Y'know, it occurs to me ...

[HB]

 

 

 

 

The major comparison that is not likely to be favorable is the defensive chemistry that team had.  We were very difficult to score on AND we seemed go generate more turnovers.  For whatever reason, our defense has been nowhere near as effective since Molinari has taken it over from my vantage point. 

 

You're mis-remembering a bit unless part of the equation of defensive chemistry is that it inspires you to play well on offense. During Mo's first year two years ago we matched the defensive numbers of the tourney team...we just cratered on offense.

 

Some numbers that show you are the one mis-remembering, and not just a bit. 

 

Steals.  Like I suggested, we generated a lot more of them.  A whole entire steal a game more.  This seemed obvious to my eye, and it is also obvious looking at the stats.  Generated more runouts, which were huge since we were challenged offensively.  We ranked an alarming 102 spots higher in the nation in steals than the outfit you are suggesting was just as good defensively. 

 

FG % we improved from 94th to 65th in this category.  However, when you look at 3 pointers, we got way worse.  And we allowed more attempts.  We allowed 1.6 more 3 point attempts per game.  When more shots are 3's the sum fg % is obviously going to go down, which is what happened improving from 94 to 65th.  However our 3 point percentage defense seemed much worse to my eyes.  And it was.  A whopping 2 percentage points worse the following year.  We dropped 90 spots from 44th in three point percentage allowed to 134th the next year. 

 

offensive boards.  We allowed the other team half an offensive board more per game than the tourney team

 

Steal percentage.  Went from 10.5 all the way down to 9.5.  We dropped from an awesome 55th in nation to a pedestrian 167th in the nation. 

 

Defensive points per 100 possessions.  On the surface, it might look like we improved the year after the tourney team.  We allowed 97.3 points the 2nd year verse 99.5 the tourney year.  However, when you look at our rank in each we were better the tourney year, as I would have suspected.  73rd in the nation the tourney year.  Dropped to 85th the following year. 

 

3 point attempt rate against.  Allowed 35.6 percent attempt rate in tourney year.  Went up to 38.2 the next year and they shot it an alarming two percent better as I mentioned earlier.  This is bad, and one of the main reasons our defense way much worse. 

 

effective FG percentage  This is one category that we did improve on slightly the 2nd year.  We went from .476 to .468 and improved from 98th to 87th. 

 

offensive rebound percentage allowed.  Tourney team gave up off. board 29.5 percent.  Next year was up to 31.1.  We ranked 101 and fell all the way to 173rd the next year.  We were obviously in much better defensive rebounding position first year, which is a big part of team defense. 

 

You add all of this up and it is not particularly close.  The tourney team was easily the superior defense.  Simple eye test told me that though. 

 

 

Stats are stats, but it doesn't necessarily point to your "It's Molinari" theory.  We had Leslee Smith that year, and a somewhat motivated Walt.  Since then we've had no bigs.  When you have to double the post, you will give up more 3s.  The offensive rebounding discussion is also personnel based, IMO.  I don't disagree that the tournament team defense was better.  But there was going to be a fall off no matter who was coaching that D. 

 

I said for whatever reason our defenses haven't been as good under Moliari.  That is a fact.  They haven't been.  You can decide for yourself why that is.  But it isn't because we were thinner in terms of big men.  Smith was on both teams and the 14-15 club also had Abraham.  I don't particularly care why our defense has been worse.  All that I care about is that it has been worse.  We clearly need to get better in this regard or we are not going to get where we all want to get. 

 

 

I did decide for myself.  By the way, if you think the second year shredded knee Smith was anything like the first year Smith your eye test brilliance let you down.  Abraham might have been a rim defender if he hadn't broken a hand that could defend a rim. Agree we "need to get better in this regard", but if we do, it will be primarily personnel based.  You can't just plug in stats across years without understanding the personnel of each team.    

[royalfan]

What's with the animosity toward Molinari?

He's a fine person and coach and recruiter (e.g., Roby).

As shown above, defensive stats for Molinari's first year are better than the defensive stats for the Tournament team, across the board. 

 

No they aren't.  They are worse in most categories as shown above. 

[royalfan]

 

 

 

 

 

The major comparison that is not likely to be favorable is the defensive chemistry that team had.  We were very difficult to score on AND we seemed go generate more turnovers.  For whatever reason, our defense has been nowhere near as effective since Molinari has taken it over from my vantage point. 

 

You're mis-remembering a bit unless part of the equation of defensive chemistry is that it inspires you to play well on offense. During Mo's first year two years ago we matched the defensive numbers of the tourney team...we just cratered on offense.

 

Some numbers that show you are the one mis-remembering, and not just a bit. 

