hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Mar 10, 2020 15:16:25 GMT -5
I think you have to look at the teams we played and how good they are offensively. These are the KP O numbers for each team and I broke it into Pre/post defections and conference.
MSM - 281 Central Arkansas - 257 Penn State - 44 Ga. State - 98 Texas - 154 Duke - 9 UNCG - 159 Avg = 143
OK St - 86 SMU - 28 SUcks - 23 UMBC - 270 Samford - 245 American - 201 Average = 142
BE Creighton - 3 Nova - 15 Seton Hall - 29 Butler - 25 Marquette - 14 Providence - 76 Xavier - 102 St. John - 99 Depaul - 176 Avg = 60
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Mar 10, 2020 15:28:34 GMT -5
I think you have to look at the teams we played and how good they are offensively. These are the KP O numbers for each team and I broke it into Pre/post defections and conference. MSM - 281 Central Arkansas - 257 Penn State - 44 Ga. State - 98 Texas - 154 Duke - 9 UNCG - 159 Avg = 143 OK St - 86 SMU - 28 SUcks - 23 UMBC - 270 Samford - 245 American - 201 Average = 142 BE Creighton - 3 Nova - 15 Seton Hall - 29 Butler - 25 Marquette - 14 Providence - 76 Xavier - 102 St. John - 99 Depaul - 176 Avg = 60 Maybe I've misinterpreted Adj D efficiency but isn't that exactly what it's doing? Just want to make sure I'm interpreting the stat correctly Game Adj. DE = PPPd / (Opponent's Adj. OE / Average PPP)
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Mar 10, 2020 15:30:42 GMT -5
Anyone want to guess who the only rotation player with an on floor positive point per possession in conference play was? The answer is Tim I. I guess there could be some question over whether he was a rotation player but I would say in conference play he was. He had 189 possessions so not exactly a small number. The biggest factor was that Tim had the only OPPP over 1. In digging the OReb % was much higher with him out there as well as FT rate. The OReb makes sense the FT rate is weird. Jahavon was 2nd in OPP at 1. One thing that stood out was Jahvon had by far the biggest difference in ON/OFF OPPP at +.13. Most everyone else (except Tim I) was around 0 to -.1. Tim and Jahvon were on the floor for 183 out of 189 of Tim's possessions and for some reason that proved to be our best 2 man combination.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Mar 10, 2020 15:37:16 GMT -5
I think you have to look at the teams we played and how good they are offensively. These are the KP O numbers for each team and I broke it into Pre/post defections and conference. MSM - 281 Central Arkansas - 257 Penn State - 44 Ga. State - 98 Texas - 154 Duke - 9 UNCG - 159 Avg = 143 OK St - 86 SMU - 28 SUcks - 23 UMBC - 270 Samford - 245 American - 201 Average = 142 BE Creighton - 3 Nova - 15 Seton Hall - 29 Butler - 25 Marquette - 14 Providence - 76 Xavier - 102 St. John - 99 Depaul - 176 Avg = 60 Maybe I've misinterpreted Adj D efficiency but isn't that exactly what it's doing? Just want to make sure I'm interpreting the stat correctly Game Adj. DE = PPPd / (Opponent's Adj. OE / Average PPP) I quoted the wrong person. I was looking at it purely from the original post which had pure PPP. I will go back and look at your #'s now. It's very hard to lump a Mac/Yurt into 1 though as they played 5 different games out of 12 if I remember correctly. Overall we are in agreement though. Even with everyone in place we were still very bad and not pretty good as the original post said. edit - Also not to go to far down the rabbit hole but of the 6 game OOC stretch post defection a few were with Myron/Galen and 5 of the 6 were blowouts which leads to some garbage time and bad data.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Mar 10, 2020 15:57:55 GMT -5
Maybe I've misinterpreted Adj D efficiency but isn't that exactly what it's doing? Just want to make sure I'm interpreting the stat correctly Game Adj. DE = PPPd / (Opponent's Adj. OE / Average PPP) I quoted the wrong person. I was looking at it purely from the original post which had pure PPP. I will go back and look at your #'s now. It's very hard to lump a Mac/Yurt into 1 though as they played 5 different games out of 12 if I remember correctly. Overall we are in agreement though. Even with everyone in place we were still very bad and not pretty good as the original post said. edit - Also not to go to far down the rabbit hole but of the 6 game OOC stretch post defection a few were with Myron/Galen and 5 of the 6 were blowouts which leads to some garbage time and bad data. All good we're on same page. FWIW Bart Torvik tries to adjust for blowouts. Unfortunately it doesn't carry through the individual game scores I used, it's more an adjustment on the top of the relative game value. An adjustment that discounts blowouts in mismatches—if the margin of victory (MOV) is more than 10 points and the difference in Barthags is above a threshold, the game starts getting discounted. If the MOV is 20 points or higher, the discount is (Higher Barthag - Lower Barthag - .5) * 2. So if a team with a Barthag of .8000 is playing a team with a Barthag of .2000, and it wins by 20 points, the game value will be 1 - (.8 - .2 -.5) * 2, or 80%
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 10, 2020 17:40:51 GMT -5
To my knowledge, KenPom doesn't allow you to pick and choose games on defense and combine them, but you can see the Conference stats:
2018: 111.9 Adjusted D efficiency 2019: 108.2 Adjusted D efficiency 2020: 108.5 Adjusted D efficiency
So yeah, really no improvement. I don't think the short roster means our defense was necessarily worse than it otherwise would have been. Listen, I like McClung and I think it'll be absolutely wonderful to get him back for next year...BUT with all that said, the kid simply isn't very good on defense. His injury meant more time for Allen and Mosely, who are clearly better defenders than him. And, Yurtseven wasn't a great defender either (though we certainly missed his offense).
The fact is our Big East defense in 2018 was worse than anybody but Marquette, and the last two years it's been the worst in the conference. To show how we aren't even remotely close to decent, the 9th place team this year was DePaul at 105.8, compared to our 108.5.
I realize this is ancient history now, but to give you a comparison, our best defensive team in the last 20 years was 2013, when our Adjusted D efficiency in conference was 91.3 compared to 108.5 this year. Even the 2017 team was 105.0.
And, an aside: Georgetown's Big East D efficiency is almost always (perhaps always, but I haven't looked) much better in total (i.e., with the OOC) than in the Big East simply because the Big East teams are better, and thus, we won't be as efficient.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2020 19:01:20 GMT -5
To me it looks this way: We were playing pretty well defensively, but struggling to find our offense. Then mass exodus... We started playing well offensively which was hiding some defensive problems caused by the shrinking rotation. Then Big East... Our offense struggled to maintain, our defense got worse, and everybody started fading as the months & minutes wore on. Good thought exercise. Below is the same but with Adjusted D efficiency as that's cleaner than trying to guess the impact of looking at Mt. St. Mary's and Duke through the same lens. These are Bart Torvik numbers. I'm sure KenPom adjustment is slightly different but same premise. Also it's really important to add in national and big east ranks before we say what's a fair target imo. Adj D Before Josh / James left: 98.82. If that was our Adj D for entire year that would be 98th in nation and last in the Big East Adj D from losing James/Josh > Before losing BOTH Mac & Yurt: 96.66. surprisingly our largest number of games and best stretch by this exercise (Thanks UMBC and St Johns, even with adjusting). That would be 67th in nation, 8th in Big East, right ahead of Creighton Adj D final stretch: 103.85: 210th in nation and last in Big East by a country mile The narrative that the team simply ran out of gas holds and is fair, but it's harder to explain the middle section or argue that we were on the right track through 7 games. Can debate where the Ok St and SMU games belong w Gardner and Alexander. The gap between the first and second group narrows if you move those two games (ends up at 97.6 and 97.06 instead, both of those are still 9th in Big East). My broader point is if you throw out the last stretch, we're still talking about a defense that would be last or 9th in Big East. Maybe it's slightly better or largely the same as last year but I don't think that puts us in a spot to be competitive. I should have included the adjusted stats as well, but... -- I DO think that's a significant difference. 98.8 for the year wouldn't have been good and still would've been last in the BE, but it would've put us in the top 100 (from 142) and had us in (or very near in) the tourney. The 10th rank belies the fact that's a very different team. -- We were at 95.5 before the conference schedule began. That's around the low 50s overall and around 7th or 8th in conference. Again - not where you hope you'd be eventually, but that's MAJOR improvement over last year and would've had us well in the tourney. So... 40% of the way through the year, we were an OK defensive team. And that had even improved after the defections. Then, the bottom fell out and we went 101.1 through the Big East and 103.8 down the final 7. (And not every team fades during BE play. 5 teams had a better AdjDE out of conference, and 5 better in.) Unless there's another angle I'm not considering (BE coaches have Ewing figured out?), the obvious answer for the freefall is we just didn't have the horses. Our defense WAS better nearly midway through the year - better than any of our teams since the 2015 team that made the tourney. Is it where you want it to be? I dunno. But I want to be in the tournament, and an Adj DE of 95.5 would've gotten us there. And 80% of the discussion about Ewing being a bad defensive coach would be hushed.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Mar 11, 2020 6:02:08 GMT -5
Good thought exercise. Below is the same but with Adjusted D efficiency as that's cleaner than trying to guess the impact of looking at Mt. St. Mary's and Duke through the same lens. These are Bart Torvik numbers. I'm sure KenPom adjustment is slightly different but same premise. Also it's really important to add in national and big east ranks before we say what's a fair target imo. Adj D Before Josh / James left: 98.82. If that was our Adj D for entire year that would be 98th in nation and last in the Big East Adj D from losing James/Josh > Before losing BOTH Mac & Yurt: 96.66. surprisingly our largest number of games and best stretch by this exercise (Thanks UMBC and St Johns, even with adjusting). That would be 67th in nation, 8th in Big East, right ahead of Creighton Adj D final stretch: 103.85: 210th in nation and last in Big East by a country mile The narrative that the team simply ran out of gas holds and is fair, but it's harder to explain the middle section or argue that we were on the right track through 7 games. Can debate where the Ok St and SMU games belong w Gardner and Alexander. The gap between the first and second group narrows if you move those two games (ends up at 97.6 and 97.06 instead, both of those are still 9th in Big East). My broader point is if you throw out the last stretch, we're still talking about a defense that would be last or 9th in Big East. Maybe it's slightly better or largely the same as last year but I don't think that puts us in a spot to be competitive. I should have included the adjusted stats as well, but... -- I DO think that's a significant difference. 98.8 for the year wouldn't have been good and still would've been last in the BE, but it would've put us in the top 100 (from 142) and had us in (or very near in) the tourney. The 10th rank belies the fact that's a very different team. -- We were at 95.5 before the conference schedule began. That's around the low 50s overall and around 7th or 8th in conference. Again - not where you hope you'd be eventually, but that's MAJOR improvement over last year and would've had us well in the tourney. So... 40% of the way through the year, we were an OK defensive team. And that had even improved after the defections. Then, the bottom fell out and we went 101.1 through the Big East and 103.8 down the final 7. (And not every team fades during BE play. 5 teams had a better AdjDE out of conference, and 5 better in.) Unless there's another angle I'm not considering (BE coaches have Ewing figured out?), the obvious answer for the freefall is we just didn't have the horses. Our defense WAS better nearly midway through the year - better than any of our teams since the 2015 team that made the tourney. Is it where you want it to be? I dunno. But I want to be in the tournament, and an Adj DE of 95.5 would've gotten us there. And 80% of the discussion about Ewing being a bad defensive coach would be hushed. That's fair, we can agree to disagree on the 98.8, I just went off your buckets and the way you broke it out. Being just at the cusp of 100 puts a lot of pressure on your offense to be top 25. The non-con 95.5 is definitely a more compelling number and it's fair, I didn't look at that number bc it wasn't one of your buckets. Agree the only other angle would be familiarity of BE teams but I'll absolutely agree if our defense was 95.5 then this wouldn't be a discussion. edit: only other thing that comes to mind is that the defense numbers being influenced by the offense. Our offensive efficiency dropped in conf play as we played better defenses. Could be a split between our transition defense and halfcourt defense if we were committing more turnovers etc.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Mar 11, 2020 12:27:16 GMT -5
Considering the PPP of the first 7 and last 6 OOC games was so close and as I showed the KP numbers were almost the same I find it difficult to grasp that the first 7 were that much better than the last 6 to get it down to a 95.55 average considering our two worst OOC games SMU and Syracuse. Could be difference between KP and BT.
|
|
gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
Member is Online
|
Post by gujake on Mar 11, 2020 14:24:06 GMT -5
The main argument I hear is... well we weren't very good defensively before everybody left... but the stats (as small a set as they are) don't show that to be true. To add some more data: KenPom Defensive Ranks (using wayback machine) at time Akinjo/Leblanc left = 87th at time Gardner/Alexander left = 96th current = 127th So, yeah, you are correct that things got worse and fatigue certainly played a role. But 87th is still very bad! 96th is still very bad! And the previous two years were also terrible. So, sure, if you want to say we were "horrible" instead of "atrocious" before the defections, I would agree, but to say we weren't bad on defense before everyone left? Not going to agree with you there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2020 15:11:40 GMT -5
The main argument I hear is... well we weren't very good defensively before everybody left... but the stats (as small a set as they are) don't show that to be true. To add some more data: KenPom Defensive Ranks (using wayback machine) at time Akinjo/Leblanc left = 87th at time Gardner/Alexander left = 96th current = 127th So, yeah, you are correct that things got worse and fatigue certainly played a role. But 87th is still very bad! 96th is still very bad! And the previous two years were also terrible. So, sure, if you want to say we were "horrible" instead of "atrocious" before the defections, I would agree, but to say we weren't bad on defense before everyone left? Not going to agree with you there. Yes. Should've been clearer there. I really meant "not not very good", not "very good". It's still pretty bad overall. But 40 spots (127 to 87) is a major difference, whether it's still bad or not. Creighton (77), St Mary's (96), and Iowa (99) are locks right now. UCLA (111), NC State (82), Miss St (119), and Northern Iowa (108) are squarely on the bubble, still fighting for spots. If we were in that neighborhood, we'd have a few more wins and be battling for a tourney spot ourselves - or maybe already in. And there wouldn't be 1k comments (& 1k opinions) about Pat's defensive coaching before the BET even starts.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 11, 2020 15:29:59 GMT -5
The main argument I hear is... well we weren't very good defensively before everybody left... but the stats (as small a set as they are) don't show that to be true. To add some more data: KenPom Defensive Ranks (using wayback machine) at time Akinjo/Leblanc left = 87th at time Gardner/Alexander left = 96th current = 127th So, yeah, you are correct that things got worse and fatigue certainly played a role. But 87th is still very bad! 96th is still very bad! And the previous two years were also terrible. So, sure, if you want to say we were "horrible" instead of "atrocious" before the defections, I would agree, but to say we weren't bad on defense before everyone left? Not going to agree with you there. Keep in mind that 7 games into the season, KenPom is also using projections, etc. in those adjustments, ratings, I believe, whereas at this point in the season, he is not (I think). So in that sense, the fact that our defensive ranking may have been better then doesn't necessary show all that much. It also reflects the fact that we shut down a few of the cupcake teams, which is a bit of an artificial boost to our defensive efficiency, since those teams are affected by height/length a lot more than teams in the Big East. I am sure everybody remembers games where Yurtseven dominated the smaller teams (Govan did the same thing last year), and while that makes the stats look good in those games, it's not really indicative of how good the defense is against better opponents. As others have said, even if one accepts that the defense was just better OOC, it was still, relatively speaking, not good. It was just a bit better than the horrible defense we are seeing now.
|
|