PDA

View Full Version : Was Indiana overrated or was Syracuse just a bad matchup? Ditto GU vs WSU



FuManShoes
03-29-2013, 11:29 AM
Seeing lots of pieces claiming Indiana was overrated (http://bustingbrackets.com/2013/03/29/hoosiers-basketball-indianas-overrated-season-ends-in-fitting-fashion/). And yes, they lost games throughout the year that suggested they were not the top team in the college hoops and then got skunked last night. But hey, even the Miami Heat lose once in a while. Point is, does losing a game mean you were no good, or that you were no good on that day or just faced a bad matchup? Fran was all over Syracuse vs Indiana and I followed his lead. Doesn't mean Indiana is no good - means Syracuse could and did exploit a good team's weakness.

CDC84
03-29-2013, 11:41 AM
Hoosiers were the most talented team in the dance. They aren't overrated.

Indiana's biggest weakness is their impatience on offense. They launch too many quick shots because they have so many scorers. That's deadly against 'Cuse's zone. I actually picked IU to lose that game.

demian
03-29-2013, 11:54 AM
Seeing lots of pieces claiming Indiana was overrated (http://bustingbrackets.com/2013/03/29/hoosiers-basketball-indianas-overrated-season-ends-in-fitting-fashion/). And yes, they lost games throughout the year that suggested they were not the top team in the college hoops and then got skunked last night. But hey, even the Miami Heat lose once in a while. Point is, does losing a game mean you were no good, or that you were no good on that day or just faced a bad matchup? Fran was all over Syracuse vs Indiana and I followed his lead. Doesn't mean Indiana is no good - means Syracuse could and did exploit a good team's weakness.

thats a good question fumanshoes. I for one do not think that this tourney in any given year is the absolute definition as to if a team is "not very good" if they get beat earlier than expected. Its tough. Sometimes you just dont play your best at the tourney time. in the case of indiana and gonzaga, they both got outplayed by their last two opponents in this tourney. They both barely overcame there one crappy game of tourney (GU vs Southern and Indiana vs Temple) and barely survived what wouldve been embarrasing losses. Then they both followed that up by being outplayed in there next game (GU vs WSU and Indiana vs Syracuse) and couldnt overcome and win cuz the quality of team was better and finished those respective games stronger than GU or Indiana did. I still think Indiana was a good team and had a good year, Syracuse is a tough matchup for anybody. Syacuse has been playing good the last few weeks dating back to semi in big east tourney vs georgetown. Syracuse is going to be a tough team to beat. Gonzaga I must say was a good team this year and had a great season but Gonzaga this year was not an elite team. I would say they zags were more like about the 15th best team in country, which is no slouch and nothing to be ashamed of at all. No offense meant by that at all either. Indiana was probably about a #6 to #8 tyoe of team. No offense meant by that either.

demian
03-29-2013, 11:55 AM
Hoosiers were the most talented team in the dance. They aren't overrated.

Indiana's biggest weakness is their impatience on offense. They launch too many quick shots because they have so many scorers. That's deadly against 'Cuse's zone. I actually picked IU to lose that game.

I agree with you CDC84 that the hoosiers had the most overall talent in tourney this year.

McZag
03-29-2013, 11:57 AM
Hoosiers were the most talented team in the dance. They aren't overrated.

Indiana's biggest weakness is their impatience on offense. They launch too many quick shots because they have so many scorers. That's deadly against 'Cuse's zone. I actually picked IU to lose that game.

This. Not overrated. Just ran into a tough matchup opponent and then had a down game to boot.

Martin Centre Mad Man
03-29-2013, 12:10 PM
Teams that peak in March beat teams that peak in February. It think that Indiana is a more talented team than the Orange, but Syracuse is playing at its highest level of the season at exactly the right time. I'm not sure that Indiana can say the same thing.

zag944
03-29-2013, 12:11 PM
Regardless of who is actually overrated and who isnt, Indiana is going to be ranked and seeded nice and fairly in the future.

Fairly or unfairly, we get to deal with buzz words like "soft" and "underachieving" until we prove otherwise.

Oregonzagnut
03-29-2013, 12:22 PM
Misery loves company. Having the #1 seed lose makes me feel better.

cjm720
03-29-2013, 12:24 PM
It means that anyone can beat anyone...we proved that both ways.

novazag2
03-29-2013, 01:02 PM
There's no shame in losing to a good Syracuse team. Indiana wasn't overrated imo. Certainly matchups play a role, but also how well a team is executing on a given day. Sometimes the shots just don't fall; sometimes refs blow key calls. Given the parity of this year's field, all of these variables become that much more crucial in determining the outcome of a game. There's no one team that is decisively better than the rest of the competition as to render these factors meaningless. It doesn't mean the top teams are overrated, it just means that there's not much of a gap between top tier and second tier teams.

cbbfanatic
03-29-2013, 01:07 PM
not overrated.

there were plenty of good data points on indiana this year that suggest they were one of the top teams. they just ran into a cuse team that is playing well and is unique with their great, disruptive zone personnel and execution.

really hard to duplicate that in practice to prepare, and it was evident that indiana was unprepared to deal with the length and athleticism in syracuse's zone. Carter-Williams having an uncharacteristically great shooting night didnt help indiana either

HOOTER
03-29-2013, 02:02 PM
we proved that both ways.

