Opening Week Thoughts (2022-23)

As stated in the opening week article, I'm going to give my review of the season up to games played through Sun Nov 20. A lot of important games have been played, as well as a few preseason tournaments, and the commentary below is my gut reactions to what I was seeing in the game. If you're reading my blog for the first time or reading this article in March in hopes of improving your bracket picking, I follow the game both visually and statistically. I decided over the off-season that I would write articles like this one in order to document my bias. As the season progresses, I hope to be able to separate my personal bias from the numbers, and this article is part of the process.

MY PERSPECTIVE ON THE SEASON IN GENERAL

1. Many top 25 teams losing home/neutral games versus non-power conference opponents. This could mean the lower end of the M-o-M range which was noted in the ETM article (17-18%) is our likely target. Again, we'll need to see confirmation from other models, most notably QC analysis before we know for sure.
2. Officiating has been very inconsistent thus far. In some of the games listed below, the two-half splits for foul counts are absurd. For example, the foul counts would be 10-4 in the first half and then flip the other way (4-10) in the second half. No team is "only-four-fouls-in-a-half" good this early in a season. The fact that the foul counts seem to flip "in order to even out the numbers" also seems sketchy. I also hate the new flop rule because I don't like the rules or the officials impacting the box score, especially because of a non-action.
3. Shooting numbers don't look very good, but this is way too early in the season. By early Dec, the stats should be better indicative of which direction the season's numbers should trend.
   

MY PERSPECTIVE ON THE GAMES

COL def TENN: Played on a neutral court in Nashville (either way, a home-bias for TENN). This is going to sound like a lot of excuses for TENN losing, but they all are true. TENN C Plasvic was injured in the opening minutes of the game, followed by star-FR Phillips picking up his 2nd foul and picking up his 3rd quickly in the start of the 2H, so immediately TENN was missing two starters for most of the game. COL lost its previous game, so they were clearly the more focused team, although they didn't look like the better team (a lot of missed easy shots and open shots). TENN launched a lot of 3-pt attempts, and looking at the box score against their previous opponents, this seems to be more of a team identity and less of a situational anomaly. TENN SG Vescovi struggled to get good shots against COL's SG Jalen Gabbidon. If COL gets a tourney bid against a team dependent on a catch-and-shoot SG (like Vescovi), Gabbidon could tilt the tourney match-up in COL's favor. TENN scored 34pts in the 1H, 17 from the FT line and 15 from 3-pt land. When the whistles stopped blowing in the 2H, TENN had to earn their points entirely from the floor (7-9 FT in 2H, 10 less than 1H and lost by 12pts).

GONZ def MIST: In previous seasons' articles, I have characterized GONZ as a well-oiled machine at the start of seasons and then failing to grow/develop as fast as other teams (especially Power conference teams), which is why I believe to be the reason they have yet to win a NC under Mark Few. In this game, GONZ did not look anything close to a well-oiled machine, instead more like 5 veteran players moving around the floor instead of a team of veterans. There was an exhibition game between aforementioned TENN and GONZ almost two weeks prior to this game, which TENN won 99-80. TENN has Gs Zeigler and Vescovi and MIST has Gs Walker and Hoggard. MIST's Gs dominated the tempo and action of the GONZ game, which I can only assume TENN Gs did the same thing in the exhibition game. I interpret this to mean GONZ is starting this season much further back than previous seasons (closer to everyone else). If GONZ experiences the same subpar growth/development rates and starts the race at the same level as everyone else, then in my eyes, they cannot be considered as a title contender this year. GONZ consistently struggled to defend pick-n-roll when Timme was the screener's defender, and this has to be fixed over the course of the season, as BAY exposed this same flaw in the 2021 NC title game. When MIST was in-system, they got and made easy shots, and when not-in-system or simply improvising/isolating, they struggled.

