot-6	2.83	-3.42	6.25
8	Jordan Theodore	Seton Hall	6-foot-0	4.90	-0.98	5.88
9	Shabazz Napier	Connecticut	6-foot-0	4.71	-1.07	5.78
10	Herb Pope	Seton Hall	6-foot-8	2.60	-3.08	5.69
11	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	6-foot-7	4.03	-1.65	5.68
12	Gorgui Dieng	Louisville	6-foot-10	2.44	-3.21	5.65
13	Sean Kilpatrick	Cincinnati	6-foot-4	3.98	-1.16	5.14
14	Jack Cooley	Notre Dame	6-foot-9	3.60	-1.47	5.07
15	Maalik Wayns	Villanova	6-foot-2	4.92	0.00	4.92
16	Otto Porter	Georgetown	6-foot-8	2.27	-2.60	4.87
17	Davante Gardner	Marquette	6-foot-8	3.47	-1.33	4.80
18	Kyle Kuric	Louisville	6-foot-4	3.40	-1.24	4.64
19	James Southerland	Syracuse	6-foot-8	2.89	-1.61	4.50
20	Ashton Gibbs	Pittsburgh	6-foot-2	4.41	0.00	4.41
21	Bryce Cotton	Providence	6-foot-1	4.36	0.00	4.36
22	Henry Sims	Georgetown	6-foot-10	2.43	-1.84	4.27
23	Jerian Grant	Notre Dame	6-foot-5	4.16	-0.03	4.18
24	Darius Johnson-Odom	Marquette	6-foot-2	3.59	-0.59	4.18
25	Brandon Triche	Syracuse	6-foot-4	3.32	-0.84	4.17

Quick Explanation – then the Top 100 players by team:
Total Value is the measurement of the percentage of points a player averages adding to his team’s score with offense and subtracting from the opponents' score with defense on a given night. The calculation that Crowder adds 5.44% to Marquette’s score and takes 3.84% of the opponents points away with defense (Total Value 9.28%) indicates that Marquette would be projected to drop from a 24-7 team with Crowder to a 16-15 team without him if going by results to date and Pomeroy’s projections for the rest of the year. The eight games that switch from wins to losses if Crowder is not playing are; Washington, 2nd Norfolk State, Villanova and Pitt as well as projected scores for Seton Hall, Notre Dame, and 2nd Villanova and Georgetown games. Only Kevin Jones is more valuable in the Big East, and noone else is close.

Thankfully the engineer just finished the program to run Total Value this week, so I am no longer risking mistakes on long spreadsheets as I pinpoint the following three precise calculations:

1. Offensive Value Add was first covered by Luke Winn at Sports Illustrated, then picked up on by ESPN, and finally adopted as a building block for other calculations including a recent one from Basketball Prospectus.

2. The Defensive Value Subtract is equally important, and has been perfected in recent months by an engineer building my program, but is not nearly as easily grasped and I don't plan to detail the formulas further. However, while the overall team Defensive Value Subtracts are very accurate, you must use common sense to adjust for on-ball defense and rotations, within the team up to 1% plus or minus per player. For example, if you adjusted DJOs defense by 1% for his much improved on-ball defense, and subtracted 1% from Gardner's defensive rating for slow rotations, you end up with DJO as the 13th best player in the Big East and Davante Gardner as the 28th best.

3. The NBA Predictor is an adjustment I am finalizing to measure not the impact on the college team, but how much impact the player is likely to have if taken at the next level, as not all great college players can translate their game to the pros but others do surprisingly well. However, this third part of the program is intended for a much smaller audience so won’t appear here. There are NBA indicators with DJO that make him a potential first round pick, even though his high turnovers and low steals hold his rating back at the college level.

The first two factors give a very accurate account of every player in the league.

While certainly Syracuse has the inside track on the championship, in the end they do not appear as dominant to me as Ohio State, Kentucky or even UNC and Duke by the end of the year. If Marquette can win at Villanova Saturday, a toss-up game due to Nova’s strong offensive rebounding that often gives MU trouble, I believe we can legitimately consider the possibility that MU could win the Big East regular season title in a year in which the conference is down from the past three years.

Here are the Top 100 players grouped by team, starting with tonight’s opponent South Florida. I also list the projected final conference record based on Pomeroy.

