|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Feb 17, 2013 12:20:41 GMT -5
Some pre-game notes: After Marquette's win over Pitt yesterday, KenPom predicts us as the 5 seed. Ironically, in a 2-day stretch that included a fantastic road victory, our predicted finish got worse. In short, what happened is that Marquette and Pitt flip-flopped between the 3rd and tied-with-us-for-4th seed. We would have likely won a tiebreaker with Marquette, but will not vs. Pitt. Notre Dame's loss (and Cincy's, to us) means the 5 seed is fairly secure. That means a Wed. night game. But I'm tired of being the 5. I want that double bye. What does this mean? 1) Just keep winning, baby. We control our destiny. 2) Root for Pitt to lose. Another interesting point - looking only at conference performance, we have the 2nd-best D in the Big East (after Louisville). That's driven in large part by our elite defensive eFG% (forcing opponents to take bad shots). But that's driven in part by opponents' very low 3P% against us. As KenPom and others have shown, opponents' 3P% is not predictive - it's essentially luck. So we should expect teams to hit more 3s against us in the future. On the other hand, you can't chalk up any of our conference losses to opponents finding their stroke from 3. Pitt shot well but didn't need to. USF and Marquette were just OK. Turnovers killed us against USF and, as you may remember, FT shooting did it in Milwaukee. It does explain how Rutgers was able to hang with us. Their 3P% was ridiculous in that game until they started chucking it at the end. Our opponents' 2P% is still very low (3rd in the conference and 11th nationally), so it's not like our defense is just 3P luck. But it's a big part. A good comp is Marquette - their opponents are shooting only about 1% better from 2 than ours, but almost 7% better from 3 (and better from the line - I love our elite "free throw defense"). The only reason that hasn't killed them is that they have the best offense in the conference. Sample size caveats apply since we're only looking at conference data. In short, and as always: watch out for tourney teams that can shoot 3s. We also have 3 of the top-10 most efficient players in the conference. Boost Nate's usage! Otto (2) and Markel (7) are also in the top 10 for 3P%. Big leap for both from last year. Nice little summary here, thanks. I usually put a lot of weight in KenPom's statistics, though rarely with any predictive value. I use it mostly to determine how teams stack up to this point. I do have to disagree somewhat with the 3p% D analysis though. I understand that from a strictly statistical standpoint, it has very little predictive value, but basketball is not played in a vacuum. To take away from the defensive performances of Markel, Jabril, Greg (when he was around), and to a lesser extent DSR, is a disservice to them. Marquette gives up a higher percentage of 3s in part because (1) Cadougan, Blue, and Mayo are significantly worse defenders than our guards and (2) their team D is not nearly as adept at switching and rotating, leading to more open shots from 3. I think the much better comparison is a team like Pitt, who also has strong perimeter defenders and almost identical 3p% D numbers - G: 30.2 overall, 27.4 conference vs. P: 30.0, 27.5 - with a similar 3pa/fga ratio as well. Is that all luck? Consider me skeptical. While I'm normally one to put a lot of stock in stats and the "luck" factor, in this case, I think the context needs to be considered. Our perimeter D is very good and I will take my chances any day of the week with the contested 3s we usually force our opponents to take.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2013 12:41:15 GMT -5
If 3 point defense is all luck, we’ve been getting lucky for 2 years now… lol
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Feb 17, 2013 12:42:05 GMT -5
The free throw defense may not be all luck. It seems that we foul bigs more than we foul guards so we are putting poor shooters on the line. The guards we keep from driving and force to take desperation threes which results in the lower 3pt percentage. If you prevent the good shooters from getting shots in rhythm and force the poorer shooters to chuck late in the clock the percentages should work in your favor over time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2013 13:09:43 GMT -5
I would like to see a stat on how often guys shoot “contested” jumpers against us.. It’s very rare you see someone shooting against us without a hand in their face..
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Feb 17, 2013 13:29:46 GMT -5
I would like to see a stat on how often guys shoot “contested” jumpers against us.. It’s very rare you see someone shooting against us without a hand in their face.. Exactly. On a game by game basis you'll have those games where teams will hit contested shots, like Rutgers, or miss open shots, like ND, but over the course of a season, I think having a hand in their face is going to result in better defensive numbers. Like you said, if it's all luck then we've been getting lucky for 2 straight years now.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Feb 17, 2013 13:35:06 GMT -5
There was an article posted on here somewhere like yesterday that discussed our defense in depth.....
