aphilso1

Defensively, we have found a scheme that play to our strengths and minimizes our weaknesses.  It feels like our defense is set up to create the following sequence of events:
1. Opponent's guard is at top of key with ball.  Wing is in or near the corner, with Husker defender shading away from him (similar to in a pack line scheme), which baits the guard into passing into the corner.
2. Husker defender closes out, but at an angle which intentionally gives away the baseline dribble drive (which is completely opposite of a traditional pack line scheme).  Wing is baited into driving baseline.
3. Mast or Gary or Allick (whoever is currently guarding the low post) slides over into a position just outside of the restricted area.
4. The ballhandler is stuck making a split second decision at this point, and at a time where he is surrounded by the baseline, the trailing defender, and the low post help defender.  There's no easy path to the basket. The skip pass to the opposite corner is restricted by the rim/backboard. It's an awkward angle to dish off into the near elbow.  A pass into the low post has to go through Mast/Gary/Allick. The easy and obvious passing lane is to the opposite elbow, and we almost always have a guard crashing into that spot.  
 
The positive of running a defense set up to do this is that it doesn't require lateral quickness.  It requires high basketball IQ/situational awareness among the wings and bigs, and we are loaded with upper classmen in those positions.  It also requires multiple low post defensive options (which we have), so that teams can't simply pull your big out of the low post.  The negative is that you're giving up a lot of open three point looks, similar to traditional pack line.  You're also prone to post lobs if the opponent has a long lean freak of nature like Kel'el Ware. But overall I think this scheme fits our personnel very, very well.
 
Offensively, we finally have the players to run a five out.  Which again minimizes our weaknesses (lack of a JPJ/Petteway/McGowens type of scorer, as well as a traditional PG) and plays to our strengths (shooters, and creating space for Gary and Mast to go to work).

Defensively, we have found a scheme that play to our strengths and minimizes our weaknesses.  It feels like our defense is set up to create the following sequence of events:
1. Opponent's guard is at top of key with ball.  Wing is in or near the corner, with Husker defender shading away from him (similar to in a pack line scheme), which baits the guard into passing into the corner.
2. Husker defender closes out, but at an angle which intentionally gives away the baseline dribble drive (which is completely opposite of a traditional pack line scheme).  Wing is baited into driving baseline.
3. Mast or Gary or Allick (whoever is currently guarding the low post) slides over into a position just outside of the restricted area.
4. The ballhandler is stuck making a split second decision at this point, and at a time where he is surrounded by the baseline, the trailing defender, and the low post help defender.  There's no easy path to the basket. The skip pass to the opposite corner is restricted by the rim/backboard. It's an awkward angle to dish off into the near elbow.  A pass into the low post has to go through Mast/Gary/Allick. The easy and obvious passing lane is to the opposite elbow, and we almost always have a guard crashing into that spot.  
 
The positive of running a defense set up to do this is that it doesn't require lateral quickness.  It requires high basketball IQ/situational awareness among the wings and bigs, and we are loaded with upper classmen in those positions.  It also requires multiple low post defensive options (which we have), so that teams can't simply pull your big out of the low post.  The negative is that you're giving up a lot of open three point looks, similar to traditional pack line.  You're also prone to post lobs if the opponent has a long lean freak of nature like Kel'el Ware. But overall I think this scheme fits our personnel very, very well.
 
Offensively, we finally have the players to run a five out.  Which again minimizes our weaknesses (lack of a JPJ/Petteway/McGowens type of scorer, as well as a traditional PG) and plays to our strengths (shooters, and creating space for Gary and Mast to go to work).

The majority of Supreme Court cases are unanimous, 8-1, or 7-2.  The ones that are split along ideological lines just get the most press attention.  

Kind of.  2018-2019 Virginia (National Champs) were the #2 most efficient offense according to KenPom, while being 210th in points per game.  They were 353/353 in tempo that year and had 6 future NBA players.  They were an elite offense, but you wouldn't know that looking just at their scores.  They were going to keep the game to 60 possessions, work for great shots, and score on a lot more of them than their opponent.  A high tempo team that is equally efficient with their possessions would beat teams by a larger amount.
 
The downside of using efficiency metrics is that they look at every possession, and I think everyone here seems to be in agreement there are unintended consequences. It seems like there could be a way to not count any possession when a team was up or down by some amount after a certain point in the game, but who is to say what those are?

Just think.  Wisconsin was ranked #6 when we played them last.
 
Can't believe we rushed the court for these clowns.

A year of having his 3pt shot developed by HCFH vs attending senior prom.  I think he made the right call.

Football state…fine. But read the room!!! And this is why the tourney win this year will mean so much to all of us on this board who have longed for this day! And this is just the beginning!!! GBR!!!
 
And while I don’t post all of the time, I can’t tell you how thankful I was to find this board about 12 years ago! Keep up the great work HHC!!! 

It looks like I had the scores flipped. I'll update when I have a chance. Particularly so I can check everyone's scores just to confirm.

Updated.
 
Triple checked everything and it was just your score. Consider it attempted sabotage. Sorry, everyone, I tried.

Based on Michigan's schedule, we could go 4-2 to finish the year and still finish with the #4 seed.  Based on the unbalanced league schedule, our lack of quality non-conference wins, and only 1 high quality in conference win, I'd bet a lot of fake money we are far on the outside looking in under this scenario - thinking 10-20 teams would be ahead of us at this point .  Now, if we rattle off a win against Michigan and Purdue in the BIG tournament, that's a different story.  But, to assume we are in solely on getting the #4 slot in the Big Standings is fools gold.  If you look at the committee data sheets, conference record or rank is not shown anywhere because it doesn't matter.

Please tell me this is because you have a bar full of whiskey.

I don't have any beer.
 

He did say he preferred to come off the bench.  Hey... whatever works my man.

Right now at this very moment it would be an absolute travesty if this team can’t get into the tournament the way they are playing.
 
makes me tear up a bit watch how well they work together, work so hard, embrace their rolls.  This truly a TEAM.
 
”and that’s all I gotta say about that”
Forrest Gump

I realize that it takes some gumption to be a longtime Husker hoops fan, but perhaps only here can we be buoyed by seeing a guy walk almost normally.   🙂 

On Tuesday night Nick had another 40+ game (41) in a matchup with a D1 commit (Bradley) who is also one of 6 finalists for Wisconsin Mr. Basketball. Pewaukee won by 20.  He's now averaging 32.2 ppg, shooting splits are 55/40/82. 

The majority of Supreme Court cases are unanimous, 8-1, or 7-2.  The ones that are split along ideological lines just get the most press attention.  

I feel like every time these two teams play no one really wants to win. Hence why I am going to submit a tie and live with the results. 
 
NU - 77
NW - 77

I despise BYU's fanbase so KSU is particularly easy to cheer for in their next game.  I may even wear a little purple on Saturday.

Every single basket still counts.  If you're up 10 and make a three pointer as time expires to win by 13, that basket still counts towards your net efficiency rating (and against your opponent's net efficiency).  As for why the formula is the way it is, I don't have any insider knowledge but can draw reasonable conclusions:
 
-By only using a range of 1 to 10 for margin of victory, it is essentially weighting points scored at the end of close games greater than points scored at the end of blowouts.  It also reduces the punishment for emptying your bench at the end of games that are well in hand.  Again, it doesn't completely remove the penalty if your walk-ins can't maintain the margin of victory, because bricks on offense and inept defense still count against your efficiency numbers.  But it also doesn't punish you twice.
-By counting all overtime games as a 1 point margin of victory, it is ensuring teams aren't punished for forcing overtime and ultimately losing.  In other words, it recognizes that forcing overtime and losing is a better performance than not even making it to overtime.
 
Perhaps a better way to think of how the data works, is in the importance or weight assigned to any given basket.  A basket made on offense or allowed on defense counts towards only one metric in a blowout (net efficiency).  A basket made/allowed in a game decided by less than 10 points is more important than one made in a blowout, and the formula reflects this by including it in a second metric (margin of victory).  A basket that ultimately decides the outcome is the most important of all, and the formula incorporates this basket into all metrics (winning %, adj win %, team value index, net efficiency, and margin of victory). 

The committee has emphasized this year in and year out. Metrics and ratings are not gospel. There's a significant human factor that can be decisive during the selection process, especially for the teams on the margins. There will always be more teams in those margins then there will be spaces. If we find ourselves there this season, frankly, that alone is significant improvement for our program. We've been an afterthought more often than not for years. I think beingthe plucky underdog that *still* hasn't won a tourney game will play in our favor. We're a perpetual cinderella. And the tourney *loves* its cinderellas. 
 
We're sitting okay. 

Every single basket still counts.  If you're up 10 and make a three pointer as time expires to win by 13, that basket still counts towards your net efficiency rating (and against your opponent's net efficiency).  As for why the formula is the way it is, I don't have any insider knowledge but can draw reasonable conclusions:
 
-By only using a range of 1 to 10 for margin of victory, it is essentially weighting points scored at the end of close games greater than points scored at the end of blowouts.  It also reduces the punishment for emptying your bench at the end of games that are well in hand.  Again, it doesn't completely remove the penalty if your walk-ins can't maintain the margin of victory, because bricks on offense and inept defense still count against your efficiency numbers.  But it also doesn't punish you twice.
-By counting all overtime games as a 1 point margin of victory, it is ensuring teams aren't punished for forcing overtime and ultimately losing.  In other words, it recognizes that forcing overtime and losing is a better performance than not even making it to overtime.
 
Perhaps a better way to think of how the data works, is in the importance or weight assigned to any given basket.  A basket made on offense or allowed on defense counts towards only one metric in a blowout (net efficiency).  A basket made/allowed in a game decided by less than 10 points is more important than one made in a blowout, and the formula reflects this by including it in a second metric (margin of victory).  A basket that ultimately decides the outcome is the most important of all, and the formula incorporates this basket into all metrics (winning %, adj win %, team value index, net efficiency, and margin of victory). 

All the data is still considered, but it's just not weighted equally.  Every made shot, turnover, and offensive rebound that happens in overtime and in blowouts still counts towards a team's offensive and defensive efficiency numbers.  They just don't double dip by impacting both the efficiency and margin of victory.
 
Schedule tough.  Win on the road.  Score lots of points per possession.  Hold your opponents to few points per possession.  Rebound.  Win the turnover battle.  Lose by a little and win by a lot.  These are still the things that impact NET rankings.