Cracked Sidewalks

Be Grateful.

2012-03-01T07:51:00.009-06:00

A few Japanese teammates and I had an event at a temporary housing complex in Sendai, Japan where people now live who lost their homes in the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami. It was a very eye-opening experience and I was happy to be involved. It basically looked like a trailer park with rows of small homes set up (see below). We came to meet the people, sign autographs, take pictures, and give the families winter mittens. The 89ers cheerleaders also came to lead the people in stretching, because I was told that it is good for the older citizens to stay active. There was a bunch of media there to cover the event, and we presented the residents with some autographed memorabilia. I was pleased to see that everyone was very happy and upbeat. Frankly, I was impressed by them. I admired their strength to continue on with their life and be so positive. These people have lost everything, some of them even lost family members. But, they were all smiling, laughing, and so appreciative of us. I cannot imagine the heartache they have experienced in the past year. Their homes were literally washed away by the tsunami, and some of them were literally running for their lives. Families lost parents, spouses, children, siblings, etc... Yet, every single person I met stood tall, shook my hand graciously, and thanked me profusely simply for taking the time to visit them. They seemed so grateful. Once we were finished, I left with one thought. I am lucky. I left feeling very grateful for everything and everyone in my life, because I have a lot to be thankful for. We all do. I am lucky to be paid to play a game that I love. Playing basketball on three continents has been a blessing, but it is just a game in the end. Life is much bigger than basketball. I am grateful for all that I have, and basketball has helped me realize that.

S-Curve: Feb 29 Update

2012-02-29T11:14:00.000-06:00

Most of the changes of the past few days involve seed differences. Unfortunately, none of that has changed yet for Marquette. I know some people have MU on the 2-line, but I just don't see it yet. Louisville and Wisconsin getting into the top-20 RPI would help, beating Georgetown would help even more, but teams like Missouri and Ohio State just have too many great wins to be upended by Marquette's good ones.

Speaking of Wisconsin and Ohio State, the Badgers moved up from being the top 6-seed to being the bottom 4-seed after their win in Columbus. At the other end, UConn is continuing to fall after that loss to Providence. The Huskies don't look very good under George Blaney. It's been said that the Selection Committee takes injuries into account over the course of the season. If Calhoun is back in the next week, will they take that into account? It's obvious that they are not the same team without their coach at the helm. On the bubble, there were no real changes, other than teams shifting around. However, both USF and Miami are making strong pushes to get into the Dance, especially with Dayton and St. Joe's having so many bad losses. Both A-10 teams have a number of quality wins that are keeping them above water, but it wouldn't take much to tilt things out of their favor. Here's the S-Curve:

First Four Out: South Florida, Miami, Washington, UCF
Next Four Out: LSU, Illinois, VCU, Arizona

Finally...my thoughts on the PAC-12 as a multi-bid league. Right now, I just don't see it. Washington and Arizona have a combined 1 top-50 win between them, and that was Arizona's win over another PAC-12 team, California. Even without bad losses, I just can't put teams in without some quality wins. That's why I like Dayton and St. Joe's right now, because despite the bad losses, they both have three top-30 wins and have actually proven they can beat someone. Bottom line, yes, some PAC-12 teams have winning conference records, but if you do nothing in your non-conference and get 80% of your wins against sub-100 teams, you are more deserving of a bid to the NIT than the NCAAs.

Will No. 7 Marquette produce the Big East Player of the Year? A look at BE leaders

2012-02-27T18:43:00.002-06:00

Jack Cooley is on the court at Georgetown as one of four candidates who seems to be in discussion for Big East Player of the Year.

A couple of weeks ago Kevin Jones seemed like the odds on favorite, but Crowder held him to a season-low 12 points while scoring 26 himself Friday night. That helped keep a suspended Darius Johnson-Odom ahead of Jones in scoring in Big East play.

Certainly Jones is still in the running, but he has averaged just 16 points a game the last five games while Cooley has averaged 20.7 points and 12.3 rebounds his last six games, DJO scored over 20 points in four straight games before the half game suspension, and Crowder has average 26.3 points per game his last four games and just claimed his second Big East Player of the Week in a row.

I’ve made it pretty clear that statistically I believe Crowder is the POY, but this column is really more a rundown of what voters might be looking at as they cast their votes in hopes of figuring out if we should get our hopes up.

Jones was the favorite for a reason – dominating K-State and Baylor early in the season and being at the top in the two stats many voters look at first – rebounds and points. DJO holding him off as the top scorer might be a key in voters’ minds as many may immediately fill in the ballot for someone leading in both. Certainly Cooley could get strong consideration if he can nudge past Jones in rebounds per game, where Crowder is 11th:

SCORING	Cl	GP	FG	3FG	FT	Points	Avg/G
1.	JOHNSON-ODOM, Darius-MU	SR	16	106	43	50	305	19.1
2.	JONES, Kevin-WVU	SR	16	114	17	57	302	18.9
3.	HARRISON, D'Angelo-STJ	FR	16	83	42	87	295	18.4
4.	CROWDER, Jae-MU	SR	16	100	28	53	281	17.6

REBOUNDING	Cl	GP	Off	Def	Total	Avg/G
1.	JONES, Kevin-WVU	SR	16	64	105	169	10.6
2.	COOLEY, Jack-ND	JR	16	75	92	167	10.4

While the top 5 NBA prospects in the Big East are not in consideration, Jones and DJO are battling to go in the top of the 2nd round. Add to that the WOW factor of DJO’s explosive game as documented early by ESPN’s Sports Science shows why some like Jason King ESPN listed DJO as his 5th choice for National Player of the Year, and the only other player in the Big East in his top 15 was Kevin Jones. He was also one of three Big East players nominated earlier in the season as a finalist for the National Player of the Year, so he could win the award for voters who want to pick the guy who just looks the most unstoppable on the court.

For the voters who look more at traditional stats than the tempo free stats on Ken Pomeroy's page that show Crowder as the best player in the Big East and 10th best in the country, Crowder is on the leaders list in 8 of 13 categories. The following are the seven players who are on the leaders list in six or more categories, and where they rank in each:

Cat.	COOLEY, Jack-ND	CROWDER, Jae-MU	DIENG, Gorgui-LOU	GRANT, Jerian-ND	HARKLESS, Moe-STJ	HENTON, LaDontae-PC	JONES, Kevin-WVU
3pt%		13				3
3ptM		15		10
Ast				6
A/TO				2
Blk	4	12	2		10
DReb	6	3	5		2	7	1
FG%	1	7	3				13
FT%				8			11
Min				7	9	5	4
OReb	1		9		13	8	1
Reb	2	11	5		5	8	1
Pts	13	4		24	10	12	2
Stl		2	12		15

So hopefully Jae or DJO can claim the award in what seems to be a four player race, but I also wanted to list the other Marquette players and what categories they make the leader’s list.

JOHNSON-ODOM, Darius-MU 1st in Scoring
JOHNSON-ODOM, Darius-MU 2nd in3-pt FG made
CADOUGAN, Junior-MU 4th in Assists
CADOUGAN, Junior-MU 4th in Asst/TO
JOHNSON-ODOM, Darius-MU 5th in 3-pt FG%
WILSON, Jamil-MU 7th in Blocked shots
MAYO, Todd-MU 7th in FT%
JOHNSON-ODOM, Darius-MU 14th in FT

Jae Crowder is NOT the 2nd best college basketball player

2012-02-26T12:53:00.003-06:00

Today Jae Crowder has moved into Ken Pomeroy’s top 10 players of the year, an incredible accomplishment.

NBC Sports (read here) was kind enough to pick up on my Value Add rankings last week that indicated that Jae Crowder was the 2nd most valuable player in college basketball to date behind Anthony Davis of Kentucky. I will tell you it was nicer to have my name next to a photo of Jae Crowder instead of next to a photo of Jordan Taylor when Sports Illustrated did their piece on Value Add last year.

However, in all honesty, I cringed when I ran the program and Jae showed up as No. 2. I am glad the formula was published last year (when it showed Jae as the 48th best returning player for this year), but as a stat nut I want people to understand I am following an exact formula, and I am sure there were some people with North Carolina, Kentucky and Michigan State that gave a “yeah right,” when they saw that Crowder showed up as No. 2.

The fact that I am a stat nut and a huge Jae Crowder fan is a chicken or the egg question – I am a huge Crowder fan because as a number-cruncher I saw early the incredible value he was bringing to Marquette, and then he just happened to take it to an even higher level. However, that being said, I need to write the most negative thing I’ve probably written about Jae Crowder in two years:

Jae Crowder is NOT the 2nd best player in college basketball.

Right now, I do believe Jae is one of the best several players in college basketball, and he may be the 2nd most valuable player in college basketball, but

I need to make a distinction between best and “most valuable.”

For me, value is simply the percent of points a player adds to his team’s total and take’s away from his team’s total. Usually this is pretty close to “best,” but there are two exceptions.

Generally a player who is a one-man star on a bad team is about as valuable as a similar player on a team with one or two other great players. The guy on the bad team gets more defensive attention, but he is free to attempt to do more things, and vice versa. So if you play on one of 343 Division I schools with between zero and three elite players, I would say Value Add treats you pretty fairly.

The only players who get “cheated” by value add are players with four or more potential NBA-level players, and this year that means anyone who plays for UNC or Kentucky.

The fact is that part of Jae Crowder’s incredible value this year is that in addition to everything else he does so well, he is often going up and taking rebounds away from a bigger center and forward at the same time. Even with Jae being among Pomeroy’s leaders in defensive rebounds, Marquette is the 303rd best defensive rebounding team in the country. I seriously believe that Marquette would finish 8-10 in the Big East if Crowder wasn’t on the team, and that makes him more valuable than anyone on Kentucky or UNC. But understand that Jae would not be as valuable if he was playing for UNC or Kentucky because he wouldn’t need to grab all those rebounds, among other things.

Kentucky and UNC are alone with 6 players among the top 85 NBA college prospects. That means that some combination of Michael Gilchrist (61st in Value Add, 3rd best NBA prospect), Terrence Jones (54th-11th), Doron Lamb (52nd-39th), Harrison Barnes (90th-4th), John Henson (55th-8th), Tyler Zeller (23rd-9th) and Kendall Marshall (97th-19th) could be BETTER players than Jae, but none are as valuable.

You lose any one of those players, and Kentucky or UNC still start a line-up of five players who could be in the NBA in the next two years. Losing one of them could be the difference between winning the title or not, but it probably only cost them a couple of wins while if Jae wasn’t at Marquette this year then MU is hoping for a home game in the NIT instead of being a #2 or #3 seed.

The other guy who could be better than Jae is Draymond Green of Michigan State, because I am still finalizing the adjustment for point guards and perimeter defenders, which cannot be accounted for on stats alone. I just hit the tip of the iceberg by getting a handful of the top point guards extra credit for bringing the ball up, and the top perimeter defenders for guarding away from the rim without a stat for “stops.” I am finalizing the adjustment for all teams.

The tricky part with Green is figuring out whether the new “Magic Johnson” deserves the point guard credit for Michigan State or if it should be divided with Keith Appling. And I don’t feel as good when there is something like this that requires observation, because it gets away from my forte of objective number crunching.

So I believe there are up to 7 players (Green plus the above-mentioned seven from UNC and Kentucky) who Bobby Knight or some other true student of the game might well say are “better” than Jae, but I believe so far that only Davis and possibly Green have been more valuable than Jae.

That would still make Jae Big East Player of the Year after out-dueling the great Kevin Jones, who really has noone else to go to outside of an occasional burst by Truck Bryant, on his home court. When it comes to All-American, I believe if you are picking the five most valuable players in the country then Jae is a 1st team All-American; if you are picking the best college players in American than Jae is a 2nd team All-American, and if you are picking the guys most likely to dominate at the next level then Jae isn’t on the 1st or 2nd team.

Now you can’t say I’ve never written anything negative about Jae!

S-Curve: Feb 26 Update

2012-02-26T12:45:00.000-06:00

The past few days, I've been noticing that everyone seems to be far higher on Michigan than I was. I initially felt they were being overrated, but as I saw them turning up on the 2 and 3 line in many brackets, I took a closer look at their profile, and realized that I was probably underrating them. Rather than simply giving Michigan a bump, I scrapped my old data and completely redid my bracket projection today. Rather than posting a bracket, for the time-being, I decided to use an S-Curve, as it prevented me from having to move teams up or down seed lines for match-up purposes, and at this point shows a more accurate depiction of where teams should be rated. Here's the current S-Curve:

First Four Out: UCF, South Florida, Washington, Illinois
Next Four Out: LSU, Minnesota, Miami, VCU

Red Text indicates teams that have are in as automatic qualifiers.
Purple Highlight indicates teams that are protected seeds.
Green Highlight indicates teams that will participate in at-large bid play-in games
Orange Highlight indicates teams that will participate in automatic bid play-in games

This was done to primarily reflect changes from Saturday, February 25, but also includes the USF/Cincinnati game. The Bulls are still on the outside looking in, but could get in with one more win. Saturday's action saw little change. For Marquette, the biggest change was moving up to the top 3-seed after Michigan lost. At the bottom of the bracket, Dayton and St. Joe's both move into the field, while LSU's loss dropped them, and idle Illinois also fell out of the field.

The Big East still leads the way with 9 bids, but USF could make it 10. The Big Ten slips to 7 bids, though both Illinois and Minnesota aren't far out, and the surprising Iowa Hawkeyes are also in the conversation due to 4 top-30 wins. They aren't yet on the bubble, but if the bubble had a bubble, that's where Iowa would be.

One team I look at that I think might make it in is VCU, who just moved into the "Next Four Out". Honestly, I don't think they are deserving. They have 1 top-50 win, and that's against #49 South Florida when they were missing two of their top players. But they do have a gaudy 25-6 record. The problem is that 2 of those losses came against sub-100 teams. Unless they win the auto-bid, VCU does not (and likely will not) deserve to make the field. But they didn't deserve to make the field last year, and we all saw how that worked out. Being a Selection Committee darling may play in their favor.

Best 200 basketball players 18 days before Selection Sunday

2012-02-22T08:04:00.003-06:00

Allen laid out the new potential NCAA bracket yesterday, and once it is actually set I will post the value of every player in the tournament by team to help you fill out your brackets. For now, I’ve listed the Top 200 players to date, with notes at the bottom on how well the Value Add system has fared based on the four questions Sports Illustrated asked about in August.

One item to stress, these are not measures of NBA potential - which is a whole different process I use - but of exactly how many points a player has added to his team's scores and taken away from the opponents' scores.

During my weekly appearance on ESPN Auburn I’ve stressed that the SEC has the most one-sided MVP race with Anthony Davis, and I’ve had a couple of previous blogs on Cracked Sidewalks on the back-and-forth between Jae Crowder and Kevin Jones in the top two spots in the Big East. However, it wasn’t until the engineer finished the program and I ran the whole country yesterday that I realized those were actually the three most valuable players in the country, despite the Big Ten’s dominant play this year that has resulted in them having five of the 10 Most Valuable Players in the country.