MIST def UK: Depth of both teams was the biggest stand-out in this game. MIST's offense tends to drop off drastically as more subs are used: 90% of points from starters (85.7% in game against GONZ). UK's defense drops off with subs. Tshiebwe fouling out in 1OT guaranteed MIST win in 2OT. MIST Hauser struggled against the size and athleticism of UK F Toppin. When Toppin picked up 2nd foul in 1H, Hauser lit up the basket with F Collins guarding him. In two consecutive games against Top 5 competition, MIST looked like the better coached team: They went under ball-screen (not respecting UK 3-pt shot), deliberately conceded baskets at the rim instead of contesting and potentially fouling, and sagged deep into the paint with off-ball defense to deny dribble-penetration and post-entry to Tshiebwe. MIST G Hoggard struggled mentally and emotionally this game: Dribbling too deep in the paint with no outlet and a few erroneous switches on defense when the obvious plan was to go under screens and this led to a few shouting matches on the sideline with Izzo. Though he hit two clutch free throws at the end of the game, his numbers for the rest of the game scream his struggles. Six illegal screens this game (I think I counted them accurately) and all six were the result of the guard going before the screen had time to get set (99% of the time, this is the case), but still a staggering number.

MIST def NOVA: I'm not sure how much value I got from watching this game. First, NOVA has been missing two key players (SR Moore and FR Whitmore). I'm not sure if Moore is coming back this season, as his injury took place in the last year's NCAA tournament. NOVA will be a different team with these two players. Second, the game felt like it was dictated by the three-point shot, which you know I'm no fan of watching three-point games. NOVA took more than half of their shots from three, and only their F/C Dixon hit more than one, which is really telling about the game. MIST pulled out to a double-digit lead in the 1H due to 8-14 perimeter shooting. In the 2H, NOVA hit 6/16 after going 2/13 in the 1H, which allowed them to erase the double-digit deficit to one point. I would attribute this poor shooting to MIST's mobility in the 1-thru-4-spots. While they don't possess great length on the 3pt line, they can move with the ball and stay attached to shooters. MIST's Sissoko struggled defending P&R after two really good defensive outings against GONZ and UK. Also, MIST only attempted six FTs, all in the 2H, and two of which were garbage-time FTs, so you know Izzo can't be happy about his offense.

KU def DUKE: Take last year's two F4 teams, subtract two head coaches, subtract seven starters, subtract all bench players but 2 KU players, add a bunch of freshman and two B-tier transfers (one for each team), and you should have the recipe for a very sloppy and disconnected game. This game was very close to that recipe. Also, these two teams spent a really long time in the warm-up tunnels waiting for the 2OT MIST-UK game to finish. Biggest takeaway is that neither team is really good defensively. KU cannot protect the paint: They are lacking interior size and 1v1 post-defense ability. On the bright-side, they have the potential and personnel to be a very good switching defense (switch every screen 1-thru-5-spots), so we'll see if Bill Self makes the decision when he returns from suspension. DUKE has the size to protect the rim, but Young doesn't have the athleticism to defend ball-screens and neither Lively or Filipowski have the experience to protect the rim (and neither looked to have the natural instinct like last year's crop of FR bigmen - AUB Jabari Smith and GONZ Holmgren). I also wouldn't be surprised if KU's Jalen Wilson wins NPOY honors because KU is going to need him to play like it.

TEX def GONZ: If you watched GONZ-MIST, this game and MIST-UK shouldn't have been surprises. TEX Gs Carr and Hunter managed their team more effectively than GONZ Gs Hickman and Bolton (second time in two big games for GONZ Gs). Again, GONZ looked less prepared and less focused for the game than their opponent (early technical fouls on two different players, although I disagree with the first one called). In 1H, TEX threw a variety of defenses at GONZ: Icing ball-screens back to the middle, switching ball screens 1-thru-4-spots, and double-downs on Timme from the post-entry defender. The only one that looked effective was the icing of ball-screens (TENN does this as a full-time defensive strategy, and may also explain their success against GONZ). Five of GONZ's nine 3PM were assisted from finding open shooter off of double-down on Timme. Both teams showed zero defensive resistance in the paint, but TEX made it much harder to get the ball there. TEX will probably blow out KU, BAY and/or TCU when they come to TEX (playing to the level of their competition), so I wouldn't be surprised if they lost a home game to a beatable team (OU, OKST, IAST, or KNST).

GONZ def UK: GONZ looked like a team that was embarrassed their previous game. GONZ was more dynamic in their offense (moving without the ball) and active with their hands on defense than their loss at TEX (being in front of your home crowd also helps, just ask UK). GONZ still had way too many TOs if their defensive woes don't get fixed. UK's shooting woes from last year still exist and were the reason they lost. If UK has national title aspirations, CJ Frederick cannot put up 17ppg against 16-seed quality teams (SCST, DUQ and HOW) and then 4ppg on the same number of shots against the likes of MIST/GONZ.

UVA def BAY: UVA returned all five starters from last year's team that failed to make the NCAA tourney last year, and they looked like a cohesive unit on the floor, especially on offense. They weren't especially adept at shooting the ball last year, and in all honesty, if you take away the big shooting performance by Franklin, they didn't look too much different than last year's team that couldn't shoot. They can make up for this lack of shooting with good offensive execution, which you would expect from a team that's played together for a entire year. BAY employed positional switching in their M2M defense (1-with-2 and 3-with-4) and essentially maintained it within a match-up zone to keep Flo Thamba out of foul trouble. UVA was allowed to drive baseline and then dish it to a big man in the high post or to an open 3-pt shooter. BAY really changed a runaway game with the full-court press, but until they get back "Every Day John" and add some experience to the freshmen, they're not going to be able to full-court press as a full-game strategy. On the flip-side, BAY ball-screen offense looked stagnant with two (and sometimes three) non-shooters on the floor. This allowed UVA to be aggressive on their shows against the ball-screen while still maintaining the integrity of their pack-line man2man defense. When George operated the P&R, it put Cryer and Flagler on the perimeter, forcing UVA to stay attached to shooters, and the middle was way more open to dribble-drives. Without EDJ, they don't really have interior scoring, and I don't know how effective he will be when he gets back from injury. BAY will have to rely heavily on Cryer and Flagler for scoring, and the rest of the team will have to get 2nd chance points to compete for a B12 title.

ILL def UCLA: UCLA offense felt like the Tyger Campbell and Jamie Jacquez show with David Singleton being used as a Phone-a-Friend. 62.5% of UCLA's shot attempts came from these two, and they only managed 37.7% from the floor. Against lesser competition in the prior three games, scoring was more balanced. Against tourney-level competition, this will not cut it. It had the feel of UCLA's tournament game against UNC last year when they controlled the pace and the lead for most of the game, only to lose it to a run down the stretch (ILL press helped with this). UCLA runs the standard Mick Cronin defense: Going under ball-screens to deter dribble-drive while checking the roll. Their 4G (and sometimes 5G) lineups allow them to switch everything to keep pressure on the ball. Their biggest flaw defensively was not adjusting to Terrence Shannon's spectacular game (29 pts on 13 shots). In my opinion, he was the best player available from the transfer portal and should make a steady two-way player in the NBA. ILL is a composition of transfer portal players in desperate need of a PG. 21 TOs will not cut it in the B10, let alone the the Big Dance. Luckily, their full-court press forced 15 UCLA TOs to even out the discrepancy.

UVA def ILL: UVA looked a little bothered by the length of ILL on the perimeter as Beekman and Franklin had more inefficient games than they did against the smaller guards of BAY. UVA did a great job at limiting the impact of Shannon, something UCLA didn't do. I did not like the body language of ILL in the final three minutes of the game. In an ILL TO, players didn't seem to be acknowledging the berating message of Coach Underwood (and sometimes he's like a wild animal). This is something to watch for ILL since they are a composition of transfer portal players. The reason I was so concerned is that it was the hold-overs from last season (Hawkins and Melendez) that were sulking during the timeout and ignoring the coach. You want your "program guys" to be the glue that holds all of the new parts together, yet these two weren't really holding themselves together, let alone the team.

BAY def UCLA: For the way this game started, I thought UCLA was going to get blown out, but they maintained composure and only trailed by two at the half. Jaylen Clark had a monster game, scoring in every capacity (transition, half-court sets with and off the ball, and off ORBs) except from three, and neither of his three point shots looked good. Even though Campbell is the PG, he's also better from the perimeter than Clark, so maybe UCLA should consider running some offense thru Clark to create better spacing and scoring opportunities for everyone. Unfortunately, UCLA could not stop scoring guards for the 2nd game in a row, as Cryer and Flagler scored 50 of BAYs 80 using only 33 shots to do it (similar to Shannon's efficiency). This is something to watch over the course of the season and for the tourney. 

