Friday, February 26, 2010

Indiana Box Score Observations - The Bloomington Blowout Version

Opening Comments: Last game against IU I suggested the Hoosiers do not have a B10 quality defense. They have not learned to play D in the last 12 days.

It is hard to imagine that this team beat Pittsburg, Minnesota and gave PU a run in Bloomington. They simply cannot protect the ball or shoot it well. I keep hearing about the rebuilding job Crean has in front of him, but he certainly does not have the talent on his roster after two years to get it done. I know Creek is likely a star, but who else?

Summarizing the game in a few words: UW had a great shooting day while IU kicked the ball around and then bricked their shots.

Pace: The game had 65 possessions, our 5 most of the season and third most in conference behind PU and PSU (which had an OT).

Efficiency: Was it offense or defense? Both, but mostly defense.

Indiana scored at .71 PPP. That is very poor. It is by far the worst in conference (or should I say our best defense?). Second place goes all the way back to the PSU road game January 3. Our conference opponent’s PPP is now at .96 PPP (it had taken a beating with the Minnesota and NU games). Only Oakland and Cal Poly had more anemic offensive performances than IU.

UW lit them up with 1.20 PPP, our 8th best of the year. By the way, this same offensive efficiency would have nosed out NU last week (65 to 63) and would not have been enough to beat Minnesota (Minnesota would have won 68 to 64).

Shooting: UW won the quality battles in all phases of shooting against the defenseless Hoosier. UW took only 21% of their FGA’s from beyond the arc, our second fewest of the year.

eFG%: UW had a great day shooting. Our eFG% was 62% to IU’s 35%. In conference we had been shooting at 51% and holding our opponents to 47%. Holding IU to 35% was our best in conference, with MSU’s 39% now second best.

3 pt shooting: IU was a perfect 0-5 from the arc. UW was a staggering 8-11, 73% from deep. Yikes! That is far and away our best shooting from deep and our best defense from deep (obviously). UW outscored them by 24 points at the arc.

2pt shooting: IU was also inept from inside the arc. They scored 18 times on 46 chances, 39% shooting. UW got 21 on 42 chances, 50%. UW picked up another 6 inside the arc.

1pt shooting: IU completed their trifecta of incompetence by shooting a bricklaiden 10-20 from the line, 50%. UW was a robust 12-15, 80%. We would have lost the quantity battle by even more if not for IU’s generosity of coughing up technicals and giving JBO 6 extra FTA’s.

Rebounding: Indiana did well on the offensive glass, UW did well on their offensive glass. IU was slightly better.

This is where the raw numbers need to be analyzed. IU outrebounded UW by 13 (38 to 25) yet the boards were more or less a draw. How can that be?

UW Defensive end: Due to IU’s ineffective shooting, there were plenty of offensive rebounding opportunities for IU. IU bricked enough shots to have 38 rebounding chances and they got 14, or 37% of their misses. That gave them extra chances to miss more shots.

UW Offensive End: UW shot better and had fewer rebounding chances – 25 compared to IU’s 38. UW grabbed 8 of their misses, 6 fewer than IU’s 14 offensive rebounds. But, with the 8 being divided by a smaller number, the percentages were about the same – IU 37%, UW 32%.

Turnovers: IU had 18 for 28%. UW had an unusually bumbling day giving it up 14 or 22%, our fourth worst of the year and third worst in conference, with at OSU being the worst at 25%. So, UW had an advantage, but not as big of an advantage as might be expected.

Opportunity Index: Believe it or not the OI went IU’s way. UW was a -2 (minus 6 offensive rebounds, plus 4 turnovers).

Quantity and Quality: IU had a narrow victory in quantity and was slaughtered in quality.

IU took two fewer FGA’s (53 to 51) but got to the line more (10 to 5) to give IU more trips with shot attempts. The quality was heavily in UW’s favor: eFG% +17 and FT% +30.

Fouls: IU fouled 17 times and UW 18. IU ended up taking 20 FTA’s and UW only 12, 6 of which were thanks to technicals.

Playing time: Leuer started in Jarmusz’s spot and played 26 minutes. Besides the starters, Wilson got 17, Jarmusz 15 and Evans 11.

Crean (and his replacement) played 8 ten or more minutes and one (Moore) 8 minutes. They were looking for someone who could defend and shoot, but found none.

Notable Performances: This could be a long list …

Hughes got 17 on 9 shots, Keaton scored 14 on 7 shots, Leuer 13 on 14 shots (7 boards and 4 blocks), Taylor 13 on 11 shots and JBo 11 on but 4 (but 5-6 shooting technicals). Starters, long will the tales of your exploits be told around the campfires of my people.

Jarmusz got 5 on one shot from the floor, two from the line and added two boards. Brusewitz only played 8 minutes yet got 3 boards.

Grading Shetown’s Predictions

1. Jason Bohannon knocks down more than 3 treys. He has been on fire for the last few weeks and Indiana will let it continue. Miss. JBo did not try a three.

2. Jon Leuer scores 19 points or more. He refinds his stride from pre-injury against a terrible defense. Miss. Jon scored 13, but added 7 boards and 4 blocks.

3. Badgers shoot better than 40% from beyond the arc. They’ve been on a roll at threes lately and I think it continues. Major hit. They hit a sizzling 8-11, 73 % outpacing IU’s 50% from the free throw line, in their own gym.

4. The Badgers grab more than 34% of the rebounding opportunities on offense and more than 75% on defense. Indiana is a terrible rebounding team. Miss. Close on the badger rebounding (32%) and IU did well getting 37% or we only got 63%, not 75% of the defensive boards.

Shetown’s Prediction: The Badgers win 70-56 in 64 possessions, making Tom think that he should have stayed at the office and tanned instead of coming to the game. Hit. UW 78 to 46 in 65.

Closing Thoughts: I wonder if IU is glad they gave Crean a two year extension before he coached his first game? I think he has 8 more years on his contract. I wonder how the IU faithful are going to react to their performance. That should be fun to watch.

Now, on to the home game with Iowa, a blowout loser to NU. Let me think, Iowa will have to beat UW on our home court on senior day. Good luck.

Let’s not forget that this was a B10 road win. All road wins are good wins, even against a poor IU team.

I never read the board until after this has been posted, so if it has been discussed, my apologies. When Crean grabbed two technicals, it reminded me of the time Kevin O’Neal got kicked out of a game in Madison that they had all but lost. To me, his message was, “We lost the game, but the ref’s were at fault.” It took the focus away from the real issue – your team sucks and our team is better than yours. I assume Crean’s explosion was pent up anger over a 3-12 season.

I wonder how much house Creaning he will do with this team. They only lose Dumas. Shetown will need a GPS system to track where these guys end up next year.

This is a good Badger team that has been great fun to watch. We are lucky to have Bo as our coach.

No comments:

Post a Comment