Rnk	Marquette (Proj 12-6)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
2	Jae Crowder	6-foot-6	5.44	-3.84	9.28
17	Davante Gardner	6-foot-8	3.47	-1.33	4.80
24	Darius Johnson-Odom	6-foot-2	3.59	-0.59	4.18
51	Jamil Wilson	6-foot-7	1.38	-0.67	2.05
55	Vander Blue	6-foot-4	0.53	-1.44	1.97
61	Todd Mayo	6-foot-3	1.90	0.00	1.90
74	Junior Cadougan	6-foot-1	0.72	-0.66	1.37
85	Chris Otule	6-foot-11	0.00	-0.86	0.86
91	Derrick Wilson	6-foot-0	0.10	-0.37	0.47
94	Jamail Jones	6-foot-6	0.00	-0.36	0.36

Rnk	South Florida (Proj 9-9)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
29	Toarlyn Fitzpatrick	6-foot-8	1.74	-2.00	3.74
34	Ron Anderson	6-foot-8	2.83	-0.50	3.33
42	Hugh Robertson	6-foot-6	1.78	-0.81	2.59
76	Augustus Gilchrist	6-foot-10	0.81	-0.44	1.25
83	Shaun Noriega	6-foot-4	0.95	0.00	0.95
84	Jawanza Poland	6-foot-4	0.64	-0.28	0.92
95	LaVonte Dority	6-foot-1	0.35	0.00	0.35

Rnk	Cincinnati (Proj 11-7)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
13	Sean Kilpatrick	6-foot-4	3.98	-1.16	5.14
31	Cashmere Wright	6-foot-0	1.89	-1.59	3.48
40	Jaquon Parker	6-foot-3	2.48	-0.27	2.75
41	Yancy Gates	6-foot-9	1.43	-1.24	2.66
45	Dion Dixon	6-foot-3	1.72	-0.72	2.44
46	Justin Jackson	6-foot-8	0.59	-1.78	2.37
93	Jermaine Sanders	6-foot-5	0.36	0.00	0.36

Rnk	Connecticut (Proj 10-8)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
3	Jeremy Lamb	6-foot-5	6.02	-0.93	6.95
9	Shabazz Napier	6-foot-0	4.71	-1.07	5.78
50	Tyler Olander	6-foot-9	1.68	-0.37	2.06
60	Ryan Boatright	6-foot-0	1.82	-0.09	1.91
73	Niels Giffey	6-foot-7	1.30	-0.08	1.38
80	Alex Oriakhi	6-foot-9	0.74	-0.32	1.07

Rnk	DePaul (Proj 4-14)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
36	Brandon Young	6-foot-3	3.15	0.00	3.15
48	Jeremiah Kelly	6-foot-0	2.17	0.00	2.17
67	Krys Faber	6-foot-10	1.30	-0.31	1.61
86	Cleveland Melvin	6-foot-8	0.44	-0.37	0.81

Rnk	Georgetown (Proj 13-5)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
4	Jason Clark	6-foot-2	4.29	-2.37	6.66
6	Hollis Thompson	6-foot-8	5.18	-1.10	6.28
16	Otto Porter	6-foot-8	2.27	-2.60	4.87
22	Henry Sims	6-foot-10	2.43	-1.84	4.27
53	Nate Lubick	6-foot-8	1.16	-0.84	2.00
58	Markel Starks	6-foot-2	1.94	0.00	1.94
88	Mikael Hopkins	6-foot-9	0.47	-0.03	0.49

Rnk	Louisville (Proj 9-9)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
12	Gorgui Dieng	6-foot-10	2.44	-3.21	5.65
18	Kyle Kuric	6-foot-4	3.40	-1.24	4.64
28	Chris Smith	6-foot-2	3.36	-0.41	3.77
38	Russ Smith	6-foot-0	0.23	-2.67	2.90
52	Chane Behanan	6-foot-7	0.37	-1.67	2.04
71	Peyton Siva	5-foot-11	0.00	-1.45	1.45
87	Rakeem Buckles	6-foot-7	0.00	-0.52	0.52
98	Elisha Justice	5-foot-10	0.00	-0.27	0.27

Rnk	Notre Dame (Proj 9-9)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
14	Jack Cooley	6-foot-9	3.60	-1.47	5.07
23	Jerian Grant	6-foot-5	4.16	-0.03	4.18
69	Eric Atkins	6-foot-1	1.53	0.00	1.53
79	Scott Martin	6-foot-8	0.00	-1.13	1.13
92	Joey Brooks	6-foot-6	0.45	0.00	0.45

Rnk	Pitt (Projected 4-14)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
20	Ashton Gibbs	6-foot-2	4.41	0.00	4.41
43	Nasir Robinson	6-foot-5	2.51	0.00	2.51
44	Lamar Patterson	6-foot-5	2.46	0.00	2.46
56	Talib Zanna	6-foot-9	1.97	0.00	1.97
57	Dante Taylor	6-foot-9	1.77	-0.18	1.95
66	Travon Woodall	5-foot-11	1.68	0.00	1.68
81	Khem Birch	6-foot-9	0.53	-0.50	1.03
89	J.J. Moore	6-foot-6	0.49	0.00	0.49

Rnk	Providence (Proj 5-13)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
21	Bryce Cotton	6-foot-1	4.36	0.00	4.36
72	Bilal Dixon	6-foot-9	0.77	-0.67	1.44
75	Vincent Council	6-foot-2	1.30	0.00	1.30
97	Ron Giplaye	6-foot-6	0.00	-0.31	0.31
99	Gerard Coleman	6-foot-4	0.21	0.00	0.21

Rnk	Rutgers (Proj 8-10)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
26	Dane Miller	6-foot-6	0.94	-2.93	3.87
59	Mike Poole	6-foot-5	0.05	-1.86	1.91
62	Myles Mack	5-foot-9	0.77	-1.07	1.83
63	Gilvydas Biruta	6-foot-8	0.50	-1.25	1.75
82	Jerome Seagears	6-foot-1	0.99	0.00	0.99
100	Austin Johnson	6-foot-8	0.06	0.00	0.06

Rnk	Seton Hall (Proj 11-7)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
7	Fuquan Edwin	6-foot-6	2.83	-3.42	6.25
8	Jordan Theodore	6-foot-0	4.90	-0.98	5.88
10	Herb Pope	6-foot-8	2.60	-3.08	5.69
49	Patrik Auda	6-foot-9	1.81	-0.27	2.08

Rnk	St. John's (Proj 4-14)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
35	D'Angelo Harrison	6-foot-3	2.72	-0.52	3.25
70	Sir'Dominic Pointer	6-foot-6	0.00	-1.48	1.48
90	Amir Garrett	6-foot-6	0.00	-0.47	0.47

Rnk	Syracuse (Proj 15-3)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
5	Dion Waiters	6-foot-4	3.74	-2.61	6.36
11	Kris Joseph	6-foot-7	4.03	-1.65	5.68
19	James Southerland	6-foot-8	2.89	-1.61	4.50
25	Brandon Triche	6-foot-4	3.32	-0.84	4.17
27	C.J. Fair	6-foot-8	2.36	-1.48	3.84
30	Scoop Jardine	6-foot-2	2.30	-1.31	3.61
32	Fab Melo	7-foot-0	1.24	-2.19	3.43
54	Baye Moussa Keita	6-foot-10	1.29	-0.70	1.98
64	Michael Carter-Williams	6-foot-5	0.63	-1.06	1.70
68	Rakeem Christmas	6-foot-9	0.67	-0.93	1.60

Rnk	Villanova (Proj 7-11)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
15	Maalik Wayns	6-foot-2	4.92	0.00	4.92
33	Mouphtaou Yarou	6-foot-10	2.67	-0.75	3.43
37	Dominic Cheek	6-foot-6	3.06	0.00	3.06
77	James Bell	6-foot-6	1.22	0.00	1.22
96	Achraf Yacoubou	6-foot-4	0.33	0.00	0.33

Rnk	West Virginia (Proj 13-5)	Ht	Offense	Defense	Total
1	Kevin Jones	6-foot-8	8.02	-2.20	10.21
39	Darryl Bryant	6-foot-2	2.85	0.00	2.85
47	Jabarie Hinds	5-foot-11	1.42	-0.84	2.26
65	Deniz Kilicli	6-foot-9	0.83	-0.86	1.69
78	Aaron Brown	6-foot-5	1.16	0.00	1.16

Back and Forth: 5-2 Edition

Rob:  Good morning. How does 5-2 go with your coffee?

Tim:  Not bad.  Good showing vs. Providence.  After holding PC to 41% eFG%, #MUBB is holding the opposition to an eFG% of 45.5% overall, their best since Pomeroy began tracking in '03.  And, the turnover rate for #MUBB opponents is a whopping 24.5%.

Rob:  You know that I care way more about the eFG% defense.  It's a great sign, especially since I believe that the ability to force turnovers goes down as the season goes on and you face better opponents*.
*note: not supported by analysis

Tim:  It was good to see another Racine product key an #MUBB victory too.  Good showing by Jamil; we’ve been waiting for him to break out, and to deliver on the road in a conference game makes it all the more impressive.

Rob:  Agreed.  The spread on players that have been key contributors is big.  That's a good sign, and to have Jamil play strongly bodes well for the team.

Tim:  By the way, the PC game marks three straight games where Vander has logged less than 20 mins.  Mayo's emergence seems to have pushed Vander into a less prominent role.  And again, no Jamail Jones, who still has not shown any signs of establishing himself.

Rob:  Vander wasn't bad, though. He played his role well. Shot efficiently, one turnover, four boards.  And Jamail doesn't seem to be in good trend, although I do hold out hope he'll stick around and contribute as an upperclassman. Older players are so important for good programs*.
*again not supported by analysis

Tim:  Amen.  What is interesting is that Vander is becoming a role player rather than the “load-bearing wall” we presumed he would be based on his high school accolades.  I am concerned that he is disappearing again, just like last season. Blue has not hit double figures in points since NoCol. In his last four BE games he is averaging 3 ppg and his minutes are down.  While he is not a scorer, his struggles against better competition mirror that of his freshman season.

Rob:  He doesn't need to be a load bearing wall. As long as he defends and plays efficiently, there are others that can pick up that slack. At least in comparison to last year, he's still contributing in other ways.

It might be time to pull him from the starting lineup officially, just like Paint Touches was asking.  I wonder if he's got the maturity to deal with that disappointment. Also, I wonder if putting Mayo in would reverse the slow starts this team is prone to suffering.

I really liked the late game lineup of Jae, Jamil, and Gardner all at the same time.

Tim:  Agreed on Vander’s efficiency, his overall game is improved year-to-year … but let’s be honest … players could not care less about a coach saying, “you’re doing great and playing so efficiently for 18 minutes – really, that is better than playing for 30 like you have for your whole life”

Like you said, does he have the maturity to deal with this?  It's hard to get pulled as a starter at any level of competition in any sport.  Truth is, Vander is a role player right now.

One thing that is interesting is how much more assertive Junior has been of late ... he is committed to the “bully drive” and has delivered 5, 7, 9, 6 and 10 assists consecutively, his best stretch since the first month of the season.

Rob:  I think Buzz has been doing a really good job of managing his rotation the last few games. The way he's shuffling the players around has been great. He is tweaking his team on the fly, and it is working.

Honestly, pretty much EVERYONE on the team is role player level but DJO, Jae, and Gardner.  That's how I consider Vander/Mayo and appreciate what Buzz is doing with his rotations.

Agreed on Junior.  I really need to find a way to measure his impact.  The stats aren't so kind to him, but there has to be a better way to show his importance.

Win on Tuesday! 6-2 would be nice

Tim:  Agreed on all points.  Go #mubb!

Bracketology: Jan. 21

It's early. Really early. But the way I see it, the best way to have an accurate feel for what might happen come March is to have an idea of what was going on in the months before March. I decided to take a stab at my own version of bracketology. I've used a compilation of RPI, SOS, Pomeroy and Sagarin computer rankings, Record v Top-100, good wins, bad losses, and non-conference SOS. Before analyzing, here's the bracket:

The Big Ten leads the way with 9 bids. The Big East is just behind them with 8. Both the Big 12 and SEC have 5 bids, the ACC and C-USA each have 4, and the A-10, Mountain West, and West Coast have 3 apiece. The only other multi-bid leagues are the Missouri Valley and Pac-12 with 2 each.

The last four byes went to Purdue, Southern Miss, Minnesota, and Florida State. The last four teams into the field were BYU, Cincinnati, Oklahoma, and UCF. The lowest RPI team to make the field was #85 Cincinnati while the lowest KenPom team to make the field was #93 UCF.

The first four teams out were Colorado State, St. Joseph's, Mississippi, and Northern Iowa. The next four out were St. Louis, LSU, Arizona, and Oregon. The highest RPI team snubbed was #39 Northern Iowa while the highest KenPom team snubbed was #16 St. Louis.

From a Marquette perspective, I feel this would be a decent draw, if somewhat predictable. I'd almost be surprised if MU didn't see Indiana by the Round of 32. I contemplated a first-round match-up with Stanford, but felt Creighton should really be up against a BCS-conference team. Kentucky looms large in the Sweet 16, but clearly that one would have Warrior fans confident considering the history of the two programs

I also tried to have some of the typical NCAA humor we see on Selection Sunday outside of the Crean v Marquette rematch. Hope if nothing else, it provides a bit of enjoyment, and I'll be updating this as the season goes on.