How so?

bartruff1
03-29-2013, 03:08 PM
Indiana was ok...but they didn't beat anyone...beating teams like Northwestern, Nebraska, Minnesota , Penn State, Iowa...won't get you ready for the Tourney... Mich hasn't been to a Sweet Sixteen for 19 years...has Northwestern ever been to the Tourney ??

If they want to get over the hump ...to get to the next level...

They need to join a better conference like the Catholic 7...

How many Sweet Sixteens has Indiana had in the last 15 years before this year ???

They just don't see athletes like that in fly over country.

I really think that the only team that can beat Cuse...is Cuse...and they do.

HOOTER
03-29-2013, 04:48 PM
If they want to get over the hump ...to get to the next level...

They need to join a better conference like the Catholic 7...


I feel like this is a conversation that's been had a lot around here concerning another team. Can't remember which one right now.

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 05:50 PM
Indiana was ok...but they didn't beat anyone...beating teams like Northwestern, Nebraska, Minnisota, Penn State, Iowa...won't get you ready for the Tourney... Mich hasn't been to a Sweet Sixteen for 19 years...has Northwestern ever been to the Tourney ??

If they want to get over the hump ...to get to the next level...

They need to join a better conference like the Catholic 7...

How many Sweet Sixteens has Indiana had in the last 15 years before this year ???

They just don't see athletes like that in fly over country.

I really think that the only team that can beat Cuse...is Cuse...and they do.

funny

Of course Indiana did beat teams like MSU and Big Blue twice each, beat OhioSt at Columbus, and more

and against some popular trending here at GU boards, I'll give Syracuse's D a big tip of the cap for forcing Indiana into shooting 3-15 from deep (Hulls 0-6 after shooting 45% for the year) and not succumbing to thinking that their efforts on D don't affect 3 point % ;)

zagco
03-29-2013, 06:37 PM
Zagco never quite got the 1 seed for Indiana. Everytime Zagco paid attention to them during the last couple weeks of the season, they were losing. Indiana just simply tailed off at the end of the season.

bartruff1
03-29-2013, 07:15 PM
funny

Of course Indiana did beat teams like MSU and Big Blue twice each, beat OhioSt at Columbus, and more

and against some popular trending here at GU boards, I'll give Syracuse's D a big tip of the cap for forcing Indiana into shooting 3-15 from deep (Hulls 0-6 after shooting 45% for the year) and not succumbing to thinking that their efforts on D don't affect 3 point % ;)

No one can defend the three......the point is to win the game.. if we only lose games when someone goes nuts from the 3 point line...that is fine with me.. the whole thing is a red herring...

I'll go with Cad...it is mostly good shooting, not poor defense and mostly poor shooting and not good defense.

webspinnre
03-29-2013, 07:45 PM
funny

Of course Indiana did beat teams like MSU and Big Blue twice each, beat OhioSt at Columbus, and more

and against some popular trending here at GU boards, I'll give Syracuse's D a big tip of the cap for forcing Indiana into shooting 3-15 from deep (Hulls 0-6 after shooting 45% for the year) and not succumbing to thinking that their efforts on D don't affect 3 point % ;)

As a note, Syracuse's zone is specifically mentioned as an exception to the 3 point shooting thing.

zagco
03-29-2013, 08:12 PM
The Cuse likes those long, lean guys up high. When you watch them play, it looks like they have 2 Scottie Pippins defending the high part of the zone. Pippin was playing zone before it was allowed in the NBA. He had the range to defend the paint and the line.

bartruff1
03-29-2013, 08:16 PM
The Cuse likes those long, lean guys up high. When you watch them play, it looks like they have 2 Scottie Pippins defending the high part of the zone. Pippin was playing zone before it was allowed in the NBA. He had the range to defend the paint and the line.

I think they will have to beat themselves...to lose this tourney.

cjm720
03-29-2013, 08:51 PM
How so?

Just us winning games people thought we wouldn't but then losing to witchita state. Being overrated should not be defined by one game.

bballbeachbum
03-29-2013, 09:09 PM
No one can defend the three......the point is to win the game.. if we only lose games when someone goes nuts from the 3 point line...that is fine with me.. the whole thing is a red herring...

