Opening Week Thoughts

Like I promised to my readers, here's my early intuitions about the 2021-22 CBB season.

Overall:

1. I expect the 2022 Tournament to be a lot more saner this year than 2021's record-setting insanity. For the sake of recency-bias, look closer at the 2015, 2017 and 2019 standards. These produced M-o-M ratings in the range of 10-12% and upset counts in the range of 6-10. We'll figure more of this out as we get closer to BCW.
2. I think the biggest impact on the current season is the 5th-year rule. As such, experience will be more abundant in 2022 than usual. With many of these 5th-year seniors using the transfer portal, I expect offense to be better than normal in the beginning of the season and defense to improve over the course of the season as teams gel together with their new parts (Throughout the article, this will be denoted as 5YOD to avoid typing it out so many times). Typically, it's the other way around as most teams start out strong defensively due to roster continuity and offense improves over the course of the season with experience being gained. I'm not sure how I feel about 2022 teams who are bucking the strong-offense/improving defense trend, so I'll put them on alert (ILL, HOU, TENN, AUB, FLST, MIST, MARY, FLA, UVA).
3. Haves vs Have-Nots: If I had to describe the quality of this year's tournament, the haves and the have-nots is probably the best description. Last year, the 2021 QC had a rising tail, and I believed this to be significant in the quantity of upsets and the stage of upsets (upsets happening in later rounds). My theory for 2022 states that the quality in 2021's tail will be pulled to the front of the curve in 2022 (thanks to the 5th year transfer rule), resulting in a calmer and chalkier tournament.
   
4. Coaching Changes. Another subtle impact to the 2022 season will be the number of basketball teams that have a different head coach than 2021. Of the 358 Division I schools, 57 have new head coaches (approximately 1 out 7). I don't really follow coaching changes too closely on a year-to-year basis because programs with new coaches rarely make the tournament. In a year where continuity is lacking, stability at the top of the program (i.e. - the head coach) keeps growth and development on pace so that tournament success is not hindered. When a team has to learn to play together with all of the newly added pieces, it can be the difference between a deep run and an early exit. When a team not only has to learn to play together but learn to play together in a new system, it could be anything from a breath of fresh air or thermo-nuclear implosion from the inside-out. Of the 57 coaching changes, here are my Top 10 in alphabetical order that I would keep track of because of tourney implications: Abilene Christian, Arizona, Indiana, Loyola-Chicago, Marquette, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, and Utah State.
   

Specific:

1. KU vs MIST: This is not your typical KU team. KU looks like a 5YOD team when traditionlly they are defense-strong early season and the offense comes along. It bothers me a little for their tourney chances because I feel like they traded away a lot of defense for a slightly better start to the season on offense. I don't think McCormack is one of the elite post players in 2022 and I know he's not a rim protector like past KU big men. KU will rely heavily on guards Martin/Agbaji, and they don't feel like the Mason/Graham duo that went to two E8s and one F4. Plus, most of KU's success in the tourney under Bill Self has come from a 1-seed (only once did they win multiple tourney games as a 2-seed in 2012). MIST is clearly offensive challenged. Julius Marble was the best post player in this game, which speaks volumes about KU's experienced bigs, but as the season goes along, I think teams will double-commit on him until a guard from MIST can prove to be a shooting threat. MIST does have a favorable schedule, but their lack of offensive power will be their Achilles heel until it improves.
   
2. DUKE vs UK: This DUKE team compositionally and statistically reminds of the 2018-2019 version except less talent and more experience. That team had freshmen Zion, RJ Barrett, Reddish and Tre Jones (the younger Jones brother) who were responsible for 77% of the season's scoring. This team has freshmen Banchero and Keels with guards Moore Jr (junior) and Roach (soph), all of which account for 78% of the team's points. Banchero reminds me of Kevin Durant (the college version, with potential to be like the NBA version). Keels reminds me of a smaller Zion except less ability and less upside. Moore Jr can run the point comparable to Tre Jones, but this hugely diminishes the impact of Keels because he's not as effective playing off-ball. This team should be able to protect the paint like the 2019 version with veteran big-men Williams and John. Between the six of them and senior role player Baker, they are a complete team, unfortunately you can only play five on the court at one time. Their season may come down to finding the right five out of seven that wins the match-up, and hopefully Coach K's farewell tour won't distract them from the team-development they need. UK in its current state looks like a team of specialists. Tshiebwe is an offensive-rebounding machine, not surprising since he transferred from WVU (a consistent quality of a Bob Huggins team). Kellan Grady and Davion Mintz are 3pt specialists, not surprising since they came from Davidson and Creighton, respectively. Sahvir Wheeler is a play-making point guard, not surprising since he spent two years at Georgia under former IND head coach Tom Crean. With Keion Brooks being a roll-man in pick-n-roll, TyTy Washington being a combo guard, and Toppin/Collins being interior anchors, UK has the pieces of the puzzle, but putting five specialists on the court and playing as a cohesive team are two different things. Their 2018-19 unit had one developed piece in soph PJ Washington, which means that unit had to develop both individually and collectively to reach the E8 in a relatively strong year. This team has more developed pieces and desperately needs to develop collectively, especially their team defense. If they can, they could match or even surpass the success of the 2018-19 team.
   
