Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

BottomLine

What will it take to win #6

Recommended Posts

Yeah I totally buy that. But I would prefer if you could look back on his standings for any given date. 

I can agree with that. That’s why if I can remember I will look this year. I anticipate Duke, Kansas and maybe Gonzaga fitting the parameters prior to the tournament. Teams like us and Michigan are the type of teams that can make a deeper run or bow out early. That’s what I expect to see. Whether or not it ends that way I don’t know.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will it take to win banner #6:

-Continue to recruit talented yet COACHABLE 4-5 star players

-consistently have a balanced roster

-finish in the top 3-4 of the B1G year in and year out

-MAKE THE TOURNAMENT EVERY SEASON

-Catch a break or two

If we can build a consistent winner then we will knock on the door until we eventually break through. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, coonhounds said:

Not sure what it will take but i am at the point where I will try to capture Santa tonight to find out why iu hasn't been winning it when i have been asking for 30 years

Sent from my SM-G920V using BtownBanners mobile app
 

Get an answer by any means necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2018 at 11:09 PM, BottomLine said:

Here are the IU numbers dating back to 2002

Presently     34 + 18 = 52

2018            92 + 65 = 157

2017            27 + 104 = 131

2016               6 + 59 = 65

2015                8 + 200 = 208

2014             126 + 38 = 164

2013                2 + 19 = 21

2012                4 + 72 = 76

2011               61 + 128 = 189

2010              190 + 176 = 366

2009               231 + 174 = 405

2008                 29 + 44 = 73

2007                 26 + 23 = 49

2006                 58 + 33 = 91

2005                 68 + 76 = 144

2004                120 + 72 = 192

2003                   20 + 102 = 122

2002                   26 + 5 = 31

At least this gives us some a means to compare one team with another.  In 2002 we lost to Maryland (4 + 7 = 11) in the championship game and in retrospect much of the work for that team can probably be attributed to the work that Knight did before Davis took over.  In the seasons that followed it was obvious that Davis was not going to get us back to that level again.  The Sampson teams were respectable but not championship caliber.  It is obvious when Crean took over and starting with nothing he made significant progress, especially on offense, up until the 2013 season, where our total of 21 was almost at the threshold level.  However, after 2013 we were back in the rebuilding mode again and we were making significant progress, again especially on offense, before Crean was let go.  We are now undergoing another rebuild because of a change in philosophy.  Crean's reams tried to beat you by outscoring you and overall did a pretty good job of doing that.  Unfortunately, at times they had trouble stopping the other team from scoring.  Now Archie is trying to build a team that wins by stopping you from outscoring us.  Unfortunately, at times we have had trouble over the last two years scoring enough points to win.  Both approaches are flawed, though the jury is still out on Archie.  To win championships and hang banners you need to play offense AND defense.  I think that Archie is aware of this, at least more so than Crean.  What we will never know is how good the present team might have been with Hunter and Thompson available.  I think we would have certain,y been better offensively.   Our early season injuries have also set back the master plan.  We have 18 more games to go against the best conference in the country.  Let's hope the numbers continue to trend down.

Thanks for the research and putting this together.  I enjoy statistics...I have since I was very young.  Putting statistics together the way you have makes it much more enjoyable and fun to think about. 

It seems college basketball/March Madness has a few variables that relatively few, if any other sport, have and that's the committee placing their opinions, wishes, needs, or forseeable ...all of which can dramatically affect a team's tournament chances (matchups, locations for first round games, seeding, etc).

Still, it is interesting (and somewhat expected) to see that there is a level a team can reach that increases their odds in statistically favorable ways.  It's also interesting to see Connecticut so low in their championship seasons when compared to other champions on your list.  Does this suggest an additional variable...does the ESPN being "hometown" factor in to easier bracket placement?  I am only speculating here not knowing what their championship teams matched up against throughout those two tournaments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What will it take to win banner #6:
-Continue to recruit talented yet COACHABLE 4-5 star players
-consistently have a balanced roster
-finish in the top 3-4 of the B1G year in and year out
-MAKE THE TOURNAMENT EVERY SEASON
-Catch a break or two
If we can build a consistent winner then we will knock on the door until we eventually break through. 
 
I think we will get alot of 5 stars but michigan has proved you can go very far with 3 and 4 stars. They are at it again this year so far.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KenPom numbers pre-tourney are just a nice guidepost. Teams need to be within reasonable distance of the 30/30 or 20/20, whichever you subscribe to, in order to be logical champion selections. Data should be used to inform decisions and identify previously unseen trends, not define black and white rules.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 of the last 17 NCAA champions have had a combined Pomeroy offense and defense ranking of 20 or less.  This year there were four qualifiers:  Virginia (3 +5 = 8), MSU (1 +12 = 13), Gonzaga (1 +12 =13), and Duke (7+6 =13).  All four reached the final 8 and Virginia and MSU reached the Final Four.  For reference Texas Tech (28 +1 = 29) and Auburn (6+36=42), while non-qualifiers still had pretty good numbers.  Indiana finished 81+30=111.  Still think this is one of the best ways to evaluate where we are and where we need to go.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BottomLine said:

14 of the last 17 NCAA champions have had a combined Pomeroy offense and defense ranking of 20 or less.  This year there were four qualifiers:  Virginia (3 +5 = 8), MSU (1 +12 = 13), Gonzaga (1 +12 =13), and Duke (7+6 =13).  All four reached the final 8 and Virginia and MSU reached the Final Four.  For reference Texas Tech (28 +1 = 29) and Auburn (6+36=42), while non-qualifiers still had pretty good numbers.  Indiana finished 81+30=111.  Still think this is one of the best ways to evaluate where we are and where we need to go.  

