Thursday, March 22, 2012

THE SOUTH: Looking back, looking forward

Ah, the rgeion with the most potential intrigue. As a student of the history of the game, I saw all of these compelling potential matchups. Then UConn lost. Okay. Then UNLV lost. Then the wheels went right off the bus crashing through the living room window and Duke got their Weber State as Lehigh forever etched themselves into the lore of the tournament and the hearts of America. After that, form played out.

One note on this bracket, VCU beat Wichita State in the first round. The only complaint I'll make about the committe and seeding is playing mid-majors off of one another in the 5-12 line. We know why it's done. Obviously, this season made it more difficult as the middle part of the field was full of them but it still isn't fun watching a 12 VCU beat a 5 Wichita State.

KENTUCKY, 2nd KenPom (2nd Adj O; 8th Adj D) vs. INDIANA, 10th KenPom (4th Adj O, 44th Adj D)

Kentucky sort of struggled with Iowa State but I compared it to a cat playing with a mouse, eventually killing it after teasing it for a while. At halftime, Coach Cal was asked about not making 3's and his reply was classic. "Why shoot 3's when you can dunk or get layups?" Good point. They get 22.5% of their scoring from beyond the arc, which is 295th in the nation yet have an effective fg % of 53.8 (18th). They don't turn it over as one might suspect with a young lineup, 20th in turnover % and they get second chance points with a 37.9 % offensive rebounding % (19th). For good measure, they nailed their 3's and ran away from the Cyclones.

I bet Iowa has a lot of cyclones.

Defensively, Indiana is okay. They don't force many turnovers and are decent on the glass, with a 30.6 defensive rebounding % (That number on defense is better lower). They don't foul a ton and teams have an effective fg% of 48% (134th).

Kentucky is a defensive force and one of the few defensive teams that are fun to watch because of how they get on you, like five Aaron Craft's. They have the nations best defensive fg % of 41%. Nice to have a human eraser like Davis in the middle. They don't force a ton of turnovers, in fact their defensive turnover % is 293rd in the nation but when you don't make shots against them coupled with not fouling, 9th in FTA/FGA on defense, it doesn't matter. They're about the same as the Hooisers on the defensive glass so that is a push.

Indiana is 7th in effective fg % on offense at 55.1%. They turn it over slightly less than the national average, so that's a push with UK not forcing them. They get some second chance points. Their offensive rebounding % is 35.2 (59th). They get to the line. Their FTA/FGA is 45.2 (12th). Can they get UK to foul? They'll need to. Indiana shoots an impressive 76.3% from the line. If they can get some free throws, they usually make them. They shoot 43% from 3 but only get 25% of their points that way which is 227th in the nation.

We see a formula for Indiana here. Though they don't make a lot of 3's, they are good at making them when they take them. Get, say 10 of them and get to the line, they'll have a shot. In December, they got Davis into foul trouble and he only played 23 minutes. They have an idea how to do it, can they repeat it?

Well, let's think about this for a second. IU played a damn near perfect game, got Davis out and won on a buzzer beater at home. In the SEC semi's, Florida made it rain from deep and UK won. It'll be tough. It can be done but I really like the makeup of this Wildcat team. Good game, Kentucky pulls away at the end. UK 76 IU 70

BAYLOR, 16th KenPom (12th Adj ); 35th Adj D) vs. XAVIER, 50th KenPom (63rd Adj O, 55th Adj D)

Before we begin looking at the numbers, I have to say this is the most fascinating game to me, non-Marquette category. I said Baylor was dead to me in February and a win returns them to the Elite 8 for the 2nd time in 3 years. Xavier was looking in not that long ago and here they are in another Sweet 16. Two real good teams. Have they figured it out? I don't think so based on matchups to get to this point but still respectable seasons, win or lose.

Baylor on offense has an offensove rebounding % of 38% (16th). So they'll have some second chance opportunities. They turn it over and get to the line at about the national average. That FT stat says a lot to me. A team with that kind of athleticism and length needs to get to the line more. They have an effective FG % of 52.6% (45th). They shoot the 3 at 38% (27th and are 75% at the line (25th).

Xavier does a very good job at not allowing second chance points. Teams only get 30%, so that'll be a number to watch. They hold teams to an effective fg% of 45.3 (45th). They don't force many turnovers, below the national average and 266th overall, so Baylor might skate on average ball handling. Xavier is average at not fouling so that should be a wash.

Defensively, Baylor as good as they are at getting offensive rebounds, they're slightly below average at garbbing defensive boards. They don't force many turnovers, just above the national average and they don't foul too much. They hold teams to a defensive fg % of 47.4 % (102nd).

On offense, Xavier is weak on the offensive glass. They're the opposite of Baylor. They do get to the line. Their FTA/FGA is 41.2 (53rd). They have an effective fg % of 49.8 (142nd). They do protect the ball pretty well. Their turnover % is 18.5 % (67th). They are weak at the line shooting 69.1%. Considering how they get to the line, if that number was closer to Baylor's, that could be a difference maker.

Baylor is about a 6 point favorite by the numbers but I'll take a flier on Xavier here since I wrote Baylor off in February. Xavier 73 Baylor 70

No comments: