The Big East has now passed the ACC for 2nd place at kenpom.
MU beats out Nova for the best defense in conference play so far. Obviously balanced out by having the lowest ranked defense, but got to love having the defense completely shored up since Fischer's arrival so we just need a little offense.
This conference is not better than the acc. Sure top to bottom it's close but overall no.
Bad news: 4 of Marquette's 5 BEast opponents are in the bottom half of the league's offensive efficiencies (the 5th - and #10 in the conference - is MU).
Further, MU has had some luck in limiting offenses to 29.9% eFG% in conference play -- the avg is 33.5% for all teams) and I believe their stellar steal % of 13.5% is due for a decline. Kris Dunn ain't finna cough it up 8 times per game against us.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 18, 2015, 11:00:39 PM
Further, MU has had some luck in limiting offenses to 29.9% eFG% in conference play -- the avg is 33.5% for all teams)
?-( ?-(
Quote from: Johnny B on January 18, 2015, 10:49:48 PM
This conference is not better than the acc. Sure top to bottom it's close but overall no.
Aren't top to bottom
And overall the same thing??
Quote from: Johnny B on January 18, 2015, 10:49:48 PM
This conference is not better than the acc. Sure top to bottom it's close but overall no.
If there was an ACC-Big East Challenge this year I say we would probably lose 4-6. Remember they could not just pick their best ten as there are an uneven number of teams.
That said, I would give the ACC the slight edge.
Quote from: murara1994 on January 19, 2015, 06:11:23 AMAren't top to bottom And overall the same thing??
LOL Yup ;D
The ACC is better at the top, the Big East is better overall. We will have a higher percentage of teams in the tournament.
What really encourages me about our defense is that we're doing out with not very great defensive players. How many plus defenders are on this team? Derrick and Luke are the only two I see. We have the league's best defense and it was built on the fly. I'm curious to see what Wojo can do once he has a team of above average defenders.
To me, Wojo's willingness to embrace the zone, and then to play multiple types of zone, after 20 years of nearly exclusively man to man at Duke, is the most impressive thing about him. Then, after embracing the zone, to have Derrick down low, both on the 2-3 and the 1-3-1, with taller players out front, completely opposite conventional wisdom, and to be successful with it, is the strongest indication that Wojo has a creative coaching mind that I have seen. In other words, this year's defense gives me hope that going forward Wojo will be a true program builder.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 19, 2015, 06:08:57 AM
?-( ?-(
Yeah, I thought we had control over our opponents 3P% and it wasn't all luck. By the way, teams we are 2nd best in defensive 3P% and 3rd best in defensive FT%.
Those defensive numbers will not continue. That zone basically invites teams to shoot, nearly every shot is wide open. It will catch up with them. Sadly, it's probably the best strategy.
Shows ya defense is not the key to winnin', hey? Ya still gotta put it in the hole yourself, aina?
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 19, 2015, 06:58:10 AM
What really encourages me about our defense is that we're doing out with not very great defensive players. How many plus defenders are on this team? Derrick and Luke are the only two I see. We have the league's best defense and it was built on the fly. I'm curious to see what Wojo can do once he has a team of above average defenders.
Juan. He was a top 200 defender in the nation last season and a top 100 this season.
Doesn't the pace of our offense make our defense look "better," or does kenpom account for that in the rankings?
It is about Points Per Possession.
Quote from: MU82 on January 19, 2015, 11:42:16 AM
Doesn't the pace of our offense make our defense look "better," or does kenpom account for that in the rankings?
It factors for pace. Ratings are based off points per possession, so whether you play 60 or 80 possessions, the average points is the same.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 19, 2015, 06:58:10 AM
LOL Yup ;D
The ACC is better at the top, the Big East is better overall. We will have a higher percentage of teams in the tournament.
What really encourages me about our defense is that we're doing out with not very great defensive players. How many plus defenders are on this team? Derrick and Luke are the only two I see. We have the league's best defense and it was built on the fly. I'm curious to see what Wojo can do once he has a team of above average defenders.
I would say Luke is a "plus" defender as well. Though with his foul trouble (especially picking up fouls on the offensive end) it has limited his playing time.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 18, 2015, 11:00:39 PM
Bad news: 4 of Marquette's 5 BEast opponents are in the bottom half of the league's offensive efficiencies (the 5th - and #10 in the conference - is MU).
Further, MU has had some luck in limiting offenses to 29.9% eFG% in conference play -- the avg is 33.5% for all teams) and I believe their stellar steal % of 13.5% is due for a decline. Kris Dunn ain't finna cough it up 8 times per game against us.
It could be partially due to them playing MU. Is MU's defense good, because they have played the worst offensive teams or are the worst offensive teams bad because they played MU? It is probably some of both.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2015, 02:44:59 PM
It could be partially due to them playing MU. Is MU's defense good, because they have played the worst offensive teams or are the worst offensive teams bad because they played MU? It is probably some of both.
Whichever fits my narrative.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 19, 2015, 11:45:50 AM
It factors for pace. Ratings are based off points per possession, so whether you play 60 or 80 possessions, the average points is the same.
Thanks to you and others who provided answers.
Quote from: MUDPT on January 19, 2015, 07:43:50 AM
Yeah, I thought we had control over our opponents 3P% and it wasn't all luck. By the way, teams we are 2nd best in defensive 3P% and 3rd best in defensive FT%.
The bigger picture is that JayBee is a "liar"!
Quote from: JakeBarnes on January 19, 2015, 02:56:32 PMWhichever fits my narrative.
I so thoroughly love this post ;)
Quote from: MUDPT on January 19, 2015, 07:43:50 AM
Yeah, I thought we had control over our opponents 3P% and it wasn't all luck.
True, but some of it is luck (far more so than 2fg%). You may disagree, but you will be incorrect & borderline insane. Watch it RISE!
My two cents
Defense
1. I don't think the 3 pt% defense will stay this low. We are worst in the conference at allowing opponents to shoot threes. There is going to be a day where an opponent goes Michigan State or Ohio State on us.
2. The 2 pt% defense /is/ sustainable. MU has done a pretty good job with eFG% defense in general.
3. I don't know if the TO% defense is sustainable. Having said that, the team keeps outperforming expectations on TO%. How well will we do on the second run through opponents?
Offense
1. MU hasn't been bad at offensive eFG%. I track us as slightly better than Pomeroy shows, although declining a bit over the past few games.
2. I don't think that the offensive turnover rate is sustainable either. At least, I hope that the team learns to protect the damn ball. Soon. If that gets fixed, then the offense will go up.
In total, MU is still about a 0.500 team. Even if the defense gets worse, the offense should get better. At the end of the day, the most likely view is still somewhere between 14-17 wins.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 20, 2015, 10:37:07 AM
My two cents
Defense
1. I don't think the 3 pt% defense will stay this low. We are worst in the conference at allowing opponents to shoot threes. There is going to be a day where an opponent goes Michigan State or Ohio State on us.
2. The 2 pt% defense /is/ sustainable. MU has done a pretty good job with eFG% defense in general.
3. I don't know if the TO% defense is sustainable. Having said that, the team keeps outperforming expectations on TO%. How well will we do on the second run through opponents?
Offense
1. MU hasn't been bad at offensive eFG%. I track us as slightly better than Pomeroy shows, although declining a bit over the past few games.
2. I don't think that the offensive turnover rate is sustainable either. At least, I hope that the team learns to protect the damn ball. Soon. If that gets fixed, then the offense will go up.
In total, MU is still about a 0.500 team. Even if the defense gets worse, the offense should get better. At the end of the day, the most likely view is still somewhere between 14-17 wins.
What are you getting for eFG% & what is the source? I have found errors in ALL websites/sources without trying to... But in this one I've got the same figured as Kenpom.com.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 20, 2015, 10:37:07 AM
In total, MU is still about a 0.500 team.
...who wins the Big East tournament.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 19, 2015, 06:08:57 AM
?-( ?-(
JayBee said that he's in great pain and he wants to know if you can help him, doc.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 20, 2015, 11:01:22 AM
What are you getting for eFG% & what is the source? I have found errors in ALL websites/sources without trying to... But in this one I've got the same figured as Kenpom.com.
