Sometimes good teams have bad losses.  Take a look at all the teams from the past several years that

1. lost by 15+ at home or 20+ on the road in Jan/Feb/March
2. did not lose AGAIN that badly (not counting NCAA tourney)
3. finished the year in Pomeroy’s top 20

• 2005: Louisville (Final Four), Villanova (Sweet 16), Kansas (1st round L)
• 2004: Oklahoma St (Final Four), St. Joseph’s (Elite 8 ), Kansas (Elite 8 ), Illinois (Sweet 16)
• 2003: Kansas (Runner up), Michigan St (Elite 8 ), Wake Forest (2nd round), Louisville (2nd round), Georgia (DNP in tourney)
• 2002: Illinois (Sweet 16)
• 2001: Maryland (Final Four), USC (Elite 8 ), Temple (Elite 8 ), Boston College (2nd round)
• 2000: Wisconsin (Final Four), LSU (Sweet 16*), Arizona (2nd round*), Texas (2nd round), Illinois (2nd round), Indiana (1st round L) … *=lost to Wisconsin
• 1999: Connecticut (National Champs), St. John’s (Elite 8 ), Maryland (Sweet 16), Iowa (Sweet 16)

I am NOT saying Kansas will be like these teams.  OK, actually I am, since the results range all the way from first round losses to national championships.  My point is that one game does not a season make.

Comments (12) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

BIG XII RECAP

A couple of times each year, I have to remind myself that the REAL Standings are not predictions-they are simply indications of where teams stand in relation not only to their current W-L record, but also taking into account who they have yet to play and where.

But when you have a day like Saturday, where the REAL Standings remain virtually unchanged, while the newspapers have to make an adjustment in either the W or L column for every team, they sure feel like predictions-and REAL good predictions at that.

The only adjustment to the REAL Standings Saturday was to add half a game to Baylor’s overall record while deducting half a game from Iowa St’s.

That’s it. That was an at-risk game for the Cyclones and an HAC game for the Bears, so a half point change for each was inevitable. In the other five conference games, the Home team won as projected: ergo, their REAL Standings records remained exactly as they were Saturday morning.

I must admit to being pleased with fact that KU fans did not inundate me prior to Saturday night’s game demanding to know why UT was in first place in the REAL Standings when the newspapers said the teams were tied. They got it: The game was in Austin. UT had the edge. It’s that simple. Duh. . .

In the past, when KU has had the benefit of being the Home team in an upcoming showdown, and that was accurately reflected with a projected W, fans from schools such as Mizzou or UT have insisted that the REAL Standings were biased in KU’s favor. First, as if that would accomplish anything. . .

Second, the REAL Standings look at the teams’ records and their remaining schedules, and the chips fall where they may. The only subjective aspect is placement of the teams in the appropriate tiers-which are, at the moment, Tiers 1 and 2 and the Pit of Oblivion. The Jayhawks began the season assigned to Tier 2 and moved up only after proving their worth on the Road-which is the only place where a team can prove its worth.

KU and UT have both proven their worth with 5-2 Road records. The difference between the two is not that UT won the head to head game on its Home court: the difference is that KU let a Home game slip away in early January before the Hawks’ youngsters realized that it might be a good idea to play a full forty minutes even against a lower level team like k-state.

Elsewhere, I noted prior to Saturday’s game that, as talented as KU is, UT was properly favored not only because of the home court, but also because of its experience. Whereas a veteran KU team went into Austin in 2002 and came away with an overtime victory, repeating that feat was a tall order with the shoe of experience on the other foot.

If a team’s starting five can have anywhere from 0-15 years of experience (i.e., 0 for freshmen and 3 for seniors), UT had an experience edge this time around of 10-2. Although the talking heads claim that freshmen are no longer freshmen this time of year, they’re wrong: freshmen are freshmen every time they encounter a new experience-like playing in their first truly “big” game in a hostile arena.

UT played in comparable games last year in Stillwater and Lawrence, as well as under the bright lights of the NCAA. Even so, they suffered a similar fate to Saturday night’s Hawks in December when they played Duke, a team with extensive big game experience, and were schooled to the tune of 31 points.