Rnk	Players	Team	Ht	Yr	Off	Def	Tot
1	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	6'10"	Fr	6.7	-5.4	12.2
2	Jae Crowder	Marquette	6'6"	Sr	6	-4.2	10.2
3	Kevin Jones	West Virginia	6'8"	Sr	8.3	-1.5	9.8
4	Damian Lillard	WeberSt.	6'2"	Jr	8.7	1	9.2
5	Cody Zeller	Indiana	6'11"	Fr	6.8	-2	8.8
6	Jordan Taylor	Wisconsin	6'1"	Sr	4.9	-1.3	8.7
7	Thomas Robinson	Kansas	6'9"	Jr	4.6	-4.1	8.7
8	Jared Sullinger	Ohio St.	6'9"	So	5.1	-3.5	8.6
9	John Shurna	Northwestern	6'9"	Sr	7.3	-1	8.3
10	Aaron Craft	Ohio St.	6'2"	So	2.3	-2.4	8.3
11	Shabazz Napier	Connecticut	6'0"	So	3.9	-1	8
12	Jeffery Taylor	Vanderbilt	6'7"	Sr	5.6	-1.2	7.9
13	Draymond Green	Michigan St.	6'7"	Sr	4	-3.8	7.8
14	Marcus Denmon	Missouri	6'3"	Sr	7.2	-0.5	7.7
15	Doug McDermott	Creighton	6'7"	So	7.6	0	7.6
16	Mike Scott	Virginia	6'8"	Sr	5.9	-1.7	7.6
17	Will Barton	Memphis	6'6"	So	5.3	-2.1	7.4
18	Matthew Dellavedova	St.Mary's	6'4"	Jr	5.3	0	7.3
19	Trevor Releford	Alabama	6'0"	So	3.3	-2.5	7.3
20	Nate Wolters	SouthDakotaSt.	6'4"	Jr	5.6	-0.1	7.2
21	Scott Machado	Iona	6'1"	Sr	5.4	-0.3	7.2
22	Kenny Boynton	Florida	6'2"	Jr	7.1	0	7.1
23	Tyler Zeller	North Carolina	7'0"	Sr	4.8	-2.2	7
24	Jeff Withey	Kansas	7'0"	Jr	3.8	-3.1	6.9
25	Dominique Morrison	OralRoberts	6'6"	Sr	6.8	0	6.8
26	John Jenkins	Vanderbilt	6'4"	Jr	6.7	0	6.7
27	Jack Cooley	Notre Dame	6'9"	Jr	4.7	-2	6.7
28	C.J. McCollum	Lehigh	6'3"	Jr	4.7	-2	6.7
29	Ken Horton	CentralConnecticut	6'6"	Sr	4.1	-2.6	6.7
30	J'Covan Brown	Texas	6'1"	Jr	6.3	-0.3	6.6
31	Tyshawn Taylor	Kansas	6'3"	Sr	3.7	-0.1	6.4
32	Tu Holloway	Xavier	6'0"	Sr	4.1	-0.4	6.4
33	Ryan Broekhoff	Valparaiso	6'7"	Jr	5.4	-0.8	6.3
34	Khalif Wyatt	Temple	6'4"	Jr	4.9	-1.4	6.3
35	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	6'7"	Sr	4.4	-1.9	6.3
36	Maalik Wayns	Villanova	6'2"	Jr	4.2	0	6.2
37	Ricardo Ratliffe	Missouri	6'8"	Sr	5.3	-0.9	6.2
38	Mike Moser	NevadaLasVegas	6'8"	So	2.5	-3.6	6.2
39	Isaiah Canaan	MurraySt.	6'0"	Jr	5.9	-0.2	6.1
40	Seth Curry	Duke	6'2"	Jr	4.3	-0.4	6.1
41	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	6'5"	So	5.4	-0.8	6.1
42	Quincy Acy	Baylor	6'7"	Sr	3.8	-2.3	6.1
43	Arsalan Kazemi	Rice	6'7"	Jr	3.5	-2.7	6.1
44	Robbie Hummel	Purdue	6'8"	Sr	4.7	-1.3	6
45	Larry Anderson	LongBeachSt.	6'5"	Sr	4.7	-1.3	6
46	Jason Clark	Georgetown	6'2"	Sr	3.5	-2.5	5.9
47	Gorgui Dieng	Louisville	6'10"	So	2.4	-3.5	5.9
48	Langston Galloway	SaintJoseph's	6'2"	So	5.7	-0.1	5.8
49	Scoop Jardine	Syracuse	6'2"	Sr	2.4	-1.4	5.8
50	Chase Tapley	SanDiegoSt.	6'2"	Jr	3.8	-2.1	5.8
51	Reggie Hamilton	Oakland	5'11"	Sr	6.2	2	5.7
52	Doron Lamb	Kentucky	6'4"	So	5.7	0	5.7
53	Dion Waiters	Syracuse	6'4"	So	3.3	-2.4	5.7
54	Terrence Jones	Kentucky	6'9"	So	3.1	-2.6	5.7
55	John Henson	North Carolina	6'10"	Jr	2.6	-3.1	5.7
56	Austin Rivers	Duke	6'4"	Fr	3.1	0	5.6
57	Michael Glover	Iona	6'7"	Sr	4.6	-1	5.6
58	Robert Covington	TennesseeSt.	6'8"	Jr	4.2	-1.4	5.6
59	Rodney McGruder	Kansas St.	6'4"	Jr	3.9	-1.7	5.6
60	Terell Parks	WesternIllinois	6'7"	Jr	3.3	-2.3	5.6
61	Michael Kidd-Gilchrist	Kentucky	6'7"	Fr	3.3	-2.4	5.6
62	D'Aundray Brown	ClevelandSt.	6'4"	Sr	2.4	-3.1	5.6
63	Brian Conklin	St.Louis	6'6"	Sr	4.8	-0.7	5.5
64	Ryan Kelly	Duke	6'11"	Jr	4.3	-1.1	5.5
65	Garrett Stutz	WichitaSt.	7'0"	Sr	4	-1.5	5.5
66	Leonard Washington	Wyoming	6'7"	Jr	2.6	-2.9	5.5
67	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	6'8"	Jr	4	-1.4	5.4
68	Drew Gordon	NewMexico	6'9"	Sr	1.8	-3.6	5.4
69	Fuquan Edwin	Seton Hall	6'6"	So	1.8	-3.7	5.4
70	Ashton Gibbs	Pittsburgh	6'2"	Sr	3.8	0	5.3
71	Meyers Leonard	Illinois	7'1"	So	3.2	-2.1	5.3
72	Otto Porter	Georgetown	6'8"	Fr	2.6	-2.7	5.3
73	Matt Gatens	Iowa	6'5"	Sr	5.2	0	5.2
74	Justin Hamilton	Louisiana St.	6'11"	Jr	3.9	-1.3	5.2
75	Mason Plumlee	Duke	6'10"	Jr	2.8	-2.5	5.2
76	Dee Bost	Mississippi St.	6'2"	Sr	3.1	0	5.1
77	Zack Novak	Michigan	6'4"	Sr	4.7	-0.4	5.1
78	Jared Cunningham	Oregon St.	6'4"	Jr	3.3	-0.8	5.1
79	Donte Poole	MurraySt.	6'3"	Sr	3.6	-1.6	5.1
80	Pierce Hornung	ColoradoSt.	6'5"	Jr	3.5	-1.6	5.1
81	Erving Walker	Florida	5'8"	Sr	5	0	5
82	Dorian Green	ColoradoSt.	6'2"	Jr	5	0	5
83	Noah Hartsock	BrighamYoung	6'8"	Sr	4.6	-0.4	5
84	Kerron Johnson	Belmont	6'1"	Jr	4.5	-0.5	5
85	Erick Green	Virginia Tech	6'3"	Jr	4.3	-0.7	5
86	Allen Crabbe	California	6'6"	So	4.1	-1	5
87	Keith Clanton	CentralFlorida	6'8"	Jr	2.9	-2	5
88	Rob Jones	St.Mary's	6'6"	Sr	2.8	-2.2	5
89	Jared Berggren	Wisconsin	6'10"	Jr	2.3	-2.8	5
90	Harrison Barnes	North Carolina	6'8"	So	4.2	-0.7	4.9
91	Mike Muscala	Bucknell	6'11"	Jr	4.2	-0.7	4.9
92	Sean Kilpatrick	Cincinnati	6'4"	So	4	-0.9	4.9
93	Bradley Beal	Florida	6'3"	Fr	3.5	-1.4	4.9
94	Andrew Nicholson	St.Bonaventure	6'9"	Sr	3.2	-1.7	4.9
95	Bernard James	Florida St.	6'10"	Sr	1.8	-3.1	4.9
96	Deshaun Thomas	Ohio St.	6'7"	So	4.8	0	4.8
97	Kendall Marshall	North Carolina	6'3"	So	2.2	-0.1	4.8
98	Justin Cobbs	California	6'2"	So	4.4	-0.4	4.8
99	Jerian Grant	Notre Dame	6'5"	So	4.3	-0.5	4.8
100	C.J. Aiken	SaintJoseph's	6'9"	So	3.4	-1.4	4.8
101	Rodney Williams	Minnesota	6'7"	Jr	3.1	-1.7	4.8
102	Terrell Stoglin	Maryland	6'1"	So	4.7	0	4.7
103	Andre Young	Clemson	5'9"	Sr	4.6	-0.2	4.7
104	Kim English	Missouri	6'6"	Sr	4.3	-0.3	4.7
105	Seth Tuttle	NorthernIowa	6'8"	Fr	4	-0.6	4.7
106	Darius Johnson-Odom	Marquette	6'2"	Sr	4.1	-0.7	4.7
107	Tyreek Duren	LaSalle	6'0"	So	3.6	-1.1	4.7
108	Ryan Evans	Wisconsin	6'6"	Jr	2	-2.8	4.7
109	Herb Pope	Seton Hall	6'8"	Sr	1.6	-3.1	4.7
110	Devon Collier	Oregon St.	6'7"	So	4.6	0	4.6
111	Stephen Holt	St.Mary's	6'4"	So	4.2	-0.4	4.6
112	Jake Cohen	Davidson	6'1"	Jr	4.1	-0.5	4.6
113	Pierre Jackson	Baylor	5'10"	Jr	3.7	-1	4.6
114	Kyle Kuric	Louisville	6'4"	Sr	3.4	-1.2	4.6
115	Terrence Ross	Washington	6'6"	So	3.2	-1.4	4.6
116	C.J. Fair	Syracuse	6'8"	So	2.9	-1.7	4.6
117	Scott Wood	North Carolina St.	6'6"	Jr	4.5	0	4.5
118	Drew Crawford	Northwestern	6'5"	Jr	4.5	0	4.5
119	Deonte Burton	Nevada	6'1"	So	4.5	0	4.5
120	Neil Watson	SouthernMississippi	5'11"	So	4.5	0	4.5
121	Joe Ragland	WichitaSt.	6'0"	Sr	4.5	0	4.5
122	D'Angelo Harrison	St. John's	6'3"	Fr	4.3	-0.2	4.5
123	Tim Kamczyc	ClevelandSt.	6'7"	Jr	3.7	-0.8	4.5
124	Tim Frazier	Penn St.	6'1"	Jr	3.6	-0.9	4.5
125	Wendell McKines	NewMexicoSt.	6'6"	Sr	3.6	-0.9	4.5
126	Dennis Tinnon	Marshall	6'8"	Jr	3.3	-1.2	4.5
127	Phil Pressey	Missouri	5'10"	So	3.2	-1.3	4.5
128	Solomon Hill	Arizona	6'6"	Jr	3.1	-1.4	4.5
129	Luke Martinez	Wyoming	6'4"	Jr	3.1	-1.4	4.5
130	Michael Dixon	Missouri	6'1"	Jr	4.4	0	4.4
131	Ceola Clark	WesternIllinois	6'3"	Sr	4.3	-0.1	4.4
132	Travis Releford	Kansas	6'5"	Jr	3.7	-0.7	4.4
133	Chris Smith	Louisville	6'2"	Sr	3.7	-0.7	4.4
134	Torye Pelham	SouthernMississippi	6'6"	Sr	3.2	-1.2	4.4
135	Victor Oladipo	Indiana	6'5"	So	2.9	-1.5	4.4
136	Javon McCrea	Buffalo	6'6"	So	2.8	-1.5	4.4
137	Mitchell Watt	Buffalo	6'10"	Sr	2.8	-1.6	4.4
138	LaRon Dendy	MiddleTennessee	6'9"	Sr	2.2	-2.2	4.4
139	Anton Grady	ClevelandSt.	6'8"	Fr	2	-2.4	4.4
140	Moe Harkless	St. John's	6'8"	Fr	1.8	-2.6	4.4
141	Arnett Moultrie	Mississippi St.	6'11"	Jr	4.2	-0.2	4.3
142	Chace Stanback	NevadaLasVegas	6'8"	Sr	4.1	-0.2	4.3
143	Durand Scott	Miami FL	6'4"	Jr	3.8	-0.5	4.3
144	Tyler Murray	Wagner	6'5"	Sr	3.6	-0.7	4.3
145	Kenny Kadji	Miami FL	6'11"	Jr	3.3	-1	4.3
146	James Ennis	LongBeachSt.	6'7"	Jr	3	-1.3	4.3
147	Tanner Smith	Clemson	6'5"	Sr	2.7	-1.5	4.3
148	Royce O'Neale	Denver	6'5"	Fr	2.7	-1.5	4.3
149	Tony Mitchell	NorthTexas	6'8"	Fr	2.5	-1.8	4.3
150	Ray McCallum	Detroit	6'1"		3.7	1	4.2
151	Keiton Page	Oklahoma St.	5'9"	Sr	4.2	0	4.2
152	Dave Sobolewski	Northwestern	6'1"	Fr	4.2	0	4.2
153	Tony Snell	NewMexico	6'7"	So	3.8	-0.4	4.2
154	Sheldon McClellan	Texas	6'4"	Fr	3.8	-0.5	4.2
155	Taylor Braun	NorthDakotaSt.	6'7"	So	3.7	-0.5	4.2
156	Keith Appling	Michigan St.	6'1"	So	3.3	-0.9	4.2
157	Quincy Miller	Baylor	6'9"	Fr	3.2	-1	4.2
158	Josh Owens	Stanford	6'8"	Sr	3.2	-1.1	4.2
159	Juvonte Reddic	VirginiaCommonwealth	6'9"	So	2.3	-1.9	4.2
160	Damontre Harris	South Carolina	6'9"	So	2.2	-2	4.2
161	Brian Stafford	Denver	6'4"	Sr	4.1	0	4.1
162	Ike Azotam	Quinnipiac	6'7"	So	3.7	-0.4	4.1
163	Patric Young	Florida	6'9"	So	3.6	-0.6	4.1
164	Tarik Black	Memphis	6'8"	So	3.1	-1	4.1
165	Kentavious Caldwell-Pope	Georgia	6'4"	Fr	3	-1.1	4.1
166	Josh Gasser	Wisconsin	6'3"	So	2.9	-1.1	4.1
167	Branden Dawson	Michigan St.	6'6"	Fr	2.6	-1.5	4.1
168	Tony Mitchell	Alabama	6'6"	Jr	1.6	-2.4	4.1
169	Jordan Hulls	Indiana	6'0"	Jr	4	0	4
170	Jordan Theodore	Seton Hall	6'0"	Sr	3.4	-0.7	4
171	Brandon Triche	Syracuse	6'4"	Jr	2.9	-1.1	4
172	Michael Snaer	Florida St.	6'5"	Jr	2.7	-1.4	4
173	Jorge Gutierrez	California	6'3"	Sr	2.4	-1.6	4
174	Zeke Marshall	Akron	7'0"	Jr	2.4	-1.6	4
175	Brady Heslip	Baylor	6'2"	So	3.9	0	3.9
176	Rahlir Hollis-Jefferson	Temple	6'6"	Jr	3.1	-0.7	3.9
177	T.J. Robinson	LongBeachSt.	6'8"	Sr	2.6	-1.4	3.9
178	Earl Pettis	LaSalle	6'5"	Sr	2.5	-1.4	3.9
179	Elias Harris	Gonzaga	6'7"	Jr	2.4	-1.5	3.9
180	Jackie Carmichael	IllinoisSt.	6'9"	Jr	2.3	-1.6	3.9
181	James Southerland	Syracuse	6'8"	Jr	2.1	-1.8	3.9
182	JaMychal Green	Alabama	6'8"	Sr	2.1	-1.8	3.9
183	Evan Smotrycz	Michigan	6'9"	So	2.2	-1.8	3.9
184	Fab Melo	Syracuse	7'0"	So	1.8	-2.1	3.9
185	Henry Sims	Georgetown	6'10"	Sr	1.8	-2.2	3.9
186	E.J. Singler	Oregon	6'6"	Jr	3.8	0	3.8
187	Laurent Rivard	Harvard	6'5"	So	3.8	0	3.8
188	J.P. Primm	NCAsheville	6'1"		3.7	-0.1	3.8
189	Robert Sacre	Gonzaga	7'0"	Sr	3.1	-0.7	3.8
190	Cody Ellis	St.Louis	6'8"		2.9	-0.8	3.8
191	Chris Udofia	Denver	6'6"	So	2.9	-0.9	3.8
192	Justin Hawkins	NevadaLasVegas	6'3"	Jr	2.9	-0.9	3.8
193	Davante Gardner	Marquette	6'8"	So	2.8	-1	3.8
194	William Buford	Ohio St.	6'6"	Sr	2.8	-1	3.8
195	Perry Jones	Baylor	6'11"	So	2.7	-1.1	3.8
196	Kendall Williams	NewMexico	6'3"		2.6	-1.2	3.8
197	Miles Plumlee	Duke	6'10"	Sr	2.5	-1.3	3.8
198	Kyle Weems	MissouriSt.	6'6"	Sr	2.4	-1.4	3.8
199	JT Sulton	MiddleTennessee	6'8"	Jr	2.3	-1.5	3.8
200	Marcos Knight	MiddleTennessee	6'2"	Jr	1.9	-1.9	3.8

Point Guards and Perimeter Defense

The Value Add system as introduced last year was purely numbers driven, but I have made three adjustments for the three major items that cannot be measured by player stats.
1. While point guards get credit for assists, they should really get about an extra 1% just for bringing the ball up the court 50 times a game and setting up the offense. In the future I’d like to give every starting point guard at least 1% extra, but for today I have simply given the top 5 point guards in the country a +2.5%, the next best 10 a +2% and the next best 15 a +1.5% based almost exclusively on the Top 30 as evaluated by CBS Sports.

2. Perimeter defense results in bad shots and a lower eFG%, but a good perimeter defender doesn’t usually get a steal for good on-ball defense, unlike a good defender at the hoop who gets plenty of defensive rebounds and blocked shots. For now, I simply awarded an extra 1% for the players identified by CBS Sports as the best perimeter defenders in the country.

3. The lowest defensive rating in the system was a 0.0%, but now if someone gets a 0.0% and his team is giving up a high 1.05 points per trip he gets a +1.0 on defense (gives up points), while a 1.10 equals +2.0 etc.

How has the system fared?

A couple of notes from the four observations Sports Illustrated made about the Value Add system when I unveiled it last year:

SI said based on the Value Add System:	What has actually happened this season?
Jordan Taylor … needs to be considered … for preseason national player of the year votes	Jordan is right back in the mix in the Top 10, but even winning Big Ten POY honors will be very tough because he is one of five Big Ten players in the top 10 as the conference has emerged as the top conference this year. Obviously when Jae Crowder was ranked as the 48th best returning player at that time, I couldn’t have dreamed he would now calculate as the 2nd best player in American in the final weeks of the season.
Lest you think the 6-6 (Central Connecticut’s Ken) Horton's (No. 8) standing on this list is inflated because he plays in a small conference, it should be noted that Pudner's fomula … means is that he'd theoretically be able to enhance a major-conference team's offense by 5.06 percent.	Despite continuing to have no support from a terrible team, in his three road games against Top 75 teams (vs. Michigan State, Northwestern and UMass) Horton has averaged 16 points, 11 rebounds, 4 assists and 4 steals per game and is back in the Top 30 of all players at any D1 level for a 2nd straight year.
Vanderbilt's offense is going to be insanely good ... but the Commodores still might not be a top-10 team.	Despite missing their star center for much of the year has a top 20 offense (114.4 trips per game) but not a Top 20 team.
If (Bradley transfer Brandon) Wood plays at the level Pudner's formula projects … that could very well equate to a top-three finish (for Michigan State) in the Big Ten, which would exceed most pundits' expectations, including mine, and establish Value Add as a worthy way of identifying next year's sleepers.	Brandon Wood has shown he could make the transition from Bradley to the Big Ten, starting for the Spartans and being one of the top 300 players in the country with a 2.7 Value Add. That has been good enough for the Spartans not only to be in the top 3 in the Big Ten, but actually in first place a week after winning by 10 at Ohio State.

CS Bracket Feb 21

2012-02-21T11:13:00.000-06:00

The only two sure things at the top of the bracket are Syracuse and Kentucky getting 1-seeds. After that, 6 teams are battling for 2 spots. For the moment, Big 12 leaders Missouri and ACC leaders Duke get the other 1-seeds. On the S-curve, Marquette came in 9th overall and is the top 3-seed. To move up between now and Selection Sunday, the minimum the Warriors would need is a 3-1 record in their last 4 games and an appearance in the Big East title game. But that would also require other teams to slip up. I'm confident that if MU won their last 4 games and followed that up with a Big East tournament title, they would be a 2-seed. While the teams ahead of them (outside of Syracuse and Kentucky) all look very solid in their positions right now, it's unlikely that all 6 of them will both finish top-two in their league and get to their title games. Regardless, Marquette is solidly looking like a 2 or 3 seed and in very good position as we move toward March.

For the first time, the Big East leads the way with 9 bids and the Big Ten is second with 8, thanks to Cincinnati moving into the field and Illinois crashing out.

Last Four Byes: Seton Hall, Mississippi State, UCF, Iowa State
Last Four In: LSU, Cincinnati, Dayton, Minnesota
First Four Out: St. Joseph's, Colorado State, Arizona, Miami
Next Four Out: Texas, NC State, Mississippi, Arkansas
Highest RPI Snub: 29 Colorado State
Highest KenPom Snub: 26 Texas

Background story on Buzz the coach, husband, father and person - the Perfectionist

2012-02-20T18:43:00.003-06:00

Really a great read if you have five minutes. If you don't, make the time. A wonderful article on Buzz from Inside Milwaukee Magazine.

http://www.insidemilwaukee.com/Article/2202012-ThePerfectionist

Post Script on Crowder’s Weekend: 2nd best game since Wade; top 10 POY, best BE duo with DJO & national championship?

2012-02-20T12:41:00.004-06:00

Just a quick post script to yesterday’s piece on Crowder vs. UConn and MUs tourney chances. Since then, Marquette fans voted his performance Saturday as the 2nd best since Wade (see top 10 below), Jeff Goodman of CBS Sports tweeted that he might be moving into the Top 10 for National Player of the Year, Greg Anthony of CBS Sports said Marquette might win the national title with Gardner back to join perhaps the best duo in the Big East in Crowder and DJO. It’s been a fun 24 hours, but hopefully the kids have missed it all and won’t show up with big heads when a Rutgers team that played Syracuse tough yesterday comes to the Bradley Center Wednesday. Oh, and MU is back in the Top 10 of the just released ESPN Coaches poll, while ESPN Insider is asking if we are a Final Four team.

Here is how the MU Scoop readers voted the top 10 performances since Wade demolished #1 Kentucky in 2003, and as for DJO not having one of the top 8 game performances - don't worry about it. Jimmy Butler and Wesley Matthews don't either and they are doing just fine.

Best 10	Date	Player	Opp	Pts	Reb	eFG%	FT	Ast/Stl/TO
1	1/3/2006	Novak	UConn	41	16	75%	11 of 11	2/2/2
2	2/18/2012	Crowder	UConn	29	12	71%	9 of 10	1/3/0
3	3/22/2008	McNeal	Stanford	30	8	60%	0 of 0	2/1/3
4	11/21/2006	James	Duke	25	3	67%	5 of 6	7/1/1
5	11/27/2006	James	Valpo	22	0	58%	11 of 13	3/1/2
6	3/20/2009	Hayward	Utah St.	26	8	75%	5 of 6	0/0/1
7	1/4/2009	McNeal	Cincy	26	5	125%	1 of 2	6/0/2
8	1/21/2007	James	Pitt	23	1	57%	5 of 6	5/0/0
9	11/27/2010	DJO	UWM	29	4	89%	4 of 4	3/0/1
10	1/7/2009	Matthews	Rutgers	23	6	100%	3 of 6	2/2/1

Crowder dominates #2 NBA prospect, DJO awesome, but history shows we may need a 3rd star to emerge for a big run

2012-02-19T01:34:00.004-06:00

NBA Draft Express updated its top 100 NBA prospects Saturday morning, and Marquette was one of 20 college teams with at least two NBA prospects. Marquette’s foe a few hours after the list was released was one of six teams with at least three NBA prospects, which as I’ve written in the past is usually what it takes for a team to make a Final Four run no matter how well they’ve played during the year.

So the question is whether or not Marquette’s prospect duo of Darius Johnson-Odom (37th best college prospect) and Jae Crowder (82nd best prospect) gives MU a chance to make that deep a run. However, first we must consider whether or not the dozen NBA Scouts at today’s game moved Crowder up from the 82nd top prospect after watching him play potentially the greatest game by a Marquette player since Dwyane Wade torched #1 Kentucky for a triple double in 2003. I posted a poll on MU Scoop if you are interested in voting between this and the other 6 greatest performances since Wade.

Crowder matched up against 6-foot-11 Andre Drummond, the player who is projected to go second in the draft after Anthony Davis of Kentucky. With both Marquette centers injured, one would think Crowder might have to foul to make up for guarding a guy 5 inches taller, than him, but actually he fouled only once while drawing five fouls on Drummond with the following results:

Time	Foul	Result
8:59 1st H	Crowder draws charge on Drummond	Mayo hits 3-pointer at other end
8:17	Crowder fouls Drummond to deny dunk	Drummond misses both free throws
7:29	Drummond fouls Crowder	Crowder hits both free throws
7:53 2nd H	Drummond fouls Crowder	Crowder hits both free throws
5:08	Crowder drains 3 as Drummond fouls him	Crowder's only missed FT, but rebounds his miss
2:43	Crowder dunks while being fouled by Drummond	Drummond fouls out, Crowder hits FT

If Crowder had done nothing else besides those six plays, you might have to give him Player of the Game. But in fact, the overall matchup was even more lopsided.

	Crowder	Drummond
Prospect Rank	82nd	2nd
Height	6-foot-6	6-foot-11
Points	29	7
Rebounds	12	4
eFG%	71% (8 of 14, 4 treys)	38% (3 of 8, no treys)
FT	9 of 10	1 of 4
Steals	3	1
Assists	1	0
Turnovers	1	2
Blocks	0	1

Greatest duo performance I can find; but do we have the 3 ½ stars?

