KenPom has a feature that allows you to look at the offensive and defensive efficiency numbers of teams solely in conference play. Good way to see how a team is playing against its peers, filtering out garbage games from the non-conference season. Essentially the higher the offensive number the better and the lower the defensive number the better. To get the overall efficiency score, you subtract the defensive number from the offensive number.
The current numbers for the BEast (including the DePaul debacle):
1. Marquette 14.0 overall (113.3 offense, 99.3 defense)
2. St. John's 12.9 overall (103.5 offense, 90.6 defense)
3. Villanova 9.2 overall (119.7 offense, 110.5 defense)
4. UConn 7.8 overall (119.7 offense, 111.9 defense)
5. Xavier 3.9 overall (109.3 offense, 105.4 defense)
6. Georgetown 2.5 overall (96.8 offense, 94.3 defense)
7. Creighton 0 overall (106.8 offense, 106.8 defense)
8. Providence -4.3 overall (106.1 offense, 110.4 defense)
9. Seton Hall -10.5 overall (108.1 offense, 118.6 defense)
10. Butler -13 overall (100.6 offense, 113.6 defense)
11. DePaul -23 overall (96.6 offense, 119.6 defense)
Lotta basketball left, but so far we have been the best team in the conference with only one team somewhat close to us.
Interesting, thanks for sharing. A good barometer for how this team is doing despite what it's felt like the last couple of games. Everything still in front of them.
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 15, 2025, 01:11:14 AMKenPom has a feature that allows you to look at the offensive and defensive efficiency numbers of teams solely in conference play. Good way to see how a team is playing against its peers, filtering out garbage games from the non-conference season. Essentially the higher the offensive number the better and the lower the defensive number the better. To get the overall efficiency score, you subtract the offensive number from the defensive number.
The current numbers for the BEast (including the DePaul debacle):
1. Marquette 14.0 overall (113.3 offense, 99.3 defense)
2. St. John's 12.9 overall (103.5 offense, 90.6 defense)
3. Villanova 9.2 overall (119.7 offense, 110.5 defense)
4. UConn 7.8 overall (119.7 offense, 111.9 defense)
5. Xavier 3.9 overall (109.3 offense, 105.4 defense)
6. Georgetown 2.5 overall (96.8 offense, 94.3 defense)
7. Creighton 0 overall (106.8 offense, 106.8 defense)
8. Providence -4.3 overall (106.1 offense, 110.4 defense)
9. Seton Hall -10.5 overall (108.1 offense, 118.6 defense)
10. Butler -13 overall (100.6 offense, 113.6 defense)
11. DePaul -23 overall (96.6 offense, 119.6 defense)
Lotta basketball left, but so far we have been the best team in the conference with only one team somewhat close to us.
We suck
With six games left against #2,3, and 4. Yikes
Opportunities for awesomeness, you mean.
Defense has to get more solid. It sounds crazy since they're top 20 nationally, but the eFG allowed is not good. Being completely propped up by TOs.
Quote from: tower912 on January 15, 2025, 07:46:30 AMOpportunities for awesomeness, you mean.
Yep. Glad we are not in a crappy conference (although I know it's a down year) and have opportunities to play a lot of good teams down the stretch. MU should win their share. Can't imagine what good teams from the SEC or Big 12 are saying. "Oh boy we have to play another good team?!".
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 15, 2025, 08:48:08 AMDefense has to get more solid. It sounds crazy since they're top 20 nationally, but the eFG allowed is not good. Being completely propped up by TOs.
Well basically TOs is what has been winning us games lately. Had 10 steals last night, DePaul had 16 TOs to MU's 6.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 15, 2025, 08:48:08 AMDefense has to get more solid. It sounds crazy since they're top 20 nationally, but the eFG allowed is not good. Being completely propped up by TOs.
This is who they are. And it hasn't been particularly volatile for them.
In my mind, getting something out of the bench unit and getting Kam back on track is what will pace this team.
Quote from: GB Warrior on January 15, 2025, 09:12:15 AMThis is who they are. And it hasn't been particularly volatile for them.
In my mind, getting something out of the bench unit and getting Kam back on track is what will pace this team.
I don't disagree, but they can definitely be more solid guarding the ball than they have been.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 15, 2025, 09:15:00 AMI don't disagree, but they can definitely be more solid guarding the ball than they have been.
