A question got posted about how the game will be called (close or loose) and how that might affect Purdue's play.
Just did a quick summary of last year's B10 teams in the tourney and how they fared compared to how they did during the conference season. I wouldn't necessarily call it complete data since I only looked at one season but it was interesting.
Iowa - 18.83 fouls committed during the conference season, 21.56 fouls against during conference. They had a single game in the tourney and committed 28 fouls (49% above their conference average) and their opponent committed 14 fouls (35% below)
Michigan - 14.17 fouls committed during the conference season, 16.89 fouls against during conference. They had 4 games in the tourney and committed an average of 11.75 fouls (17% below their conf. average) and their opponents committed on average 14.25 fouls (16% below conference average).
MSU - 20.06 fouls committed during the conference season, 17.11 fouls against during conference. They had 4 games in the tourney and committed an average of 19.75 fouls (2% below their conf. average) and their opponents committed on average 16 fouls (6% below conference average).
Nebraska - 18.94 fouls committed during the conference season, 17.67 fouls against during conference. They had a single game in the tourney and committed 31 fouls (64% above their conf. average) and their opponent committed 16 fouls (9% below their conference average).
OSU - 17.17 fouls committed during the conference season, 18.67 fouls against during conference. They had a single game in the tourney and committed 16 fouls (7% below their conf. average) and their opponent committed 14 fouls (25% below their conf. average).
Wisconsin - 15.51 fouls committed during the conference season, 19.72 fouls against during conference. They had 5 games in the tourney and committed an average of 16.2 fouls (7% above their conf. average) and their opponents committed an average of 17.8 fouls (10% below their conference average).
What I can take away from this is that with those teams that lose in the first round, the number of fouls they commit may have a tendency to be higher due to being behind late in the game or simply point to why they lost in the first place. Hard to tell without taking in more data and trying to put some game context into the numbers.
For those teams that advanced past the first game, two of the three teams saw a fairly equal drop in the number of fouls called on them as well as the fouls called on their opponent. In Michigan's case, it was a fairly large drop (17% & 16%). In MSU's case, the drop was much less (2% & 6%) which might be attributed to MSU's more physical style of play.
Wisconsin was the only team which advanced past the first round and saw the number of fouls called on them increase (7%). The number of fouls called on their opponents however dropped almost as much (10%). If anything, this seems to indicate that Wisky probably gets some preferential treatment during the conference season which they lose once the team enters the tourney.
Again, hard to make any hard and fast statements based on the limited data but thought it was interesting none the less.
Just did a quick summary of last year's B10 teams in the tourney and how they fared compared to how they did during the conference season. I wouldn't necessarily call it complete data since I only looked at one season but it was interesting.
Iowa - 18.83 fouls committed during the conference season, 21.56 fouls against during conference. They had a single game in the tourney and committed 28 fouls (49% above their conference average) and their opponent committed 14 fouls (35% below)
Michigan - 14.17 fouls committed during the conference season, 16.89 fouls against during conference. They had 4 games in the tourney and committed an average of 11.75 fouls (17% below their conf. average) and their opponents committed on average 14.25 fouls (16% below conference average).
MSU - 20.06 fouls committed during the conference season, 17.11 fouls against during conference. They had 4 games in the tourney and committed an average of 19.75 fouls (2% below their conf. average) and their opponents committed on average 16 fouls (6% below conference average).
Nebraska - 18.94 fouls committed during the conference season, 17.67 fouls against during conference. They had a single game in the tourney and committed 31 fouls (64% above their conf. average) and their opponent committed 16 fouls (9% below their conference average).
OSU - 17.17 fouls committed during the conference season, 18.67 fouls against during conference. They had a single game in the tourney and committed 16 fouls (7% below their conf. average) and their opponent committed 14 fouls (25% below their conf. average).
Wisconsin - 15.51 fouls committed during the conference season, 19.72 fouls against during conference. They had 5 games in the tourney and committed an average of 16.2 fouls (7% above their conf. average) and their opponents committed an average of 17.8 fouls (10% below their conference average).
What I can take away from this is that with those teams that lose in the first round, the number of fouls they commit may have a tendency to be higher due to being behind late in the game or simply point to why they lost in the first place. Hard to tell without taking in more data and trying to put some game context into the numbers.
For those teams that advanced past the first game, two of the three teams saw a fairly equal drop in the number of fouls called on them as well as the fouls called on their opponent. In Michigan's case, it was a fairly large drop (17% & 16%). In MSU's case, the drop was much less (2% & 6%) which might be attributed to MSU's more physical style of play.
Wisconsin was the only team which advanced past the first round and saw the number of fouls called on them increase (7%). The number of fouls called on their opponents however dropped almost as much (10%). If anything, this seems to indicate that Wisky probably gets some preferential treatment during the conference season which they lose once the team enters the tourney.
Again, hard to make any hard and fast statements based on the limited data but thought it was interesting none the less.