When you add DJOs stats today, I cannot find a more dominant two-man performance. Marquette’s two seniors dominated play for 53 points on 65% effective field goal shooting (16 of 31 with 8 of the hits being from behind the arc to make it effectively 20-31 since the 8 treys are like turning 4 misses into made shots).

But Al McGuire’s adage that you needed 3 ½ stars to be a championship team has proven accurate more often than not. I determined a couple of years ago that the vast majority of Final Four teams include three players that will be within the NBA within two years. Clearly Marquette has two that are at least potential NBA players in DJO and Crowder, and they have the “half” star in the unselfish Junior Cadougan who had another 8 assists yesterday and has been the biggest reason MU is the third best assist team in the country (65.6% of all baskets scored off of assists).

However, everyone else on the roster is a freshman or sophomore and one will have to emerge to give MU a true third star in the tournament. Hopefully Davante Gardner will be back from the knee injury soon, and he has given MU a dominant half court option when healthy. Todd Mayo was unstoppable a few times early. Jamil Wilson is perhaps the most talented player on the roster and finally exploded last week for a big game.

However, the most likely candidate is Vander Blue who missed all five shots today, but is still considered the 30th best NBA prospect among sophomores and has played like that several times. While 3 stars does not guaranty any tournament wins – some teams have huge chemistry issues and lose in the first round. The VCUs and Butlers really are rare exceptions, and it is generally the Kentucky and UConn teams from last year who even when they have poor regular seasons have the horses to take over and make a tournament run.

So let’s identify those teams, and if Marquette can match up against them.

Kentucky and UNC in a class by themselves with 6 NBA prospects each
While I was there in person for Kentucky’s only loss this year, they look almost unbeatable on a neutral court. While UNC has been inconsistent, be aware that they are the only other team with six NBA stars as we unfortunately saw in the Sweet 16 last year. So let’s get those two out of the way since they don’t fit on my table. The following are their players listed among the top prospects, and their rank (e.g. Anthony Davis is expected to go No. 1 in the draft, so is the Number One college prospect, etc):

Kentucky NBA Prospects: 1 Anthony Davis PF, 3 Michael Gilchrist, 11 Terrence Jones SF/PF, 33 Marquis Teague PG, 39 Doron Lamb SG, 78 Darius Miller 78
UNC NBA Prospects: 4 Harrison Barnes SF, 8 John Henson SF, 9 Tyler Zeller PF/C, 17 James McAdoo PF, 19 Kendall Marshall PG and 54 Reggie Bullock SG

That’s unfair. There are only four other teams with 3 of the top 100 prospects, and Marquette has played 3 of the 4. Here is the list with where their players rank and their current projected seed in the tournament:

Team	Top NBA Prospect	Rnk	Other NBA prospects	Seed
Connecticut	Andre Drummond C	2	12 Jeremy Lamb SG, 65 Alex Oriakhi PF	9
Kansas	Thomas Robinson PF	6	42 Tyshawn Taylor PG, 51 Elijah Johnson PG/SG	1
Syracuse	Dion Waiters SG	26	49 Kris Joseph SF and 53 Fab Melo C	1
Vanderbilt	Jeff Taylor SF	24	29 Festus Ezeli C and 40 John Jenkins SG	7

History would indicate that Kentucky, UNC, Kansas and Syracuse therefore have the best chance at the Final Four when you combine how they are playing with the fact that they each have three players who could be in the NBA within two years. But the warning is that while UConn and Vandy have been very inconsistent, teams with that much talent can make the surprise runs if they can pull it together.

At the other extreme, Louisville and Michigan State are the two top teams who do not have a single player among the top 100 prospects. Certainly you have two coaches who can take those teams on runs, but most teams with no NBA prospects hit a team they just can’t match up with sometime in the first four games during which their three-pointers aren’t falling.

All 20 teams with more than one NBA prospect on the list are projected to make the tournament, but certainly it is no guaranty. In addition to UConn above, Alabama, NC State, Texas and Washington from the list below are no shoo-ins to make the tournament – particularly since both players on Alabama’s list were suspended by Anthony Grant recently with no news on when he will let them play again:

Team	Top NBA Prospect	Rnk	Other NBA prospects	Seed
Alabama	JaMychal Green PF	67	69 Tony Mitchell SF	10
Baylor	Perry Jones PF	7	13 Quincy Miller	3
Duke	Austin Rivers SG	20	21 Mason Plumlee PF	2
Florida	Bradley Beal SG	10	16 Patric Young PF/C	5
Georgetown	Hollis Thompson SF	58	85 Henry Sims PF	3
Indiana	Cody Zeller C	18	76 Christian Watford PF	4
Marquette	Darius Johnson-Odom SG	37	82 Jae Crowder SF/PF	3
Memphis	Adonis Thomas SG/SF	28	41 Will Barton SG/SF	8
Mississippi St.	Arnett Moultrie PF/C	25	79 Dee Bost PG	8
Missouri	Ricardo Ratliffe PF/C	45	56 Marcus Denmon SG	1
N.C. State	C.J. Leslie SF/PF	35	55 Lorenzo Brown PG	12
Ohio State	Jared Sullinger C	5	48 William Buford SG	2
Texas	Myck Kabongo PG	27	50 J’Covan Brown PG/SG	11
Washington	Terrence Ross SG/SF	15	32 Tony Wroten PG/SG	13

Certainly other duos are more highly ranked than DJO and Crowder (e.g. Baylor has #7 Perry Jones and #13 Quincy Miller), but experience is also important in the tournament, and Marquette is one of only three teams with more than one senior in the Top 100 list (Vanderbilt and Missouri are the others).

Don’t base your bracket on this. Experienced guards, computer rankings and teams that are hot going into the tournament can be better indicators in a given matchup. But when it comes to having to put together four wins in a row, it usually takes a few players who are just plain better than their opponents. Certainly DJO and Crowder established again yesterday that we have two, and Cadougan has proven we have our distributor/half star, but it may take one more player taking it to the next level for two weekends in a row to give MU a shot at a big run.

Marquette’s road resume vs. top 25 one of top 6 in country; another top 50 road win at UConn, WVU or Cincy could clinch top 4 seed

2012-02-17T15:25:00.003-06:00

It is unlikely that Marquette will have a chance to join Michigan State, Kansas and Missouri as the only teams in the country with two road wins over Top 25 opponents, but MU still has one of the best six resumes when visiting a team in Pomeroy's Top 25.

Of the other teams to win a road game vs. a Top 25, only three teams in the country have stayed within single digits in two other road Top 25 match-ups (MU at Syracuse and Georgetown, Vandy at Louisville and Florida, and Miami at Virginia and Florida State).

The fact is that when a team visits a top 25 opponent, they have only an 8.5% chance of winning the game, and a 73.1% of losing by double digits. As the table below shows, even Lunardi’s 1 through 4 seeds have won only 30% of their road games vs. the Top 25 and been blown out by double digits 40% of the time. So Marquette looks better than your average top 4 seed with the performances at Wisconsin, Georgetown and Syracuse, and even if you do include the one blowout loss at Notre Dame (not in the Pomeroy Top 25, but in the new AP and ESPN).

While my colleagues here at Cracked Sidewalks have mounted an imaginary banner in the Bradley Center (look closely at the background photo) to commemorate how excited I got when MU pulled the rare feet of going a whole season without a double digit loss with Lazar, the fact is that keeping teams like Georgetown and Syracuse within single digits on the road is a huge boost when seeds are being handed out.

In fact, UNLV and Baylor are down as a 4- and 3-seed respectively, and have lost by double digits EVERY time they have played a road game vs. the Top 25. In fact, they join K-State and a total of 270 teams (78% of all teams) who have yet to stay within single digits of a Top 25 team on the road. The table below lists every team who has at least stayed within single digits in one Top 25 road game, and teams are ranked by; 1) road wins over a Top 25, 2) staying within single digits against a top 25, and finally 3) as a tie-breaker the fewest number of opportunities on the road vs. a Top 25.

When it comes to strong performances on the road vs. the Top 25, Marquette has the 5th best resume in the country, and even if you count the double digit loss at Notre Dame, Marquette is still in a 5th place tie with Miami with one win, two games within single digits and one double digit loss.

One more top 50 road win in remaining three chances could lead to 4-seed or better

While MU will not play another Top 25, we do have three more opportunities to pull off a road upset against a Top 50 team. If we win one of those three games – today at UConn at 11 a.m., next Friday at West Virginia, or February 29 at Cincinnati, the road resume will be very strong. According to Pomeroy (which does not account for Gardner missing tomorrow), MU is a one-point underdog in all three, so we do need to win one of them. Win two and the sky is the limit, lose all three and we drop several seeds.

So the next time you hear someone criticizing Marquette for not having more big road wins, show them the table below (unless they are wearing a Missouri, Kansas or Michigan State shirt of course):

Team on road vs. Top 25	Top 4 seed	Win	Stay within single digits	Lose by double digits
All teams		32 (8.5%)	69 (18.4%)	275 (73.1%)
Total Top 4 Seeds		12 (30%)	12 (30%)	16 (40%)
Michigan St. (best record)	2	2	1	0
Kansas	1	2	1	0
Missouri	1	2	0	0
Vanderbilt		1	2	0
Marquette	3	1	2	0
Miami		1	2	1
Arizona		1	1	0
Georgetown	3	1	1	0
Indiana State		1	1	0
Kentucky	1	1	1	0
Virginia Tech		1	1	0
Xavier		1	1	0
Ohio State	2	1	1	1
Minnesota		1	1	1
Syracuse	1	1	0	0
Cleveland St.		1	0	0
Creighton		1	0	0
Murray St		1	0	0
New Mexico State		1	0	0
Notre Dame		1	0	0
Princeton		1	0	0
Duke	2	1	0	1
Cincinnati		1	0	1
Mississippi St		1	0	1
San Diego State		1	0	1
Temple		1	0	1
Florida State		1	0	2
Iowa		1	0	2
Tennessee		1	0	3
Marshall		0	2	0
Pitt		0	2	0
Florida		0	2	1
Long Beach State		0	2	1
Virginia		0	2	1
Iowa St		0	2	2
Northwestern		0	2	2
Alabama		0	1	0
Charlotte		0	1	0
Clemson		0	1	0
Illinois State		0	1	0
College of Charleston		0	1	0
Colorado		0	1	0
Dayton		0	1	0
Lehigh		0	1	0
Middle Tennessee		0	1	0
Ohio		0	1	0
USC		0	1	0
Southern Mississippi		0	1	0
St. Louis		0	1	0
Utah State		0	1	0
West Virginia		0	1	0
Western Illinois		0	1	0
Louisville	4	0	1	1
UNC	2	0	1	1
Belmont		0	1	1
Illinois		0	1	1
Memphis		0	1	1
Miami OH		0	1	1
Nebraska		0	1	1
NC State		0	1	1
Oregon		0	1	1
Providence		0	1	1
Purdue		0	1	1
Rutgers		0	1	1
Seton Hall		0	1	1
South Carolina		0	1	1
Villanova		0	1	1
Wisconsin	4	0	1	2
Texas		0	1	2
Towson		0	1	2
Indiana	4	0	1	3
Michigan	3	0	1	3
Oklahoma St		0	1	3
St. John’s		0	1	3
Texas A&M		0	1	3
UNLV	4	0	0	2
Baylor	3	0	0	2
K-State & other 267		0	0	213

Game-by-game, player-by-player match-ups on MU road to the Final Four, updated Value ratings

2012-02-16T03:33:00.002-06:00

To continue to build on Tim pointing out that four of our last five games are projected as 1-point affairs, and Alan’s projected MU bracket, I ran the Total Value calculations again for the Big East through tonight’s games. I also ran the numbers for all of the players on the six teams we would have to beat in the NCAA tournament to win the National Title.

Obviously the projected opponents will not match the actual Big East and NCAA tournaments, but the point is to get an idea of how Marquette’s 7-man rotation matches up against other 7-man rotations at every step of the tournament to see how possible a Big East title and deep NCAA run would be. The following is a quick summary of the 14 games that would get us there, followed by the Total Value rankings of Marquette’s top 7 as well as the top 7 of each of these team’s in our path:

at Uconn, computer says lose by 1
The teams look pretty even on Total Value if both healthy. Unfortunately it sounds like Davante (#28) may not be ready for Saturday, while Jeremy Lamb (#5, 6-foot-5) and Andre Drummond (#31, 6-foot-11) looked completely recovered against DePaul last night. Could be tough to get a third straight win at Connecticut.

vs. Rutgers, computer says win by 13
You can’t take any conference games for granted, but MU is the only Big East team besides Syracuse with five of the Top 50 players in the Big East, and Rutgers has only one (Dane Miller, #34, 6-foot-6).

at WVU, computer says lose by 1
Kevin Jones (#2, 6-foot-8) has dropped just below Jae Crowder in Total Value to rank as the 2nd best player in the Big East statistically. Darryl “Truck” Bryant (#38, 6-foot-2) is his only teammate in the Top 50 though. While Deniz Kilicli (#82, 6-foot-9) is a tough match-up inside, and it’s hard to beat Huggins at West Virginia, MU clearly has the better talent and could grab a road win.

At Cincy, computer says win by 1
While they don’t match MU, Sean Kilpatrick (#16, 6-foot4) has been close to DJO’s level statistically, and Cashmere Wright (#36, 6-foot-0) and Yancy Gates (#41, 6-foot-9) give them three that could certainly win at home.
I know the 16-point win looked good, but beware. Under Buzz, MU has played a team at the Bradley Center and away from the Bradley Center in the same year, and seven of those times there was more than a 16-point swing against MU (Nova 7 pt win at Bradley Center but 19-point loss on the road, Gtown 3-point win but 23-point loss, Providence 30-point win but 3-point win away, DePaul 21-point win after 1-point loss, Seton Hall 9-point win but 13-point loss, ND 22-point win but 5 pt loss and Norfolk State 31-point win but 2-point win).

Gtown, computer says win by 1
While they can’t match MU’s five players in the top 50, Georgetown has the best trio in the conference with three of the best 11 players (6-foot-2 Jason Clark #8, 6-foot-8 Hollis Thompson #9, 6-foot-8 Otto Porter #11), backed up by 6-foot-10 Henry Sims at #30. A serious threat to hand MU another senior day loss.

Big East Tournament Opener – Cincinnati, computer says win by 5
Right now it shapes up that MU, Notre Dame and Georgetown would get Louisville, Cincinnati and South Florida in the third round. If Pomeroy were to play out, Cincinnati would win the tie-breaker for 5th seed, and Marquette would lose the tie-breaker to the other two to fall to 4th seed. We switch from Pomeroy to Sagarin for the predictions since you can use his numbers to predict match-ups not yet set, and MU comes in as a 5-point favorite vs. Cincy on a neutral court.

Syracuse, computer says lose by 5
People can say they are only seven deep, but when your top 7 are all in the top 32 of the conference, and 7-foot Fab Melo would rank higher than 29th if he hadn’t miss games, you are left with a tough but winnable Big East semifinal.

Georgetown, computer says lose by 1
See above on match-ups, but if MU were to get to Georgetown in a Big East final, Sagarin says we would come in as only 1-point underdogs. However, this would be MUs third game in three nights, and as I posted earlier this year, we have struggled mightily in those situations since we rely on such aggressive defense.

VCU #14 seed, computer says win by 6
We now shift to Alan’s projected bracket from Monday, which has MU as a #3 seed facing #14 seed VCU. The Rams have no one at the level of Crowder or DJO, but 6-foot-9 Juvonte Reddic would rate one spot ahead of Gardner at #28 if he played in the Big East, and they do have three other players in the Top 50. Coming off their Final Four run last year, certainly a nervous match-up, but one in which MU would have the clear talent edge.

Murray State #6 seed, computer says win by 7
With one bad loss playing in a very weak conference, Murray State has slipped from #7 in the country to a projected #6 seed. However, even after adjusting for competition, Isaiah Cannan would rank as the 4th best player in the Big East, and Donte Poole wouldn’t be far behind at #15. So they match up with our duo of DJO and Crowder, BUT at 6-foot-0 and 6-foot-3, the don’t pose the big inside threat. While 6-foot-7 Ed Daniel (#47 in the Big East) would rank pretty even with Vander Blue and Jamil Wilson, those two players are moving up the ranks pretty quickly, so basically MU would need to contain two great guards to win and go Sweet 16 for the second straight year.

Duke #2 seed, computer says lose by 2
This summer the Total Value system said Kentucky, Ohio State, North Carolina and Duke looked like the teams with the best shot at the Final Four, and Duke may have finally jumped in with the other three after the win at UNC. As explosive as they are, Duke is only the 73rd best defense in the country, and you can see below their defensive ratings really hold down their total value. However, in a matchup to try to go to the Elite 8, the big problem is that Ryan Kelly and Mason Plumlee would rank in the Top 10 among Big East players, and at 6-foot-11 and 6-foot-10 they would provide the same kind of nightmare scenario that we almost got through against the Lopez brothers at Stanford. With Austin Rivers (#37 if in Big East, 6-foot-4) lobbing it into them and 6-foot-10 Miles Plumlee (#27), MU would have to force them to play small to win.

Kentucky #1 seed, computer says lose by 7
I know we have the history on Kentucky, but Anthony Davis would rank as by far the Big East Player of the Year with an incredible 12.45% value to Kentucky. That means that that hypothetically MU could beat Kentucky 71-70 without Davis, that Davis’ presence would change the score to 75-67 Kentucky – a 9-point swing. Which is not to ignore the fact that Kentucky has three other players that would be in the Top 10 of the Big East. We’ve done a good job of getting opposing big men in foul trouble – that’s how Indiana beat Kentucky and MU could do the same.

Ohio State #1 seed, computer says lose by 8
Jared Sullinger was the preseason Player of the Year based on Total Value, and if he hadn’t battled injuries earlier he would be close to Davis for the honor. However, while the computer ranks OSU a slightly tougher game than Kentucky, when looking at the five top players of each – OSU is clearly not quite at the level of Kentucky. Even with the injuries, 6-foot-9 Sullinger would rank as the third best player in the Big East, and 6-foot-2 Aaron Craft isn’t far behind at #13.

Syracuse #1 seed, computer says lose by 5
And if we somehow ran the gauntlet and the other seeds played out in Alan’s bracket, that would leave MU playing Syracuse for the national title – and hoping for a repeat of the magic in Cleveland last year.

