Whiplash

[IdahoAlum]

My it's amusing to see the pendulum swing on this board. Pre-season, we were hearing about a "Final Four" team. Now we're sticking collective forks in the carcass. Last year largely the same NU team was able to take Gonzaga to the final minutes in the NCAA tournament. Now we're being told NU isn't as athletic as Nebraska. When Anthony Gaines scored 24 points in NU's exhibition, folks were ready to install him in the starting lineup. Now we have posters burying his career two Big Ten games into it. As usual, I suspect the truth lay somewhere in between these vast extremes. I still think this is a capable roster with Big Ten quality athletes. Law, Lindsey, BMac, Pardon -- they didn't turn into chumps overnight. But they were probably never "Final Four" material either, despite what Clark Kellogg may have thought. Still, the fact that he would even utter such an assessment shows there is some "athleticism" there.

I guess the reality is that sometimes teams and players don't progress like we expect, they regress occasionally. Sometimes the chemistry that was so magical one season disappears the next. Sometimes opposing coaches scout you and learn how to exploit your weaknesses. And sometimes, maybe, you just weren't as good as you thought you were.

 

[TheC]

My it's amusing to see the pendulum swing on this board. Pre-season, we were hearing about a "Final Four" team. Now we're sticking collective forks in the carcass. Last year largely the same NU team was able to take Gonzaga to the final minutes in the NCAA tournament. Now we're being told NU isn't as athletic as Nebraska. When Anthony Gaines scored 24 points in NU's exhibition, folks were ready to install him in the starting lineup. Now we have posters burying his career two Big Ten games into it. As usual, I suspect the truth lay somewhere in between these vast extremes. I still think this is a capable roster with Big Ten quality athletes. Law, Lindsey, BMac, Pardon -- they didn't turn into chumps overnight. But they were probably never "Final Four" material either, despite what Clark Kellogg may have thought. Still, the fact that he would even utter such an assessment shows there is some "athleticism" there.

I guess the reality is that sometimes teams and players don't progress like we expect, they regress occasionally. Sometimes the chemistry that was so magical one season disappears the next. Sometimes opposing coaches scout you and learn how to exploit your weaknesses. And sometimes, maybe, you just weren't as good as you thought you were.

And sometimes its perfectly normal to be disappointed when a team you thought had a chance to be really great turns out to really lay an egg. I think most people's reactions around here are not surprising at all.

 

[Sec.112]

Yes, sometimes players progress. Sometimes they regress. And sometimes it rains. Think about that.

 

[blockm2]

I think there is a natural tendency for fans to see a program that has had continued improvement under a coach and expect that improvement to continue in a linear fashion year after year. Doesn't always happen. There is also a tendency for fans to see a degree of postseason success and project what it means going forward when in reality it's no more or less meaningful than other games throughout the season.

Last season objectively Northwestern finished #38 in KenPom, although that fluctuated between a high of #31 and a low of #62. There is always some luck involved. Last season, NU was probably a bit lucky in that opponents only shot 33% on 3s and 67% on FTs (both opponent 3pt% and FT% are mostly luck driven). This season they have conversely been a tad unlucky with opponents shooting over 38% on 3s.

So last year NU probably got a little lucky and the outcome of a few close games made fans see what they want to see and expect it to keep improving. In reality take away some good luck and add some bad and you see a step back. That doesn't change the overall narrative for the program IMHO, just means that success and improvement aren't linear.

 

[winnetkat]

Last season objectively Northwestern finished #38 in KenPom, although that fluctuated between a high of #31 and a low of #62. There is always some luck involved. Last season, NU was probably a bit lucky in that opponents only shot 33% on 3s and 67% on FTs (both opponent 3pt% and FT% are mostly luck driven). This season they have conversely been a tad unlucky with opponents shooting over 38% on 3s.

So last year NU probably got a little lucky and the outcome of a few close games made fans see what they want to see and expect it to keep improving. In reality take away some good luck and add some bad and you see a step back. That doesn't change the overall narrative for the program IMHO, just means that success and improvement aren't linear.

Was there a difference between home and away free through percentage last year? One of the benefits of Welsh-Ryan is that players were shooting free throws directly into an often distracting student section, so I wouldn't be surprised if some of that free throw percentage wasn't luck, but wasn't likely to be replicated at Allstate...

 

[Fitz51]

I think there is a natural tendency for fans to see a program that has had continued improvement under a coach and expect that improvement to continue in a linear fashion year after year. Doesn't always happen. There is also a tendency for fans to see a degree of postseason success and project what it means going forward when in reality it's no more or less meaningful than other games throughout the season.

Last season objectively Northwestern finished #38 in KenPom, although that fluctuated between a high of #31 and a low of #62. There is always some luck involved. Last season, NU was probably a bit lucky in that opponents only shot 33% on 3s and 67% on FTs (both opponent 3pt% and FT% are mostly luck driven). This season they have conversely been a tad unlucky with opponents shooting over 38% on 3s.

So last year NU probably got a little lucky and the outcome of a few close games made fans see what they want to see and expect it to keep improving. In reality take away some good luck and add some bad and you see a step back. That doesn't change the overall narrative for the program IMHO, just means that success and improvement aren't linear.

Really great, well-thought-out post. It’s not as easy as “which way is the wind blowing?”

 

[blockm2]

Was there a difference between home and away free through percentage last year? One of the benefits of Welsh-Ryan is that players were shooting free throws directly into an often distracting student section, so I wouldn't be surprised if some of that free throw percentage wasn't luck, but wasn't likely to be replicated at Allstate...

there is plenty of evidence that home courts in NBA and NCAA provide very little difference in FT shooting between home and road teams. While it seems like it should, it just doesn't matter.

If you look at random teams from college hoops that have rowdy home crowds, their opponents shoot FTs just like everybody else. Duke's opponent's FT% has ranged from good to bad to mediocre over the years. It's just random. Opponent 3 point shooting is similar (although not quite as completely random) since offenses really only take 3s when they are open shots. If you defend them well they won't take it unless it's an end of shot clock heave. That's why 3 pt defense is better measured by preventing attempts in the 1st place rather than what percentage get made.

It's not intuitive that luck can play such a role in the outcome of a season, but it happens every year. SMU's opponents have shot 63% on FTs this year and Ohio's have shot 82%. That's a massive disparity and while you can influence it somewhat by fouling big men and not guards, the fact that the skill isn't transferrable from year to year (or even within a year if you split it into 2 halves) just shows how much luck it is.

 

[winnetkat]

there is plenty of evidence that home courts in NBA and NCAA provide very little difference in FT shooting between home and road teams. While it seems like it should, it just doesn't matter.

I agree with blockm2 for the most part, but -- despite the background noise -- according to https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/opponent-free-throw-pct, Arizona State (of the "Curtain of Distraction" fame) and Northwestern have both been about 3.3-3.4% better than the average team at home free throw defense (see my worksheet below) from the last 5 "seasons"... 2013-2014 through yesterday (and there's already about a 1.4% difference between home and away free throw percentages). But instead of +7.5% home/away differential of Welsh-Ryan 2013-2017, the Wildcats are -4.3% so far this year. Luck? Environment? A little bit of both probably, but it does make me wish for the better free throw defense of yore!

 

[NJCat]

\ A little bit of both probably, but it does make me wish for the better free throw defense of yore!

Speedo Man.....

 

[blockm2]

I agree with blockm2 for the most part, but -- despite the background noise -- according to https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/opponent-free-throw-pct, Arizona State (of the "Curtain of Distraction" fame) and Northwestern have both been about 3.3-3.4% better than the average team at home free throw defense (see my worksheet below) from the last 5 "seasons"... 2013-2014 through yesterday (and there's already about a 1.4% difference between home and away free throw percentages). But instead of +7.5% home/away differential of Welsh-Ryan 2013-2017, the Wildcats are -4.3% so far this year. Luck? Environment? A little bit of both probably, but it does make me wish for the better free throw defense of yore!

I don't think 4 or 5 seasons is a big enough sample size when the difference is that small. Take MSU for example, their opponent FT% ranks going back by year (starting with this season)...140, 288, 259, 316, 322. Wow, that's pretty bad. And here I thought Breslin was a tough environment but yet their opponents have been money at the FT line for years. But then go back from there...54, 233, 33, 275, 179, 72. That's 2 great season of FT defense and some average ones mixed in with some bad.

You can go on and on and on with almost any team you can think of over a 10-15 year span.

ASU? Their wall of distraction may have gotten a small edge the first season it debuted for the sheer absurdity of it, but that was gone by the very next season and hasn't held since. They ranked #3 nationally in 2013-14, but have been 192, 169, 222, and 104 since.

NU's ranks going back by year...133, 20, 297, 52, 24, 5, 193, 207, 320, 274, 255, 146, etc. Hard to discern any pattern in that except some years it is good and some it is bad.

 

[mikewebb68]

My it's amusing to see the pendulum swing on this board. Pre-season, we were hearing about a "Final Four" team. Now we're sticking collective forks in the carcass. Last year largely the same NU team was able to take Gonzaga to the final minutes in the NCAA tournament. Now we're being told NU isn't as athletic as Nebraska. When Anthony Gaines scored 24 points in NU's exhibition, folks were ready to install him in the starting lineup. Now we have posters burying his career two Big Ten games into it. As usual, I suspect the truth lay somewhere in between these vast extremes. I still think this is a capable roster with Big Ten quality athletes. Law, Lindsey, BMac, Pardon -- they didn't turn into chumps overnight. But they were probably never "Final Four" material either, despite what Clark Kellogg may have thought. Still, the fact that he would even utter such an assessment shows there is some "athleticism" there.

I guess the reality is that sometimes teams and players don't progress like we expect, they regress occasionally. Sometimes the chemistry that was so magical one season disappears the next. Sometimes opposing coaches scout you and learn how to exploit your weaknesses. And sometimes, maybe, you just weren't as good as you thought you were.

Unfortunately, it is the nature of the internet, We can't prevent the hyperposters who know zero about college basketball from posting, nor the trolls, though there are far fewer of the latter since we made the Dance.

 

[EvanstonCat]

My it's amusing to see the pendulum swing on this board. Pre-season, we were hearing about a "Final Four" team. Now we're sticking collective forks in the carcass. Last year largely the same NU team was able to take Gonzaga to the final minutes in the NCAA tournament. Now we're being told NU isn't as athletic as Nebraska. When Anthony Gaines scored 24 points in NU's exhibition, folks were ready to install him in the starting lineup. Now we have posters burying his career two Big Ten games into it. As usual, I suspect the truth lay somewhere in between these vast extremes. I still think this is a capable roster with Big Ten quality athletes. Law, Lindsey, BMac, Pardon -- they didn't turn into chumps overnight. But they were probably never "Final Four" material either, despite what Clark Kellogg may have thought. Still, the fact that he would even utter such an assessment shows there is some "athleticism" there.

I guess the reality is that sometimes teams and players don't progress like we expect, they regress occasionally. Sometimes the chemistry that was so magical one season disappears the next. Sometimes opposing coaches scout you and learn how to exploit your weaknesses. And sometimes, maybe, you just weren't as good as you thought you were.

The disappointment is in finding out that not only aren't we ahead of the Coach K plan, we're not on the plan at all...

I'm still dazed and trying to figure out what happened. I really thought we were becoming a basketball school.

 

[ricko654321]

I don't think 4 or 5 seasons is a big enough sample size when the difference is that small. Take MSU for example, their opponent FT% ranks going back by year (starting with this season)...140, 288, 259, 316, 322. Wow, that's pretty bad. And here I thought Breslin was a tough environment but yet their opponents have been money at the FT line for years. But then go back from there...54, 233, 33, 275, 179, 72. That's 2 great season of FT defense and some average ones mixed in with some bad.

You can go on and on and on with almost any team you can think of over a 10-15 year span.

ASU? Their wall of distraction may have gotten a small edge the first season it debuted for the sheer absurdity of it, but that was gone by the very next season and hasn't held since. They ranked #3 nationally in 2013-14, but have been 192, 169, 222, and 104 since.

NU's ranks going back by year...133, 20, 297, 52, 24, 5, 193, 207, 320, 274, 255, 146, etc. Hard to discern any pattern in that except some years it is good and some it is bad.

I agree with you that FT% defense is essentially random. Completely so against NBA players, maybe slightly less so against college players but still close to it.

3 Pt% Defense however is decidedly not random. It may fluctuate quite a bit from year to year, especially in college, but in the NBA using the SportVU data and all that you can find plenty to suggest that some teams are legitimately good at defending the 3 and some are bad. Some also put more focus on it and force higher portions of shots not from 3 (or allow higher portions from 3). Some are better at ensuring that 3's are contested. etc etc etc. The fact that our 3 pt defense has gone from 33% to 38% this year is not random, it is a product of worse defense.

 

[Fitz51]

I agree with you that FT% defense is essentially random.

Unless you're Dennis Rodman versus Karl Malone.

 

[blockm2]

I agree with you that FT% defense is essentially random. Completely so against NBA players, maybe slightly less so against college players but still close to it.

3 Pt% Defense however is decidedly not random. It may fluctuate quite a bit from year to year, especially in college, but in the NBA using the SportVU data and all that you can find plenty to suggest that some teams are legitimately good at defending the 3 and some are bad. Some also put more focus on it and force higher portions of shots not from 3 (or allow higher portions from 3). Some are better at ensuring that 3's are contested. etc etc etc. The fact that our 3 pt defense has gone from 33% to 38% this year is not random, it is a product of worse defense.

At the college level there is a plethora of evidence that opponent 3pt percentage is mostly random noise. You can feel free to believe that a 5 point change in that is purely worse defense, but it's likely not.