I'll go with Cad...it is mostly good shooting, not poor defense and mostly poor shooting and not good defense.

please consider a couple of homegrown examples to the understanding

Remember when Matt would face the longer athletic matchups and struggle to shoot well? Is the belief that those defensive matchups weren't the reason he struggled, and that it wasn't because of the D he faced since 3 pt D doesn't really matter? Or an example from this year: was the Zags better 3Pt D% with GBj on the floor vs. when he was off the floor (check out Samwise's thread btw) not because of the better 3 pt D the Zags play with him on the floor? since 3 pt D is basically irrelevant and it's about good/poor shooting?

is that really the belief? not from me

without discounting anything cad's analysis shows and outlines, defense and defensive matchups matter. It's kind of a disservice to GBj's abilities to not credit his skills in this area seems to me.

anyway, I don't expect you'll agree with my thoughts here, seems I'm disagreeing with many on this one

:cheers:

bartruff1
03-29-2013, 09:26 PM
You can always find examples or even statistics to support a reasonable opinion.... I think the important point is that teams can usually get clean three point attempts (drive and kick out...swing the ball...pull up on a break.. ect...) so in the majority of the cases, it is a matter of making them...good shooting..

Yes it hurts... and when it hurts you want it to stop...but Gonzaga played about 35 games and more than likely there were a lot of three point attempts in all of those games....and I think they only lost 2 because someone had a career night...those are good odds...and I don't know that any team of the 350 or so in D1 had more success... like I said ...red herring...

I am not saying defense is irrelevant or that they shouldn't do their best or that matchup don't matter...but that if the shooter is hot, he will make them.. good shooting will beat good defense...and this is not a problem unique to Gonzaga.

IMHO of course.

surfmonkey89
03-29-2013, 09:33 PM
You can always find examples or even statistics to support a reasonable opinion.

You really should have stopped right there.

jim77
03-30-2013, 11:09 AM
I said this once I'll say it again...I do not understand why more folks don't play zone. Boeheim recruts for his zone...he always has long guys who can defend the line. Not to mention his bigs get rested on every defensive play. When you play Syracuse theres really only one issue...if you can shoot 3's over LONG guards you win...most lose. You also only get 1 shot cause you've got 3 big guys guarding the hoop. Sometimes those LONGS aren't the greatest scorers but, most times its enough to win. They could win it all too. The above posters are correct...its not what Syracuse's oppponents do..its what Syracuse does. They control the outcome for the most part...Boeheim also seems to have his guys on top of their game come March.

Reborn
03-30-2013, 11:32 AM
You can always find examples or even statistics to support a reasonable opinion.... I think the important point is that teams can usually get clean three point attempts (drive and kick out...swing the ball...pull up on a break.. ect...) so in the majority of the cases, it is a matter of making them...good shooting..

Yes it hurts... and when it hurts you want it to stop...but Gonzaga played about 35 games and more than likely there were a lot of three point attempts in all of those games....and I think they only lost 2 because someone had a career night...those are good odds...and I don't know that any team of the 350 or so in D1 had more success... like I said ...red herring...

I am not saying defense is irrelevant or that they shouldn't do their best or that matchup don't matter...but that if the shooter is hot, he will make them.. good shooting will beat good defense...and this is not a problem unique to Gonzaga.

IMHO of course.

I think many, many basketball minds will disagree with you. Sorry. Defense wins championships. That's the truth. The best defensive teams are the ones still in the tournament, imo. Have you been watching the games? Gonzaga's defense doesn't come close to what I see Duke, Louisville, Syracuse, Marquette, Wichita St., Florida. Florida smothered Florida Gold Coast with great defense. Witchita St has smothered every team they have played in the tournament. Most of the talk has been about their shooting against GU but look at their D. Gonzaga was held to something like 36% shooting, and we were the #3 team in the nation for offensive efficiency. Clearly in this case Defense won over offense. And Duke smothered Michigan State. Louisville's D has dismantled everyone.

bartruff1
03-30-2013, 11:38 AM
You obviously completely missed my point...

Reborn
03-30-2013, 11:43 AM
I think the important point is that teams can usually get clean three point attempts (drive and kick out...swing the ball...pull up on a break.. ect...) so in the majority of the cases, it is a matter of making them...good shooting..

but that if the shooter is hot, he will make them.. good shooting will beat good defense...and this is not a problem unique to Gonzaga.

IMHO of course.

Your point is pretty clear. What did I miss. You say "good shooting will beat good defense." This is just not true. Sorry.