Such a flawed stat. Of course your pomeroy ranking will go up beating 6 tourney teams. Looked this up awhile ago for this topic. 4 of the last 5 didn’t have top 20 in both pre tourney. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Such a flawed stat. Of course your pomeroy ranking will go up beating 6 tourney teams. Looked this up awhile ago for this topic. 4 of the last 5 didn’t have top 20 in both pre tourney. 

Playing good teams shouldn’t necessarily improve your O and D efficiency ratings right? Don’t you need to play well (which they obviously did if their ratings are moving up) in general to improve your KenPom rating?

I’m actually asking, not trying to be a BH. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

Playing good teams shouldn’t necessarily improve your O and D efficiency ratings right? Don’t you need to play well (which they obviously did if their ratings are moving up) in general to improve your KenPom rating?

I’m actually asking, not trying to be a BH. 

It’s certaibly possible to not move up after 6 straight tourney teams. But highly unlikely 

4 of 5 were 20/20 in rankings. After beating 6 straight 4/5 were. The one that wasn’t moved up 60 spots in the stat that kept them out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brass Cannon said:

It’s certaibly possible to not move up after 6 straight tourney teams. But highly unlikely 

4 of 5 were 20/20 in rankings. After beating 6 straight 4/5 were. The one that wasn’t moved up 60 spots in the stat that kept them out. 

After re-reading, I think I see what you’re saying and we agree. 

The more interesting metric is KenPom pre-tourney because if you beat 6 straight tourney teams, your efficiency ratings will probably skyrocket, which I’m assuming is what you looked up a while ago like you said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You need a mix of depth of talent and experience. If your depth of talent is greater and you have 5*'s up and down the roster then you don't need as much experience to win but we don't have the sort of starting lineups like the ones you might see at Kansas or Duke or Kentucky. So we need to get older, and we're on the way to doing that with a nice corps of players. If Archie keeps recruiting like he has been to finish out the 2019 and 2020 classes I think we'll have a very nice group by the time his first full class reaches their upperclassman years.

The defense is trending in the right direction - maybe that side of the ball will be good enough to float the offense a bit more next year as the pack line should be pretty well drilled in our returnees by now. Some say pack line teams tend to take a jump defensively in the third year, we'll see what happens next year but there's a chance we're pretty good on that side of the ball.

Edited by Aeggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

After re-reading, I think I see what you’re saying and we agree. 

The more interesting metric is KenPom pre-tourney because if you beat 6 straight tourney teams, your efficiency ratings will probably skyrocket, which I’m assuming is what you looked up a while ago like you said. 

Yep you explained it much better. I do believe off the top of my head all 5 of those teams, and what will now be true 6 years in a row, had a top 30 Kenpom before the tourney. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.png.a18ecd8941470e9532430f9949d2e4b5.png

If we are looking for a hard fast rule, it would appear you need to be Top 20 in one category offense or defense, and be capable of playing better in the other category if you want to win the tourney.  Important to note that unless you are UCONN you have to be Top 10 in one category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is not necessarily how to pick the winner.  The point is that this is a useful measuring stick to determine where your program is at any given point.  Sometimes we, as Hoosier fans, have a tendency to over evaluate out team and our players.  We were all high on the team back in December when we were ranked n the top 25 and we were all dreaming of a return to the NCAA Tournament and a long run.  The fact is that December was fools gold and our numbers were not good enough to sustain those hopes and in fact it was apparent that rougher times were ahead.  There isn't a magical formula that will guarantee success.  There were teams that met the criteria that I suggested that obviously didn't make it to the Final Four.  You still need to play the games and anything can and often does happen during the 40 minutes of a single game.  However, those teams with good offensive and defensive ratings seems to have a definite advantage in postseason play, which shouldn't be a big duh.  My contention is that a mathematical rating such as Pomeroy offense and defense give us a much truer picture than subjective ratings systems such as the coaches or writers polls, and are certainly more valuable then the overall win/loss record.  As for the team's ratings changing during the course of the tournament, those changes are minor.  Nobody is making huge jumps or drops based upon a few games because we are looking at a population of about 35 games.  I'm trying not to split hairs here.  If Indiana wants to be considered one of the top programs and a post season threat, I think we know what our numbers need to look like.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×