Sure, Joe, whatever you say.
Even if true, that means it sure is one weak bubble.
Next 12 out?
- Thread starter macarthur31
- Start date
Sure, Joe, whatever you say.
Even if true, that means it sure is one weak bubble.
Yeah, it's strange and somewhat unfortunate given we are out of the running for NCAA Tourney (barring a big BTT run). But this year our KenPom and related metrics are actually more flattering than our record. We are #51 in KenPom despite having a 15-13 record and 6-11 in B1G. We are #55 in NET - both that and the #51 KenPom are 1 spot ahead of Indiana, who is viewed as right on the edge of the bubble. That KenPom number compares to #41 and #38 in 2024 and 2023 when finishing with a 22-12 record and solidly above .500 B1G records both seasons. We've had a whole bunch of close losses this year unfortunately, and recently a few comfortable conference wins (Indiana, OSU, Minnesota) that are helping that number. We are #308 out of 364 in "Luck" rating this year at -0.087 - which over 28 games played I believe means that are expected to have 2.4 more wins (i.e. our Pythagorean win total based solely on point differentials). 2 more wins would put us at 17-11 and I think we'd be hanging right around the bubble. While we've had our share of close wins (2 in OT!), the Iowa and PSU losses really stand out - one from a whistle dubiously taking away a Barnhizer 3 and then an Iowa almost halfcourt buzzer beater, the other from some egregious reffing all the way through. That's basketball though, sadly. And then the injury bug hit us.
Impressed by this team's resilience, as many others have stated. Coming back from that brutal Nebraska loss, I did not at all expect us to rebound with 2 convincing road wins.
(Note: We were positive in "Luck" in both 2023 and 2024, though by much less than we are negative this year: +0.025 and +0.015)
Sometimes, it just comes down to winning enough games.
The number of times I've rued the Butler, Iowa, Penn State, Michigan, and now Nebraska losses in the last week...yuck. Flip three of those due to the crazy circumstances and we're right there. And that's not even addressing Washington and Oregon, where we likely win one or both with a healthy roster. Just one of those years.
Amazingly, though, there's still plenty to play for. Gotta beat Iowa Friday to preserve a crack at the BTT. From there, 9-11 is mathematically possible, and our Kenpom/NET would likely get into the low/mid-40s due to putative wins over quality UCLA and Maryland teams (the latter on the road). And there will be Big Ten/SEC/Big 12 teams getting into the field this year with sub-.500 records.
I'm not counting on it, but the fact that this is even possible is quite a testament to the mental toughness and development of the players on the floor, plus the ability of the staff to shapeshift an entire roster in February.
Appreciate the breakdown from a fellow kenpom subscriber. Last night it sure felt like the refs were making up for a season of bad calls (the debt is still there, mind you).
I look at the FTA/FGA - and while it's considered the weakest of the 4 Factors, (I think Oliver rates it around 15%), the 'Cats are 17th offensively, and dead last defensively. In short, we don't get to the line as much as the average B1G team, and we sure put our opponents on the line at a higher rate than the average B1G team.
This year, especially with Barnhizer - he and Martinelli were mid-range and at the rim type scorers. Collins was pleading for this in post-game pressers - why haven't his wings gotten to the line? Nicholson's best OReb% year has anchored perhaps the best OReb% team in the Collins era (32.6/3rd in B1G - which is better than Pardon-era '20 when the 'Cats grabbed 30%/3rd). There should be more calls earned from stickbacks attempts. Defensively, yes, with younger players getting more minutes, they are susceptible to fouling more given they're trying to adapt to the faster pace of play and losing bad habits. However, that Penn State road game where the Nits marched to the line 45 times (!) - c'mon, right?
All is to say - that specific factor for us has been quite significant - perhaps a 2-3 possession swing per game, and given the close losses we've endured, perhaps that's what accounts for the "bad luck" on that stat.
Agreeing with everything said above, I have been really happy to see Windham and Angelo's growth ... we still have plenty to play for this year but I already feel better about the long offseason with Martinelli, another year of those two and the freshmen coming in.
For what it's worth, the "Luck" number is just the sum total of the expected wins based on point differential in each game, compared to actual wins. Fewer FTs than our opponents is something that has hurt us and likely contributed to us underperforming our potential wins in a general sense. But the "Luck" thing is basically saying that we've lost more close games than we've won. More FTs could have helped that but I think it would be more of an indirect relationship than a direct one.
Similar threads