 

Steals.  Like I suggested, we generated a lot more of them.  A whole entire steal a game more.  This seemed obvious to my eye, and it is also obvious looking at the stats.  Generated more runouts, which were huge since we were challenged offensively.  We ranked an alarming 102 spots higher in the nation in steals than the outfit you are suggesting was just as good defensively. 

 

FG % we improved from 94th to 65th in this category.  However, when you look at 3 pointers, we got way worse.  And we allowed more attempts.  We allowed 1.6 more 3 point attempts per game.  When more shots are 3's the sum fg % is obviously going to go down, which is what happened improving from 94 to 65th.  However our 3 point percentage defense seemed much worse to my eyes.  And it was.  A whopping 2 percentage points worse the following year.  We dropped 90 spots from 44th in three point percentage allowed to 134th the next year. 

 

offensive boards.  We allowed the other team half an offensive board more per game than the tourney team

 

Steal percentage.  Went from 10.5 all the way down to 9.5.  We dropped from an awesome 55th in nation to a pedestrian 167th in the nation. 

 

Defensive points per 100 possessions.  On the surface, it might look like we improved the year after the tourney team.  We allowed 97.3 points the 2nd year verse 99.5 the tourney year.  However, when you look at our rank in each we were better the tourney year, as I would have suspected.  73rd in the nation the tourney year.  Dropped to 85th the following year. 

 

3 point attempt rate against.  Allowed 35.6 percent attempt rate in tourney year.  Went up to 38.2 the next year and they shot it an alarming two percent better as I mentioned earlier.  This is bad, and one of the main reasons our defense way much worse. 

 

effective FG percentage  This is one category that we did improve on slightly the 2nd year.  We went from .476 to .468 and improved from 98th to 87th. 

 

offensive rebound percentage allowed.  Tourney team gave up off. board 29.5 percent.  Next year was up to 31.1.  We ranked 101 and fell all the way to 173rd the next year.  We were obviously in much better defensive rebounding position first year, which is a big part of team defense. 

 

You add all of this up and it is not particularly close.  The tourney team was easily the superior defense.  Simple eye test told me that though. 

 

 

Stats are stats, but it doesn't necessarily point to your "It's Molinari" theory.  We had Leslee Smith that year, and a somewhat motivated Walt.  Since then we've had no bigs.  When you have to double the post, you will give up more 3s.  The offensive rebounding discussion is also personnel based, IMO.  I don't disagree that the tournament team defense was better.  But there was going to be a fall off no matter who was coaching that D. 

 

I said for whatever reason our defenses haven't been as good under Moliari.  That is a fact.  They haven't been.  You can decide for yourself why that is.  But it isn't because we were thinner in terms of big men.  Smith was on both teams and the 14-15 club also had Abraham.  I don't particularly care why our defense has been worse.  All that I care about is that it has been worse.  We clearly need to get better in this regard or we are not going to get where we all want to get. 

 

 

I did decide for myself.  By the way, if you think the second year shredded knee Smith was anything like the first year Smith your eye test brilliance let you down.  Abraham might have been a rim defender if he hadn't broken a hand that could defend a rim. Agree we "need to get better in this regard", but if we do, it will be primarily personnel based.  You can't just plug in stats across years without understanding the personnel of each team.    

 

I am very confident that I understand the personnel of each team.  And I am also confident that we played way better defense with the tourney team than any time since.  Not even all that close.  Especially after Biggs got sent packing.  I am not sure why people are trying to argue otherwise to be honest.  It is ridiculous. And this isn't even considering the often horrific defense this year.  Why is that not being considered?  We let a mediocre true freshmen NW big man have a career day because we cannot defend a simple pick and roll. Not sure what everyone else is watching, but I was watching a flawed defensive scheme. 

[HB]

 

 

 

 

 

 

The major comparison that is not likely to be favorable is the defensive chemistry that team had.  We were very difficult to score on AND we seemed go generate more turnovers.  For whatever reason, our defense has been nowhere near as effective since Molinari has taken it over from my vantage point. 

 

You're mis-remembering a bit unless part of the equation of defensive chemistry is that it inspires you to play well on offense. During Mo's first year two years ago we matched the defensive numbers of the tourney team...we just cratered on offense.

 

Some numbers that show you are the one mis-remembering, and not just a bit. 

 

Steals.  Like I suggested, we generated a lot more of them.  A whole entire steal a game more.  This seemed obvious to my eye, and it is also obvious looking at the stats.  Generated more runouts, which were huge since we were challenged offensively.  We ranked an alarming 102 spots higher in the nation in steals than the outfit you are suggesting was just as good defensively. 

 

FG % we improved from 94th to 65th in this category.  However, when you look at 3 pointers, we got way worse.  And we allowed more attempts.  We allowed 1.6 more 3 point attempts per game.  When more shots are 3's the sum fg % is obviously going to go down, which is what happened improving from 94 to 65th.  However our 3 point percentage defense seemed much worse to my eyes.  And it was.  A whopping 2 percentage points worse the following year.  We dropped 90 spots from 44th in three point percentage allowed to 134th the next year. 

 

offensive boards.  We allowed the other team half an offensive board more per game than the tourney team

 

Steal percentage.  Went from 10.5 all the way down to 9.5.  We dropped from an awesome 55th in nation to a pedestrian 167th in the nation. 

 

Defensive points per 100 possessions.  On the surface, it might look like we improved the year after the tourney team.  We allowed 97.3 points the 2nd year verse 99.5 the tourney year.  However, when you look at our rank in each we were better the tourney year, as I would have suspected.  73rd in the nation the tourney year.  Dropped to 85th the following year. 

 

3 point attempt rate against.  Allowed 35.6 percent attempt rate in tourney year.  Went up to 38.2 the next year and they shot it an alarming two percent better as I mentioned earlier.  This is bad, and one of the main reasons our defense way much worse. 

 

effective FG percentage  This is one category that we did improve on slightly the 2nd year.  We went from .476 to .468 and improved from 98th to 87th. 

 

offensive rebound percentage allowed.  Tourney team gave up off. board 29.5 percent.  Next year was up to 31.1.  We ranked 101 and fell all the way to 173rd the next year.  We were obviously in much better defensive rebounding position first year, which is a big part of team defense. 

 

You add all of this up and it is not particularly close.  The tourney team was easily the superior defense.  Simple eye test told me that though. 

 

 

Stats are stats, but it doesn't necessarily point to your "It's Molinari" theory.  We had Leslee Smith that year, and a somewhat motivated Walt.  Since then we've had no bigs.  When you have to double the post, you will give up more 3s.  The offensive rebounding discussion is also personnel based, IMO.  I don't disagree that the tournament team defense was better.  But there was going to be a fall off no matter who was coaching that D. 

 

I said for whatever reason our defenses haven't been as good under Moliari.  That is a fact.  They haven't been.  You can decide for yourself why that is.  But it isn't because we were thinner in terms of big men.  Smith was on both teams and the 14-15 club also had Abraham.  I don't particularly care why our defense has been worse.  All that I care about is that it has been worse.  We clearly need to get better in this regard or we are not going to get where we all want to get. 

 

 

I did decide for myself.  By the way, if you think the second year shredded knee Smith was anything like the first year Smith your eye test brilliance let you down.  Abraham might have been a rim defender if he hadn't broken a hand that could defend a rim. Agree we "need to get better in this regard", but if we do, it will be primarily personnel based.  You can't just plug in stats across years without understanding the personnel of each team.    

 

I am very confident that I understand the personnel of each team.  And I am also confident that we played way better defense with the tourney team than any time since.  Not even all that close.  Especially after Biggs got sent packing.  I am not sure why people are trying to argue otherwise to be honest.  It is ridiculous. And this isn't even considering the often horrific defense this year.  Why is that not being considered?  We let a mediocre true freshmen NW big man have a career day because we cannot defend a simple pick and roll. Not sure what everyone else is watching, but I was watching a flawed defensive scheme. 

 

 

We aren't arguing the whether, we're arguing the why.  

[hhcmatt]

If you want to tell yourself our defensive is as good or better the following year go ahead.  I don't think it was, especially in the second half of the season.  Sometimes you have to let your eyes be your guide.  You are drastically undervaluing the importance of rebounding in your analysis IMO.  And the free throw stats were greatly impacted by the rules changes.  That UMASS game was so silly that it almost needs to be thrown out.   Also, I completely disagree about "turnover percentage is what really matters".  Steals are way more valuable that any other kind of turnover.  They often lead to run outs.  Other types of turnovers result in the opponent being able to set the defense up. 

 

 

 

FT Stats:  The assessment wasn't made on a raw number...it was made on relative ranking. We were 271st in the country in 2013-14 and 2014-15 team was 212 making us relatively better. Remove the UMass game? That wasn't even the worst FT game to cherry pick out.

 

Offensive reb %: We slipped but I'm not overvaluing it and the overall defensive numbers back that up.  What we lost in teams gaining extra possessions via additional offensive rebounds we made up for with a better turnover % and lower eFG%.  In terms of their overall value, btw, it's eFG%, TO%, OR%, FTR

 

Steals: Your argument is an offensively based one...that steals lead to easier offense.  I'm arguing solely based on defense here. As I stated earlier, you can argue that our defensive scheme/engery was part of our offensive problems.  

 

At the end of the day to say that the 2013-14 defense was significantly statistically better than the 2014-15 defense is simply a gross misrepresentation or misinterpretation of the numbers; Both teams are easily identified as top 50 squads and calling them both top 25 squads isn't a stretch regardless of how much anecdotal evidence is thrown at it.