I currently have 50.8% for offensive eFG% and 47.5% for defensive eFG%. I have the offense as slightly better than Pomeroy (48.6% in conference) and the defense as slightly worse (47% in conference).
The source is a spreadsheet that I created using Kalman Filter calculations. In other words, the spreadsheet takes a factor, creates predictions, and then modifies the factor based on performance vs the prediction.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 19, 2015, 09:42:13 AM
Juan. He was a top 200 defender in the nation last season and a top 100 this season.
Thank you!
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 20, 2015, 10:37:07 AM
My two cents
Defense
1. I don't think the 3 pt% defense will stay this low. We are worst in the conference at allowing opponents to shoot threes. There is going to be a day where an opponent goes Michigan State or Ohio State on us.
2. The 2 pt% defense /is/ sustainable. MU has done a pretty good job with eFG% defense in general.
3. I don't know if the TO% defense is sustainable. Having said that, the team keeps outperforming expectations on TO%. How well will we do on the second run through opponents?
Offense
1. MU hasn't been bad at offensive eFG%. I track us as slightly better than Pomeroy shows, although declining a bit over the past few games.
2. I don't think that the offensive turnover rate is sustainable either. At least, I hope that the team learns to protect the damn ball. Soon. If that gets fixed, then the offense will go up.
In total, MU is still about a 0.500 team. Even if the defense gets worse, the offense should get better. At the end of the day, the most likely view is still somewhere between 14-17 wins.
I think that most of your posts should start with the following note.
"Spoiler Alert: If you do not want to know how the season will play out, do not read on."
Quote from: LittleWade on January 20, 2015, 11:58:58 AM
I think that most of your posts should start with the following note.
"Spoiler Alert: If you do not want to know how the season will play out, do not read on."
I am wrong ALL THE TIME!
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 19, 2015, 09:25:05 AM
Shows ya defense is not the key to winnin', hey? Ya still gotta put it in the hole yourself, aina?
What's the saying about offense and defense? Something about offense can come or go, but if you put in the effort, defense will always be there.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 20, 2015, 12:00:30 PM
I am wrong ALL THE TIME!
I thought that I was wrong once, but it turned out I was mistaken...
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 20, 2015, 11:41:54 AM
I currently have 50.8% for offensive eFG% and 47.5% for defensive eFG%. I have the offense as slightly better than Pomeroy (48.6% in conference) and the defense as slightly worse (47% in conference).
The source is a spreadsheet that I created using Kalman Filter calculations. In other words, the spreadsheet takes a factor, creates predictions, and then modifies the factor based on performance vs the prediction.
Gotcha, I think. You're calculating an eFG%-related metric that adjusts actual results based on whatever assumptions. Eg, predictive v's actual & so forth..... whereas Kenpom's eFG% is no diff than mine, Jim, Bob, dave's or anyone else's - it's just actual eFG%.
I ran a correlation coefficient from last year, using John Gasaway's defensive PPP on January 21, 2014 (http://johngasaway.com/2014/01/21/tuesday-truths-were-back-edition/ (http://johngasaway.com/2014/01/21/tuesday-truths-were-back-edition/)) and the end of year Pomeroy defensive efficiency numbers. r value= .415. Somewhat correlated, but definite variance.
Quote from: MUDPT on January 20, 2015, 08:55:16 PM
I ran a correlation coefficient from last year, using John Gasaway's defensive PPP on January 21, 2014 (http://johngasaway.com/2014/01/21/tuesday-truths-were-back-edition/ (http://johngasaway.com/2014/01/21/tuesday-truths-were-back-edition/)) and the end of year Pomeroy defensive efficiency numbers. r value= .415. Somewhat correlated, but definite variance.
Uhhh, what?
You looked at actual ppp in January vs. Pomeroys Adj DE (used for predictive purposes) as of year end? How come why?
Sorry, used the end of the year Conference DE numbers from Pomeroy. Not the full season. Was trying to see if there was correlation between after 5-6 games and end of the season. When I'm not at work later, I can run January 21 versus end of season.