I was bored today and found an interesting trend - don't read unless you're a stats nerd, as I'll probably waste your time. The last time I got bored and looked into Purdue basketball statistics, I tried to prove that Painter hasn't underperformed in the tournament - but, for the sake of argument I'll say this is my explanation as to why Purdue underperforms: play style decisions.
Purdue had Zach Edey and Jaden Ivey last season. Needless to say, it got fouled a lot (15th highest free throw rate in the country in 2022), and this is a typical trend with its year-in-year out low post offense. On the other hand, Painter always plays a low pressure defensive style and doesn't try to force turnovers or foul much (10th lowest rate in country in 2022), as he needs to slow down the game to allow his bigs to catch a breath, which explains their slow tempo. Basically, Purdue played the far extreme on both ends of the court and was the biggest outlier in the country.
What is interesting is that it appears that teams are disproportionately rewarded with defensive success for fouling (see chart linked); there is a direct correlation where fouling more led to better defense in 2022. This correlation is strong enough that if Purdue were to have, instead, inverted its foul rates to foul a lot and rarely get fouled, the data shows an expected +5.02 points per game in scoring margin (data analyzed the top 150 teams in 2022).
How did this affect Purdue in the tournament? Purdue played 3 teams that foul a ton (Yale = 233rd most, Texas = 336th, St. Peter's = 347th). Purdue ran into teams that played high pressure defense that knew they were relatively undersized but had a quickness advantage. As a result, they had game plans that wanted to force turnovers and force a lot of whistles. Purdue was +22 on free throws against Yale (even TOVs) and +34 (-5 TOVs) against Texas during the first weekend. This got a lot of media attention. Crazily enough, this attention coupled with the fact that Courtney Green refereed the next game (Purdue is 1-15 against the spread in games he referees since 2020) led to Purdue being -6 against St. Peter's (-7 TOVs).
I think it's fair to say that Edey and Haas draw less fouls than they might deserve - there is a rule in college basketball more or less dedicated to Haas for this reason. However, my biggest takeaway is that Purdue plays a very unusual style where it gets fouled more than almost anyone and fouls less than almost anyone, and that this strategy may cost it. If it decided to press and get in ball handlers' faces, I believe that Purdue would get called for more fouls, which would, in turn, allow them to draw more fouls, as well, but with the benefit of forcing more turnovers.
My conclusion is that this odd play style of having a huge big man that is fed on every play is very unusual and forces referees to call a game that is outside of their comfort zone, especially in the tournament where you have two random teams from different conferences with different play styles. As a result, Painter introduces his team to more game-to-game variance in outcomes than almost any other team. Courtney Green seems to favor calling fouls on guards over bigs. This is fine - I'm not going to say he is right or wrong in doing so, but I would say that this style of his doesn't lend itself to helping Purdue win games. On the other hand, I'm sure there are officials who greatly benefit Purdue, and this plays into my theory of greater game-to-game variance with such a polarizing team strategy. Purdue may have benefitted big time against Texas, but it may have caught the opposite luck against St. Peter's. You could probably play that game 100 more times and never see the team that is in the 97th percentile of FT shooting rate end up -6 against the team that fouls more than 97% of teams in the country - statistically, Purdue was expected to be +14, and 20 is a huge net difference - that's going to the line 10 extra times!
If I were the coach of Purdue Basketball, I would consider this data a detractor to the idea that the 7 foot big man system is ideal for tournament success. I find it hard to believe that this strategy actually costs Purdue 5 points per game, but I think 2 points per game (averaged) is reasonable. 2 extra points would have saved Purdue from losing on 4 buzzer beaters last year. This study was concluded upon a small data set, but in 2019, Purdue was 264th in drawing fouls and 144th in committing them. Coincidence? Who knows. I didn't feel like spending more than a half hour on collecting data for other years to look into it, so maybe my theory just so happened to align with exactly what seemed to happen in 2022 lol.
Purdue had Zach Edey and Jaden Ivey last season. Needless to say, it got fouled a lot (15th highest free throw rate in the country in 2022), and this is a typical trend with its year-in-year out low post offense. On the other hand, Painter always plays a low pressure defensive style and doesn't try to force turnovers or foul much (10th lowest rate in country in 2022), as he needs to slow down the game to allow his bigs to catch a breath, which explains their slow tempo. Basically, Purdue played the far extreme on both ends of the court and was the biggest outlier in the country.
What is interesting is that it appears that teams are disproportionately rewarded with defensive success for fouling (see chart linked); there is a direct correlation where fouling more led to better defense in 2022. This correlation is strong enough that if Purdue were to have, instead, inverted its foul rates to foul a lot and rarely get fouled, the data shows an expected +5.02 points per game in scoring margin (data analyzed the top 150 teams in 2022).
How did this affect Purdue in the tournament? Purdue played 3 teams that foul a ton (Yale = 233rd most, Texas = 336th, St. Peter's = 347th). Purdue ran into teams that played high pressure defense that knew they were relatively undersized but had a quickness advantage. As a result, they had game plans that wanted to force turnovers and force a lot of whistles. Purdue was +22 on free throws against Yale (even TOVs) and +34 (-5 TOVs) against Texas during the first weekend. This got a lot of media attention. Crazily enough, this attention coupled with the fact that Courtney Green refereed the next game (Purdue is 1-15 against the spread in games he referees since 2020) led to Purdue being -6 against St. Peter's (-7 TOVs).
I think it's fair to say that Edey and Haas draw less fouls than they might deserve - there is a rule in college basketball more or less dedicated to Haas for this reason. However, my biggest takeaway is that Purdue plays a very unusual style where it gets fouled more than almost anyone and fouls less than almost anyone, and that this strategy may cost it. If it decided to press and get in ball handlers' faces, I believe that Purdue would get called for more fouls, which would, in turn, allow them to draw more fouls, as well, but with the benefit of forcing more turnovers.
My conclusion is that this odd play style of having a huge big man that is fed on every play is very unusual and forces referees to call a game that is outside of their comfort zone, especially in the tournament where you have two random teams from different conferences with different play styles. As a result, Painter introduces his team to more game-to-game variance in outcomes than almost any other team. Courtney Green seems to favor calling fouls on guards over bigs. This is fine - I'm not going to say he is right or wrong in doing so, but I would say that this style of his doesn't lend itself to helping Purdue win games. On the other hand, I'm sure there are officials who greatly benefit Purdue, and this plays into my theory of greater game-to-game variance with such a polarizing team strategy. Purdue may have benefitted big time against Texas, but it may have caught the opposite luck against St. Peter's. You could probably play that game 100 more times and never see the team that is in the 97th percentile of FT shooting rate end up -6 against the team that fouls more than 97% of teams in the country - statistically, Purdue was expected to be +14, and 20 is a huge net difference - that's going to the line 10 extra times!
If I were the coach of Purdue Basketball, I would consider this data a detractor to the idea that the 7 foot big man system is ideal for tournament success. I find it hard to believe that this strategy actually costs Purdue 5 points per game, but I think 2 points per game (averaged) is reasonable. 2 extra points would have saved Purdue from losing on 4 buzzer beaters last year. This study was concluded upon a small data set, but in 2019, Purdue was 264th in drawing fouls and 144th in committing them. Coincidence? Who knows. I didn't feel like spending more than a half hour on collecting data for other years to look into it, so maybe my theory just so happened to align with exactly what seemed to happen in 2022 lol.
