This poster on the Badger Scout site does this for all the games. Thought the numbers people would find it interesting.
______________________________________________________
Here is my pre game analysis of Minnesota based upon KenPom (UM and UW)and Jeff Sagarin. The Big Ten only stats come from The BigTenGeek (Link).
What the expert nerds say: Sagarin has UW ranked #26 and UM ranked #36. After adding in the home court advantage, UM is a 3 point favorite.
KenPom has UM winning 61-60. He predicts a 59 possession game and gives Minnesota a 55% chance of winning.
General Thoughts: UM seems like a team of contradictions.
Minnesota plays games with lots of turnovers – on both ends of the court. UW plays games with few turnovers, at both ends of the court. That is a brewing conflict. Something has to give.
Minnesota is a better defensive team than an offensive team, yet they are successful at crashing the boards on offense and do not do a good job of protecting the boards on defense. That makes little sense.
What Minnesota is really good at:
1) Blocking shots. They are #1 in the nation blocking 19.6% of their opponent’s FGA’s. Yikes. This is cause for concern. I am sure Bo will have some strategy to counter this obvious strength.
2) Forcing turnovers. As we painfully remember from the first game, UM is good at forcing TO’s. They get their opponents to give it up on 23.1% of their possessions, which is #44 in the nation. In BigTen play, UM rakes #2 in forcing TO’s. Avoiding TO’s is a strength of UW. So, TO’s will be a strength on strength situation.
3) Offensive rebounding. UM is #2 in the B10 in offensive rebounding getting 36.2% of the many misses.
What Minnesota is really bad at:
1) Shooting. They are dead last in effective FG% at 46.4%. To achieve this dubious distinction, you need to do several things not well including clanking 3pt shots (31.8%, #10 in league) and clanking 2pt shots (45.8% - #10 in league).
2) Defensive Rebounding. Strangely, they are as bad at protecting the glass on their end as they are attacking the glass on the other end. They are #8 in the league allowing opponents to get 33.3% of their misses. If they do not successfully block the shot, they do not get the rebound either. That smells like a team that plays a lot of zone.
3) Turning the ball over. They puke up the ball on 23.3% of their possessions to rank 10th in conference (thank god for Indiana). They are as bad at protecting the ball as their opponents. Strange.
Relative efficiency: UW has a +.07 PPP efficiency margin compared to UM’s +.01 efficiency margin. UW is #3 in efficiency margin and Minnesota #6.
On offense, UM scores .98 PPP, which is #9 in the conference. UW is used to giving up 1.00 PPP, which is the #5 defense. So, it looks like mediocre defense against mediocre to poor offense on that end.
On the other end, UM’s defense holds teams to .97 PPP, which is #4 in B10 play. UW scores 1.07PPP, which is #2 in conference.
Remembering the First Game: I know I do not want to remember the first game, but, here is a summary:
1) UM won at the Kohl Center 78-74 in overtime in a 77 possession game
2) Rebounding was even – UM 33% offensive, UW 36% offensive
3) Both teams had 18 TO’s, many of UW’s came late when UM put the heat on with a full court press
4) UM and UW each made 5 3pters, but UM tried 13 and UW 24, or UW took 11 extra threes and missed them all. UM hit key threes to send the game to OT.
My expectations:
1. Pace. UM tends to play more frenetic games than UW (66 possessions to 60 for the year). I predict a game with 55 possessions. I think there will be plenty of possessions extended with offensive rebounds and the TO count will be lower. Both tend to reduce pace. I will go with 57 possessions.
2. UW will do well on the glass on both ends. UW will hold UM to about 25% offensive rebounds and will get about 33% on the other end.
3. Turnovers are key to the game, as noted above. The team with the positive TO count will win. I expect UW to have a 2-3 turnover advantage.
4. I predict a low scoring game, say, UW 55, UM 52.
Closing Thoughts: On KenPom’s pregame analysis (link), our loss to Minnesota is the only bad loss we have this year. It did not seem too bad (painful, yes, bad no) at the time because Minnesota was ranked. But, UM’s slide has moved the game into the moderately bad loss category. This must be avenged.
______________________________________________________
Here is my pre game analysis of Minnesota based upon KenPom (UM and UW)and Jeff Sagarin. The Big Ten only stats come from The BigTenGeek (Link).
What the expert nerds say: Sagarin has UW ranked #26 and UM ranked #36. After adding in the home court advantage, UM is a 3 point favorite.
KenPom has UM winning 61-60. He predicts a 59 possession game and gives Minnesota a 55% chance of winning.
General Thoughts: UM seems like a team of contradictions.
Minnesota plays games with lots of turnovers – on both ends of the court. UW plays games with few turnovers, at both ends of the court. That is a brewing conflict. Something has to give.
Minnesota is a better defensive team than an offensive team, yet they are successful at crashing the boards on offense and do not do a good job of protecting the boards on defense. That makes little sense.
What Minnesota is really good at:
1) Blocking shots. They are #1 in the nation blocking 19.6% of their opponent’s FGA’s. Yikes. This is cause for concern. I am sure Bo will have some strategy to counter this obvious strength.
2) Forcing turnovers. As we painfully remember from the first game, UM is good at forcing TO’s. They get their opponents to give it up on 23.1% of their possessions, which is #44 in the nation. In BigTen play, UM rakes #2 in forcing TO’s. Avoiding TO’s is a strength of UW. So, TO’s will be a strength on strength situation.
3) Offensive rebounding. UM is #2 in the B10 in offensive rebounding getting 36.2% of the many misses.
What Minnesota is really bad at:
1) Shooting. They are dead last in effective FG% at 46.4%. To achieve this dubious distinction, you need to do several things not well including clanking 3pt shots (31.8%, #10 in league) and clanking 2pt shots (45.8% - #10 in league).
2) Defensive Rebounding. Strangely, they are as bad at protecting the glass on their end as they are attacking the glass on the other end. They are #8 in the league allowing opponents to get 33.3% of their misses. If they do not successfully block the shot, they do not get the rebound either. That smells like a team that plays a lot of zone.
3) Turning the ball over. They puke up the ball on 23.3% of their possessions to rank 10th in conference (thank god for Indiana). They are as bad at protecting the ball as their opponents. Strange.
Relative efficiency: UW has a +.07 PPP efficiency margin compared to UM’s +.01 efficiency margin. UW is #3 in efficiency margin and Minnesota #6.
On offense, UM scores .98 PPP, which is #9 in the conference. UW is used to giving up 1.00 PPP, which is the #5 defense. So, it looks like mediocre defense against mediocre to poor offense on that end.
On the other end, UM’s defense holds teams to .97 PPP, which is #4 in B10 play. UW scores 1.07PPP, which is #2 in conference.
Remembering the First Game: I know I do not want to remember the first game, but, here is a summary:
1) UM won at the Kohl Center 78-74 in overtime in a 77 possession game
2) Rebounding was even – UM 33% offensive, UW 36% offensive
3) Both teams had 18 TO’s, many of UW’s came late when UM put the heat on with a full court press
4) UM and UW each made 5 3pters, but UM tried 13 and UW 24, or UW took 11 extra threes and missed them all. UM hit key threes to send the game to OT.
My expectations:
1. Pace. UM tends to play more frenetic games than UW (66 possessions to 60 for the year). I predict a game with 55 possessions. I think there will be plenty of possessions extended with offensive rebounds and the TO count will be lower. Both tend to reduce pace. I will go with 57 possessions.
2. UW will do well on the glass on both ends. UW will hold UM to about 25% offensive rebounds and will get about 33% on the other end.
3. Turnovers are key to the game, as noted above. The team with the positive TO count will win. I expect UW to have a 2-3 turnover advantage.
4. I predict a low scoring game, say, UW 55, UM 52.
Closing Thoughts: On KenPom’s pregame analysis (link), our loss to Minnesota is the only bad loss we have this year. It did not seem too bad (painful, yes, bad no) at the time because Minnesota was ranked. But, UM’s slide has moved the game into the moderately bad loss category. This must be avenged.