On another note. I don't think that either GU or Indiana were overrated. They both had great years. I know that Gonzaga has played better defense then they played against Wichita St. I've seen it several times. I just feel that GU underperformed on Defense that night. Having our small guard team out on the court contributed to that as well.

bartruff1
03-30-2013, 11:54 AM
You keep missing it....I see nothing constructive that can come from this... so you can have the last word...happy Easter....

caduceus
03-30-2013, 12:04 PM
I think many, many basketball minds will disagree with you. Sorry. Defense wins championships. That's the truth.

Actually, no.

http://wp.bracketscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Off-Def-Raw-Points.png

The blue line tracks scoring offense and the red tracks defense. Notice that, with each succeeding round of the dance, the teams get significantly higher scoring. Final Four teams are 4.8 points more prolific than the overall field, and champions have the highest-powered offenses. On the other hand, the points that advancing teams allow doesn’t change much from round to round. In fact, champions give up more points than any other round of advancers.

Using offensive and defensive efficiency ranks:

http://wp.bracketscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2013_offdef.png

Lower numbers are better here. Tourney winners are much higher ranked offensively than defensively—a gap of five positions. In fact, the gradually flattening curve for defense suggests that, while you need a solid defense to advance in the dance, defense can only take you so far. On the other hand, you have to have an elite offense to cut down the nets.

http://wp.bracketscience.com/?p=478

Reborn
03-30-2013, 12:14 PM
Actually, no.

http://wp.bracketscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Off-Def-Raw-Points.png

The blue line tracks scoring offense and the red tracks defense. Notice that, with each succeeding round of the dance, the teams get significantly higher scoring. Final Four teams are 4.8 points more prolific than the overall field, and champions have the highest-powered offenses. On the other hand, the points that advancing teams allow doesn’t change much from round to round. In fact, champions give up more points than any other round of advancers.

Using offensive and defensive efficiency ranks:

http://wp.bracketscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2013_offdef.png

Lower numbers are better here. Tourney winners are much higher ranked offensively than defensively—a gap of five positions. In fact, the gradually flattening curve for defense suggests that, while you need a solid defense to advance in the dance, defense can only take you so far. On the other hand, you have to have an elite offense to cut down the nets.

http://wp.bracketscience.com/?p=478 Some teams, and probably championship caliber, have both good defense and good offense, especially from the 3 point line. Like Duke. Like Louisville, Like Ohio St ect ect. And maybe good defense leads to good offense, as in the case of Louisville and Syracuse.

caduceus
03-30-2013, 12:24 PM
Some teams, and probably championship caliber, have both good defense and good offense, especially from the 3 point line. Like Duke. Like Louisville, Like Ohio St ect ect. And maybe good defense leads to good offense, as in the case of Louisville and Syracuse.

It's very possible. We did too. Chips didn't fall our way.

Reborn
03-30-2013, 01:15 PM
watching Syracuse vs Marquette game. Don't see much outside shooting in this one, and frankly not a lot of good offense at all.

maynard g krebs
03-30-2013, 06:06 PM
"Great offense beats great defense" Dan Dickau
"Offense wins championships. Defense is a foundation" Bill Walton

With the "physical" play that is now allowed, even encouraged, it's becoming more true that defense wins. If you can call all the shoving and handchecks and bumping cutters, etc, defense. But the "defense wins championships" cliche originated in football back in the "3 yards and a cloud of dust" era.

Basketball is an offensive game, if it is officiated according to the rules. That's happening progressively less and less, and scoring is dropping as a result. The tables posted by cad don't give a time frame. They must be over a period of at least a decade or more, because I doubt we see 80+ pts scored by the winner of the champ. game. But regardless, the numbers clearly point out the fallacy of the simplistic cliche that values defense over offense.

And most kids don't grow up with the basic understanding of how to play that you need to attack a zone today-quick ball reversal, finding the seams etc.

HOOTER
03-30-2013, 08:35 PM
Just us winning games people thought we wouldn't but then losing to witchita state. Being overrated should not be defined by one game.

I was just curious who they beat this season that they shouldn't have.

mgadfly
03-31-2013, 08:02 AM
I'm not smart enough to read Cad's graphs. But here are the championship teams going back to 2006 with offensive efficiency ranking followed by defensive efficiency ranking:

Florida: 2 - 5
Florida: 1 - 12
Kansas: 2 - 1
N. Carolina: 1 - 16
Duke: 1 - 4
UCONN: 16 - 14
Kentucky: 2 - 9

I've bolded the two teams with better defense than offense.

Here are the remaining six teams rankings as of this morning (offense then defense):

9 - 1
5 - 2
4 - 17
21 - 6
1 - 46
33 - 25

Four of the remaining six teams have better defenses than offenses.

Anyone care to pick a team based on the numbers alone?