The Hawks now have their Duke game out of the way. If they learn what they need to learn in order to compete in the “big game” environment against teams that are talented, but no more so than themselves, they will be better for the experience when March rolls around. As it is about to do.

THE REAL STANDINGS*

The REAL Standings, as of February 26, 2006:

1. 13.5-2.5

Texas
(12-2/No projected L’s/at risk game: at A&M)

2. 13-3

Kansas
(11-3/No projected L’s/at risk games: None)

3. 11-5

Oklahoma
(10-4/projected L at UT/at risk games: none)

4. 9-7

Colorado
(8-6/projected L at KU/at risk games: none)

5. 8.5-7.5

Nebraska
(7-7/No projected L’s/at risk game: at MU)

A&M
(8-6/projected L at Tech/at risk game: vs. UT)

7. 7.5-8.5

Texas Tech
(6-8/No projected L’s/at risk game: at Baylor)

9. 6-10

Iowa St
(5-9/Projected L at CU/at risk games: none)

Okie St

(5-9/Projected L at OU/no at risk games)

10. 5-11

k-state
(5-9/ Projected L’s at NU, vs. KU/no HAC games)

11. 4.5-11.5

Mizzou (4-10/Projected L at ISU/HAC game: vs. NU)

12. 3.5-12.5

(4-10/Projected L at ISU/HAC game: vs. NU) 12. 3.5-12.5 Baylor (3-11/Projected L at Okie St/HAC game: vs. Tech)

GAMES TO WATCH

Big XII Games February 27-March 1, with IQ (Interest Quotient) are:

1. Okie St @ OU (Mon. at 8p.m.)****

The Bedlam Series might be a little more bedlamic than last time, now that Okie St has learned to tie its shoes. Another one possession game for OU, and they might need a synonym for “bedlam” that connotes a higher level of intense hysteria. On the other hand, it is a Road game for the Cowboys, and they might find themselves back in the REAL world. . .

2. Texas at A&M (Wed. at 7p.m.)****1/2

What is a word that connotes a higher level of intense hysteria. This is the game that either validates UT as the conference regular season champion or punches A&M’s ticket to the Dance. The latter could also drop UT into a flat-footed tie for first place in the REAL Standings.

3. Mizzou at Iowa St (Wed. at 7p.m.)*

If there were an NCAA quitting tournament, Mizzou would win the national championship.

4. Colorado at Kansas (Wed. at 7p.m.)****1/2

CU would lock up a spot in March Madness with a victory in Lawrence. Trying to keep their eyes off the scoreboard, the Hawks could end the night atop the REAL Standings for the first time this season.

5. k-state at Nebraska (Wed. at 7p.m.)**

The Huskers downed k-state easily in Manhattan. k-state seems to have toughened up since then to the point where better teams than NU have had trouble shaking them. A MUST win for NU if they are to entertain any hopes of being invited to play in the NCAA tournament. A MUST win for k-state’s NIT hopes. Or maybe not-word is the NIT will take any team with a pulse.

6. Texas Tech at Baylor (Wed. at 7p.m.)***1/2

Baylor is feisty at home. Subjectively, I give them slightly better than the objective HAC of stealing the Raiders’ bacon.

Go Big Blue!

–Mark

*Texas, KU, and OU, the Tier One teams, are projected to win all of their home games, lose their road games vs. other Tier One teams, and to be “at risk” in road games vs. Tier Two teams.

The Tier Two teams are projected to win all home games with the exception of games vs. Tier One teams. They are projected to lose all road games vs. Tier One and Two teams. They are “at risk” against Tier One teams at home and on the road against the teams that have cast themselves into the Pit of Oblivion.

As for the teams in the Pit, each is projected to (a) lose every Road game; (b) lose every home game vs. the Tier One teams; (c) win every home game vs. each other; and (4) to have a Half-Assed Chance to win every home game vs. a Tier 2 team.

As always, teams can move up or down in status with meaningful road wins and embarrassing (or enough) home losses.

Comments (3) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

I won’t take anything away from UT. Both defensively and offensively, they played great. If they play like that, they will be in the Final Four.

They just couldn’t miss and I think that demoralized us over time.

A brief rant: It’s time for Dick Vitale to retire. I used to enjoy his enthusiasm, but he’s become an absurd caricature of himself. ESPN should have higher standards for their in-game analysis. Seriously Dick? Talking about the square footage of Shaq’s house? What a slap in the face.

How much are they paying you to ignore the game? ESPN and its viewers ought to demand more.

UT beats anybody in the country tonight, and while 25 points is much much worse than I expected, the season’s not over and our Baby Jays are going to grow up.

Here’s my Saturday Night Special Guarantee: Brandon Rush will be a Jayhawk next year.

Here’s my Saturday Night Wish: Dick Vitale gives up the mic for color commentary. He just doesn’t add anything to the game for anyone. He doesn’t provide any special insight into what’s happening *on the floor. Indeed, he only masks his ignorance of the game by blabbering endlessly about every imaginable topic except that which he should be talking: what’s happening between the baskets.

I’m really not that down about this game. We hit Texas on a blistering night and we really had no chance. Bill will teach these guys a lot from the game and our boys have already shown that they can rebound.

They’ll wake up smiling tomorrow and they’ll rebound strongly.

Have a good night everybody!

Comments (23) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

Congrats to Bonnie’s girls.

Comments (1) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

 Basketball Shrink^TM is Ken Pomeroy’s little toy that allows you to click on a team’s name on one of his stat pages and see teams that are similar, according to the stats being viewed.  For example, the KU defense is most similar statistically to Florida.  To make a long story short, I rigged up an Excel file that does something similar, but using ALL of the stats listed on Pomeroy’s site, instead of just those from one page.  Also, if a team is particularly good or bad in a category, that category is given more weight.

“Why did you waste your time doing this?” you ask.

My original reason was that I wanted to look at the teams Texas had lost to, to see how similar they were to eachother and to Kansas, but that didn’t prove to be too fruitful.  Along the way, though, I ran across something interesting.  Take a look at the teams Texas is most similar to:

1. Kansas
2. Connecticut
3. Pittsburgh
4. LSU
5. North Carolina

Now look at Kansas:

1. Texas
2. Connecticut
3. LSU
4. Bradley  (not as ridiculous as it first seems - statistically they’re like “Kansas Jr.“)
5. Syracuse

Now, as soon as you WATCH the teams you can see they’re not that similar.  As mentioned earlier today, Texas plays a lot of zone (softies!), while Kansas plays (hard-nosed) man-to-man.  But the results are pretty similar.

Anyway, I just thought I’d offer up what I thought was an interesting little coincidence.  If this is any indication, tomorrow’s game should be a good one.  I guess I should throw up a prediction.  I think KU will hang close but fall in the end.

Kansas 67

Texas 72

Comments (14) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

I think Kansas will be able to play the game at a faster pace than Texas typically plays.

I don’t think Kansas will be able to play the game as fast as they would prefer.

I think both teams will shoot a hair below 50 eFG% from the field.

I think both teams will get to the free throw line about 20 times.

I think if Robinson, Chalmers, and Jackson take the bulk of those free throw attempts, Kansas will at least match Texas’ production at the line.

I think Daniel Gibson will score 19 points on 17 shots.

I think Mario Chalmers and Brandon Rush will combine for 12 three-point attempts, making 5.

I think both teams will get about 40% of their offensive rebound opportunities.

I think PJ Tucker gets, at minimum, 12 rebounds.

I think both teams will turn the ball over on just over 20% of their possessions.

I think point differential between Jeff Hawkins and AJ Abrams will be very close to the point differential between the two teams.

I think that PJ Tucker will present such a unique set of complications for Brandon Rush that Rush can play well and still be less effective than Tucker.

I think it’s unlikely that Kansas wins this game.

I think it’s less likely that the outcome of the game is decided with more than 30 seconds left on the clock.

I think the game will be close enough that a bad call could impact its outcome.

I think that Brandon Rush takes and misses Kansas’ final shot.

I think PJ Tucker gets the rebound, is fouled, and makes at least one free throw.

I think Kansas throws the ball away attempting a long inbounds pass.

I think Texas wins 71-68.

Comments (7) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

If you missed Bill Self’s interview with Jim Rome today, you can catch it here. I didn’t do most of the work to put this together, so no promises as to quality, but it should work pretty well.

Let me know if you have any issues.

Or download here.

And if you’re into national attention, Andy Katz’ latest is a must read:

How many teams are led by two freshmen in scoring — Rush (14.2 ppg) and Chalmers (10.7 ppg) — and have a legit chance to reach the Final Four? How many have only two double-figure scorers and have that shot? Only one: Kansas (although in Big 12 games, Rush, Chalmers and Robinson are all in double figures).

READ THE WHOLE THING.

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

Jason Whitlock is falling all over himself in his attempts to clamber back on the Jayhawk bandwagon. He deserves a little credit because 1) his efforts to suck up are fittingly repentant, and 2) he wrote this article before the Texas game.

He also makes the good point that Jeremy Creswell, the Moon Bar fiasco, and Giddens’ departure, paved the way for this season’s success.

Re: tomorrow’s game, the two big stats I’ll be tracking are turnovers by the Jayhawks’ backcourt and the number of Tucker-stops (similar in desirability to Stinson-stops). If KU keeps their turnovers below 15 and keep Tucker from leading his team by example, I’m calling for a double-digit win.

Comments (1) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

Click here for Part One (Team Stats and Backcourts)
All stats are from conference games only.

stats glossary

Rush v. Tucker

One’s essentially a guard, the other’s essentially a forward. They’re both arguably the best players on their respective teams. If forced to make one overriding, potentially foolish prediction, I’d say that the player who makes this matchup of disparate types a mis-match will lead his team to victory.

Player	eFG%	Pts/100	PPWS	%min
Rush	56.3	25.7	1.17	85.0
Tucker	51.0	27.8	1.11	85.8

Brandon Rush is a little more efficient from the field than PJ Tucker…

Player	FTA	FT%	FT Rate
Rush	32	75.0	15.2
Tucker	54	75.9	26.8

…but Rush takes a lot more jump shots even though less than a quarter of his field goal attempts are three-point shots. Tucker’s free throw rate is solid in conference play, but well below his season rate.

Player	OR%	DR%	TR%
Rush	5.7	15.8	11.2
Tucker	9.2	22.7	16.2

Brandon Rush is a good rebounder for his size. PJ Tucker is a good rebounder for anybody’s size. The degree to which both players have an advantage on the glass over a typical college small forward is masked to some degree by playing alongside two good rebounders at all times.

Player	A/100	TO/100	S/100	BS/100
Rush	3.44	4.84	2.14	1.38
Tucker	4.66	4.94	2.80	0.42

Tucker is a better passer and ball-handler than Rush. Both are good defensive players, though Tucker has quicker hands and plays the passing lanes better. Rush has become an effective on-the-ball defender, using good lateral movement to keep smaller players in front him and his long arms to challenge their jump shots. When guarding his man off-the-ball, Rush can still get caught ball-watching and be slow to react.

(more…)

Comments (2) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

Caveat Emptor: my thoughts in an email from early this morning, fraught with speculation and hearsay.

I have concerns about Russell or Mario getting in foul trouble or Gibson/Paulino being hot from the outside.

Texas will have less fouls, but they should - they play a zone.

Their zone has some issues though:

1. UT will likely try to pressure our guards far away from the basket - our guards have shown vulnerability to this pressure and I’d be surprised if they don’t see it. However, that extends the center of gravity of the zone out as well, and opens up some alley-oop lanes along the base line. We’ve done a very good job of exploting those lanes this year and we may be able to pull them back a little bit.

2. Not unlike a delicious donut, there is a hole right in the middle of UT’s 2-3 zone. Rotate JW into that hole and we might see more dunkin and less donut.

3. UT isn’t rotating as well as they were in the beginning of the year, or people are getting better at executing against them.

Here’s my theory there:

UT’s zone was successful at the beginning of the year because it was a new look and people really couldn’t prepare for it. As B12 coaches got more and more game film on them, their zone began to show its weaknesses and B12 coaches played to those weaknesses. The same thing happened to us last year - we struggled late in the year not only because we were complacent, but also because teams began to understand the proper game plan for us - pack it in the lane and force us to beat you from the perimeter. Once Keith lost a step due to injury and JR went cold, it was very hard for us to win.