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Feb 17, 2013 14:02:07 GMT -5
Kenpom had an article later where he admitted that there may be more than luck to a teams defensive 3pt%. His earlier study showed that teams who are good at defending the 3pter reduce the number of shots taken and the 3pt% wasn't necessarily indicative of how well a shot was guarded. Like against Rutgers sometimes shots just go in even if they're well defended. My problem with this observation is that some teams are more willing to chuck up bad three pointers. Cinci took a ton of three's against us because that's just their game plan they were 4/24. They were going to shoot a lot of threes no matter what, but we did a good job defending the three.
His second article actually used syracuse as the example of a team who's defensive 3pt% is consistently one of the best in the nation. This makes sense to me because their zone dares teams to take bad three point shots from deep. The Hoyas have been great at guarding the three the last two years. It's not luck. It's the fact that we shut the interior down so well we force teams into poor outside shots.
The problem with kenpom's study is there's just too much noise in the Data.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Feb 17, 2013 14:05:50 GMT -5
The free throw defense may not be all luck. It seems that we foul bigs more than we foul guards so we are putting poor shooters on the line. The guards we keep from driving and force to take desperation threes which results in the lower 3pt percentage. If you prevent the good shooters from getting shots in rhythm and force the poorer shooters to chuck late in the clock the percentages should work in your favor over time. Exactly. 3pt shooting can be a decent amount of luck but our defense causes difficult shots all over. In fact I'd argue that many 3s made even against our stringent defense are only off balance shots that luckily go in.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,398
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Feb 17, 2013 14:16:36 GMT -5
I understand what Deez Scruggs means when he says three pt defense is essentially luck, in that usually three pointers are open shots. The shooter either hits it or he doesn't, independent of the defense. But I also feel that our perimeter D has forced people to take really deep threes more often than they would like, and we usually have a hand in their face on closer attempts. Thus far this yr, teams don't seem to get many good looks against against us, as snowplow says. As good as our interior D has been, the perimeter D, IMO, has been equally good, if not better. We've been quite disruptive on D. Gasaway has a nice article up at ESPN Insider. QUOTE:Thompson's men have arrived at this point thanks primarily to outstanding defense. Over the course of this seven-game win streak, Georgetown has held opponents to just 0.88 points per possession. This has brought the team's defensive efficiency for the conference season as a whole down to 0.92 points allowed per trip, and the Hoyas are rapidly closing in on Louisville (0.91) for the league lead in that category. When you think "defense" in the Big East, most people think first of the Cardinals, but the Hoyas have proved they deserve mention in that same echelon.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,443
|
Post by lichoya68 on Feb 17, 2013 17:32:47 GMT -5
bmartin GREAT POINT about our foul shot defence which i have always JOKED ABOUT but there might be a little something to it shut down the outside shooters and then they HAVE to get it inside where the bigs tend to be poorer foul shooters. .HMMMMM interesting good point gohoyas have great three and two and FOUL SHOT DEFENSE vs the blue demons MUST WIN. ;D ;D ;DBE MEAN ;D ;D ;D ITS FEBRUARY NOW FOR REAL. HOYAS TIME.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2013 18:12:57 GMT -5
Breaking….. Seth Davis Responds to his Critics on Twitter…
Seth Davis @sethdavishoops He stole my lunch money RT @getatcharthur: Any reason for not having John Thompson III in your top 20 COY candidates?
|
|
|
Post by bigelephant on Feb 17, 2013 19:54:59 GMT -5
Everyone is a TRAP game ( literalists GTH} bring it on wth all we got and really make this one a laugher - an easy win is nice for the heart!!
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,558
|
Post by tashoya on Feb 17, 2013 20:03:19 GMT -5
Is a trap game even possible at this point? If part of the lesson from the USF game wasn't that you need to bring it every day, I'm not sure that will ever sink in. That said, I think this team gets it. We don't always play well but it certainly doesn't look to me that we're ever not giving the effort or that our guys aren't engaged. Go get em Hoyas!
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Feb 17, 2013 20:14:26 GMT -5
I understand the idea of 3pt % defense being hard to measure, but I find it is far from just being about luck. Just because Kenpom cannot come up with a metric to measure 3pt defense, does not mean we should just consider it luck. I am glad he is coming around a little on this point.
