Offense and the Sweet 16

[FirstDownB]

Saw this mentioned in other post and thought I'd tease it out a bit more..

The modern game of college basketball is slanting more and more toward offense. With the rule changes promoting scoring and freedom of movement, offensively skilled teams are being rewarded by the NCAA. I think in the B1G we see less of this in the conference season as the home crowds and big name coaches who emphasize hard nosed defense still carry influence. But in the tourney it is by and large the teams who are embracing the modern style who are enjoying the most success.

Here are some stats, using KenPom ratings, on the remaining 16 tournament teams:

Average Offensive Efficiency Rank = 19.06
Average Defensive Efficiency Rank = 40.75

# of teams in the Top 10 Offensive Efficiency = 8
# of teams in the Top 10 Defensive Efficiency = 4*

*These 4 teams (VA, KU, NC, Nova) are also in the Top 10 of Offensive Efficiency

Take away the #1 and #2 seeds (teams that tend to be really damn good both offensively and defensively) and Gonzaga who is equally offensive/defensive, here is the breakdown of the remaining teams:
-Better offense than defense: (6) Iowa St., Duke, Indiana, Notre Dame, Miami, Maryland
-Better defense than offense: (3) Wisconsin, ATM, Syracuse

In conclusion, good offensive teams are indeed advancing farther in the tourney than similarly ranked defensive teams. Since we are losing our top 2 defensive players anyway, there is no time like the present for a philosophical shift.

 

[BBG]

Great analysis. I hate the new rules but the NCAA wants high scoring games and like you said, that doesn't translate well to most teams in the B1G.

I think Painter sees it and while we lose defense, we stand a chance to be better next season since we will have a lot more offense.

 

[Heller]

Saw this mentioned in other post and thought I'd tease it out a bit more..

The modern game of college basketball is slanting more and more toward offense. With the rule changes promoting scoring and freedom of movement, offensively skilled teams are being rewarded by the NCAA. I think in the B1G we see less of this in the conference season as the home crowds and big name coaches who emphasize hard nosed defense still carry influence. But in the tourney it is by and large the teams who are embracing the modern style who are enjoying the most success.

Here are some stats, using KenPom ratings, on the remaining 16 tournament teams:

Average Offensive Efficiency Rank = 19.06
Average Defensive Efficiency Rank = 40.75

# of teams in the Top 10 Offensive Efficiency = 8
# of teams in the Top 10 Defensive Efficiency = 4*

*These 4 teams (VA, KU, NC, Nova) are also in the Top 10 of Offensive Efficiency

Take away the #1 and #2 seeds (teams that tend to be really damn good both offensively and defensively) and Gonzaga who is equally offensive/defensive, here is the breakdown of the remaining teams:
-Better offense than defense: (6) Iowa St., Duke, Indiana, Notre Dame, Miami, Maryland
-Better defense than offense: (3) Wisconsin, ATM, Syracuse

In conclusion, good offensive teams are indeed advancing farther in the tourney than similarly ranked defensive teams. Since we are losing our top 2 defensive players anyway, there is no time like the present for a philosophical shift.

Did you do any comparisons to past years? Strikes me that all teams have to make shots to win. We make one or two more open looks and we definitely beat UALR.

 

[FirstDownB]

Did you do any comparisons to past years? Strikes me that all teams have to make shots to win. We make one or two more open looks and we definitely beat UALR.

I did not look at previous years. Unfortunately, day job gets in the way..
Obviously with any trend there are exceptions. All you are doing is playing the odds. And this doesn't really even fit the Purdue-UALR game because they were also a defensive minded team. If anything it just goes to show how we may have struggled in the next round had we gotten by UALR.

Also I should note that we were actually a pretty efficient offensive team this year stat-wise. But our dominant size advantage against certain opponents who could not match up or offset with scheme inflated that quite a bit.

 

[honey_badger]

I did not looked at previous years. Unfortunately, day job gets in the way..
Obviously with any trend there are exceptions. All you are doing is playing the odds. And this doesn't really even fit the Purdue-UALR game because they were also a defensive minded team. If anything it just goes to show how we may have struggled in the next round had we gotten by UALR.

Also I should note that we were actually a pretty efficient offensive team this year stat-wise. But our dominant size advantage against certain opponents who could not match up or offset with scheme inflated that quite a bit.

Good point. Still can't believe we got beat by UALR. Argggghh!!!

 

[Boiler Buck]

Great offensive teams winning w/ great guard play is typically the case in the NCAA...same every year.

 

[icewind7]

If you cannot change the rule, play along with the new rules. Being stubborn isn't going to get you anywhere.

 

[icewind7]

Yes, you can insist that you like your motorola Razor, but everyone is using Iphone.

 

[TC4THREE]

Tony79 has been tracking offensive efficiency in the NCAA tournament for years and there is certainly a correlation which is probably even greater with the new rule changes.

 

[TC4THREE]

If you cannot change the rule, play along with the new rules. Being stubborn isn't going to get you anywhere.

Not sure we are being stubborn. You just can't snap your fingers and change the roster overnight though. I would expect there to be a focus on getting more ball handling and perimeter quickness on the roster and I think Edwards is the first step in that direction.

Here's the dilemma. When we have people who penetrate like the Johnsons people complain that we don't have shooters. When we have people who can shoot people complain that we don't have anyone that can create. When you have someone who can do both, that's usually called a 5-star player and they are tough to get.

So at the end of the day I just think the solution is that we need to recruit more 5 stars and then everyone will be happy.

 

[tjreese]

Not sure we are being stubborn. You just can't snap your fingers and change the roster overnight though. I would expect there to be a focus on getting more ball handling and perimeter quickness on the roster and I think Edwards is the first step in that direction.

Here's the dilemma. When we have people who penetrate like the Johnsons people complain that we don't have shooters. When we have people who can shoot people complain that we don't have anyone that can create. When you have someone who can do both, that's usually called a 5-star player and they are tough to get.

So at the end of the day I just think the solution is that we need to recruit more 5 stars and then everyone will be happy.

people need to remember that these players were essentially recruited prior to the rule changes...The rules hurt Purdue and helped IU that is the way it is. Purdue could have been one of the better teams in NCAA had there been only a two point shot and no shot clock...at least no shot clock. It is just teh way the cookie crumbles as the game becomes less of a team and more of an individual since more fans understand that part of the game...

 

[Do Dah Day]

I predict much wailing, head banging, and unhappiness regardless of who we recruit and who is the coach ....

 

[FirstDownB]

Not sure we are being stubborn. You just can't snap your fingers and change the roster overnight though. I would expect there to be a focus on getting more ball handling and perimeter quickness on the roster and I think Edwards is the first step in that direction.

Here's the dilemma. When we have people who penetrate like the Johnsons people complain that we don't have shooters. When we have people who can shoot people complain that we don't have anyone that can create. When you have someone who can do both, that's usually called a 5-star player and they are tough to get.

So at the end of the day I just think the solution is that we need to recruit more 5 stars and then everyone will be happy.

I think there is a middle road here.. Sure, if there was a switch to flip every coach would do it. And while having stud players helps, its not like there aren't other factors. As in most things in life there are trade-offs you make. There is a reason our teams are generally good at defense, and it goes beyond recruiting. It is a mindset, what style you play, what you work on in practice, where you spend your energy, and how you apportion playing time. I just happen to think at some point that defensive focus is diminishing returns on the offensive end.

So, specific to next year, with the roster essentially set, how can this team become more offensive? I'd say it mainly comes down to adjusting playing time and lineups with preference to offensive skill and pieces that complement each other on that end of the floor. Example, don't play 2 below average shooting perimeter players at the same time for the sake of having your best defensive players on the floor. Maybe this is a self-fulfilling prophecy because I think this will be sort of a natural thing with guys like Mathias and Cline getting some of Ray's minutes and Hill graduating. I don't think Painter will have the lock-down defenders to do anything but.

 

[gelesen]

Did you do any comparisons to past years? Strikes me that all teams have to make shots to win. We make one or two more open looks and we definitely beat UALR.

Or if ALR hadn't made a couple of 30 footers that normally only go in probably less than 20% of the time.