Join the Phun.

Enter the PhogBlog Group in the Las vegas Journal-Review March Madness contest.

This one is a little different than most of those going around the internet. Instead of having your Elite 8 or Final Four teams knocked out in the first or second round, resulting in games of no interest to you, you pick each round after the previous round’s games have been played.

In other words, every game counts.

Go to the LVRJ registration page, register, and click on My Groups. Click on “Join Public Group” and search for “PhogBlog.”

Then pick away for Round One.

What do you win?

Pick all games correctly, and the LVJR says it will fork over $100,000. (About the same chance as you would have facing off against Tiger in match play.)

Garner the most points in the PhogBlog group, and you will bask in PB glory for 12 full months.

Good luck. You will need it against the PB’s regular cast of luminarias.

Hint: Take KU in Round 1, and you will be perfect for at least a while, depending on the length of the other Thursday morning games. I promise.

–Mark

UCLA made shots. Kansas missed shots.

I haven’t gone back and watched the game again to determine the relative approximate cause (bad Kansas offense vs. good UCLA defense) of the second sentence above. I probably won’t. In a box in a closet in my house there sits an unwatched tape of the 2002 National Semifinal, procured with the intention of charting Maryland’s relative success against Kansas’s man-to-man defense vs. Kansas’s “point zone.”

At least in the first half, Kansas missed shots they did a good job of creating. I believe that the quality and ease of shot that Kansas created declined as the game progressed.

Much of my writing here this season has depended on parsing final box scores in search meaning. I hope I have always remembered that those final numbers derive, in great part, from the effect of individual plays and brief sequences within the games. Because I am a Kansas fan and because Kansas lost, I cannot but wonder how the game would have played out if Kansas had converted some of their early opportunities, allowing them to trade blows with the Bruins for 40 minutes rather than attempting a desperate comeback over the final 13 minutes.

Because I am a Kansas fan and because Kansas lost, I focus not only on Kansas’s improbable misses, but also on UCLA’s improbable makes. This despite full knowledge that the inverse of both those descriptions most likely occurred. (The likelihood of Russell Robinson making both of his three-point attempts is about 11%.)

The inescapable fact of the game, the truth that catches wouldas, couldas, and shouldas in the throat, is this: UCLA won because they made shots that Kansas forced them into taking. Arron Aflalo’s contributions in this regard were most frequent and impressive. Darren Collison’s 23-foot heave over two Jayhawks as the shot clock expired elicited a pained, purely animalistic vocal response from me at the time. In my calmer moments and upon reflection I try to see the almost pure good fortune of the Bruins in that instance as another partial karmic payback for Clint Normore’s less-contested, but similarly deep, desperate, and successful three-point make in Kemper Arena in 1988. Perhaps Collison’s shot will prove to be the one that balances the books as we prepare for the twentieth anniversary of certain charmed events I would very much enjoy seeing replicated.

I had little doubt that UCLA was capable of beating Kansas. I only wish that the Jayhawks had given a better account of themselves with the ball in their hands. As a Kansas fan, though, I’ve experienced far worse ends to a season.

I have been cognizant of the last 24 trips Kansas has made to the NCAA Tournament. 23 of those trips have ended with a loss. 21* or 22** of those losses have been moderately to paralyzingly unpleasant. Even two days later it’s a cold comfort, but I’ve seen worse.

(more…)

According to Ken Pomeroy and Mr. Picklesimer (anybody else read “Picklemiester” every time?).  UNC is still slightly favored in a head-to-head matchup, but Kansas has an easier path.  Of course, I suspect this doesn’t include UCLA’s home state advantage should they meet the Jayhawks in the Elite 8.  I might be rooting for Pittsburgh next round.

Contrary to popular perception (or at least my perception of popular perception), Tubby Smith’s 2006-07 Kentucky team is an excellent shooting team that struggles to guard their opponents. Of course, Kentucky went out and beat Villanova in atypical fashion last night. A solid defensive performance made up for their field goal shooting being merely adequate rather than outstanding.

The 0.94 points per possession Kentucky allowed last night marked the first good defensive performance (less than one point allowed per possession) from the Wildcats since they held Florida to 0.95 points per possession in Rupp Arena ten games ago. Extending Kentucky’s defensive slump, in the two games preceding that Florida game, the Wildcats allowed 1.24 points per possession to South Carolina, and 1.09 points per possession @Arkansas. (It should also be noted that when Kentucky visited Florida, the Gators shot 73 eFG% and rebounded half of their misses en route to scoring 1.29 points per possession.)