UT’s a lot better team this year than we were last year, but they are very vulnerable. Their limited depth forces them to play a zone, and since Barnes is a man to man defensive coach, their zone is perhaps more porous than a team like Temple or Syracuse which plays it every game and has players selected to fit into it.

This is where KU has a major advantage - it’s very hard to prepare for KU because you don’t know what to look for. You can’t isolate us offensively because we’ve got a lot of weapons. You really can’t simulate our defensive pressure either, so you just hold your nose, jump in and hope that you can take the icy blast that hits you when Mario and Russ start tightening the screws.

If UT’s zone looks like it has over the last 5 games, KU should be able to handle it.

I could have saved everyone a lot of reading if I had just said this : UT’s zone is like a video game level boss - extremely difficult at first, but once you discover its vulnerable points, it’s merely a matter of attacking them until the giant flesh eating death machine shrivels up and expires into a cloud of gas and leaves you a shiny golden heart.

Am I wrong here?

Comments (7) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

I’ve got too many tables for a single preview post, so here’s the breakdown:

Part One: Team stats and Backcourts
Part Two: Rush v. Tucker and Post players
Part Three: Prediction

All stats will be from conference games only as the teams played significantly different non-conference schedules and I’m not near clever enough to adjust for quality of competition faced. (Nor am I clever enough to thoroughly cut-and-paste my introduction on the first try.)
Stats glossary

Team Stats

Kansas has almost closed the efficiency gap with Texas. The Jayhawks are more reliant on their defense while the Longhorns have the best offense in the conference by a considerable margin.

Team	PPP	Opp PPP	Diff
KU	1.09	0.86	+0.23
UT	1.18	0.93	+0.25

There’s not a lot of difference between the two teams in terms of field goal offense and defense or rebounding.

Team	eFG%	FTRate	OR%	TO%
KU Off	53.2	28.6	39.5	23.2
UT Def	44.8	27.2	29.8	20.5

Texas has more of the possessions in their games end with a shot attempt than does Kansas. The Jayhawks and their opponents are more likely to turn the ball over.

Team	eFG%	FTRate	OR%	TO%
KU Def	43.4	30.4	29.7	23.8
UT Off	53.3%	26.2	42.1	19.3

It will be incumbent upon the Jayhawks to force Texas into more turnovers. An average Texas possession in conference play is worth 1.18 points to the Longhorns. Over a 67 possession game (Kansas plays at about 70 possessions a game; Texas plays at 64.), there’s a difference of 3 turnovers between the turnover rate Kansas forces on average and the average rate at which Texas turns the ball over. That’s three-and-a-half points the Jayhawks could gain on Saturday.

On the other hand, Texas will likely do a better job of keeping Kansas off the free throw line (their lack of depth forbids them from getting into foul trouble) than the typical conference opponent and could pick up an equal number of points versus the season averages.

(more…)

Comments (4) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

ESPN has us as a three seed (effectively ranked #11) in their latest Power 16, and the silver tongues are wagging our way:

Yes, KU is blasting people left and right, but aside from a one-point W over Oklahoma, is this streak a product of a mediocre Big 12? We’ll know more Saturday, but I think that answer is no.

Check out the individual voter’s breakdowns here.

Luke Winn is sprouting flightless wings this week, naming the Baby Jays the 8th best team in the nation. His sailor-tongued missive on our own Julian Wright is a must read:

Damn, Julian Wright! The Jayhawks’ freakishly athletic point/power forward scored 20 points in 22 minutes on Tuesday in a win over Baylor — on 10-of-11 shooting. It was Wright’s breakout performance this season, his first time over 15 points in a game. And according to the Kansas City Star, it was the best percentage (90.9) a KU player had shot in a Big 12 game since the venerable Mark Randall made 11 of 12 attempts against Oklahoma State in 1989.

Dunkel says 3rd best.

Pomeroy says 7th, 4th and 4th.

Sagarin Predictive says 6th.

Dolphin Predictive says 4th.

Is this team that good or do we just know how to play to make computers love us?

Comments (4) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments