Big Ten Basketball: Grading each team's 2023-24 non-conference performance (Minnesota Golden Gophers: C-)

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,980
Reaction score
18,170
Points
113
Per Cole:

Minnesota Golden Gophers: C-​

Minnesota may stand at 9-3 (1-1), but their best non-conference win is…Florida Gulf Coast? Ball State?

Although this is the most talented group that Ben Johnson has had in his three years leading the Gophers, Minnesota’s NCOS -- which currently ranks dead-last in college basketball, according to KenPom -- is nothing to be proud of.

In their two toughest tests in non-conference play, the Gophers blew a 20-point second-half lead to Missouri and fell in blowout fashion to San Francisco.

Because the Gophers do not have a quality win in non-conference play, it's hard to accurately gauge how well this team can perform come Big Ten play in January.

It's clear that there is a talent upgrade as the Gophers were able to win comfortably despite the recent absence of their leading scorer, Dawson Garcia (18.2 PPG). Mike Mitchell, Joshua Ola-Joseph and freshman Cam Christie have stepped up -- but can this solid core step up again with increased competition?

Minnesota will play Maine on Friday, Dec. 29 before reopening Big Ten play at Michigan on Thursday, Jan. 4.

bustingbrackets.com

Big Ten Basketball: Grading each team's non-conference performance

The end of the non-conference portion of the season is near, meaning it is time to grade how each Big Ten team has fared in non-conference play.
bustingbrackets.com bustingbrackets.com

Go Gophers!!
 



chicago.suntimes.com

Big Ten hoops re-rankings: Here’s the real 1-14 as conference play is about to begin in earnest

Purdue remains the “it” team, but Illinois is coming on strong, Wisconsin likewise is much-improved and Northwestern is doing mostly encouraging things.
chicago.suntimes.com chicago.suntimes.com

Big Ten Hoops Re-ranking from Chicago Sun-Times (12/26/2023):

Each school had a write up...by Steve Greenberg

In order of predicted finish:

Purdue, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio St., Northwestern, Indiana, Nebraska, Mich.St., MINNESOTA, Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan, Iowa, & Penn St.

# 9 MINNESOTA (9-3, 1-1)

What’s right: Big man Dawson Garcia has blossomed into an offensive force, and Elijah Hawkins’ 7.6 assists per game is an eye-opening stat. So is this: 19.9 assists per game for the Gophers, sixth-most in the country. A very efficient team.

What’s wrong: The Gophers still are looking up at much of the league in terms of overall talent.

Best case: End that six-season streak of losing records in the Big Ten, and then we’ll talk.
 

Of course, it’s just click bait, but a couple comments. I think the best the Gophs’ grade could have been is B-. They played zero tournament worthy teams in the noncon, so if you’re trying to grade the conference on a curve, Purdue was taking graduate level organic chemistry while the Gophs were in elementary school - their relative max grade reflects that.

Second, being high in assists does not mean you’re efficient. The writer obviously is clueless. It’s points per possession, period - it really doesn’t matter at all whether there’s an assist that’s associated with a basket. And, a high rate of turnovers kills your efficiency (a possession with a turnover is always a possession with zero points).
 


formerlybis said:
Of course, it’s just click bait, but a couple comments. I think the best the Gophs’ grade could have been is B-. They played zero tournament worthy teams in the noncon, so if you’re trying to grade the conference on a curve, Purdue was taking graduate level organic chemistry while the Gophs were in elementary school - their relative max grade reflects that.

Second, being high in assists does not mean you’re efficient. The writer obviously is clueless. It’s points per possession, period - it really doesn’t matter at all whether there’s an assist that’s associated with a basket. And, a high rate of turnovers kills your efficiency (a possession with a turnover is always a possession with zero points).
Click to expand...

The bolded part is more than a bit presumptuous. I think there is something you're missing: Points per Possession is an output, not an input. It's what is known in statistics as an endogenous variable (a/k/a dependent variable) so it is a function of other variables. It is not something a team or player can input directly. One would be interested in the correlation of the inputs (independent variables) with the outputs (dependent variables). I haven't done an analysis of the relationship of assists (an input) to points per possession (an output) so I wouldn't dismiss out of hand a claim that there is a significant correlation between the two.
 

Rex said:
# 9 MINNESOTA (9-3, 1-1)

What’s right: Big man Dawson Garcia has blossomed into an offensive force, and Elijah Hawkins’ 7.6 assists per game is an eye-opening stat. So is this: 19.9 assists per game for the Gophers, sixth-most in the country. A very efficient team.

What’s wrong: The Gophers still are looking up at much of the league in terms of overall talent.

Best case: End that six-season streak of losing records in the Big Ten, and then we’ll talk.
Click to expand...