Below is a list of the top 7 players in the Total Value system for all of Marquette’s players as well as all of the opponents in this hypothetical run. The offensive figure is the percent the player increases his team’s scoring by over the course of the season, and the Def number is the percent of points he takes away from opponents. The Total Value is the combination of the two. For non-Big East players, a listed where they would rank if they played in the Big East.

rank	Player	Team	Ht	Off	Def	Total
1	Jae Crowder	Marquette	6-foot-6	5.65	-4.04	9.69
19	Darius Johnson-Odom	Marquette	6-foot-2	3.84	-0.64	4.47
28	Davante Gardner	Marquette	6-foot-8	2.88	-1.02	3.89
46	Vander Blue	Marquette	6-foot-4	1.34	-1.25	2.58
47	Jamil Wilson	Marquette	6-foot-7	1.66	-0.92	2.58
83	Todd Mayo	Marquette	6-foot-3	1.26	-0.07	1.33
91	Junior Cadougan	Marquette	6-foot-1	0.70	-0.40	1.10
5	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	6-foot-5	5.30	-0.99	6.29
15	Shabazz Napier	Connecticut	6-foot-0	3.64	-1.00	4.63
31	Andre Drummond	Connecticut	6-foot-11	1.41	-2.35	3.76
45	Ryan Boatright	Connecticut	6-foot-0	2.30	-0.43	2.72
65	Tyler Olander	Connecticut	6-foot-9	1.38	-0.49	1.87
98	Niels Giffey	Connecticut	6-foot-7	0.89	-0.03	0.92
103	DeAndre Daniels	Connecticut	6-foot-8	0.31	-0.55	0.86
34	Dane Miller	Rutgers	6-foot-6	0.95	-2.59	3.54
52	Myles Mack	Rutgers	5-foot-9	1.44	-0.96	2.40
70	Mike Poole	Rutgers	6-foot-5	0.26	-1.51	1.78
76	Eli Carter	Rutgers	6-foot-2	0.86	-0.62	1.48
79	Gilvydas Biruta	Rutgers	6-foot-8	0.53	-0.87	1.40
97	Jerome Seagears	Rutgers	6-foot-1	0.94	0.00	0.94
112	Derrick Randall	Rutgers	6-foot-8	0.31	-0.40	0.72
2	Kevin Jones	WestVirginia	6-foot-8	8.35	-1.28	9.63
38	Darryl Bryant	WestVirginia	6-foot-2	3.23	0.00	3.23
63	Jabarie Hinds	WestVirginia	5-foot-11	1.70	-0.25	1.95
82	Deniz Kilicli	WestVirginia	6-foot-9	1.02	-0.34	1.36
89	Gary Browne	WestVirginia	6-foot-1	0.34	-0.80	1.13
93	Aaron Brown	WestVirginia	6-foot-5	0.99	0.00	0.99
95	Kevin Noreen	WestVirginia	6-foot-10	0.87	-0.10	0.97
16	Sean Kilpatrick	Cincinnati	6-foot-4	3.84	-0.78	4.62
36	Cashmere Wright	Cincinnati	6-foot-0	1.88	-1.49	3.37
41	Yancy Gates	Cincinnati	6-foot-9	1.90	-1.10	3.01
51	Dion Dixon	Cincinnati	6-foot-3	2.12	-0.36	2.48
60	Jaquon Parker	Cincinnati	6-foot-3	1.69	-0.37	2.06
62	Justin Jackson	Cincinnati	6-foot-8	0.31	-1.68	2.00
104	Kelvin Gaines	Cincinnati	6-foot-10	0.00	-0.81	0.81
8	Jason Clark	Georgetown	6-foot-2	3.54	-2.33	5.87
9	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	6-foot-8	4.29	-1.34	5.63
11	Otto Porter	Georgetown	6-foot-8	2.74	-2.71	5.44
30	Henry Sims	Georgetown	6-foot-10	1.76	-2.03	3.79
57	Nate Lubick	Georgetown	6-foot-8	1.26	-1.03	2.29
64	Markel Starks	Georgetown	6-foot-2	1.88	0.00	1.88
77	Jabril Trawick	Georgetown	6-foot-5	0.99	-0.45	1.44
3	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	6-foot-7	4.45	-1.97	6.42
7	Dion Waiters	Syracuse	6-foot-4	3.53	-2.50	6.03
24	Brandon Triche	Syracuse	6-foot-4	3.06	-1.11	4.17
25	C.J. Fair	Syracuse	6-foot-8	2.44	-1.73	4.16
27	James Southerland	Syracuse	6-foot-8	2.19	-1.85	4.03
29	Fab Melo	Syracuse	7-foot-0	1.67	-2.20	3.87
32	Scoop Jardine	Syracuse	6-foot-2	2.29	-1.38	3.67
28	Juvonte Reddic	VCU	6-foot-9	2.03	-2.00	4.02
30	Bradford Burgess	VCU	6-foot-6	3.01	-0.80	3.81
36	Briante Weber	VCU	6-foot-3	0.78	-2.67	3.45
42	Troy Daniels	VCU	6-foot-4	2.21	-0.72	2.94
74	Darius Theus	VCU	6-foot-3	1.29	-0.33	1.62
77	Treveon Graham	VCU	6-foot-5	0.86	-0.60	1.46
93	D.J. Haley	VCU	7-foot-0	0.19	-0.83	1.02
4	Isaiah Canaan	MurraySt.	6-foot-0	6.22	-0.17	6.39
15	Donte Poole	MurraySt.	6-foot-3	3.10	-1.54	4.64
47	Ed Daniel	MurraySt.	6-foot-7	1.17	-1.41	2.58
72	Ivan Aska	MurraySt.	6-foot-7	1.30	-0.38	1.68
72	Jewuan Long	MurraySt.	6-foot-1	1.70	0.00	1.70
87	Latreze Mushatt	MurraySt.	6-foot-5	0.00	-1.23	1.23
113	Stacy Wilson	MurraySt.	6-foot-3	0.36	-0.33	0.70
9	Ryan Kelly	Duke	6-foot-11	4.64	-1.16	5.80
9	Mason Plumlee	Duke	6-foot-10	3.29	-2.51	5.79
22	Seth Curry	Duke	6-foot-2	4.00	-0.38	4.38
27	Miles Plumlee	Duke	6-foot-10	2.76	-1.33	4.10
37	Austin Rivers	Duke	6-foot-4	3.27	0.00	3.27
39	Andre Dawkins	Duke	6-foot-4	3.19	0.00	3.19
60	Quinn Cook	Duke	6-foot-0	2.10	0.00	2.10
1	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	6-foot-10	6.85	-5.60	12.45
7	Michael Kidd-Gilchrist	Kentucky	6-foot-7	3.48	-2.44	5.92
9	Doron Lamb	Kentucky	6-foot-4	5.62	-0.12	5.74
10	Terrence Jones	Kentucky	6-foot-9	2.87	-2.68	5.55
36	Darius Miller	Kentucky	6-foot-8	3.15	-0.36	3.51
74	Marquis Teague	Kentucky	6-foot-2	1.14	-0.46	1.59
80	Kyle Wiltjer	Kentucky	6-foot-9	1.17	-0.23	1.40
3	Jared Sullinger	OhioSt.	6-foot-9	5.23	-3.60	8.82
13	Aaron Craft	OhioSt.	6-foot-2	2.51	-2.50	5.01
22	Deshaun Thomas	OhioSt.	6-foot-7	4.34	0.00	4.34
26	William Buford	OhioSt.	6-foot-6	3.09	-1.05	4.14
34	Lenzelle Smith	OhioSt.	6-foot-4	1.91	-1.66	3.57
83	Evan Ravenel	OhioSt.	6-foot-8	0.70	-0.64	1.34
86	Amir Williams	OhioSt.	6-foot-11	0.45	-0.83	1.28
	Other Top 20 Big East	Team	Ht	Off	Def	Total
4	Jack Cooley	NotreDame	6-foot-9	4.39	-1.99	6.38
6	Gorgui Dieng	Louisville	6-foot-10	2.41	-3.67	6.08
10	Fuquan Edwin	SetonHall	6-foot-6	1.63	-3.83	5.46
12	Jerian Grant	NotreDame	6-foot-5	4.76	-0.51	5.27
13	Bryce Cotton	Providence	6-foot-1	4.91	0.00	4.91
14	Herb Pope	SetonHall	6-foot-8	1.67	-3.05	4.72
17	Maalik Wayns	Villanova	6-foot-2	4.54	0.00	4.54
18	Chris Smith	Louisville	6-foot-2	3.72	-0.81	4.53
20	Ashton Gibbs	Pittsburgh	6-foot-2	4.47	0.00	4.47

CS Bracket Feb 13

2012-02-13T23:44:00.001-06:00

The bracket is starting to solidify itself as we are less than a month away from Selection Sunday. Kentucky and Syracuse both seem like near-locks for 1-seeds. Missouri has moved up to the 1-line as well. While they have a weak non-conference SOS, wins over Baylor and Kansas while only suffering 2 losses make the Tigers impossible to ignore, though it may be to their detriment, as the last 1-seed will almost certainly play out West, which prevents Mizzou from a near-home game in St. Louis. Ohio State is the last team on the top line.

In terms of bids, the Big Ten leads the way with 9 bids, as Northwestern moves into the field. Again the Big East is one back with 8 bids. The SEC and Big 12 both have 5, the A-10, Mountain West, and ACC have 4 apiece, the West Coast and C-USA each get 3, and the Missouri Valley has 2.

The last 4 byes went to Purdue, Xavier, Illinois, and Dayton. The last 4 teams in the field are Minnesota, Colorado State, Iowa State, and UCF. The lowest RPI for an at-large team is Dayton at 71 while the lowest Pomeroy rating is Colorado State at 109.

The first four teams out are Miami, Mississippi, Wyoming, and Texas. The next four teams out are NC State, Arizona, Mississippi, and Cincinnati. The highest RPI snub is St. Joseph's at 48. The highest Pomeroy snub is Texas at 23.

For Marquette, I think this is the best bracket so far. While VCU may have magic left in those slippers, the real hope is for Marquette to either expose Murray State or reacquaint themselves with Rick Majerus in the second round. While the expected marquee match-up in the Southeast would be Kentucky v Duke, Marquette could crash that party. While it may not be the easiest path (that goes to Syracuse's paved road to the Final Four) it would be a road Marquette could successfully travel.

And at the bottom...it's a very soft bubble again. I look at teams like Iowa State, Colorado State, UCF, Texas, and Miami and there's very little difference, except that all of them look more like NIT teams than they do NCAA teams. For that matter, I'm not overly impressed with some of the higher seeds, as Seton Hall looks nothing like a 10-seed, West Virginia's 10 losses are too many to be in the field right now (yet they were an easy inclusion), and it baffles me how the slumps of teams like Xavier, Illinois, and Dayton haven't cost them bids yet.

I will be continuing to update this periodically in the thread at MUScoop. I still plan to do a weekly bracket, but for mid-week updates, check out the thread on the Scoop.

Tossups and white knucklers

2012-02-13T08:48:00.001-06:00

With a convincing win over Cincinnati on Saturday, Marquette moved to 21-5 on the season and a gaudy 10-3 record in the Big East. Despite devastating injuries to their front line, Buzz Williams' crew has run off nine wins in their last ten games, the program's best stretch since joining the Big East.

The latest Pomeroy numbers pulled MU up to #19 with a projected final record of 24-7 overall and 13-5 in Big East play. With a week to prepare for the next game, a roadie at UConn, this sounds reasonable given the current pace, no?

However, a closer look at the final five games shows that the Warriors are heading into the most uncertain stretch of the season. Four of the last five games are toss-ups per Pomeroy, who currently predicts four one-point games in the season's final two weeks.

Loss @ UConn, 71-70 (49% certainty)
Win vs. Rutgers, 75-62 (87% certainty)
Loss @ WVU, 74-73 (49% certainty)
Win @ Cincy, 71-70 (50% certainty)
Win vs. Georgetown 67-66 (55% certainty)

The toss-ups are punctuated by three road games including back-to-back tilts against West Virginia and Cincinnati. Marquette has handled itself very well on the road this season, claiming three conference wins away from home to go with its signature road over the Badgers in December and a handful of neutral site wins.

While the KenPom numbers say 'tossup' there is more reason for optimism than not even though MU has a depleted roster at this point. Counting the road game at Villanova, MU has reeled off wins in four of the last five. This stretch corresponds to the Davante Garnder injury which many thought could derail the season, but ultimately saw MU once again demonstrate the fortitude that has long characterized the program.

Marquette was already one of the smaller teams in the nation prior to Gardner's injury. In addition, there was also the very real concern about the loss of Gardner’soffensive repertoire, one of the most efficient on the team and in the Big East.

Still, despite the vertically-challenged roster, opponents' height, quality and defensive efficiency have largely not mattered as Williams' crew has shown a great capacity for adjustment and improvement throughout the season.

For example when the Warriors hosted Seton Hall, the 63rd tallest team in the nation and one of the Big East's top defensive units, the Pirates only mustered a 43.7% eFG which was better than MU’s defensive average for the season. Marquette also tuned up the Pirates delivering 1.18 point per possession (ppp) in the decisive second half while holding SHU to just 0.83. (*note that 1.00 is the normalized average).

On Saturday the Warriors hung 95 points on the Bearcats thanks to an eye-popping 1.35 ppp against one of the conference's better defenses. Marquette shot 62.5% eFG% against an opponent that typically allows 0.91 ppp and 45.8%, respectively. And the Warriors held UC to just 0.92 ppp in the first half ... all the more remarkable considering that Cincy roared out to a 16-4 lead.

Obviously, this team is still improving despite the injury bug -- and in more areas than expected. In our Tweet stream on Saturday, Rob noted that MU’s turnover rate was 10% against Cincinnati --- the third-straight game with with elite ball protection (12.5%, 12.5%, 10%).

Tossups or not – Gardner or not -- MU will be a tough out in these last five games thanks to a deep, talented rotation and sound strategies on both sides of the ball which ultimately run well with just about any roster combination coach Buzz Williams chooses.

Cincinnati grabs 48% offensive rebounds tonight in tune-up for showdown that could determine if they or MU get crucial double bye

2012-02-09T00:15:00.002-06:00

UConn’s sixth loss Monday and West Virginia’s sixth loss tonight gives MU a three-game lead over them in the loss column as MU gets closer and closer to its first ever Top 4 finish. That leaves three teams at 7-4 and tied in 5th place, but with MU already having the tie-breaker due to beating two of them (Louisville and South Florida), that just leaves Cincinnati.

The most important thing that can happen the rest of the season is that Marquette finishes ahead of Cincinnati, because if we do there is a very good chance we will be somewhere in the Top 4. A win Saturday and MU has the tie-breaker and lead or a three game lead over every team who could knock them out of the top 4. A loss and Cincinnati has the inside track – pulling within a half game of MU with the tie-breaker and a game left against MU in Cincinnati.

The following is a breakdown of the Big East standings with current records, and which remaining games a team is favored in (66% of better chance of winning), as well as which are toss-ups (33% to 66% chance).

Team	Current	Favored/if win all	Toss-up/if win all	Underdog/if win all	MU have tie-breaker?
Syracuse	11-1	Con,atRut,SF,Lou (15)	atLou,atCon (17)	None (17)	No
Marquette	9-3	Cin,Rut (11)	atCon,atWV,atCin,Geo (15)	None (15)	N/A
Notre Dame	8-3	DeP,Rut,Pro (11)	atVil,WV,atStJ (14)	atGeo (15)	No
Georgetown	8-4	StJ,atPro,Vil,ND (12)	atSH,atMar (14)	None (14)	No?
Louisville	7-4	atDeP,SF (9)	atWV,Syr,atCin,Pit (13)	AtSyr (14)	Yes
S. Florida	7-4	(7)	atPro,Vil,Cin,WV (11)	atPit,atSyr,atLou (14)	Yes
Cincinnati	7-4	Pro (7)	SH,Lou,atSF,Mar,atVil (12)	atMar (13)	?
West Virginia	6-6	DeP (7)	Lou,atPit,atND,Mar,atSF (12)	None (12)	?
UConn	5-6	DeP (6)	Mar,atVil,Syr,atPro,Pit (11)	atSyr (12)	?

So if every team won only the games they are favored in, then MU finishes fourth (Syracuse 15 wins, Georgetown 12, Notre Dame 11 and head-to-head over MU, MU 11, then Louisville in 5th with 9.

If every team won all of their toss-ups (can't actually all do it since they play each other, but just to give an idea), then MU would finish 2nd place (Syracuse 17 wins, MU 15, ND and Georgetown 14 and Louisville 13.

Both sound great. But if Yancy Gates plays like he did tonight (6 of 8 field goals and 5 offensive rebounds in only 21 minutes for the 76-54 blowout at St. John’s) and Gardner is still out, the Bearcats could pull the upset and alter the entire forecast for the season.

Cincy is solid, and Sean Kilpatrick and Cashmere Wright have actually been their best two players, but Yancy is always the guy with the potential to breakout and give them a deadly three players. Three other players give them a very solid 6-man rotation in Dion Dixon, Jaquon Parker and 6-foot-8 Justin Jackson.

When I picked Georgetown and Cincinnati as my two surprise teams in the Big East during the preseason, my logic was that Yancy Gates was finally showing signs of dominating.

Theoretically MU could finish as low as 11th in the Big East, but that would entail being passed by Seton Hall (Magic number is 2 – meaning any two MU wins or Seton Hall losses mean the Pirates can no longer catch us), and a win by MU Saturday would eliminante St. John’s , Pitt, Rutgers, and Nova from having even a mathematical chance of catching us. DePaul and Providence cannot catch us mathematically.

I get much more nervous about games like this when we have a lot to lose against a team we are favored against but that certainly has the ability for the upset. When we play at Syracuse or Georgetown, I believe we are playing with house money. This is a game Marquette has to win – it could determine if we finish in the Top 4 or not.

Underclassmen’s dominant performances Monday could indicate a great present (March Madness) and future (winning new Big East)

2012-02-08T00:48:00.002-06:00

The support class that emerged Monday night to turn a 12-point deficit into a 13-point win gives great hope for March Madness this year, and even more for just how far the program could go in the future Big East that we learned yesterday would include Memphis.

Junior Cadougan had 8 more assists Monday to make Marquette the 3rd best assist team in the country (65.7% of all baskets off of assists), while the ESPN crew discussed whether Jae Crowder OR DJO had the better shot at being player of the year in the Big East. DJO is on the Wooden List as one of the Top 25 candidates for national Player of the Year, while Crowder is statistically superior to everyone else in the conference except perhaps Kevin Jones.

But with no other junior or senior on the team, Monday’s performance may have shown the true potential for a run this year, as well as brimming optimism over the future of the program in the new Big East. Even if you drop the great performances by Junior, DJO and Crowder Monday and just look at the stats from four other players – then throw in Davante Gardner’s stats from his last game before the injury, you end up with an incredible box score:

Freshman & Sophs	MIN	FGM	FGM	FTM	FTA	REB	PTS
Jamil Wilson, F	39	8	11	2	2	10	18
Vander Blue, G	23	5	10	6	6	3	16
Todd Mayo, G	17	2	4	2	2	0	6
Derrick Wilson, G	7	1	1	-	-	0	2
Davante Gardner, F	24	5	7	5	9	7	15
Total	110	21	33	15	19	20	57

When you run the math on all of the stats for these five (including turnovers, etc.) the math suggests that they would have used 38 possessions to scored their 57, thus averaging about 1.5 points per trip on their 64% shooting from the floor and 79% from the line.

On the defensive end, Jamil added two blocked shots and two steals, and all three guards played phenomenal defense. Granted, Gardner is still weak overall on the defensive end, but with the other four playing that kind of defense, just having the big body to put on someone and grab some rebounds could make this a very strong defensive team.

That’s in 110 minutes, folks, with those five only using 38 possessions out of the typical 70 trips a game MU takes down the court. That means you could have DJO, Crowder and Junior average an easy 30 minutes between them and even if they were all off a little and just scored 32 points in the 32 trips that one of the three of them used the possession, that’s 89 points and an awfully impressive defensive performance. If the three of them play just average games with the five above doing that, and MU may score 100.

While a tournament foe would be tougher than DePaul and hold these numbers down some, there would only be a couple of teams in the country who would have a chance against MU with that kind of performance.

MU could run up future Big East titles

And with the announcement today that Memphis will be joining the Big East, that paints an even better picture for life in the future Big East.

Most of the time, players get substantially better every year, so if those five put up numbers at least that good in two years, then any combination of contributions from potential superstar Deonte Burton, Aaron Durley, Steve Taylor, Jamal Ferguson, TJ Taylor, Juan Anderson, Jake Thomas, Jamail Jones and possibly even a medical red shirt Chris Otule could easily have Marquette atop the Big East in two years.

At which point you may ask, “yes, but will winning the Big East be a big deal in two years?” For argument’s sake, let’s say that now that Rick Pitino has gotten his first wish and Memphis is joining, that he gets his other wish and Temple is the final addition.

If we look at the new conferences in two years under those scenarios using Pomeroy’s current ratings, the Big East still looks great. As the Table below shows, the Big East and the Big Ten would be the only two conferences with eight Top 50 teams. Taking the best 12 teams in each conference, the Big East and Big Ten would easily be the top two conferences, with an average projected winning percentage of 0.817 and 0.812 respectively.

2014 Conf	Top 10 teams	Top 50	Ave. best 12
Big 10	OSU, Wis, MSU, Ind	8	0.817
Big East	None-Gtown 13th	8	0.812
SEC	Kent, Missouri	5	0.785
ACC	Syr., UNC	5	0.798
Big 12	Kan, Bayl	6	0.759
MWC	None-N. Mex 11th	2	0.713
MVC	None-Wich St 16th	2	0.653
A10	None-St. L 12th	2	0.652
Pac 12	None-Cal 21st	2	0.647
CUSA	None-S.Miss 44th	1	0.639

Yes, the conference would lack a Top 10 program, and some would criticize the size and some weak teams at the bottom, but overall I believe the Big East has done a very good job with the very poor hand they were dealt, and I believe there is an outstanding chance that Marquette will be an excellent program competing for the top of a very good conference for years to come.

SMU and Houston will need to really step up their basketball programs, which they may do with the move, but the conference would be strong. The following are the current ratings of 18 conference members in two years if Temple were to join, and there were no other changes by then:

2014 Conference Member	Pomeroy Rnk
Georgetown	13
Marquette	20
Louisville	26
Memphis	29
Temple	38
Connecticut	39
Notre Dame	47
Cincinnati	50
Seton Hall	69
Villanova	80
Central Florida	97
Rutgers	101
South Florida	113
Providence	117
St. John's	140
DePaul	173
Southern Methodist	203
Houston	209

Horace Grant's nephew (Jerian), best first-year player in BE and 13th best overall, has let ND overcome Abromaitis injury

2012-02-03T21:38:00.004-06:00

I just updated the Value Add rankings, and Marquette’s trip to Notre Dame tomorrow at Noon could have been a battle for MVP of the Big East except for Tim Abromaitis injury.

Jae Crowder has just nudged ahead of Kevin Jones for top player of the year by a microscopic margin (10.4% to 10.3% improvement to team’s scores) to far out distance 3rd place Jeremy Lamb (6.8%). But when I look at the rankings I did of returning Big East players this summer, you have to believe Abromaitis could well have been the top player this year except for the season-ending injury:

Preseason Total Value
1. Ashton Gibbs, Pittsburgh (forced to play PG, current #21)
2. Tim Abromaitis, Notre Dame (injured for year)
3. Jae Crowder, Marquette (current #1)
4. Kyle Kuric, Louisville (missed couple of games, current #23)
5. Kevin Jones, West Virginia (current #2)
6. Jeremy Lamb, Connecticut (current #3)

The fact is that Notre Dame looked like a middle of the conference team WITH Abromaitis, lost their potential MVP, and is still 4th place in the Big East and is on fire coming off wins against then No. 1 Syracuse and on the road vs. Seton Hall and UConn. While we'd certainly like to see Buzz grab Coach of the Year, it would be hard to by-pass Mike Brey going into the Noon showdown with Marquette.

If Davante Gardner is out tomorrow, the Irish may be a slight favorite in part due to having the 2nd best big guy (6-foot-9 or taller) in the Big East based on Total Value:

Players 6-foot-9 or taller in Top 50 of Big East
4 Gorgui Dieng, Louisville
10 Jack Cooley, Notre Dame
25 Andre Drummond, Connecticut
30 Henry Sims, Georgetown
38 Mouphtaou Yarou, Villanova
41 Yancy Gates, Cincinnati

While that presents a match-up problem, the reason that Notre Dame is in 4th place in the Big East and on the verge of being ranked is that a 3-star freshman, Jerian Grant, is the 13th Best Player in the Big East. Like Marquette’s surprisingly strong performance from another 3-star, Todd Mayo, the 6-foot-5 Grant certainly had the lineage to suggest future greatness.

Grant's dad was Harvey Grant, who strung together a decade long-career (Bullets, Trail Blazers and 76ers), and his uncle and dad’s twin Horace Grant has NBA rings from the Bulls and Lakers. However, no one expected the 105th best recruit in the land to play 86% of Notre Dame’s minutes his first year, while being among Pomeroy’s leaders in assists and low turnovers, and hitting a cool 37% from behind the arc in almost 100 attempts. When I compared preseason rankings to rankings right now, Grant ranked as the biggest surprise in the Big East – almost enough to offset the Abromaitis injury as the biggest disappointment. While most of the 150 players are within 25 spots of their summer projection, here are the 10 players who have exceeded their expectations by the widest margin with their projected rank and actual rank to date:

Surprise	Proj	Actual	First name	Lname	Team
1	NR	13	Jerian	Grant	NotreDame
2	NR	36	LaDontae	Henton	Providence
3	NR	43	Russ	Smith	Louisville
4	112	17	Herb	Pope	SetonHall
5	118	31	Toarlyn	Fitzpatrick	SouthFlorida
6	123	37	Fab	Melo	Syracuse
7	109	34	Dane	Miller	Rutgers
8	119	48	Vander	Blue	Marquette
9	69	9	Fuquan	Edwin	SetonHall
10	82	35	Lamar	Patterson	Pittsburgh
19	46	19	Davante	Gardner	Marquette

Abromaitis would give Notre Dame three of the top 14 players in the conference, but even without him Notre Dame matches up almost even with a Gardner-less Marquette if you go through the best eight players from both teams – and Notre Dame averages exactly 3 inches taller per spot (6-foot-3 5/8” to 6-foot-6 5/8”):

BE	Rnk	Marquette	BE	Rnk	Notre Dame	Height
1	Jae	Crowder	10	Jack	Cooley	6-6 vs. 6-9
16	Darius	Johnson-Odom	13	Jerian	Grant	6-2 vs. 6-5
48	Vander	Blue	62	Eric	Atkins	6-4 vs. 6-1
53	Jamil	Wilson	79	Scott	Martin	6-7 vs. 6-8
77	Todd	Mayo	87	Pat	Connaughton	6-3 vs. 6-5
89	Junior	Cadougan	91	Alex	Dragicevich	6-1 vs. 6-6
122	Derrick	Wilson	106	Tom	Knight	6-0 vs. 6-10
125	Jamail	Jones	108	Mike	Broghammer	6-6 vs. 6-9

The good news is that since January 24, Crowder (big jump to pass Jones for 1st), DJO (from 24th to 16th) and Blue (from 55th to 48th) are all shooting up in the rankings, the bad news is that Grant is too (from 23rd to 13th), so he is on the verge of earning All-Big East consideration in his first season.

Also as covered in the past, while the offensive Value Add is precise, you can make a 1% subjective adjustment within a team for the “team defensive stops” calculation, and if you do so with Marquette I believe it’s safe to drop Davante Gardner from his calculated 19th to 32nd, while raising Blue from his current 48th to 34th.

Biggest Disappointments
On the flip side of the nice surprises, below are the biggest 10 disappointments. While Abromaitis, through no fault of his own, is the biggest disappointment, he is followed closely by UConn's Alex Oriakhi who was benched the year after being the inside power for the NCAA title run and has been terrible. The third biggest disappointment is Providence's Kadeem Batts, whose academic problems cost him the first semester of his sophomre year after a very promising freshman campaign - but he is working to redeem himself on the court now.

Proj	Act	First name	Lname	Team
2	Inj	Tim	Abromaitis	NotreDame
8	114	Alex	Oriakhi	Connecticut
36	150	Kadeem	Batts	Providence
33	142	Roscoe	Smith	Connecticut
17	94	Khem	Birch	Pittsburgh
23	97	Cleveland	Melvin	DePaul
38	99	Shaun	Noriega	SouthFlorida
14	67	Gilvydas	Biruta	Rutgers
32	75	Peyton	Siva	Louisville
21	59	Dante	Taylor	Pittsburgh

Overall, 59 of the almost 200 players in the Big East have improved their team's overall scores this year by at least 2%. And while Crowder and Jones are clearly the best two players in the league by this measurement, I do want to make sure everyone knows I will be THRILLED if Darius Johnson-Odom wins the Big East player of the year. He is doing what he did last year at an even higher level - saving his dominant play for the big conference and (hopefully) tournament games.

While DJO is 16th in Total Value to date, he is shooting up rapidly and my only hope is that having two incredible seniors doesn't divide their votes for Big East honors after the year. With the way Blue has taken it to another level the last two games, and Gardner has been dominant on offense, we could easily have the three-and-half stars that Al McGuire said it took to win a title - particularly when you look at how strong we are down the entire bench.

Rnk	Player	Team	Ht	Off	Def	Total
1	Jae Crowder	Marquette	6-foot-6	5.64	-4.40	10.04
2	Kevin Jones	WestVirginia	6-foot-8	8.22	-1.81	10.03
3	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	6-foot-5	5.81	-0.96	6.77
4	Gorgui Dieng	Louisville	6-foot-10	2.66	-3.62	6.28
5	Jason Clark	Georgetown	6-foot-2	3.82	-2.38	6.20
6	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	6-foot-8	4.58	-1.50	6.07
7	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	6-foot-7	4.11	-1.86	5.97
8	Dion Waiters	Syracuse	6-foot-4	3.23	-2.61	5.83
9	Fuquan Edwin	SetonHall	6-foot-6	1.98	-3.68	5.66
10	Jack Cooley	NotreDame	6-foot-9	3.64	-1.81	5.46
11	Maalik Wayns	Villanova	6-foot-2	5.15	0.00	5.15
12	Sean Kilpatrick	Cincinnati	6-foot-4	3.96	-1.12	5.08
13	Jerian Grant	NotreDame	6-foot-5	4.40	-0.61	5.01
14	Otto Porter	Georgetown	6-foot-8	2.22	-2.74	4.96
15	Shabazz Napier	Connecticut	6-foot-0	3.98	-0.94	4.92
16	Darius Johnson-Odom	Marquette	6-foot-2	3.75	-1.01	4.75
17	Herb Pope	SetonHall	6-foot-8	1.67	-3.07	4.74
18	Bryce Cotton	Providence	6-foot-1	4.72	0.00	4.72
19	Davante Gardner	Marquette	6-foot-8	3.27	-1.32	4.59
20	Brandon Triche	Syracuse	6-foot-4	3.46	-1.11	4.57
21	Ashton Gibbs	Pittsburgh	6-foot-2	4.56	0.00	4.56
22	Moe Harkless	St.John's	6-foot-8	1.58	-2.96	4.54
23	Kyle Kuric	Louisville	6-foot-4	3.11	-1.34	4.46
24	D'Angelo Harrison	St.John's	6-foot-3	3.70	-0.76	4.45
25	Andre Drummond	Connecticut	6-foot-11	2.11	-2.17	4.28
26	James Southerland	Syracuse	6-foot-8	2.49	-1.73	4.22
27	Jordan Theodore	SetonHall	6-foot-0	3.35	-0.72	4.07
28	C.J. Fair	Syracuse	6-foot-8	2.24	-1.64	3.88
29	Chris Smith	Louisville	6-foot-2	3.30	-0.54	3.85
30	Henry Sims	Georgetown	6-foot-10	1.72	-2.08	3.80
31	Toarlyn Fitzpatrick	SouthFlorida	6-foot-8	2.02	-1.74	3.76
32	Scoop Jardine	Syracuse	6-foot-2	2.44	-1.28	3.72
33	Cashmere Wright	Cincinnati	6-foot-0	2.09	-1.44	3.53
34	Dane Miller	Rutgers	6-foot-6	0.78	-2.65	3.43
35	Lamar Patterson	Pittsburgh	6-foot-5	2.96	-0.34	3.30
36	LaDontae Henton	Providence	6-foot-6	2.84	-0.41	3.25
37	Fab Melo	Syracuse	7-foot-0	1.13	-2.12	3.25
38	Mouphtaou Yarou	Villanova	6-foot-10	2.59	-0.60	3.19
39	Darryl Bryant	WestVirginia	6-foot-2	3.19	0.00	3.19
40	Dominic Cheek	Villanova	6-foot-6	3.12	0.00	3.12
41	Yancy Gates	Cincinnati	6-foot-9	1.78	-1.29	3.07
42	Nasir Robinson	Pittsburgh	6-foot-5	3.05	0.00	3.05
43	Russ Smith	Louisville	6-foot-0	0.26	-2.74	3.00
44	Brandon Young	DePaul	6-foot-3	2.97	0.00	2.97
45	Ron Anderson	SouthFlorida	6-foot-8	2.71	-0.19	2.90
46	Dion Dixon	Cincinnati	6-foot-3	1.96	-0.76	2.72
47	Hugh Robertson	SouthFlorida	6-foot-6	1.98	-0.65	2.63
48	Vander Blue	Marquette	6-foot-4	0.82	-1.65	2.47
49	Tray Woodall	Pittsburgh	5-foot-11	2.43	0.00	2.43
50	Myles Mack	Rutgers	5-foot-9	1.54	-0.84	2.38
51	Bilal Dixon	Providence	6-foot-9	1.50	-0.80	2.31
52	Jaquon Parker	Cincinnati	6-foot-3	1.96	-0.33	2.30
53	Jamil Wilson	Marquette	6-foot-7	1.23	-1.03	2.25
54	Chane Behanan	Louisville	6-foot-7	0.37	-1.88	2.25
55	Jeremiah Kelly	DePaul	6-foot-0	2.17	0.00	2.17
56	Baye Keita	Syracuse	6-foot-10	1.24	-0.87	2.12
57	God'sgift Achiuwa	St.John's	6-foot-8	2.07	0.00	2.07
58	Talib Zanna	Pittsburgh	6-foot-9	2.02	0.00	2.02
59	Dante Taylor	Pittsburgh	6-foot-9	1.66	-0.34	2.00

Aged Whine

2012-02-02T22:31:00.000-06:00

We welcome back another guest post by Dr. Blackheart. In this version, he looks at the role experience plays in winning percentage, analyzes the experience of the Big East in comparison to previous years, and then peeks at MU (and the rest of the league) using experience. It's yet another great writeup.

====
There has been a lot of fan and media attention around the down year for Big East basketball this season. Pretty much every rating service, whether Pomeroy, Nolan, Real Time RPI, Colley or others, has the Big East Conference as only the third best conference overall. “The Fall of the Mighty Big East” seems to be a popular theme for the critics and pundits with all the surprise outcomes and the up and down games. Adding to the hype is all the drama around conference defections and realignment, and talk about the end of an era.

Likewise, MU fandom is equally perplexed about the team’s major scoring droughts at the start of games or halves. Last season was about the incredible number of nail biter games decided in the last possession(s). This season, the theme seems to be digging out of a hole to China. Fan sentiment is equally as uneasy, despite a great Big East start for Marquette, and now major injuries are creeping in to an already limited depth team to add to the “Golden Eagle Angst Rating” (or GEAR).

As a result, I decided to put on the scuba GEAR and take a deep statistical dive to find out exactly what the heck is going on. Chaos can be modeled after all.

“In almost everything, experience is more valuable than precept”.

Looking at various factors in Pomeroy going back in time, the one factor that stood out was “Experience”. Pomeroy (who started measuring “Experience” in the 2006-07 season) defines this measure as: “Uses eligibility class, weighted by minutes played. A freshman has no years of experience, a sophomore has one year of experience, etc.” Here is what I initially found in terms of on-court performance over the past six Big East seasons based upon segments of experience:

More experienced teams win more in Big East play by fifteen-plus percentage points, and by ten-plus percentage points for the total season. This just confirms in numbers a pretty obvious fan conventional wisdom, especially in the tough grinder that is the Big East.
Sixty-nine percent of the inexperienced teams had .500 or less BE seasons, confirming that experience can trump young potential.
Only six of the average to more experienced teams had overall losing total season records.
While the correlation of experience to winning is positive, it isn’t universally conclusive. The 2010-11 National and Big East Tournament Champion, UConn, was the 322th most experienced team, but they did finish just .500 in BE play. Talent like Kemba Walker helps to settle the young troops as they become more big game experienced, but the lack of the experienced Walker this season has resulted in a UConn slide to date. Last season’s UConn’s finish was the exception though (although not rare, as talent can triumph).

Historical Conference Perspective

After verifying the overall value of experience, the next step was to provide historical context to confirm or deny current fan and media sentiment around the Big East Conference. The following table looks at the average Big East… 1) Pomeroy conference ranking, 2) KPom’s average BE team’s experience level, 3) the average BE team’s national experience ranking, and 4) the number of BE’s teams at or above the national average in terms of experience.

To debunk a myth, the Big East has historically been ranked as the third best overall conference, mainly because of the statistical limitations with its large number of teams. This season is no different.
What’s very different, which is the crux of this piece, is that the Big East has always been known for its elite top teams. However, if experience is indeed one of a handful of success factors, then the BE is indeed down this year.
There is only one team, Louisville, who has more experience than the average national team. Last season there were 11 teams high on experience who knew and had played in the Big East wash cycle. That explains a lot.
More so, the average BE team level of experience is the lowest ever measured, basically in virgin territory — or about 17% less experienced than the previous low and 41% less experienced than last season. Wow!

Old Man Marquette?

The outlook for Marquette based on experience helps explain their success to date, in that they are tied with Syracuse as the second most experienced team in the Big East. However, this is also Marquette’s second youngest Big East team in measured times -- with only the 2006-07 team being younger. This relative inexperience can help explain the scoring droughts as the team struggles to gather its offensive sea legs during game spurts this season.

The inconsistent struggles of teams like UCONN, West Virginia and Seton Hall are easily seen in the lower experience levels.
You can also see that teams like Notre Dame and South Florida are rising to the top of the middle parity group and have chances at more favorable than expected seasons.
Villanova, Providence, Rutgers and St. Johns will continue to struggle despite their young talent, but will continue to show the signs of their upside.
Pittsburgh, with the return of their point guard, has the opportunity to continue their recent run after a horrid BE start. Louisville has been hampered by injuries but an observer can easily see why they are playing more consistently as players return. Georgetown has a blend of young and old, but that can explain also their highs and lows.

The outlook is for more parity within the conference, making the Big East the NFL of college basketball. While the more experienced teams like Marquette and Syracuse may have bumps in the road as they are still very young (and may also be hampered by injuries and other factors like Melo with academics), they are the ones who will be the winners because of upperclass leadership and overall match-up depth. Watch out for Pittsburgh and Louisville to make season end runs as they get healthy. The Big East is down in experience, but the wild ride seen every year will continue—just in different ways. And, like fine wine, if given the right conditions and time, the teams of the Big East will be full-bodied by season’s end just like UConn last season.

January Non-Conference Report

2012-02-01T14:45:00.000-06:00

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

2012-01-30T19:31:00.000-06:00

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

2012-01-30T14:02:00.004-06:00

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

2012-01-26T20:39:00.004-06:00

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

2012-01-25T09:26:00.001-06:00

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

2012-01-24T02:42:00.005-06:00

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

2012-01-23T10:11:00.000-06:00

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

2012-01-21T10:56:00.000-06:00

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.

Big East NCAA Teams Becoming Clearer

2012-01-19T09:48:00.005-06:00

Since my last view of the tournament horserace back at the start of the year, the tournament picture has become clearer for the Big East. UL has been exposed. WVU and Cincy have proven themselves as solid teams. Marquette, UConn, and Georgetown continue to prove they belong. And Syracuse continues to roll.

At this early stage, the league has already sorted itself out into 7 top-"half" teams worthy of tournament consideration (Syracuse, Marquette, Cincy, Georgetown, UConn and West Virginia, and possibly Seton Hall), and nine flawed bottom-"half" teams that probably aren’t and probably can’t get there (Pitt, USF, Lousville, Villanova, St. Johns, Rutgers, DePaul, Providence, and Notre Dame). At this point, I can't see an 8th deserving team.

I’m not looking at the mathematical possibilities—I’m looking at the realistic chances based on the old adage that a leopard doesn’t change its spots. With about 20 games under every team’s belt, we have a pretty good idea how good they are, not just by looking at the W/L record, but where those wins and losses came. Take a team like Louisville for example. If they can’t beat Notre Dame or Providence—and the only conference wins are against DePaul and St. Johns—you probably aren’t going to turn it around when you hit a stretch that includes UConn, Georgetown, Syracuse and Cincinnati.

There have been 28 matchups between a top- and bottom-group team. And the top group has won 24 of those of those games. Those 4 exceptions are Rutgers over UConn, USF and Villanova over SHU, and St. Johns over Cincy). Those are upsets—not a sign of hope for RU, SUF VU or SJU.

Take the case of a team like Villanova. They’re 2-5 in conference. They have an easier schedule coming up, with seven games against other bottom opponents (ND and PC at home, road games at Rutgers, Pitt, UL, USF and St. Johns). But I don't see that a team that lost to USF at home can go 7-0 against that schedule. They’re going to lose a few of those. And they still have to face MU, Cincy, GU and UConn as well.

South Florida has a good-looking 4-2 record, but most of those wins have come to other bottom half teams. They also all but disqualified themselves in non-conference play. Five non-conference losses, including Penn State (currently last in the Big 10), and Auburn (nearly last in the SEC) show that USF is not tournament worthy,

The biggest question mark in the conference remains Seton Hall. Their wins over UConn and WVU suggest they belong in the top. But their losses to USF and Villanova suggest they don’t. I’m putting them in the top because the UConn and WVU wins are (for now) more impressive than USF’s win over Seton Hall. And USF is already out based on their poor non-conference performance.

In basketball, past performance is an indication of future capability, but not a guarantee. It is still possible that team like Notre Dame or Rutgers transform themselves and start playing like a contender. That (as they say) why they play the games.

But don’t be surprised when bids come out if the Big East has just seven bids.

Top "Half"/Likely Tournament Worthy:

Syracuse: Undefeated. Interestingly, they have a 6-0 record against the bottom, and have just on game (MU) against the top.

WVU: Overall 4-2. 1-2 against the top half, 3-0 against the bottom half teams. Bottom half wins were over VU, and Rutgers twice. Plus they have a win vs. Cincy. Both losses were to top half teams (SHU, UConn).

Georgetown: Overall 4-1. 1-2 against the top half (Win over MU, losses to WVU & Cincy. 3-0 against the bottom half teams (DePaul, SJU, Providence).

Cincy: Overall 5-1. 2-0 against the top (Georgetown, UConn). 3-1 versus the bottom with wins over VU, Pitt, ND and a loss to SJU.

Marquette: Overall 4-2. 0-2 against the top (GU, SU), 4-0 against the bottom (VU, SJU, Pitt, U).:

SHU: Overall 4-3. 2-1 against the top (Wins over UConn, WVU, loss to Syracuse). 2-2 against the bottom (Beat DePaul, Providence, lost to USF, Villanova)

UConn: Overall 4-3. 1-2 against the top (Beat WVU, Lost to SHU, Cincy). 3-1 against the bottom (Wins over USF, St. Johns, ND, loss to Rutgers)

Bottom Half/Probably Not Tournament Worthy:

USF*: 4-2 overall. 1-1 against the top (win over SHU, loss to UConn). And 3-1 against the bottom (wins vs. RU, St. Johns and Villanova, loss to ND).

St. Johns*: 2-5 overall. 1-3 against the top (Win against Cincy, losses to MU, GU, UConn). 1-2 against the bottom (Win over PC, losses to USF, UL).

Rutgers*: Overall 3-3. 1-2 against the top (Win over UConn, 2 losses to WVU). 2-1 against the bottom (Wins vs. ND & Pitt, loss to USF).

Notre Dame*: Overall 3-3. 0-2 against the top (UC, UConn), 3-1 against the bottom (victory over Rutgers, losses to Pitt, UL, USF).

DePaul: Overall 1-5. 0-3 against the top (SU, SHU, GU); 1-2 against the bottom (win over Pitt, losses to VU, UL).

Villanova*: Overall 2-5. 1-4 against the top (Beat SHU, lost to MU, WVU, SU, Cincy). 1-1 against the bottom (Beat DePaul, Lost to USF).

Providence: Overall 1-5. 0-4 against the top (GU, SUx2, GU). 1-1 against the bottom (UL was the win, St. Johns was the loss)

Louisville: 2-4 overall. 0-2 against the top (MU, GU), and 2-2 against the bottom (Wins versus SJU, DePaul, losses to ND, PC).

Pitt: No wins – 0-6 overall. 0-3 against the top-half (Cincy, MU & SU), 0-3 versus the bottom-half (ND, DePaul, Rutgers).

*Team with five or more non-conference losses.

All-Star Weekend

2012-01-17T07:17:00.010-06:00

I just had my first all star experience this past weekend in Saitama, Japan for the BJ League. I also got to participate in the 3 point contest which was a lot of fun. Saitama Super Arena was packed with 14,000 people to watch the best players in the league perform. Saitama is just outside of Tokyo, which made it a perfect host to the festivities.

Some of the notable American players people in the U.S. may recognize are: Lynn Washington and Jeff Newton(Indiana alumni), John "Helicopter"Humphrey (AND1), Lance Allred (Weber St./Cleveland Cavs), Justin Burrell (St. John's), Ray Nixon (Wisconsin), and Kevin Palmer (Texas A&M). They also included several of the league's Japanese stars, which makes for a fun atmosphere for the fans.

Surprisingly, this was my first ever official 3 point contest since high school. They only invited two americans to participate, all the rest being japanese who are known for their spot shooting. I won the first round, and went head to head in the final against the only 6-time all-star in the leagues history in 5'4" Japanese phenom, Cohey Aoki. It came down to my last money ball that rimmed in and out, and I lost by one! It made for an exciting start to the weekend's events, and I definitely want to come back next year to avenge the loss.

John "Helicopter" Humphrey won the dunk contest, adding another title to what I'm sure is a long list of dunk titles. The game was an offensive affair, just like an NBA all-star game, the West outscoring the East as both teams scored in triple digits. The entire weekend was a lot of fun to get to know guys from other teams and represent our respective clubs. It's amazing to me how big the game of basketball is growing in the world today. I never would have thought the game was this big in Asia, but it is certainly one of the biggest rising sports all around the world. The event had a big-time atmosphere and I felt like I was back in the Bradley Center!

This game has taken me to so many places around the world, and this weekend's all-star events in Japan will be a memory I will never forget!

GO MARQUETTE!

Daniel Fitzgerald 08'

Defensive Table: MU 3rd best defense with Otule, 69th best in next eight games, and now 10th best in last four games

2012-01-17T02:05:00.004-06:00

I'm sure I've lost most of your interest by now, but I just had to go back and look at the game-by-game defensive performance to figure out when MU's defensive rating started to improve again. With Chris Otule MU gave up an average of 0.82 points per trip, which even after adjusting for some weak offenses gives them a defensive rating of 0.84 (the points per trip against an average offense). That means that Marquette's defense played as well as the:

- 3rd best defense in the country while Otule was playing,
- the 69th best defense in the country the first 8 games he was out (0.98 per trip, and even after adjusting for tough offenses faced, a 0.94 adjusted rating), and finally,
- the 10th best defense in the country the last 4 games (0.94, but adjusted to 0.87 due to offenses faced).

Four games doesn't a season make, but it appears it took MU a while to figure out the defensive adjustments they'd have to make with Otule no longer having their back, but four straight stellar performances on defense indicates they may have now solved it.

Opponent	Pts Allow	Possess	Raw Def	Adj for Opp
Mount St. Mary's	37	72	0.51	0.59
Norfolk St.	68	84	0.81	0.84
Winthrop	73	71	1.03	1.08
Mississippi	66	80	0.83	0.86
Norfolk St.	57	64	0.89	0.92
Jacksonville	56	68	0.82	0.86
Wisconsin	54	63	0.86	0.77
Ave. with Otule				0.84
Washington	77	72	1.07	0.99
Wisconsin Green Bay	61	77	0.79	0.84
Northern Colorado	72	74	0.97	0.93
Louisiana St.	67	65	1.03	1.03
Wisconsin Milwaukee	50	65	0.77	0.78
Vanderbilt	74	70	1.06	0.97
Villanova	77	73	1.05	0.97
Georgetown	73	66	1.11	0.98
1st 8 games w/o				0.94
Syracuse	73	74	0.99	0.83
St. John's	64	70	0.91	0.91
Pittsburgh	57	59	0.97	0.87
Louisville	63	72	0.88	0.85
Last 4 games				0.87

CORRECTION FROM POST BELOW: Tonight Pomeroy calculated Louisville with 72 trips, rather than the 74 I had last night, so I've made that correction.

Pomeroy now has MU as the 28th best offense and the 27th best defense in the country, making MU one of 11 teams in the Top 30 in both offense and defense along with; Syracuse (4 offense, 10 defense), Michigan State (7, 9), Kansas (8, 3), Kentucky (10,6), Baylor (11, 16), Ohio State (12, 1), UNC (2, 12), Wichita State (21, 17), Gtown (23, 15) and St. Louis (27, 20).

MU puts together top 5 DEFENSIVE effort, allowing only 63 points on 74 trips to beat Louisville

2012-01-16T19:45:00.002-06:00

I was bit stunned before writing the previous post to see that Marquette had actually played better defense than offense this year (by a hair) based on the ultimate measure - how many points per trip down the court do you allow? (see www.kenpom.com).

Well, the come from behind win against Louisville was even better defense, as MU allowed only 63 points on 74 trips down the court to - IRONICALLY - win by a reversal of the two numbers, 74-63. Only four defenses in the country are allowing fewer points per trip than the defensive performance MU allowed today:

Rnk	Defense	Pts/Trip
1	Ohio St	0.793
2	Wisconsin	0.813
3	Kansas	0.823
4	Flo State	0.848
5	MU (today only)	0.851

Admittedly Louisville is an average offense without injured Kyle Kuric, but the sharp-shooter is not dominant like he was last year, as he still only gets the ball about 15% of their possessions and has dropped from a Top 10 to barely a Top 200 offensive player.

When looking at how MU shut down the Cardinals offense, they once against used great pressure to end 23.4% of Louisville's trips in turnovers, but perhaps more impressively turned it over without fouling. Louisville's free throw rate of only 15.9% (only 10 free throw attempts vs. 63 field goal attempts) indicate an incredible job of stripping the ball and forcing other turnovers without fouling.

	Lville O	MU Def	Today
Efficiency	1.03	0.91	0.85
eFG%	48.2%	45.6%	46.8%
TO%	21.0%	25.0%	23.4%
OR%	36.2%	34.7%	34.3%
FTR	38.7%	33.5%	15.9%

Once again that effort was needed to stop Louisville's pretty strong offensive rebounding, which would have dominated except for Jae Crowder's 8 defensive rebounds. Along with Crowder's 6 steals and two treys, this keeps him on pace to easly become only the second player in the past decade to hit 160 defensive rebounds and 40 steals while hitting 40 treys in TWO seasons. (thanks for pointing this out College Hoops Journal.)

Carmelo Anthony would have done if for a second year if he hadn't gone NBA, but even if I include him that leaves Jae in pretty elite company of only three players to accomplish the feat assuming he grabs just 56 more defensive rebounds this year:

The Elite Three	Def. Reb	Steals	Treys
Carmelo Anthony 2003	248	55	56
Terrence Williams 2008	208	48	60
Terrence Williams 2009	266	86	68
Jae Crowder 2011	168	48	42
Jae Crowder 2012 (19 games)	104	42	36

In fact, Lazar Hayward is one of only 10 players to do it just once along with Kyle Singler, Mike Dunleavy Jr., Kevin Durant, Wes Johnson, Ryan Gomes, Maarty Leunen and Anthony, Williams and Crowder.

Crowder is also one of the top shot-blockers among all forwards, as Gorgui Dieng learned first hand when Crowder basically did a volleyball spike on his dunk attempt. But I believe the other exciting defensive development today was seeing Jamil Wilson step up defensively, because if he plays like that then MU really does have a potential dominant defensive line-up in Derrick Wilson, Vander Blue, Crowder, Wilson and a much improved DJO.

This line-up can suffocate many many opponents, with the only question being whether or not they can contain great offensive rebounding teams. But Louisville was a very good - though not great - offensive rebounding team, and today was reason for guarded optimism.

1st for Buzz – MU defense now ranked higher than offense, and team is playing well except against big offensive rebounders

2012-01-15T02:39:00.006-06:00

For the first time since Buzz Williams took over, Marquette’s defense is better than its offense. As of now MU has the 31st best offense in the country (1.112 points per trip) and the 28th best defense (0.906 points allowed per trip), and while this may not last, it’s never even been close under Buzz:

Year	Offensive Rank	Defensive Rank
Current	31st	28th
2011	22nd	61st
2010	22nd	57th
2009	9th	51st

For all the complaining about the aggressive style, MUs ability to be the 19th best team at turning opponent’s over (25.0% of opponents’ possessions end in a turnover), has offset the fact that MU is one of the worst defensive rebounding teams in the country (258th of 345 for allowing 34.7% offensive rebounding by opponents).

While every MU starter steals the ball at least 2% of opponents’ trips (Crowder 3.9%, GARDNER 3.2%, Blue 3.1%, Junior/D. Wilson 2.4%/2.6% and DJO 2.0%), once the opponents’ shot is up Crowder is the only strong rebounder –grabbing 19.6% of misses to rank among www.kenpom.com national leaders.

Davante has to be one of the only guys in the country who is more likely to grab a rebound when his team misses than when the opponent misses, and his game sealing rebound against Pitt made him the 15th best offensive rebounder in the country at 16.1% of all MU misses grabbed (to 15.6% of opponents’ misses).

This Achilles Heel showed itself again Saturday when Marquette barely beat a Pitt team that, while having a terrible year, is the best offensive rebounding team in the country.

Since Chris Otule was injured, GAME SCORES calculate that Marquette has played like a ranked team 6 times and like an unranked team 5 times. As this table shows, in almost every case the poor performances have been against great offensive rebounding teams and the good performances have been against poor offensive rebounding teams:

Poor Performances	Off Reb Rnk
Louisiana St.	39
Pittsburgh	1
Vanderbilt	160
Villanova	35
Washington	28
Good Performances	Off Reb Rnk
Georgetown	112
Northern Colorado	139
St. John's	105
Syracuse	13
Wisconsin Green Bay	150
Wisconsin Milwaukee	170

What does this mean for the rest of the season? While Pomeroy’s predicted scores have proven very accurate, it appears likely that MU will not do as well as predicted when up against a strong offensive rebounding team, and vice versa.

Therefore I have laid out the rest of the season with the score Pomeroy currently predicts, followed by the opponents’ rank on the offensive glass. Marquette really needs to go at least 5-2 in the next seven games including a road game against an excellent offensive rebounding team in Villanova, because the five games after that are all against very good offensive rebounding teams that could send MU into a tail spin late.

Opponents	Pomeroy	Off Reb%	Gut on game
Louisville	W, 73-65	59	Slight favorite
at Providence	W, 77-70	42	Slight favorite
South Florida	W, 70-58	99	Double digit favorite
at Villanova	W, 76-72	35	Toss-up
Seton Hall	W, 73-66	114	Solid favorite
at Notre Dame	W, 72-69	266	Solid favorite
at DePaul	W, 89-77	190	Solid favorite
Cincinnati	W, 73-65	43	Slight favorite
at Connecticut	L, 72-71	9	Big underdog
Rutgers	W, 76-63	14	Solid favorite
at West Virginia	L, 74-71	19	Big underdog
at Cincinnati	W, 70-69	43	Slight underdog
Georgetown	W, 70-67	112	Solid favorite

(So Louisville is the 59th best offensive rebounding team in the country, etc., down to Georgetown, who is only the 112th best offensive rebounding team in the country.)
This is not to say that every team can dominate MU on the offensive boards. In fact, the past couple of years MU has struggled to stop opponents’ offensive rebounds early in the season but then been right in the middle of the pack at defensive rebounding in conference play.

After Pitt grabbed 6 of their first 7 misses to start the game for an Offensive Rebounding percentage of 86%, MU adjusted and allowed them to get only 5 of their last 27 misses. However, it appears that when facing a strong offensive rebounding team, MU has to make adjustments to stop them at some level that hurt their overall performance.

Pomeroy correctly predicted our record preseason - and now has MU on pace for 2nd place

2012-01-14T06:16:00.002-06:00

Preseason Big East Player of the Year Ashton Gibbs leads Pitt into the Bradley Center at 1 p.m. CST as the Panthers seek an upset for their FIRST Big East win. Like Dwight Buycks last year, Gibbs has been forced to play out of position at point guard and the Panthers have the worst offense (93.2 points per 100 trips) and worst shooting percentages on both 2-pointers (42.3%) and 3-pointers (22.7%) of any team in Big East play so far.

Marquette is exactly on pace this year - having lost exactly as many games (4) as Pomeroy predicted in the preseaon prediction. A loss to Pitt would be a major blow, while a win could be the second in a 10-game stretch of being the favorites during which an 8-2 mark would keep MU on pace for 2nd place in the Big East.

Focusing on Pomeroy’s predicted conference finish gives by far the clearest picture of where all of the teams stand today. Marquette is 2-2 in conference play – big deal – we’ve played Georgetown and Syracuse to single digits on the road and if we keep playing like this we finish 12-6.

How accurate is Pomeroy? I saved his predictions before the season started, and pulled them back up tonight when a colleague said he really didn’t like the fact that Pomeroy uses a “cumulative” predictor. Here is what he published BEFORE the season started:

Pomeroy Preseason	Prediction
Mount St. Mary's	94%
Norfolk St.	96%
Winthrop	89%
Jacksonville	90%
Wisconsin	28%
Washington	55%
Wisconsin Green Bay	91%
Northern Colorado	93%
Louisiana St.	73%
Wisconsin Milwaukee	89%
Vanderbilt	54%
Villanova	67%
Georgetown	47%
Syracuse	21%
St. John's	85%
Total 11-4 (CORRECT)	1072%

Adding up the percentages gives the best prediction of what a team’s record will be, and in this case they added up to 10.7 wins and 4.3 losses – rounding to the actual record of 11-4 (prior to the season there was no prediction for the two unknown opponents in tournament play, so Marquette is 13-4 overall with those two games not on this list).

Conference predictions even more accurate now; USF win over Seton Hall big
Of course, predictions get even more accurate as more and more games are played, so it is much more important that Pomeroy predicts Marquette will be one of four teams to go 12-6 in conference play to finish in a 2nd place tie behind 16-2 Syracuse.

Cincinnati and Notre Dame are currently tied in 2nd in the conference at 3-1 apiece, but they are projected to finish 10-8 and 9-9 respectively, so we should be more worried about Seton Hall, Georgetown and West Virginia right now, who have much easier schedules and better results to date and are likely to be battling MU for a top spot.

If MU is upset no more than two times in the 10-game stretch that started with the win over St. John's, then MU could pass Cincinnati while the Bearcats are playing at UConn, West Virginia and Rutgers and at home against Syracuse after today’s much easier game against Villanova. Meanwhile Notre Dame gets UConn twice, Syracuse and road games at Seton Hall and Rutgers for their next five. If Cincy and Notre Dame win most of their five in that tough stretch then the prediction will adjust, but right now MU is in better position than either team.

The fact is that right now MU is on course to finish ahead of traditional powers UConn, Louisville and of course Pitt. Things can change, but this is the much better snapshot of the “standings” than just looking at current records:

Team	W	L	To stay on pace
Syracuse	16	2
Seton Hall	12	6	win at Nova Wed
Georgetown	12	6	5 wins in next 6
West Virginia	12	6	win 2 of 3 before Cuse
Marquette	12	6	7 wins in next 9
Cincinnati	10	8	after Nova, 1 of next 4
Connecticut	10	8	win 2 or 3 of 4 before at Gtown
Notre Dame	9	9	2 upsets in next 7 games
South Florida	8	10
Louisville	8	10
Rutgers	7	11
St. John's	6	12
Villanova	6	12
DePaul	5	13
Providence	5	13
Pittsburgh	5	13

So of the four evenly matched teams, the key will be to see if any can beat one of the other three on the road to shoot ahead. Marquette came the closest so far with the narrow loss at Georgetown, while the other two home teams dominated. Now Marquette needs to hold home court against Seton Hall and Georgetown, and try to steal a road upset at West Virginia.

The potential miniconference tie-breakerat Seton Hall 67, West Virginia 48
at Georgetown 73, Marquette 70
at West Virginia 74, Georgetown 62
PredictedJan. 31: at Marquette 73, Seton Hall 66
Feb 21: at Seton Hall 63, Georgetown 62
Feb. 24: at West Virginia 74, Marquette 71
March 3: at Marquette 70, Georgetown 67

Why is Pomeroy’s predictor so much more accurate than a game-by-game approach?
The idea of going by actual game-by-game predicted wins rather than cumulative percentages could be less accurate than flipping a coin to predict overall records.

Here is why. Let's say that a team has an pretty clear edge in it's next six games, a 2-to-1 chance of winning in each of those games. This is the same odds of rolling a 3, 4, 5 or 6 on a single die (a win) instead of rolling a 1 or 2 (a loss).

The suggestion that predictions should be the result of simply assuming wins for every team that is favored over the course of a season would indicated that the team should be predicted to go 6-0 over those games because they are clearly better than all 6 opponents.

There is only an 8% chance that a team goes 6-0 over those games, and a 92% chance that they play "below expectations" if that is the bar. While there is a 66% chance of winning the first game, there is only a 44% chance of winning the first two, a 29% of winning the first 3, etc.

So if someone bets such a team will go 6-0 against a guy who flips a coin and bets they will go 3-3, then the coin-flipper is more likely to prove the better predictor.

But Pomeroy's cumultive total is much more likely to be the most accurate than either going game-by-game or flipping a coin - correctly predicting that a team in this situation will have the greatest chance of going 4-2, though certainly there is also a good chance of going either 5-1 or 3-3 - just not 6-0.

The reason it is NOT immediately obvious that going with game-by-game is such a terrible system is that most teams have games they are favored in and games they are not in any stretch, so it just doesn't hit you that this is what is happening.

Also, I'd refer to my piece earlier in the week where I documented that every year Marquette - and every other team - play a game well below their ability once every six games and play a game well above their ability once every six games, and during the hypothetical 6-game stretch it is very likely they will play one terrible game, and it is very unlikely they will win that game, so game-by-game is terribly flawed and Pomeroy is exactly right.

It's only in cases like Murray State, where their last 11 games are all against teams that are ranked #200 or lower and they have between an 81% and 97% chance of winning, that a game-by-game approach has any chance of being more accurate than the cumulative prediction model Pomeroy uses. There the game-by-game prediction of a 28-0 record is not quite as likely as Pomeroy's prediction of a 27-1 mark, but there you have a fighting chance.

Stop setting unrealistic expectations! 7-2 in next 9 would be strong
This isn't just an academic exercise - this is where so many fans get unfairly down on the team. For example, if you look at Marquette's next 9 games you can say, "Marquette should win EACH of these games." True, we have the edge in all nine matchups. But many fans - and a game-by-game predictor model - misunderstand this to think it means that "Marquette should win these next nine straight to be 23-4."

No they shouldn't. It is VERY unlikely Marquette wins all 9, so at this point the expections are so detached from reality that if the team goes 7-2 during the stretch fans view it as a disappointing stretch because they were upset twice and didn't beat anyone they weren't supposed to beat. 9-0 becomes PAR in fans minds, and even if the team goes undefeated - like the early stretch the Three Amigos had to get to #8 one year, and people don't realize the accomplishment. in fact, MU should lose at least two of those games, and possibly three, and has only a 7% chance of winning all 9, so fans should be happy with 7 of 9 wins, very happy with 8, and unbelievably ecstatic if we win 9 more in a row. It should only be if the team goes 6-3 or worse that fans should be disappointed in the stretch.

So expect to have Marquette upset twice in the next 9 games – and only panic once we’ve been upset for a third time. A 7-2 keeps Marquette on pace for a potential 2nd place finish.

Gardner-ing Tips

2012-01-13T10:35:00.002-06:00

After Davante Gardner's dominant performance against St. John's, I began to wonder if it was an outlier, or the start of a very nice trend. Granted, his career highs in points and rebounds both came along with a career high in minutes, but it seemed to me like had THAT Davante shown up against LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse, Marquette might have a much better record.