KENTUCKY DEFENSE v. KANSAS OFFENSE

(at-risk games only)

Kentucky’s at-risk profile includes home wins over Miami, OH, Eastern Kentucky, Indiana, and Tennessee (without Chris Lofton), neutral court wins over DePaul, Chattanooga, Alabama, and Villanova, road wins over Louisville, Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Arkansas, home losses to Vanderbilt and Florida, neutral court losses to UCLA, Memphis, and Mississippi State, and road losses to North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Vanderbilt, and Florida.

With the exception of the game against Tennessee (again, without Lofton) at home, Kentucky’s outstanding defensive performances (less than 0.9 points per possession allowed) in at-risk games all occurred in mid-January or earlier: Miami, OH, vs. Chattanooga, Indiana, @Louisville, and @South Carolina.

Kentucky’s defensive numbers have been helped by their opponents’ poor free throw shooting. They allowed 1.04 points per possession in SEC play despite their conference opponents shooting just 62.7% from the free throw line. This is the rare instance where a typical performance at the free throw line from the Jayhawks could hurt their opponent.

It may not matter, though, as Kentucky’s performance in the other three factors are what have kept them slightly below average defensively. Kansas’s penchant for making a good percentage of their field goal attempts and rebounding a high percentage of their missed shots should trouble a Kentucky team who isn’t very good at forcing misses and just adequate at protecting their defensive glass. Against Kansas these tendencies may be magnified if Kentucky continues to struggle to force turnovers.

KENTUCKY OFFENSE v. KANSAS DEFENSE

(at-risk games only)

Kentucky’s offense performed quite similarly to Kansas’s in at-risk games. The Wildcats make a few more shots and rebound a lower percentage of their misses. The frequency with which they turn the ball over will necessitate that they make a typical percentage of their field goals. That’s extremely difficult to do against Kansas. Kentucky has a shot at doing so, though, as Sheray Thomas is the only player in the Wildcat rotation to shoot less than 50 eFG% or score less than 1.07 PPWS.

There’s littel doubt that NBA free agent Randolph Morris will test Sasha Kaun defensively. If Kaun continues to establish good defensive position and let the double-teamer harass the opposition’s best post scorer, Kansas can be expected to limit Morris’s effectiveness. Though he’s Kentucky’s best scorer (both in terms of volume and efficiency) Morris is not a particularly good passer (2.4 A/100 against 4.7 TO/100) so effective double-teams in the post could cause Kentucky’s offense to stagnate.

On the perimeter, Kansas’s guards will need to refrain from gambling for turnovers against Kentucky’s guards, instead forcing them into the heart of the KU defense for difficult field goal attempts. Ramel Bradley (5.0 TO/100) and Derrick Jasper (6.0 TO/100), especially, will probably turn the ball over often enough due to the basic ball pressure and swarming interior defense Kansas typically musters.

Bradley, Joe Crawford, and Jodie Meeks combine to take half their shots from beyond the three-point arc, making 37.2, 35.3, and 36.5% of those shots respectively. The guard trio troubles defenses because they are quite good at converting the two-point shots they attempt as well. Crawford shoots 52.6% inside the arc, Meeks makes 50.5% of his two-point shots, and Bradley converts on 49% of his attempts.

Kentucky’s balanced and efficient offense will test Kansas’s outstanding defense. The Wildcats are capable of getting hot enough that the opposing defense can effectively cease to be relevant for stretches of a game. What should encourage Kansas fans is that the Jayhawks have survived such performances from Texas each of the last two weekends. For all Kevin Durant did in the first halves of those games, Kansas held Texas 2% below their season average offensive efficiency in Lawrence, and 8% below their season average offensive efficiency in Oklahoma City.

Kentucky isn’t as good offensively as Texas (though they’re probably an equal amount better defensively than the Longhorns) so supressing their offense by 6-8% would put them far enough behind Kansas’s expected offensive efficiency against a mediocre defense to keep the game from coming down to the final possessions.

Prediction: Kansas 73 Kentucky 62

David’s excellent efficiency preview available here and at HackTheBracket (along with 31 other previews of equal quality).

Niagara is better than a typical 16-seed and their offensive efficiency is their clear strength. Unfortunately for the Purple Eagles, their offensive efficiency is a clear strength in part due to their defensive efficiency being a clear weakness.

Considering that Niagara’s three toughest games consisted of (with efficiency margins in the parentheses) hosting Akron (-25), hosting St. John’s (-33), and playing Holy Cross (+13) at neutral site, their performance in at-risk games (admittedly impacted by leading scorer Charron Fisher missing 7 of Niagara’s 25 at-risk games, including the losses to Akron and St. John’s) doesn’t suggest they can expect to compete with Kansas for 40 minutes.

NIAGARA OFFENSE v. KANSAS DEFENSE

(at-risk games only)

Niagara will likely shoot even worse than normal from the field against Kansas’s defense and it’s even more unlikely that Niagara will be able to match their usual offensive rebounding rate. Even with his outstanding shooting performance Tuesday night in Dayton, Clif Brown is just a 46.4 eFG% shooter on the season. Charron Fisher (50.9 eFG%), Tyrone Lewis (50.2 eFG%), and JR Duffey (51.4 eFG%) all shoot better than Brown, but none of them would rank higher than 7th in eFG% on Kansas’s stat sheet. If they’re struggling to create easy shots against the 288th rated defensive schedule in the country, then Kansas should cause them fits.

Let me make this clear: Kansas is an oustanding defensive team. There are other important factors for the team entering the NCAA Tournament: pace of play (Niagara should cooperate with that in the first round), field goal shooting (just 49.1 eFG% in the Big 12 Tournament), and health (I’d rather they not have to try and win six games in a row without one or more members of the eight-man rotation) but any prolonged success they have in this tournament will be due first and foremost to their defense.

In Ken Pomeroy’s adjusted defensive efficiency rankings, Kansas is 2.8 points per 100 possessions better than the second-placed team. The difference between first and second is greater than the difference between the second- and twelfth-ranked teams.

Kansas emerged as a national title contender because their offense improved over the course of the season but the underlying, constant reason for Kansas’s recent success has been the team’s defensive play. (Again, David represents this excellently in graph form.)

(more…)

From Jason Whitlock in this morning’s K.C. Star:

Just in Division I college football and basketball, despite two vastly different systems, we manage to produce a handful of seemingly tortured, reparation-worthy victims each year. March Madness, with its playoff format, is supposed to be the sports utopia - unless you’re one of a dozen teams sitting on the “bubble” with an impeccable resume.

First, Jason, there is no such thing as a “bubble team” with an impeccable resume. If there were, they wouldn’t be a bubble team.

Second, when you leave an undefeated team, or any major conference champion, out of the BCS “championship” game in football, you don’t have a true national champion. What you have is a two-conference “champion”–barring the situation we almost had this year in which we could have had Ohio St and Michigan playing for the post-season Big 11 championship.

When you leave a fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, or even ninth place team out of the NCAA basketball tournament, Big Freakin’ Deal. You are leaving out losers. If they don’t want to be left out, they need to win more games. They have no gripe. They deserve no sympathy. They merit no reparation. Their resume is eminently peccable.

In fact, unlike football, where more teams (6 more would do it) must be included to have a true national champion, you could have a true basketball national champion with fewer teams.

Won’t happen. A 64 team field (65 if you include the meaningless play-in game) makes the tournament a national event: all areas of the country are represented; everyone with a pulse makes out a bracket for money or fun or both; and the drama and excitement in the first two rounds is unmatched anywhere else in the world of sports.

And that’s all right. The tournament might not be well designed to determine the best team; but, unlike football, whoever the best team is gets a chance to win a national championship on the field of play. As long as everyone who might be the best team is included, we have a legitimate national champion, best team or not.

As for teams like k-state, Texas Tech, Florida State, Alabama, Drexel, Illinois, etc., their absence from the field means nothing. So they don’t get their participation trophy. So they cannot win the tournament. The tournament will be fine without them. They have no gripe. Enjoy the NIT. It is what you have earned. And you might even have a chance to win.

But you are not a victim. You are simply a Blance DuBois team–i.e., one that has to rely on the kindness of strangers in, of all places, Indianapolis.

–Mark