It doesn't matter if you tell them or not. They have the film. So its not a secret.
Illinois 66, Oakland 54 Postgame
- Status
Very True. Good luck convincing this board or the modern fan of that fact though.
....Also relevant because some of our passing last night looked similar.
was definitely shaky
MDchicago
- Lake Norman NC
Not a defender in any respect of the NCAA or the NET, but do recall reading (e.g., the Andy Katz article linked below) that NET ratings cap the impact of scoring margin at 10 points per game. Not sure if that has changed, but Chat GPT still mentions 10 point scoring margin cap in its description of the NET.
Regardless, for scheduling purposes, I think that programs that view themselves as good enough to win multiple games in the tournament are better served to
schedule competition that will challenge them and make them better by providing meaningful opportunities for growth and experience, rather than building a non-con schedule around trying to game the NET by playing cupcakes. Would feel differently if I was a coach trying to save my job or thought my team was marginal/on the bubble.
Katz link
<<<The NCAA Evaluation Tool, or NET, will be the new barometer for the committee, and it will include game results, strength of schedule, game location, scoring margin (capping at 10 points per game), and net offensive and defensive efficiency.
The committee did consider using the game date, an uncapped scoring margin, distance traveled and days of rest before a game but decided against using these in the equation.
“This will have the components of all the metrics,’’ said Gonzaga coach Mark Few, one of the coaches from the National Association of Basketball Coaches who was a consultant on the project. “This will prevent the outliers,” Few said. “There were teams and leagues that were able to trick the RPI, either intentionally or unintentionally. We have all the technology and analytics, and it was silly not to use it...>>>
Yes but offense and defense efficiency are uncapped
I thought the same thing. It was obvious that we don’t practice any of the shots that they were forcing us to take. Lots of bricks. We just looked uncomfortable all night. Good to see us find a way on a tough night though.
ptgrd23
- orange county CA
Illini defense designed to prevent 3's and dunks. Force opponents to shoot mid range jumpers. Oakland did this to us with their zone.
We did not punish them on the boards. We had too more turnovers trying difficult interior passes and being sloppy with the ball on the perimeter. Somebody besides Tomas has to score inside. Last year Quincy would drive from corner, Marcus and Dain would post up. Maybe we missed Ty.
We also did not fast break. Last year TSJ would push the ball up on the court at every opportunity. Brad should have been all over the team for not throwing the outlet pass and getting easy fast break buckets.
Great job by Brad to schedule Oakland. We are lucky that Jack Golke graduated or we may have been looking at a home loss
We did not punish them on the boards. We had too more turnovers trying difficult interior passes and being sloppy with the ball on the perimeter. Somebody besides Tomas has to score inside. Last year Quincy would drive from corner, Marcus and Dain would post up. Maybe we missed Ty.
We also did not fast break. Last year TSJ would push the ball up on the court at every opportunity. Brad should have been all over the team for not throwing the outlet pass and getting easy fast break buckets.
Great job by Brad to schedule Oakland. We are lucky that Jack Golke graduated or we may have been looking at a home loss
Illini defense designed to prevent 3's and dunks. Force opponents to shoot mid range jumpers. Oakland did this to us with their zone.
We did not punish them on the boards. We had too more turnovers trying difficult interior passes and being sloppy with the ball on the perimeter. Somebody besides Tomas has to score inside. Last year Quincy would drive from corner, Marcus and Dain would post up. Maybe we missed Ty.
We also did not fast break. Last year TSJ would push the ball up on the court at every opportunity. Brad should have been all over the team for not throwing the outlet pass and getting easy fast break buckets.
View attachment 37318
Great job by Brad to schedule Oakland. We are lucky that Jack Golke graduated or we may have been looking at a home loss
Thing that sticks out to me in that game graphic is 32 points in the paint, 7 threes (and 13 free throws). I think that's two games in a row with zero mid-range points scored?
If we land KJ first would Kylan even have been a take?
Early on NET did include margin of victory as an additional input which they did state they capped, however they deemed it redundant in 2020 and removed it. And while margin of victory is indeed already included in efficiency metrics (it's scaled by number of possessions), this change made NET more volatile and made blowouts worth even more than they already were.
And the Mark Few comment is indeed correct, there were ways to take advantage of the shortfalls of rpi/sos, and there are ways to take advantage of the shortfalls of efficiency stats, and smart teams took advantage. I detailed those shortfalls in my post. That said, NET has it's own shortfalls, and teams and coaches are currently taking advantage of it. Now whether they benefit your team outside of seeding purposes is another question...
So long and the short of it, NET no longer uses margin of victory as a separate input. Raw efficiency though is still included which is just your margin of victory scaled by number of possessions and then it's compared to your expected efficiency margin against said team. The better actual is vs expected, the more you rise, the worse, the more you fall.
Why wouldn't the Illini want the second best guard on the team?
Of course. Would Boswell have come is another question.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
From everything I’ve read, I agree with every word of this.
What remains unclear to me is how much your own NET rating matters vs NET simply being a tool to measure who you’ve beaten and lost to.
I personally think Brad should tell everyone in every press conference that we PREFER ONLY mid range jumpers! Then we’d get all the open layups and 3s we want!
So on 2...sounds like you are missing Terrence Shannon (elite at rushing ball...)
In general, your points make sense. But when you put them in the context of last year’s game against Oakland — some, not so much. Last year we out rebounded Oakland 36 to 32; this year 37 to 27. This year as you point out, we had 13 fast break points. Last year with TSJ pushing “the ball up the court every opportunity,” we had 6. Bottom line we beat them by 11 last year with Gohlke (only had 6 points in 37 minutes) and by 12 this year. Some opponent’s playing style impacts a game more than others.Illini defense designed to prevent 3's and dunks. Force opponents to shoot mid range jumpers. Oakland did this to us with their zone.
We did not punish them on the boards. We had too more turnovers trying difficult interior passes and being sloppy with the ball on the perimeter. Somebody besides Tomas has to score inside. Last year Quincy would drive from corner, Marcus and Dain would post up. Maybe we missed Ty.
We also did not fast break. Last year TSJ would push the ball up on the court at every opportunity. Brad should have been all over the team for not throwing the outlet pass and getting easy fast break buckets.
View attachment 37318
Great job by Brad to schedule Oakland. We are lucky that Jack Golke graduated or we may have been looking at a home loss
I think that guy could be Will Riley. He doesn't have the body yet, but he has the length and control to get downhill. Sadly we probably won't see year 2 of him when he could build that athleticism and explosiveness he would need.
Not many teams play zone or even practice it.
Technically you’re right….but the mid range level of scoring becomes obsolete because the way offenses are designed now and how
They run action get you open 3’s and shots at the rim…which have way higher ROI. Open 3s> Open 15 footers.
Only counterpoint I'd make is to the first sentence/statement.
We scored all of our points either in the paint, from the free throw line or from the three point line. I don't recall even one mid-range jump shot from an Illinois player in this game.
He's not quite saying that, haha, but this is the actual argument he's making:I don’t have any of your credentials, but you seem to be saying that the addition of a lower value to two higher values raises the mean…
Me:
Sometimes adding a 3rd variable, while a worse individual option in a bubble, results in the first 2 options becoming more successful simply through it's introduction that it's actually better overall.
Imagine Illinois only shoots latups or threes and the shoot them at the following clips:
Layups (40%of shots): 57% shooting
Threes (60% of shots): 36% shooting
So overall, you expect 2pts*.57*.4×3pts*.36*.6.= 1.10pts per shot on average.
Now let's introduce those inefficient midrange shots at say a 48% shooting percentage. You seldom do it, only 10% of the time, but in doing so your opponents are forced to defend it and , and as such your 3pt and layup shooters are getting more space and better looks so now you're hitting layups at 61% instead of 57% and threes at 40% instead of 36%. Your shooting now looks like this:
Layups (37% of shots): 61%
Midrange (10% of shots): 48%
Threes (53% of shots): 40%
So now you'd expect 2pts*.61*.37+2pts*.48*.1+3pts*.4*.53= 1.18pts per shot on average
Again, these are fake numbers, but sometimes adding something that by itself is less efficient actually increases overall efficiency by making your other parts more efficient than they previously were.
If I could give a real world example of this, it'd be something like spending time writing and following detailed work instructions for an assembly installation. It's inefficient writing them as it costs time, however, it allows your workers to complete the overall job faster with less mistakes and rework such that it more than makes up for the time spent creating these instructions. Hope that explains things a bit better.
We should also take more half court shots to create even more space for closer in threes and layups
- Status