One thing that stood out was St. John's lack of size and depth. That God's Gift Achiuwa is averaging 36.6 minutes per game in St. John's last 10 indicates they don't have any depth in the middle. I decided to analyze Gardner's numbers using Pomeroy's Effective Height ranking. Marquette has played 10 games against top-100 EFR teams and 6 games against sub-100 EFR teams First, the raw data:

	FGM	FGA	FTM	FTA	PTS	REB	AST	STL	TO	MIN
Top-100	35	61	23	30	93	53	7	17	16	211
Sub-100	22	35	24	31	68	41	3	2	4	121

Because of the disparate minutes Gardner played early on and recently, it only seemed fair to compare his numbers on a per-40 minutes basis rather than a per game basis. Here's a the per-40 breakdown:

	FGM	FGA	FG%	FTM	FTA	FT%	PP40	RP40	AP40	SP40	TP40
Top-100	6.6	11.6	57.3	4.4	5.7	76.7	17.6	10.0	1.3	3.2	3.0
Sub-100	7.3	11.6	62.9	7.9	10.2	77.4	22.5	13.6	0.7	0.7	1.3

Looking at this, the stat that jumped out was free throw attempts. Against bigger teams, Gardner is averaging 4.5 fewer FTAs per 40 minutes. His free throw percentage stays constant, so the attempts also explain much of why he averages more points against smaller teams. And while his field goal percentage and rebounds are down a bit, 57.3% and 10.0/40 are still great numbers. In everything else, he actually seems to perform a bit better overall against big opposition.

The 4 top-100 teams that interested me most were Ole Miss, LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse. Against Ole Miss, Gardner got to the line 9 times on 6 fouls in 40 minutes. Had he played 40 minutes, that projects out to 25.7 free throws in that one game alone. But against LSU, Georgetown, and Syracuse, the three games Marquette lost in which Gardner played enough minutes to have an impact, he shot only 6 free throws in 83 minutes, an average of just 2.9 FTA per 40 minutes. For Marquette to have success against the big, talented teams, they need to have Gardner getting to the line and putting the opposition in foul trouble.

Recently, Marquette radio announcer Steve "The Homer" True mentioned that Gardner's goal is to always get the "and one". Looking at these numbers, it's easy to see why -- when he is getting to the line, he makes Marquette a much better team. When he isn't, they are far more likely to struggle.

Marquette's next 3 games are all against sub-100 EHR teams, so it wouldn't be surprising to see Gardner continue to put up big numbers. But it will be important for him to be aggressive and draw contact after this stretch, because games against big teams like Villanova, Connecticut, West Virginia, Seton Hall, and Georgetown could be the ones that separate Marquette from being top-four or middle-of-the-pack in the Big East. If Gardner can get to the line early and often, Marquette stands a good chance of having success against the types of teams that usually give them trouble. But if he's unable to be effectively aggressive down low, it's possible this team will be carrying the Team Bubble Watch moniker once again come March.

While 1 in 6 games (Norf, LSU, Vandy) are a dud for most teams; Gardner & Mayo step up to remind us this may be a Top 10 team

2012-01-12T00:17:00.010-06:00

I’m not sure the next time you will see four players as dominant across the board as you saw last night when Davante Gardner, Todd Mayo, DJO and Jae Crowder outscored and outrebounded St. John’s by themselves despite playing just over half the minutes (106 of 200). With help from Junior Cadougan scoring on an early trey and drive to help set the stage for his seven assists, the four combined for an effective Field Goal percentage of 75%, the same percent they shot from the line.

STARTERS	MIN	FGM	FGA	3PM	3PA	FTM	FTA	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Davante Gardner, F	34	8	13	0	0	6	8	15	1	0	2	22
Darius Johnson-Odom, G	28	7	11	2	4	4	6	2	6	0	0	20
Jae Crowder, F	23	7	10	1	3	0	0	9	2	4	2	15
Todd Mayo, G	21	5	6	0	1	2	2	2	0	0	0	12
TOTALS	106	27	40	3	8	12	16	28	9	4	4	69

Perhaps most importantly with Chris Otule out, Gardner showed he could dominate for 34 minutes in the third straight game MU has played like a borderline Top 10 team. This may make the average fan ask how this can be the same team that didn’t look like they belonged in the Top 100 against Norfolk State, LSU or Vanderbilt.

You could have asked the same question about Dwyane Wade’s Final Four team that FIVE TIMES did not look like a Top 100 team based on GAME SCORES of 75 or lower (edged #284 Texas San Antonio 80-68 at home, lost to #32 Notre Dame 71-92, lost to #151 East Carolina 70-73, lost to #69 UAB on neutral court 76-83, lost to Kansas 61-94).

The fact is that on average teams play a terrible game about once every six games, and Marquette has been very close to that ratio every one of the last 10 years – except for when they were much worse in 2004 and 2005. Here is a breakdown of how many times Marquette played like a Top 10 team (Game Score of 90 or higher) and like a non-Top 100 team (75 or lower) in each of the past 10 seasons:

Year	Top 10	%	>Top100	%	Games
2003	17	52%	5	15%	33
2004	5	17%	10	33%	30
2005	5	17%	12	40%	30
2006	7	23%	5	17%	30
2007	10	30%	5	15%	33
2008	16	47%	6	18%	34
2009	11	31%	5	14%	35
2010	11	32%	4	12%	34
2011	13	35%	6	16%	37
2012	7	41%	3	18%	17
Decade	75	32%	61	19%	314

This is why taking the national title is so difficult for any team – you need six wins in a row to take the title, meaning on average you are going to have to win once when you play a terrible game.

The fact is that if Marquette had scored just 2 more points against both Syracuse and St. John’s the last two games, it would have made three straight games in which Marquette played like a Top 10 team, and 9 of 17 for the year, putting them on par with the 2003 team that played like a Top 10 team 17 of 33 outings.

Granted, MU is still not playing at the level they did when they played like the national champion three of their first seven games this year (Mt. St. Mary’s, Mississippi and Wisconsin). That was the best stretch Marquette has had since they played near the level of a national champion all but the middle game of a five-game stretch in late February 2008. (beat Seton Hall 89-64, Pitt 72-54, St. John’s 73-64, Rutgers 78-48 and Villanova 85-75)

However, if Marquette played near the same level of the last three games for the next six, then they would travel to South Bend with a record of 19-4. Even assuming one of the next six is a dud, MU would very likely be 18-5.

The fact is that while Chris Otule’s defense cannot be replaced, Davante Gardner showed tonight that the offense can make up for it. It may have been good that Jae Crowder and DJO were on the bench in foul trouble so early, because it made both Gardner and Mayo step up and show once again they can take charge on offense, and once DJO and Crowder came back you had one of the truly great combined performances you will ever see by four players on the same night.

The ceiling for this team remains very, very high, so we shouldn’t give up as long as the bad performances continue to happen once every six games, any more than we should see a national championship if the team looks unbeatable once every six games.

Brad Stevens summed up this typical cycle a couple of years ago when he told his players, “Over 30 games, 5 times you will play terribly, 5 times you will be unbeatable. You aren’t that good or that bad. It’s how you play the other 20 games that determine your season.”

Last year Butler kept the ratio, losing six games to teams outside the Top 100 (#166 Evanston, #140 UWM twice, #112 Wright St, #107 Valparaiso and #247 Youngstown State), before winning 14 straight to make their second straight national title game. Marquette is probably due to have two or three more bad performances before the NCAA tournament, but unless it happens more often than that, let’s not give up on this potentially being a very special year.

Five Questions with Rumble in the Garden

2012-01-10T16:38:00.003-06:00

Blogger friend Pico from Rumble In the Garden sat down with Cracked Sidewalks to answer some questions about the Johnnies. His information is insightful and interesting, and will help you better understand tonight's opponent. Both Anonymous Eagle and Cracked Sidewalks provided provided responses to his questions, so go and check those out too.

1. Can you catch the non-fanatic up to speed on what’s going on with Lavin and in-game coaching?

Currently, Steve Lavin continues to recover from his prostate cancer surgery. But he is traveling, doing recruiting and some media appearances. It sounds strange to some fans - and even to me, at times - but it makes sense when you think of Lavin's persona and the rigors of coaching that have driven some to burnout.
Lavin is an energetic fellow, on and off the court, known to fire off calls and texts to media members and players at crazy hours. If he only has a portion of his energy, he could use it on the court; but Mike Dunlap is an excellent coach, and already was very involved in the game coaching decisions. Additionally, this year is much more about on-court and in-game lessons, and Dunlap and Rico Hines are the members of the staff who are stronger on the development side. Lavin's not bad at coaching; but his great ability is his charisma, which is better used at replenishing the program's roster.

Lavin told the LA Times that there's a chance he won't return this season, which is a blow to the players, and to recruiting. But he is expected to return next year fully invigorated and healthy. It's not an ideal situation, but I have no reason to think he's not coming back (and I tend pessimistic).

2. Why have the Johnnies struggled to shoot efficiently, and how confident are you in their ability to shoot well against MU’s poor defensive eFG%?

The Johnnies are young, and that's a lot of it. A number of guys have struggled to convert shots at the rim, most of the team can't shoot well from outside the arc, and a few don't convert well through contact - a little more time in the weight room, a little more time shoring up their mechanics, and there will be some solid scorers on the roster. Right now, the team is best at scoring in transition. In the open court, they are faster and quicker than many if not most teams. Of course, high level basketball is hardly ever played like a wind sprint.

Marquette could come out looking defensively stout against St. John's, who struggled at times with Cincinnati's handsy pressure - Marquette does a bit of the same high-energy flailing arm defense.

BUT.

St. John's loves to run, and Marquette doesn't seem to bother anyone's assist rate... and Marquette's lack of height may make them look a little more like Providence to the Johnnies' eyes. If Marquette turns the ball over, or gives Moe Harkless and Sir'Dominic Pointer a lane in which to drive, things could get very interesting.

3. The wheels appeared to come off for St Johns early this season, has Lavin righted the ship?

To me, the wheels never came off. There are the struggles of trying to enlist a full team in one offseason - for most coaches, that's a task that just can't be done. There was one returnee - Malik Stith - and he's no impact player in the Big East. He's kind of like DePaul's Mike Bizoukas - heady player, tough and game, but...

I expected losses. I'll be happy if they can get to a .500 record. I expected a transfer (though Lindsey's transfer doesn't really make sense for him). And not having two recruits is bad, but one was already my pick to transfer out; the other's a loss.

The ship's not much more right than it was a month ago. The young players are getting time, they're learning, and this team is trying to take the wins they can grab and developing for next year.

The one place where the ship needs some righting is in recruiting. The team needs players, and to have no one (except for an impact transfer, thanks Jamal Branch, for not joining Team Jamal/ Team Texas at Marquette!) coming is a little worrisome. But I bet they'll get players; and with 4 top-100 talents, the team doesn't necessarily need high-level guys to be competitive.

4. Mo Harkless has emerged as a beast on the blocks and former MU target DeAngelo Harrison is pouring in the points? Are they the leaders of this team?

Yes.

D`Angelo powers the team, and I've thought since December that he has a strong chance to win rookie of the year, for his combination of high usage, the ability to get hot from outside (people are attracted by streak shooters, it seems), and an ability to make/ help out on plays all over the court.

Harkless gets his points more quietly, turns the ball over more, and struggles with his jumper. But he's pretty good near the basket and has done an incredible job rebounding for a guy his slim size.

5. What have been the greatest signs of improvement (or not) for the Johnnies during this transition year?

The Johnnies execute their game plans solidly - they don't foul much, they've been okay at not turning the ball over, and none of the big men have been in much foul trouble, which is incredible, because they're not very big. That's the mark of a team that listens and absorbs solidly. There's speed and ability when they're in transition.

By player, there are lots of signs. Harkless can compete on the glass. Sometimes, he uncorks a move that's straight up "next level" - like a shot fake from the free throw line and a dribble later, he's at the rim. He has an array of shots that aren't falling yet, but look pretty good.

Meanwhile, Harrison can play either guard spot. And while he needs a little more consistency, he can get hot in transition off the dribble, draw fouls, catch-and-shoot from the outside, and he works hard for his shots.

God'sGift Achiuwa has some nice moments in the paint and good quickness; he doesn't leap high enough to be a beast inside, his timing's not excellent, and his handle is loose when he tries to play outside-in, but he holds his own.

Dom Pointer is offensively reluctant, but can attack the rim and has a jumper (developing). His defense is bothersome at all five positions. Amir Garrett is long and is getting used to D1 play after being ineligible until December, but he will take on ballhandlers at the top of the zone. Those guys don't give up.

Phil Greene has some quickness, though he's a little exposed right now as the point guard; I can see him becoming better/ more competent.

Despite losses, 2 best performances since Otule injury a great sign

2012-01-07T20:17:00.007-06:00

While the two losses this week will almost certainly drop Marquette out of the Top 25, the two strong performances broke a miserable 7-game stretch since Chris Otule was injured. As the graph of Game Scores (Margin of victory/defeat + Opponent + or - for home or away), Marquette played like a Top 10 team (90 or higher) six of seven games with Otule, including playing like a national champion (100 or higher) in three of those games.

In the first seven games without Otule, Marquette played like a team that did not belong in the top 100 twice (LSU and Vandy) and barely played like a Top 25 team at all during any of the games. That changed this week when Marquette played like a Top 10 team (90 or higher) at Georgetown, and like a solid Top 25 team at Syracuse. The two games also offer hope because these were by far the toughest two games of the season, AND they were against two of the tallent five teams in the country.

While not returning to early season form, it appeared MU was starting to figure out how to win games without the 6-foot-11 shotblocker who, despite his excellent defense, should not account for the team being 10 to 20 points worse in the first 7 games without him.

The encouraging signs this week include:

Vander Blue showing no fear with a desperately needed 3-pointer in a day that included 9 points, 7 rebounds and 5 assists against the No. 1 team in the country.

Crowder and Gardner scoring 24 points while taking just 16 shots against the Syracuse trees.

Junior and DJO both going to the hoop fearlessly for 10 and 19.

On the downsiide, MU could have beaten a #1 team for the second time in history with any kind of 3-point shooting (their season average on 26 shots would have won), or bench scoring (Jamil wilson and Todd Mayo both had 4 rebounds, but the bench had 4 points in 45 minutes).

I have been made fun of in the past for complementing the team for keeping it within single digits against great teams, but these performances were much more impressive than the very weak performances against Villanova and Washington. If MU plays like this week the rest of the Big East season, they could quickly be back on track for 10 or 12 Big East wins again and a solid seed.

The Season So Far In One Picture

2012-01-06T11:56:00.000-06:00

A few years ago I did a similar "DOOMED!!!!" post and then the season promptly turned itself around. I really hope to be just as wrong with this one.

The four columns in the picture below are the difference between how well Marquette was predicted to do and how well they actually did in the every game so far. There's a column for Efficiency, Defensive Efficiency, eFG%, and def eFG%. To understand better, against Winthrop we were predicted to have an efficiency of 110.7 but actually got 133.2 for a positive delta of 22.5.

Each column has been color coded to reflect doing better or worse than expected. In that situation, Winthrop was 22.5 better than expected offensively, but 17.8 worse than expected defensively.

There’s not a lot of green or even upward arrows lately.

How much of this decline can be chalked up to the absence of Otule? Unfortunately, I still don't believe there is a statistically significant relationship between Otule's absence and any of the four columns listed above. Feel free to go here for the additional details. However, the average Pomeroy ranking of opponents was 185 when Otule was on the court, and it is 90 while he's been gone. It's much more likely that MU has stumbled because our competition is getting better.

In fact, even if you look back at even our wins against “so called good teams” or our losses against “good teams”, many are not showing up that way. Somehow, the unbeatable Kohl Center has three home losses for Wisconsin already this year. Washington lost last night to Colorado by 20 points. Norfolk State has some absolute whopper losses to nobody. LSU lost to Coastal Carolina…Vandy has some bad losses. Right now, Marquette probably just isn't that good.

Finally, in case anyone was wondering, there are the predictions for this weekend.

MU Efficiency - 94.9
Syracuse Efficiency - 105.6
MU eFG% - 44.9
MU def eFG% - 49.9

Anyone want to take the under on the defensive eFG%? Yeah, me either.

Improved Guard Play Will Be Key To Reversing Trends

2012-01-04T09:02:00.002-06:00

Tonight, Marquette begins a difficult two-game stretch of road games. Unfortunately, despite the recent conference opening win over Villanova, the Warriors have been slumping. This chart shows the cumulative total of how many points Marquette has been winning (or losing) by since the second Norfolk State game.

However, that chart just shows Marquette plateauing, mostly due to two rough losses. There is a definite slump on the current efficiency trends. Below is a five-game moving average of Marquette's efficiency (offensive and defensive) since the NFSU #2.

Both our offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency are getting worse as the season goes along. Part of this can be chalked up to poor recent outings. However, consider that Marquette hasn't been strong offensively almost the entire month of December (Northern Colorado is the exception). That the defensive efficiency is getting worse is not really a surprise (unfortunately), but the offensive trend is a real concern. After all, offense has never been an issue under Buzz.

When we look at the same trends of the top three players on Marquette (Jae, DJO, and Gardner), their net contributions are still continuing to trend mostly upwards. DJO has also had a stretch of slumping/plateauing. However, it is the play of the remaining guards that tells a different story.

Junior's contributions float along sideways and are fairly varied. Lately, his net contributions have been either really good or really bad on the court. It is the current trends of Vander Blue and Todd Mayo that are concerning. After a very strong start to the season for both players, their net contributions on the court are both trending negative, somewhat in mirror to the overall team trends.

After the year that Vander had last year, this is especially reason to worry. He likewise started the year strong and struggled mightily at the end. Mayo was sensational to open the season, but he remains a freshman. It would be the exception for Todd to not have struggles this year. Regardless of what happens, we will almost certainly need their overall contributions to improve for Marquette to get better. Improved guard play tonight and this weekend appears to be the key.

An early look at NCAA possibilities.

2012-01-02T21:05:00.004-06:00

As the message boards are starting to buzz with talk about how many bids the Big East teams may receive, it is interesting to note this observation:
Since expansion in 2006, there have been zero Big East teams with more than four non-conference losses that were subsequently invited to the NCAA tournament.
Bad news for the league is that we have five conference teams that have already tallied five non-con losses: Notre Dame, Villanova, Rutgers, South Florida and St. Johns. If history is any indication, these teams are likely out of the race for an NCAA bid. And with the possible exception of Rutgers' win over Florida--there isn't much evidence to date that one can use to mount a counter-argument.

Strip away the reputation of Villanova and Notre Dame based on prior Big East success and you find that there are only 3 wins over current RPI* top 100 teams: the aforementioned Rutgers upset of Florida, USF's win over #65 Cleveland State and St. Johns win over #99 Lehigh. VU and ND have a combined zero non-conference victories over a current top 100 RPI opponent.

In the past, the league separated itself into a handful of elite teams, and handful of laggards, and bunch of teams in the middle fighting for fan NCAA bid. It appears the same is happening this year as well.

In: UConn, Georgetown, Louisville, Marquette, Syracuse

Some have questioned whether UL belongs up here, but they have more top 50 RPI wins than anyone in the league. UConn has not been truly tested yet (and even suffered an upset at the hand of UCF). Some might question MU given the losses to Vanderbilt and LSU. Nonetheless, there seems to be consensus based on non-conference play that these are the top five teams in the conference, and Syracuse stands alone as the team to beat.

This is not to say that these teams can't play their way out of the tournament. However, each of them have the talent and have demonstrated a level of play which separates them from the rest of the league.

Bubble: Pitt, Cincinnati, Seton Hall, West Virginia

Not all four of these teams will make the tournament. Most likely, two of them, perhaps with a greater chance of three making it (8 total bids) than one (6 total bids). But each of them still has some work to do.

Pittsburgh: Ordinarily, one would be writing off the tournament possibilities for a team with the body of work that Pitt has put forth to date. However, as long as Tray Woodall has a chance to return, the Panthers remain alive if they put together some strong wins once he returns.
Cincinnati: The Bearcats haven't distinguished themselves in non-conference play (leading to imponderables like: which is uglier--the brawl against Xavier or the loss to Presbyterian?). UC has a chance to separate themselves from the bottom over the next two weeks. 3 of their next four games are at home against ND, Villanova and St. Johns.
Seton Hall is the 2012 version of 2011 Cincinnati. Nice non-conference record, but they will remain suspect until they beat someone of note. The blowout loss to Syracuse doesn't do it, but the blowout win over WVU might be an indication that SHU is at the head of the middle of the pack. However, questions of legitimacy will dog the Pirates unless they pull an upset over Syracuse, Marquette, Louisville, UConn or Georgetown.
West Virginia gives you just enough good (wins over K-State, Missouri State and Miami) to think they're bordering on the upper-division. But they lost their two best chances for a quality non-con win losing to Mississippi State and Baylor, and the loss to Seton Hall puts them at an early disadvantage in the middle.

Out: Notre Dame, Villanova, Rutgers, USF, St. Johns, Providence, DePaul

Some will argue that ND or Villanova still have a chance to make the tournament despite 5 non-conference losses. However, history suggests that if a team hasn't won in non-conference play, its a pretty good indication that they won't be able to win in Big East play either. If a team can't beat teams like Georgia, Maryland, St. Louis or St. Joseph's, they're going to have a hard time against WVU or Cincinnati (not to mention Marquette, Syracuse, UConn, Georgetown or Louisville).

More importantly, aside from Rutgers, none of these teams have compelling non-conference victories that would cause the committee to fight for them come Selection Sunday. Absent multiple upsets of the top teams in the league, one simply can't make the case for ND, VIllanova, and to a lesser extent PC, DePaul, St. Johns, Rutgers or USF).