3. UCLA vs NOVA: This was arguably the best game to watch during opening week. I feel with at least 95% confidence that I saw two F4 teams in this game. UCLA started strong out of the gates, which is typically the case with the home team. They protected the paint 1v1 exceptionally well as NOVA tried to post-up perimeter mismatches. This did lead to some foul trouble for undersized PG Tyger Campbell, but UCLA has plenty of options to run their offensive sets. Where UCLA struggled was defensively on in-bound sets. NOVA scored much easier in the paint on these plays than 1v1 isolation in the post. NOVA looked exceptional on the perimeter, not surprising since Jay Wright emphasizes 3-pointers and free throws in this era of basketball. Where NOVA struggled was their decision to switch all ball-screens. As experienced as NOVA's guards are, I don't think they are capable of defending isolation against UCLA's perimeter players. UCLA's Tyger Campbell had an inconsistent and foul-plagued first-half, but when NOVA began switching everything defensively, he abused 1v1's against NOVA's big men. Both teams gave up multiple 10-point advantages in this game. UCLA led by nine in the first-half, only to be tied before the last possession of the first-half, then NOVA led by ten in the second-half, only to miss the final shot of the final possession to go to OT. Then, NOVA lost the OT period by nine points. All in all, I did not like NOVA's gameplan offensively or defensively against UCLA. Granted, it is what NOVA does best and they will beat a lot of teams this year with it, but UCLA is not the match-up for it (nor GONZ for that matter), so if these teams meet again, hopefully NOVA can do something different.
   
4. GONZ vs TEX: If the 2022 tournament was played in Nov, I would have no problem slotting GONZ as my third F4 team (with UCLA, NOVA, plus one). However, the tourney is played in Mar and GONZ's path is entirely different than the rest of the country, and it may be why their path has never ended in a title. This season, GONZ lost more than 50% of its scoring from last year's runner-up team, so it feels like a rebuild year for them even though they are miles ahead on development than other teams right now. It would be hard to deny them a S16 run, but this team looks nothing in terms of total team quality like its 2017 and 2021 counterparts. GONZ does play UCLA in a few weeks (I'm leaning UCLA to win at the moment) with top-overall seed in the tournament potentially on the line. They also have games against DUKE two days later and ALA a week later. TEX looked like a veteran-laden team that has never played a game together. Another 5YOD team with a brand new coach, they have four months to find their chemistry and cohesion, especially defensively, if their tourney run is going to justify their pre-season #5 ranking. My biggest worry with TEX is their inability to win big games. Collectively, this team has two NCAA wins on their roster, both from Creighton transfer Christian Bishop (Marcus Carr redshirted the year MINN won their 7v10 matchup). I wouldn't count out incoming coach Chris Beard from TXTC, but if I were coaching the team, I'd figure out my starting guard trio first (Carr at PG, Jones at SG, and Febres at SF with Ramey as 6th man) and run with it for the whole season.
5. FLA vs FLST: I'd like to say this game was a tale of two Florida teams, but it looked more like five or six different Florida teams. When FLA was moving the ball in their half-court offense with the pass, feeding the post-entry to Castleton, and kicking out to shooters on the opposite side, they looked crisp and clean. When they tried to run dribble-drive action, it typically resulted in a turnover, blocked shot, or otherwise low-percentage shot. I also don't understand why they were full-court pressing FLST. If there is one team in the country that wants to play in the open-court, it is FLST, especially this youthful and less-talent-than-usual FLST team. FLST repeatedly punished FLA's full-court press. In the 2nd half, the tables flipped and FLA begin locking down in the half-court while FLST began to extend full-court, and in predictable fashion, the game became a FLA runaway win. Despite his consistency in winning NCAA tournament games, I am highly skeptical of FLA HC Mike White. There are times the camera gives him a close-up and he looks like a deer in headlights. Not to mention, the full-court press strategy should have never been on the drawing board for this game, and it should have been called off after FLST broke the press twice for baskets and eventually a lead in the first half.
   
6. Honorable Mentions: Thanks to the B10 Network showing replays, I've been able to catch a lot of teams in this conference. MICH and PUR both look like teams that will guarantee you a win in the tournament. I have a hard time seeing PUR lose another opening round game two years in a row, and consistent-scoring big men like MICH Dickinson is usually a safe bet. MARY looked incredibly shaky against George Washington. I don't know if this team can pull off a tournament win like last year's squad, but they have to prevail through conference play first. Finally, OHST scares me. They have good players and good chemistry, but I think they're upside is limited and they're missing guard-play and guard-depth. Their core three (Sueing, Young and Liddell) are all forwards/centers, and their truest shooter (Ahrens) is a defensive liability against opposing 1s and 2s. If they pair in the tourney with another perimeter-oriented team like 2021's match-up against OROB, they'll be going home after one game in 2022 as well. Fortunately for their sake, the B10 is post-oriented this year, so the conference match-ups will be to their liking.

My Final Thoughts

You may or may not find anything in this article useful or agreeable. The one thing I'm taking away from it is self-reflection. This gives me an opportunity to record my thoughts and perceptions (nicer terms of describing my biases). When I get to BCW, I don't want my biases clouding my bracket analysis, and knowing my biases is probably the best way to approach it. After all, you can't solve a problem until after you first identify it. Maybe I've accidentally stumbled onto something. Anyways, thanks for reading my work and I'm most likely to produce an article on the Experience Talent Model even though the schedule says it is coming much later.