This ties into my thought about reconsidering switching 1-5. Opponents are looking to and getting switches leaving Ben on a guard and Chase or Stevie guarding a big. This was really noticeable when it was Ben and Sean getting switched. Ben isn't the unicorn Oso was. He is quick enough, but can get burned trying to stay with a quick, driving guard from 25 feet out all of the way to the basket. MU'S guards are good, but them rasslin post players is not what they are best at. Plus, they reflexively help on drives, as they should, leading to dump offs.
This is not nearly as egregious as when Theo would be guarding the perimeter while Rowsey and Howard collapsed on the post. But it is a parallel theme. It is a fine line and a philosophical as well as physical adjustment.
MU opponents have made adjustments to attack MU. What is the counter? Which is a fun question to ask at 15-2, 6-0, #7.
Quote from: tower912 on January 15, 2025, 09:27:19 AMThis ties into my thought about reconsidering switching 1-5. Opponents are looking to and getting switches leaving Ben on a guard and Chase or Stevie guarding a big. This was really noticeable when it was Ben and Sean getting switched. Ben isn't the unicorn Oso was. He is quick enough, but can get burned trying to stay with a quick, driving guard from 25 feet out all of the way to the basket. MU'S guards are good, but them rasslin post players is not what they are best at. Plus, they reflexively help on drives, as they should, leading to dump offs.
This is not nearly as egregious as when Theo would be guarding the perimeter while Rowsey and Howard collapsed on the post. Put it is a parallel theme. It is a fine line and a philosophical as well as physical adjustment.
MU opponents have made adjustments to attack MU. What is the counter? Which is a fun question to ask at 15-2, 6-0, #7.
Can we bring brook lopez in to teach Ben the drop defense
Quote from: geps on January 15, 2025, 07:43:55 AMWith six games left against #2,3, and 4. Yikes
Important to note, the figures brew is citing are RAW efficiency numbers and not adjusted fit competition (like the "normal" KenPom ratings most people cite do)
Quote from: GB Warrior on January 15, 2025, 09:30:30 AMCan we bring brook lopez in to teach Ben the drop defense
I know you were only kidding, but there's nothing to "teach." On defense, Gold is doing the exact thing Shaka wants him to do. Ben's not going rogue and doing it on his own.
Quote from: geps on January 15, 2025, 07:43:55 AMWith six games left against #2,3, and 4. Yikes
Each of those teams has two games left against the Big East leader and the nation's #7 team. Yikes for them.
Quote from: MU82 on January 15, 2025, 12:25:47 PMI know you were only kidding, but there's nothing to "teach." On defense, Gold is doing the exact thing Shaka wants him to do. Ben's not going rogue and doing it on his own.
Each of those teams has two games left against the Big East leader and the nation's #7 team. Yikes for them.
We suck
Quote from: geps on January 15, 2025, 07:43:55 AMWith six games left against #2,3, and 4. Yikes
Thank God we don't have to play #1.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 15, 2025, 08:48:08 AMDefense has to get more solid. It sounds crazy since they're top 20 nationally, but the eFG allowed is not good. Being completely propped up by TOs.
Don't you think these 2 things are linked? Take more chances and double team more often and it will lead to some easy shots for the opponent. But so far, the trade-off is worth it. That is our team's identity.
I agree, though, that the defense has some work to do. Still making too many mistakes.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on January 15, 2025, 12:31:10 PMThank God we don't have to play #1.
Unbalanced conference schedules are stupid.
Quote from: geps on January 15, 2025, 07:43:55 AMWith six games left against #2,3, and 4. Yikes
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 15, 2025, 12:23:51 PMImportant to note, the figures brew is citing are RAW efficiency numbers and not adjusted fit competition (like the "normal" KenPom ratings most people cite do)
Correct, but also important to note that #2 and #4 need to play 5 games each against the top 4 (including 2 against #1) and #4 needs to play 4 games against the top 4 (including 2 against #1).
The team that could have an interesting second half is Xavier. They have already played each of the top 4 once and will play Marquette, St. John's, and UConn for the second team each over their next three games. Meaning 7/8 of their games against the top 4 will be done before the end of January. KenPom currently has them favored in 8 of their final 9 games...but they really need to get a win before then. They are currently 0/6 against Q1 opponents and lost their best Q2 game. Those final 9 games? 1 Q1 opportunity and that is the 1 game they are projected to lose.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 15, 2025, 08:48:08 AMDefense has to get more solid. It sounds crazy since they're top 20 nationally, but the eFG allowed is not good. Being completely propped up by TOs.