I also hated the officiating for all four of these games. For example, BAY's George committed the exact same foul in two different games (an open hand to the face of the opposing player while flailing his arm when being stripped of the ball). Neither one looked intentional or malicious, but they were the exact same contact. In the first game, it was called Flagrant 1, and in the second game, it was called a common foul. It's either one or the other (not both, not neither). YOU CANNOT HAVE THIS KIND OF INCONSISTENCY IN COLLEGE BASKETBALL OFFICIATING, yet inconsistency was the hallmark trait of officiating in these four games.

IND def XAV: A very good game which was ultimately decided by the little details (a lot of NCAA tourney games are decided in this manner). IND was +1 FTM, +2 FGM, -1 TO, and -1 fouls committed (-3 if you don't count the two technicals). Ultimately, XAV couldn't stop pre-season All-American TJD, and I doubt many teams this year will. I'm surprised he only recorded four ORBs because it felt like 20 from watching it, and at least two of the four were ORB for buckets. Both teams have reliable interior scoring, rim protection, and experience (four seniors in the starting lineups). For IND and I mean this in the nicest way possible, their FRs need to grow up fast, emotionally and skillfully, for this team to make a deep-run in March. Although IND wants to play at a deliberate/methodical pace, they can play at an up-and-down pace. Their biggest flaw is perimeter shooting, as it was last year. TJD is going to attract the attention of every good defense, so they need to be able to force the defense to respect the perimeter. XAV has very skillful players at multiple positions for which you can run set plays to reliably get buckets. However, they lack a go-to playmaker that can get their own shot whenever they want (IND has two: TJD and PG Johnson with exceptional downhill speed). If I was a 1- or 2-seed, I would not want to see XAV on the 7-thru-10-seed lines in my pod.

PUR def MARQ: In my opinion, MARQ was the better team, but lack of offensive discipline in a true road game at PUR was their downfall. PUR returns their starting front-court from last year, which should do wonders for them in B10 home games. The development of the back-court will be the key factor in whether they achieve a >500 conference record, as B10 road wins aren't easy to collect (5 road losses last year). MARQ returned two starters, a lot of minutes, but not a lot of production from last year. Shot selection was horrible. Though the final box score showed 35/72 shot attempts (48%) were from three, it felt like 2/3 of their shots were from deep. Most were off of one- or zero-passes, further than 2 feet from the line, and not in the rhythm of the offense. This lack of offensive discipline can be further seen in the time-out splits. In the first four TV time-outs, MARQ scored 13 pts, 3pts, 8pts, and 4pts, respectively compared to PUR's splits of 7pts, 7pts, 7pts, and 8pts. MARQ's defensive principles started to wane as the game went on, and this could have been the result of their game plan to keep PUR off of the ORBs (which they did really well).

HOU def ORE: I have seen every HOU game this year, and they are a solid team to start the season. I am worried if they will suffer from the GONZ effect by playing in AAC (more prestigious competition than the WCC, but not power-6 level). Last year, both MEM and SMU gave them formidable challenges and a favorable path got them to the E8. This year, they get Sasser and Mark back from injury and Jarace Walker is a talented freshman. Unfortunately, they don't shoot the ball very well, as a lot of their points come from turnovers and offensive rebounds, and you should expect this from a fundamentally sound team like HOU. They shot 50% from three against ORE, but ORE was giving them open looks in rhythm (and yours truly could have shot 75% from the good looks HOU was getting). ORE did a much better job at protecting the paint with Dante, as HOU was 13/34 from two with several of these shots coming from transition (17 fast break points and 30 pts off TOs) and not against a set defense. ORE's offense looked atrocious (15 TOs and 3/22 from three), but in fairness, HOU can do this to a team (I'm guessing UCI did this to ORE too, as UCI has been a Top-5 2P% Defense over the last several years). Maybe UCI and HOU are proxies for tournament match-ups for ORE, if ORE makes the Big Dance. On a funny side note, ORE did not get called for their first team foul in the 2nd half until 1 minute remaining, but by this time, HOU had already been called for 10.