*RPI source: Statsheet.com

Closing Time

2012-01-02T16:14:00.005-06:00

Welcome back, Dr. Blackheart. Following the Warriors' victory over the Villanova Wildcats to start the Big East season, the Good Doctor hit the keyboard to share his thoughts on the conference opener -- specifically the excruciating close.

****************************************

At the of last season, I did a guest piece on late game free throw shooting, where it was pointed out that MU shot 56% in the last four minutes of BE play at the free throw line, despite shooting 73% for the other ninety percent of the game. MU Big East opponents shot nearly 80% at crunch time, in comparison.

While I loved MU's play at home against Villanova up till the final 4:00 mark where MU led comfortably 72-61, and with MU in the double bonus at the line, I did not (nor did any fan) like the ensuing action. (I apologize for the negative fan rant upfront, but this same story is a tough rerun to watch). Let's recap the final four minutes:

MU shot 9-16 on free throws, or a very familiar 56%.
MU committed three turnovers, leading (luckily for MU) to two Nova points (this could have been up to eight points).
Although not technically a turnover, MU attempted a trey with 24 seconds left on the shot clock that was directly turned around--eight seconds later--into a made three point shot on the other end. If MU just holds the ball and lets the shot clock expire before Nova scores, that is 32 seconds burnt. More likely, Nova fouls and MU gets the chance at points and further erodes Nova.
MU stopped the clock for Nova with four fouls on their own, where Nova shot 7 for 8 at the charity stripe, or 87.5%. Again, this opponent FT% sounds very familiar to last season.
So, MU gave Nova back eight possessions on turnovers, fouls and an ill-advised shot (not even counting the missed MU free throws). Nova was able to score 12 points off these. Two key MU rebounders also fouled out during this time.
Further, between the missed Mayo three that was turned around and the Nova made free throws, Nova was able to score 10 points in a total of 8 seconds.
MU's full court, all-out pressure defense did cause five Nova turnovers. However, MU did not stop any of the four Nova possessions where they attempted field goals (made first shot or put backs on offensive rebounds--as our rebounders had fouled out), and MU stopped the clock with four fouls of their own as they scrambled. (Note: Jay Wright only had two timeouts to use in the final 4:00).
While the pressure mistakes by underclassmen are very understandable, our senior leaders committed three fouls, had two turnovers and went 1-2 on free throws. Who is this year's JFB? Is it Jae Crowder like against Washington? Is it Todd Mayo?
From the 4:00 minute mark to 1:37, MU scored one point. Buzz used a 30 second time out at 1:37 to settle the troops, finally. After that point, Nova outscored MU only 9-8, with that last second meaningless tip-in giving Nova the advantage. Still, MU was 8-12 on FT's and had two fouls after that time out, but no had turnovers.

Great win. Great game preparation and strategy. Great bounce back. A Big East win is always prized and should always be cherished. However, this end of game approach continues to need focus. The opponent here is the time clock, whether playing the talent level of a Norfolk State or a Big East talent of Villanova. Frankly, this is a "coachable moment" that should be practiced time and again.

December Non-Conference Report

2012-01-01T17:03:00.002-06:00

Time to take another look at our non-conference opponents, this time for the month of December. A couple teams took big jumps in their projections, with Norfolk State now projecting as a top-100 RPI team and LSU getting close to cracking the top-50, largely at Marquette's expense. Unfortunately, poor months for Mount St. Mary's, Winthrop, and Jacksonville have all three now projecting as sub-280 teams.

Mount St. Mary's: The Mountaineers broke a 9-game losing streak with a win over American, and almost made it two in a row before falling 65-64 to Albany. Currently Marquette's biggest RPI drag, MSM will have chances to right the ship in January as they play 5 sub-200 kenpom opponents.

Norfolk State: Two wins over the Spartans are starting to look like a blessing. They don't have a bad loss and are favored to win 7 of 9 in January. Right now they look like a solid bet to win the MEAC.

Winthrop: The Eagles could have had a banner month, but they lost four games in which they were outscored by a total of 7 points in regulation. Conference play should be a blessing -- they are favored to win 6 of 9 games they play in January.

Mississippi: The Rebs started December well, tallying wins at high-majors DePaul and Penn State. Unfortunately, they slumped to 3 straight defeats away from home against top-100 kenpom opponents to close the year. They have one last tune-up against SMU before conference play starts.

Jacksonville: The Dolphins had a month to forget, losing all 6 (5 on the road). Their projected RPI is dipping dangerously close to 300. Hopefully January starts off better -- they play 4 of 6 at home before a four-game road-trip to close the month.

Wisconsin: The Badgers cruised to a 6-0 start before losing at home to Iowa, a game that Pomeroy gave them a 96.4% chance of winning. They are still kenpom's top team, but if they're struggling with the Hawkeyes, this win might lose some of its luster by Selection Sunday.

Washington: The Huskies sputtered through December, losing 4 of 5 to start the month. They seem to have righted the ship, and started 2-0 in Pac-12 play. They play 4 games at home in January, and are favored in 3 of 4 they play on the road. If they play to their potential, Washington could still be a very good win.

Green Bay: Brian Wardle's club has had its ups and downs, but while late-year losses to Butler and Valpo are discouraging, a combined margin of 7 points on the road indicates good things going forward. January will be very telling as they get into the meat of the Horizon schedule.

Northern Colorado: The Bears played a tough schedule, but managed to get a win over Northern Arizona in their conference opener. They are favored in 7 of 8 games in January, so there's still time for this team to turn it around and possibly challenge for an automatic bid to the NCAAs come March.

LSU: The Tigers had a great month...for Marquette fans, TOO great of a month, since their biggest win was over the Warriors. They have one last non-con tuneup at home against Virginia to prove that the win over MU wasn't a fluke. They'll be underdogs in 6 of 8 games in January, so now is the time for LSU to prove whether or not they are for real.

Milwaukee: With under 2 minutes to play at the Hinkle Fieldhouse, UW-M seemed to be on their way to a 4-0 Horizon start. Instead, Butler came back and the Panthers dropped their first conference game. It was an up and down month for the Panthers, but now that conference play has started they can prove they are a legitimate conference contender. UW-M will be favorites in 8 of 9 games in January and are projecting as a top-100 RPI team again.

Vanderbilt: Vandy got their signature win on the road at Marquette, and now will be favored in 8 of 9 games in January. Their early-season slump seems to be forgotten, and Vandy certainly has the talent to still contend in the SEC, if they truly have their act together.

	December W-L	Overall Record	Current RPI	Projected RPI	kenpom Rating	Best Win	Worst Loss
Mt St Mary's	1-7	2-11	307	316	305	237 American	252 Sav St
Norfolk St	5-2	8-4	37	74	195	186 Long Island	81 Illinois St
Winthrop	2-5	2-10	266	284	236	220 Presbyterian	242 Gardner Webb
Mississippi	4-3	9-4	42	23	105	150 Penn St	71 Dayton
Norfolk St	5-2	8-4	37	74	195	186 Long Island	81 Illinois St
Jacksonville	0-6	2-10	310	298	240	(None)	236 Winthrop
Wisconsin	6-2	12-3	50	19	1	21 UNLV	96 Iowa
Washington	4-4	8-5	85	89	56	67 Oregon St	108 Nevada
Green Bay	3-4	4-8	127	176	169	121 Idaho	159 Valpo
N Colorado	1-3	3-7	160	170	176	300 N Arizona	101 Colorado St
LSU	6-0	10-3	69	53	88	18 Marquette	(None)
Milwaukee	5-4	9-5	82	99	86	152 DePaul	118 Butler
Vanderbilt	4-2	9-4	30	36	40	18 Marquette	110 Indiana St
Marquette	5-2	11-2	20	7	18	1 Wisconsin	88 LSU

Big East kickoff at Noon - top 20 Big East players and MU picked to finish top 4 with conference slumping

2012-01-01T10:27:00.004-06:00

Team	Proj W	Proj L	Trend in Pomeroy	Top 20 BE players
Syracuse	15	3	#4 steady all year	5, Kris Joseph 6-f-7; 7, James Southerland 6-f-8; 8, Dion Waiters 6-f-4; 12, Scoop Jardine 6-f-2; 18, Brandon Triche 6-f-4
Georgetown	14	4	rose from #50 preseason to #13	10, Henry Sims 6-f-10; 13, Otto Porter 6-f-8; 14, Jason Clark 6-f-2
Marquette	12	6	slid from #6 to #18 since Dec. 4	2, Jae Crowder 6-f-6; 20, Darius Johnson-Odom
Connecticut	11	7	slid from #6 preseason to #28	4, Shabazz Napier 6-f-0; 6, Jeremy Lamb 6-f-5
Louisville	11	7	slid from #6 Dec. 3 to #17	9, Gorgui Dieng 6-f-10; 15, Kyle Kuric 6-f-4; 16, Chris Smith 6-f-2
Seton Hall	10	8	rose from #77 preseason to #42	3, Herb Pope 6-f-8; 11, Fuquan Edwin 6-f-6
West Virginia	10	8	#37 steady all year	1, Kevin Jones 6-f-8
Cincinnati	9	9	slid from #26 Nov. 16 to #52	17, Sean Kilpatrick 6-f-4
Notre Dame	9	9	steady #65 since Abromaitis inj.	None (Abromaitis out for year)
Pittsburgh	9	9	slid from #7 preseason to #50	None (Ashton Gibbs can't play PG)
Villanova	8	10	slid from #33 Nov. 16 to #64	None
Rutgers	6	12	steady #124, just upset #11 Flor.	None
South Florida	5	13	dropped from #86 preseason to #137	None
St. John's	5	13	dropped from #94 Nov. 10 to #144	None
DePaul	4	14	steady #152	19, Brandon Young 6-f-3
Providence	4	14	dropped #111 preseason to #139	None

As strange as it sounds after getting blown out by Vanderbilt at home and not playing like a Top 25 team since Chris Otule was hurt, Marquette enters Big East play with their best chance ever at a Top Four finish in the Big East and the resultant double bye in the tournament.

While Marquette has struggled, the Big East has been in free fall. While the good news is that means that MU could finish very high in the conference, the bad news is an 11th place finish this year would result in a trip to the NIT.

Today’s Noon opponent, Villanova, has fallen from #33 early in the season to #64 in Pomeroy, while Marquette is one of three Big East teams (UConn and Louisville) to peak at #6 at one point this season before dropping more than 10 spots, as you can see from the title.

Villanova does have two of the Top 35 players in Maalik Waynes (6-foot-2) and Mouphtaou (6-foot-10), but for perspective so are Vander Blue and Davante Gardner, and Todd Mayo would be with a few more minutes played.

The teams projected to finish in the Top 5 spots this year with 11 or more Big East wins all have at least two of the Top 20 players in the conference.

Jae Crowder has been the 2nd best player in the conference, behind only West Virginia’s Kevin Jones, and DJO has been the 20th best Big East player so far. While that may not sound that great, remember that DJO was barely one of the 50 best players in non-conference play last year before dominating Big East opponents all year. In the best case, DJO explodes again in conference play, and Crowder stays steady this year.

Even when Jae Crowder has a terrible night like in his 0 for 7 shooting start against Vandy, by the end of the game he has drawn a half dozen fouls including charges on big men, leads the team with 4 assists, grabs 7 offensive rebounds going up against two 6-foot-11 players with no help from a center. When that is one of your terrible games, you can see why he is among the nation’s best few players.
The win today is crucial though, because Marquette next plays the only two conference games that look almost unwinnable.

Syracuse has five of the best 18 players in the conference, and Georgetown has three of the top 14 players and a ton of height – which has proven a problem for Marquette. With both those games being on the road, a loss today would almost guaranty an 0-3 start. However, even though a win today will probably just leave Marquette 1-2 in a week, that could be enough to have a very good chance about a Top 4 finish.

While Pomeroy picks MU to finish 12-6 behind only Syracuse and Georgetown, UConn seems to be doing just enough to win, so we assume they can turn it on. Certainly other teams could beat MU, but Louisville is also sliding, and Jones is having to do it all for West Virginia.

Seton Hall is the only team besides Georgetown that is improving, and Cincinnati certainly could rebound with all of their players suspended from the Xavier fight back soon.

However, Ashton Gibbs is having a lot of trouble playing point guard, and the rest of the Big East is really struggling even if MU doesn’t get back to early season form.

Blogger says Vandy with Ezeli his top pick to stay within single digits or win; MU must leverage defensive and bench superiority

2011-12-28T22:45:00.007-06:00

A look at the match-ups tonight shows that with the return of 6-foot-11 Festus Ezeli against Marquette, the starting squads are virtually even offensively and Vanderbilt is either 2- or 3-inches taller at every position. That combination has one blogger saying his surest college hoops pick is Vanderbilt staying within single digits or winning.

Here is a match-up player-by-player of the Value Add (% of points added to offense), Defensive Subtract (% of opponent points stopped) and the player’s total value as a combination of these two. I go through the starters first, from tallest to smallest, then the reserves in the same order.

No.	Name	Ht.	Off	Def	Tot	Name	Ht.	Off	Def	Tot
3	Festus Ezeli ***	6-f-11	3.6	0.2	3.8	Davante Gardner	6-f-8	3.5	1.2	4.7
5	Lance Goulbourne	6-f-8	1.0	1.9	2.9	Jae Crowder	6-f-6	6.2	3.2	9.4
44	Jeffery Taylor	6-f-7	4.0	1.0	5.0	Vander Blue	6-f-4	1.9	2.1	3.9
23	John Jenkins	6-f-4	5.2	0.0	5.2	Darius J-O	6-f-2	4.2	1.0	5.1
1	Brad Tinsley	6-f-3	2.3	0.0	2.3	Junior Cadougan	6-f-1	1.3	0.4	1.7
	Starters Total		16.1	3.2	19.2	MU total		17.0	7.8	24.9
33	Steve Tchiengang	6-f-9	0.4	0.3	0.7	Chris Otule **	6-f-11	0.0	2.3	2.3
34	Shelby Moates	6-f-8	0.0	0.0	0.0	Jamil Wilson	6-f-7	1.2	0.6	1.8
45	Rod Odom	6-f-9	0.0	0.0	0.0	Jamail Jones	6-f-6	0.0	0.6	0.6
2	Kedren Johnson	6-f-4	0.0	0.0	0.0	Juan Anderson	6-f-6	0.0	0.0	0.0
24	Dai-Jon Parker	6-f-3	0.0	0.0	0.0	Todd Mayo	6-f-3	1.9	0.4	2.3
11	Kyle Fuller	6-f-1	0.0	0.1	0.1	Derrick Wilson	6-f-0	0.0	0.3	0.3
	Reserves Total		0.4	0.4	0.8	MU total		3.1	4.1	7.2

*** Last year’s figures for Ezeli and projected totals for Otule over 12 games; some numbers appear 0.1 off due to rounding

In the preseason projections, Vanderbilt actually had the highest rated offense in the country with five returning starters from the 13th best offense in the country last year (116.5 points per 100 trips). Even though they haven’t quite lived up to expectations, if you add the 3.6% Ezeli was adding from last year, then the starting five are adding 16.1% this year (a 116.1 per 100 trips). Combined with the height advantage, the team’s excellent shooting (particularly on two-point shots), and the fact that this team took Xavier (before the meltdown) and Louisville (on the road) into overtime WITHOUT Ezeli, Vanderbilt does look like a big threat.

However, there is good news when you look at the rest of the table.
First of all, Marquette’s starting five actually has put up slightly better offensive numbers, even with Ezeli on the court, at 17.0% for their starting five. While John Jenkins has been one of the best offensive players in the country (5.2% Value Add), and Jeffrey Taylor has been almost as good (4.0%) they are slightly behind Marquette’s top two offensive players to date (Crowder 6.2% and DJO 4.2%). Ezeli’s was almost exactly as valuable last year as Gardner has been this year (3.6% to 3.5%). Neither Goulbourne or Blue have had a big impact offensively (1.0% to 1.9%), and Brad Tinsley has been only a little better than Cadougan (2.3% to 1.3%), though if Tinsley returns to last year’s offensive form he would give Vandy the overall edge offensively.

MU must leverage defense and bench to win

So if Tinsley heats up, perhaps Vandy has a better offense overall. However, when we look at the defense and the bench, Marquette has a huge edge that must be leveraged to pull out a win if it gets close (or preferably to give MU a little breathing room).

Marquette has had three fantastic defenders this year, though obviously we assume one of them will still be on the bench at least for a while. When Otule has been on the court he erases an extra 1.7% of opponents’ points that the average shotblocker as part of his overall 2.3% of opponents’ points erased. When Blue is on the court he erases 1.8% more of opponents’ points via the steal than the average ball stealer. And finally Crowder is among leaders in blocked shots (0.3% of points erased beyond average), steals ( 1.3% erased) and defensive rebounding (1.8% erased) to be the most effective overall defender with 3.2% of opponents erased in all of Marquette games (the first three totals are while he is on the court, while the cumulative is for the entire game, thus lower than the total).

As covered in the column on deriving defensive value this summer, there are limitations beyond that. Clearly Derrick Wilson is a much better defender than Davante Gardner because he forces many more non-steal turnovers and pressures opponents out of good spots, but since the NCAA doesn’t keep track of those two stats, we have to give all five players on the court equal 0.2 stops, or buckets allowed, when there is no steal or block. Therefore Davante’s statistical rating is a little better than Derrick’s just based on the fact that he actually is one of the top ball stealers in the country so far (2.9% of opponents’ trips Davante has stolen the ball compared to 2.1% for Derrick, even though his overall defense obviously is not.

But overall, you can see that every Marquette player off the bench adds value – Anderson just doesn’t have enough minutes yet to register – while Vanderbilt’s subs have produced virtually nothing to date. The defense has been much better throughout all 11 players since last year, and Todd Mayo and Jamil Wilson have produced a ton of additional offensive (1.9% and 1.2%) despite playing only 50% and 41% of the minutes respectively.

Certainly Vanderbilt comes in with a chance to show they are an elite team now that they are back at full strength with a huge road win in the Bradley Center. Unfortunately Marquette has little to gain and a lot to lose with a home loss, so they need to use superior defense and depth to hold serve and get a win.

This does not mean that Marquette necessarily needs a low-scoring game to win, only that the defense has to contain the explosive Vandy offense to create baskets at the other end.

As a reference for those interested who didn’t see the initial pieces, here are the links to how the Offensive Stat (Value Add) and Defensive Stat (Defense Sub) are calculated.

Holidays in Japan

2011-12-26T07:33:00.009-06:00

We've just wrapped up the first part of the season, and have a few days off along with the All-Star weekend coming up. We just finished playing ten weekends straight of back to back Saturday-Sunday games and I could certainly use a break to recharge. Usually, overseas players always look forward to getting a week to ten days to go home to the states for the holidays. Unfortunately, we played games on Christmas Eve and Christmas day this year. Japan doesn't really celebrate Christmas like we do, so it's been quite a different holiday season this year for my wife and I. We did however, get to spend it with a great friend and fellow former Marquette Golden Eagle, Trend Blackledge. Trend plays for Osaka Evessa, and it was great to match up against him on the floor and grab some grub afterwards. We didn't get the traditional Christmas meal, but we certainly enjoyed great american food at the Hard Rock Cafe in downtown Osaka.

The Sendai 89ers are sitting at 11-11 now after a rough stretch, losing 4 straight. The club just released one of our four americans, and coach just put in a whole new offense. So we've been struggling a bit because of all the change. American players being replaced during the season is a common occurrence in overseas leagues. You really can be fired for any reason, just the nature of the business. That does make it tough for the team to gel when players are being funneled in an out, but you've got to stay professional and just do your job. Right now we've got a true 7 foot center, a strong slashing wingman, and yours truly, a 3/4 shooter for americans. Along with our hard-working japanese players, I'm confident the team can band together and make a long run in the playoffs.

All-Star weekend is in a week, and we have three 89ers involved in the festivities. Our japanese point guard is loved by the city, and was tops in the fan voting in the league. We also have the two-time defending slam dunk champion on our squad, who is also japanese. He is especially known for his showmanship and costumes, so I'm excited to see it live this year!

I'm the third representative for Sendai, elected to participate in the 3-point contest. I lead the league in the category so far, so I hope to represent the 89ers well. Also, Trend Blackledge is in the dunk contest as well, so we hope for a Marquette sweep! He'll have some tough competition though, as John "Helicoptor" Humphrey is the favorite.

I'm still getting used to the food here, trying a lot of foods I never would have guessed I'd put in my mouth. My wife enjoys sushi and seafood, so I've certainly expanded my horizons lately. Some of these include fish eggs, eel, octopus, squid, tuna with raw egg yoke, and fried whale. Not exactly like training table back at Marquette Union!

I have been trying to catch every Marquette game I can online, even if that means getting up extra early the next day here to catch last night's game at home. I missed the LSU loss, and turns out I'm glad I did. I hope Golden Eagle Nation isn't panicking too much over our first loss, even though it was one we shouldn't have given away. Basketball is a game of mistakes, so I hope we are on the right track towards fixing ours. I'd like to give a big congratulations to all our Marquette guys who have finally begun their season in the NBA, its about time! Especially, to Lazar and Steve. Good luck with your new teams!

GO MARQUETTE!

Daniel Fitzgerald '08