I can't complain about the ranking. Unlike the author of another piece posted here recently, the author doesn't mention how the rest of the team has "blossomed" in Garcia's absence so maybe he isn't as aware of that. Personally, after the last four seasons, I'd be fairly pleased if the Gophers finished 9th in the conference.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
I can't complain about the ranking. Unlike the author of another piece posted here recently, the author doesn't mention how the rest of the team has "blossomed" in Garcia's absence so maybe he isn't as aware of that. Personally, after the last four seasons, I'd be fairly pleased if the Gophers finished 9th in the conference.
Click to expand...
A ninth place prediction is quite generous by the writer. Possible? Yes. Likely? I’m saying no. And I would consider it a short term success if it happened.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
The bolded part is more than a bit presumptuous. I think there is something you're missing: Points per Possession is an output, not an input. It's what is known in statistics as an endogenous variable (a/k/a dependent variable) so it is a function of other variables. It is not something a team or player can input directly. One would be interested in the correlation of the inputs (independent variables) with the outputs (dependent variables). I haven't done an analysis of the relationship of assists (an input) to points per possession (an output) so I wouldn't dismiss out of hand a claim that there is a significant correlation between the two.
Click to expand...
No, it's not presumptuous. It's harsh, but not presumptuous. Efficiency is defined as points per possession, both offensively and defensively, on all the basketball analytics sites. You are correct, however, that many different inputs go into it - shooting percentage, rate of getting to the FT line, offensive rebounding, and turnovers matter. Assists do not matter, at least not directly. Plus, assists are a judgement call by the official scorer, and you can have wide variation - it's not a reliable stat.

Anyone who actually has a clue what they are talking about would never use "efficiency" in the context of describing assists.
 



Its a mute point and irregardless what "efficiency" entrails (Ha!). The intuitive test for efficiency is points per poss., yes. The article's author is entertainingly dripping with sarcasm at times, and is just an opinion piece, signifying nothing. I'm also not a fan of Howard or McCaffrey despite their effervescent personalities. Any of us could have written that after doing an hour or so of online research and not watching any games.
It is my strong believe, and I will stay on the CBJ wagon watching this team win half its BTN conf. games, entering the NCAA "discussion" by season's end after conf. tournament results... It can and very may well happen if people stay healthy.
It is interesting to note the projected conf. record on Torvik is now 8-12, creeping up. Gophers effective FG% is elite (vs. weak opp) at 56.5% #19 rank, as is MN 2PFG% 58.6% #11 rank. Of note the Gophers defense inside the line yields only a 44.5% opp shooting % #26. Glad to have Carrington back on the bench, as he'll be a key component in Jan.
 

formerlybis said:
No, it's not presumptuous. It's harsh, but not presumptuous. Efficiency is defined as points per possession, both offensively and defensively, on all the basketball analytics sites. You are correct, however, that many different inputs go into it - shooting percentage, rate of getting to the FT line, offensive rebounding, and turnovers matter. Assists do not matter, at least not directly. Plus, assists are a judgement call by the official scorer, and you can have wide variation - it's not a reliable stat.

Anyone who actually has a clue what they are talking about would never use "efficiency" in the context of describing assists.
Click to expand...

You still don't get it. You can't practice "points per possession." You can only practice things that may lead to a greater points per possession number. You're assuming that the author is stupid when in reality he may just be thinking about this more deeply than you.
 

Holy Man said:
A ninth place prediction is quite generous by the writer. Possible? Yes. Likely? I’m saying no. And I would consider it a short term success if it happened.
Click to expand...

In other words, the Gophers are damned if they don't rise to 9th place and damned if they do.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
In other words, the Gophers are damned if they don't rise to 9th place and damned if they do.
Click to expand...
No. That's a twisted interpretation of what I posted. As indicated, I think the ninth place finish is a generous prediction, and I would consider it a success if they met that prediction. The leap from last to middle is a big jump, and would be laudable. I've not seen enough against decent competition to suggest that big a jump in the standings.
 



TwistingMyMelon said:
You still don't get it. You can't practice "points per possession." You can only practice things that may lead to a greater points per possession number. You're assuming that the author is stupid when in reality he may just be thinking about this more deeply than you.
Click to expand...
You think I don't get it. Maybe I don't. Anything's possible. I have thought a great deal about the meaning (or lack thereof) of assists, however, as it relates to efficiency.

I listed the key direct factors in efficiency in my previous post, and all of these are things that can be practiced:

-shooting percentage (technically the effective FG%, which takes into account 3s vs. 2s),
-free throw rate, meaning being good at getting to the line (getting to the line a lot improves efficiency - it's simplifying things, but if you assume 2 shots, averaging 70% FT% gets you 1.4 points per possession, which is super-high)
-offensive rebounding, which extends possessions and can make up for lesser shooting
-turnovers. Every turnover is 0.0 points per possession.

Defense efficiency is the reverse of these - make the opponent take low percentage shots, don't foul, protect your glass, and force turnovers.

I will listen to an argument that assists might raise shooting percentage. However, I believe that correlation will prove weak, and the correlation with overall efficiency will be nonexistent. The #1 offense right now is Alabama and they are 158th in assists. Purdue is #2 and they do have a good assist rate at #15. #3 TAMU is 256th in assists (and #1 in offensive rebounding, btw). #4 FAU is 170th. #5 Baylor is 103rd. You get the idea. They achieve their efficiency with the factors I listed above.