Also, reducing shots taken is nice in theory, but was anyone "upset" that Cincy took 24 threes, of which probably 16 were bad shots? Shots taken does not tell the story either. Unfortunately, I do not think there is a nice and clean answer to measuring 3 pt defense. I put much more stock in who is taking the shot and if it is challenged. I have no problem if the defense lets a 27% shooter take as many challenged 3s as he would like, however, I would be disappointed if the defense allowed the best shooter on the opposing team to get open looks. There is also a big difference between a wide open kick out for a three in the rhythm of the offense versus a 3 point shot rushed at the end of the shot clock after playing suffocating half court defense for 34 seconds.
I guess what I mean is not all 3pt attempts are equal and some are actually the result of great defense. So good luck to anyone in trying to find a way to measure it, but I can see, the Hoyas are pretty damn good 3pt defenders!
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Feb 18, 2013 0:17:20 GMT -5
I understand the idea of 3pt % defense being hard to measure, but I find it is far from just being about luck. Just because Kenpom cannot come up with a metric to measure 3pt defense, does not mean we should just consider it luck. I am glad he is coming around a little on this point. Also, reducing shots taken is nice in theory, but was anyone "upset" that Cincy took 24 threes, of which probably 16 were bad shots? Shots taken does not tell the story either. Unfortunately, I do not think there is a nice and clean answer to measuring 3 pt defense. I put much more stock in who is taking the shot and if it is challenged. I have no problem if the defense lets a 27% shooter take as many challenged 3s as he would like, however, I would be disappointed if the defense allowed the best shooter on the opposing team to get open looks. There is also a big difference between a wide open kick out for a three in the rhythm of the offense versus a 3 point shot rushed at the end of the shot clock after playing suffocating half court defense for 34 seconds. I guess what I mean is not all 3pt attempts are equal and some are actually the result of great defense. So good luck to anyone in trying to find a way to measure it, but I can see, the Hoyas are pretty damn good 3pt defenders! Yea, I think this is pretty much what we've been trying to say. All you have to do is watch this team the past two years to realize it's not just luck. Not only do we take away the interior, but we generally challenge the bad shots from the outside too, making them even worse. That's definitely not luck. I've never really understood the whole "trap game" fascination. Truly good teams don't lose to Depaul at home while in the midst of a 7 game winning streak (and 9 of 10). They just don't. If this team is as good as we think they are, this will be a dominating win, with our bench - namely Moses and AB - getting significantly more minutes than they have recently to give our stars a bit of a breather before going into the dome.
|
|
hoyazeke
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,837
|
Post by hoyazeke on Feb 18, 2013 1:00:50 GMT -5
Gtown really hasn't dominate anyone. The ND game is the only one that comes to mind in the BE. We normally win gritty games in which we turn a 4 pt lead into a 8-10 pt win late. DePaul can score and Melvin would be a BE POY candidate if he were on Quette or any other Top 5 BE team. It's really easy for a team to get caught looking pass a team like DePaul when things are going as good as they are now. We should win the game but I wouldn't be surprised to see a 57-51 final score............
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Feb 18, 2013 2:20:08 GMT -5
One at a time. All this talk about polls, Big East finish, and seeding is all premature.
Take care of 'em one at a time and the rest will take care of itself.
I still see 4 very possible losses left for this team - I hope they are practicing and guarding against the same.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Feb 18, 2013 2:45:37 GMT -5
Gtown really hasn't dominate anyone. The ND game is the only one that comes to mind in the BE. We normally win gritty games in which we turn a 4 pt lead into a 8-10 pt win late. DePaul can score and Melvin would be a BE POY candidate if he were on Quette or any other Top 5 BE team. It's really easy for a team to get caught looking pass a team like DePaul when things are going as good as they are now. We should win the game but I wouldn't be surprised to see a 57-51 final score............ We beat Seton Hall by 22 at home. Both St. John's games we dominated pretty easily. ND as you pointed out. Depaul puts up points because they play fast and take tons of shots, but they're not very efficient. And they're by far the worst defensive team in the BE. If we only score 57, that's a bad sign and we probably lose. I'm thinking more like 72-60. Would love to see 83-61 or something.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Feb 18, 2013 9:27:14 GMT -5
One at a time. All this talk about polls, Big East finish, and seeding is all premature. Take care of 'em one at a time and the rest will take care of itself. I still see 4 very possible losses left for this team - I hope they are practicing and guarding against the same. I get what you're trying to do here, man, but this is a message board. These things, talk radio, websites, etc. wouldn't exist if fans were required to take things one at a time. The players have to do that. Last I checked we weren't suiting up.
|
|
skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Post by skyhoya on Feb 18, 2013 9:35:33 GMT -5
BigDog, this is everyone's Board , not yours. Pound sand!
|
|