Agreed this is my biggest concern with our metrics right now. That being said, I noticed two things last night.
1. Last year our defensive eFG% was 49.8, this year it is 50.6%. Slightly worse but by less than a percentage point. That team finished with a top 20 defense and a sweet 16 and it wasn't defense that caused our unfortunate exit. Our current team is better at both offensive and defensive TO% than last year's team which I think makes up for the slight decrease in defensive eFG%.
2. In conference play, we are giving up 54.2% on opponents' shots inside the arc. That's good for 9th in the Big East. We are giving up 33.1% on opponents' shots outside the arc. That's a decent percentage that puts us at 6th in the Big East (and our numbers were a lot better before the last minute of OT last night. Prior to River turning into Steph Curry for 45 seconds, it was 31.3% and 3rd in the Big East). But we are also 11th in 3PA/FGA at 46%. That means that opponents have shot more threes and less two against us than any other team in the Big East. What this tells me is that part of our defensive strategy is simply denying 2P FGAs and forcing teams to shoot more threes which we are better at defending. My theory is that this is due to all the switching that we do. I think it makes us very good at denying penetration and denying entry passes. But if a team manages to penetrate or have a successful entry pass, than they are going to score. Whether that's a viable strategy? Last season says it is. We'll see how the rest of the season plays out.
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 15, 2025, 01:21:53 PMAgreed this is my biggest concern with our metrics right now. That being said, I noticed two things last night.
1. Last year our defensive eFG% was 49.8, this year it is 50.6%. Slightly worse but by less than a percentage point. That team finished with a top 20 defense and a sweet 16 and it wasn't defense that caused our unfortunate exit. Our current team is better at both offensive and defensive TO% than last year's team which I think makes up for the slight decrease in defensive eFG%.
2. In conference play, we are giving up 54.2% on opponents' shots inside the arc. That's good for 9th in the Big East. We are giving up 33.1% on opponents' shots outside the arc. That's a decent percentage that puts us at 6th in the Big East (and our numbers were a lot better before the last minute of OT last night. Prior to River turning into Steph Curry for 45 seconds, it was 31.3% and 3rd in the Big East). But we are also 11th in 3PA/FGA at 46%. That means that opponents have shot more threes and less two against us than any other team in the Big East. What this tells me is that part of our defensive strategy is simply denying 2P FGAs and forcing teams to shoot more threes which we are better at defending. My theory is that this is due to all the switching that we do. I think it makes us very good at denying penetration and denying entry passes. But if a team manages to penetrate or have a successful entry pass, than they are going to score. Whether that's a viable strategy? Last season says it is. We'll see how the rest of the season plays out.
Good stuff. Thanks.
Quote from: Jockey on January 15, 2025, 12:35:26 PMDon't you think these 2 things are linked? Take more chances and double team more often and it will lead to some easy shots for the opponent. But so far, the trade-off is worth it. That is our team's identity.
I agree, though, that the defense has some work to do. Still making too many mistakes.
To a degree, yes. But there are still too many times where MU is giving up the paint too easily off the bounce. The scheme is the scheme, and it's mostly successful, but guys need to be more solid on the ball.
Great thread, y'all. This is what it's about.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on January 15, 2025, 12:31:10 PMThank God we don't have to play #1.
Shaka dodging the tough scheduling again
Also looking at our numbers, I don't see many areas where I'm worried about regression. There aren't any stats that we are suddenly doing better in conference season than we were doing all season long. We know the low offensive and high defensive turnovers are for real. We know that we can defend without fouling. We know we are a ok (not good, not bad) rebounding team. We have enough data to safely predict that we are playing to our level there.
I do see significant room for progression in 3P%. We're shooting 31.7% from three in conference play, 10th in the Big East. We shot 33.5% in the non-conference season. We have also historically gotten better at shooting threes as the season has gone on. I don't think we're a top half of the conference 3P shooting team but I do believe that we are at least a middle of the conference 3P shooting team. My main evidence for this is Kam Jones. He's shooting 20% from three in conference. We have three and a half years of data that tells us that Kam is a much better three point shooter than that. While Benny might be in line for some regression (46.2% from three in conference) everyone else is shooting a sustainable % from three so far. If Kam ends up closer to his career 37.5% by the end of the season, I think we end up with a top 10 offense to compliment our top 20 defense.
TLDR, I think this team has another gear that we haven't seen so far in conference play. I think Shaka can unlock it.
Agree TAMU
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 15, 2025, 05:05:20 PMAlso looking at our numbers, I don't see many areas where I'm worried about regression. There aren't any stats that we are suddenly doing better in conference season than we were doing all season long. We know the low offensive and high defensive turnovers are for real. We know that we can defend without fouling. We know we are a ok (not good, not bad) rebounding team. We have enough data to safely predict that we are playing to our level there.
I do see significant room for progression in 3P%. We're shooting 31.7% from three in conference play, 10th in the Big East. We shot 33.5% in the non-conference season. We have also historically gotten better at shooting threes as the season has gone on. I don't think we're a top half of the conference 3P shooting team but I do believe that we are at least a middle of the conference 3P shooting team. My main evidence for this is Kam Jones. He's shooting 20% from three in conference. We have three and a half years of data that tells us that Kam is a much better three point shooter than that. While Benny might be in line for some regression (46.2% from three in conference) everyone else is shooting a sustainable % from three so far. If Kam ends up closer to his career 37.5% by the end of the season, I think we end up with a top 10 offense to compliment our top 20 defense.
TLDR, I think this team has another gear that we haven't seen so far in conference play. I think Shaka can unlock it.
I'm too lazy what is the team on 3s w/o Kam in conference?
Quote from: Newsdreams on January 15, 2025, 05:48:46 PMI'm too lazy what is the team on 3s w/o Kam in conference?
49/139 (35.3%)
To speculate, let's keep the above percentage the same but add Kam back in as if he hit his career 37.5% instead of the 20%.
64/179 (35.8%). So if Kam progressed to the mean, our team would go from 31.7% to 35.8%. That would jump us from 10th to 6th in the Big East.
To be fair, I did say Gold(Brick) may be due for some regression. If Kam progressed to his career average and Ben regressed to his career average than the number becomes 61/179 (34.1%). That would only move us to 8th, though only .1% behind 7th.
The fun thing is that if Kam does progress to his career average of 37.5% than he's going to shoot significantly higher than 37.5% the rest of the way.
Wanted to update this after the whole season:
1. St. John's 14.1 overall (106.3 offense, 92.2 defense)
2. Marquette 9.4 overall (110.4 offense, 101.0 defense)
3. Creighton 8 overall (111.5 offense, 103.5 defense)
4. UConn 7.3 overall (114.7 offense, 107.4 defense)
5. Xavier 6.5 overall (109.9 offense, 103.4 defense)
6. Villanova 4.7 overall (112.6 offense, 107.9 defense)
7. Butler -3.3 overall (110.0 offense, 113.3 defense)
8. Georgetown -3.8 overall (102.1 offense, 105.9 defense)
9. Providence -7 overall (105.5 offense, 112.5 defense)
10. DePaul -16.1 overall (94.1 offense, 114.9 defense)
11. Seton Hall -20.1 overall (94.1 offense, 114.2 defense)
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 13, 2025, 12:19:19 PMWanted to update this after the whole season:
1. St. John's 14.1 overall (106.3 offense, 92.2 defense)
2. Marquette 9.4 overall (110.4 offense, 101.0 defense)
3. Creighton 8 overall (111.5 offense, 103.5 defense)
4. UConn 7.3 overall (114.7 offense, 107.4 defense)
5. Xavier 6.5 overall (109.9 offense, 103.4 defense)
6. Villanova 4.7 overall (112.6 offense, 107.9 defense)
7. Butler -3.3 overall (110.0 offense, 113.3 defense)
8. Georgetown -3.8 overall (102.1 offense, 105.9 defense)
9. Providence -7 overall (105.5 offense, 112.5 defense)
10. DePaul -16.1 overall (94.1 offense, 114.9 defense)
11. Seton Hall -20.1 overall (94.1 offense, 114.2 defense)
Am I the only one who read this from the bottom up?
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 13, 2025, 12:19:19 PMWanted to update this after the whole season:
1. St. John's 14.1 overall (106.3 offense, 92.2 defense)
2. Marquette 9.4 overall (110.4 offense, 101.0 defense)
3. Creighton 8 overall (111.5 offense, 103.5 defense)
4. UConn 7.3 overall (114.7 offense, 107.4 defense)
5. Xavier 6.5 overall (109.9 offense, 103.4 defense)
Huh.