Minnesota's got the 85th rated offensive efficiency with the #2 assist rate. 85th is rarefied air for the Gophers, but it still stinks for a P6 team. They are not an efficient offense.

FWIW, the main factor in bringing the Gophers' efficiency down is being 227th in TO%.

Ergo, assists and efficiency do not belong as synonyms. At best, the team assist rate is really just a descriptive stat on how the team achieves its points.

FYI, all of these stats are from barttorvik (T-rank).
 

formerlybis said:
You think I don't get it. Maybe I don't. Anything's possible. I have thought a great deal about the meaning (or lack thereof) of assists, however, as it relates to efficiency.

I listed the key direct factors in efficiency in my previous post, and all of these are things that can be practiced:

-shooting percentage (technically the effective FG%, which takes into account 3s vs. 2s),
-free throw rate, meaning being good at getting to the line (getting to the line a lot improves efficiency - it's simplifying things, but if you assume 2 shots, averaging 70% FT% gets you 1.4 points per possession, which is super-high)
-offensive rebounding, which extends possessions and can make up for lesser shooting
-turnovers. Every turnover is 0.0 points per possession.

Defense efficiency is the reverse of these - make the opponent take low percentage shots, don't foul, protect your glass, and force turnovers.

I will listen to an argument that assists might raise shooting percentage. However, I believe that correlation will prove weak, and the correlation with overall efficiency will be nonexistent. The #1 offense right now is Alabama and they are 158th in assists. Purdue is #2 and they do have a good assist rate at #15. #3 TAMU is 256th in assists (and #1 in offensive rebounding, btw). #4 FAU is 170th. #5 Baylor is 103rd. You get the idea. They achieve their efficiency with the factors I listed above.

Minnesota's got the 85th rated offensive efficiency with the #2 assist rate. 85th is rarefied air for the Gophers, but it still stinks for a P6 team. They are not an efficient offense.

FWIW, the main factor in bringing the Gophers' efficiency down is being 227th in TO%.

Ergo, assists and efficiency do not belong as synonyms. At best, the team assist rate is really just a descriptive stat on how the team achieves its points.

FYI, all of these stats are from barttorvik (T-rank).
Click to expand...
Websites like T-rank and Kenpom take into account schedule, home court, and other factors to come up with offensive and defensive efficiency (as they should). They are ranked low because their schedule sucks. If they were putting up the same stats against decent teams they would be way higher on those websites. The assist rate you're using doesn't include schedule adjustments while the efficiency does.

The Gophers without the schedule adjustment measure are a top 35 offense. Basically you aren't comparing apples to apples because of the way those websites work.

NCAA Basketball Stats - NCAA BB Team Offensive Efficiency | TeamRankings.com

NCAA Basketball offensive efficiency, by team.
www.teamrankings.com www.teamrankings.com
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
Websites like T-rank and Kenpom take into account schedule, home court, and other factors to come up with offensive and defensive efficiency (as they should). They are ranked low because their schedule sucks. If they were putting up the same stats against decent teams they would be way higher on those websites. The assist rate you're using doesn't include schedule adjustments while the efficiency does.

The Gophers without the schedule adjustment measure are a top 35 offense. Basically you aren't comparing apples to apples because of the way those websites work.

NCAA Basketball Stats - NCAA BB Team Offensive Efficiency | TeamRankings.com

NCAA Basketball offensive efficiency, by team.
www.teamrankings.com www.teamrankings.com
Click to expand...
Adjusted or not (and I’m fully aware how tho good analytics sites work), being high in assist rate in not synonymous with efficiency. Thinking so demonstrates a lack of understanding of what efficiency is.
 

C- seems about right. They played a mostly soft schedule. The Missouri collapse and loss was horrible and the team played poorly at SF. IMO, they played better as December marched on, and playing w/o Garcia may have helped the maturity of the team — assuming they do not over-rely on him once he is back. I still think they could be a surprise team in the B1G.
 
Last edited:

I'll give it a B.

We looked like a better team when we crushed bad teams. The loss to Mizzou stunk, but again, we looked like the much better team. Because of the quality of the opponents, the weight of that grade isn't much, but I'm confident in the team being improved.
 

This might deserve a separate thread, but I'll put it here because I already posted a bit on my indifference towards assists.

Granted the Gophers have only played two games away from Williams this season so far, but the difference in the percent of baskets with an assist in home games vs. away games is striking. At home, the average is over 70%. The lowest game was Mizzou at 67%.

The two non-home games were 50% and 43%.

This sort of home/away difference in assist rate has been going on for years for the Gophers. Most other teams do not have nearly this discrepancy by venue (though MSU has a bit of this, too).

My conclusion: the official scorer at Williams Arena (and Breslin) may be overly generous in handing out assists.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom