Some Post-Game Thoughts: Xavier 68 Marquette 65, Big East Tournament

Jake Thomas was rather unhappy with his inability to get any space (Frank Franklin II, AP)

Stainbrook came back!

Matt Stainbrook only played 15 minutes (though that looks really good in the Selection Committee’s eyes), but they were also a very effective 15 minutes.  8 points on 2-3 shooting, including 4-5 at the free throw line, plus an assist in addition to his standard for excellent passing out of the post.

Semaj and JMart

This duo really asserted themselves in this game, which is good, as they are clearly the best two players out there for Xavier with Stainbrook still getting winded from his short stints after injury.  They put up 19 and 18 points respectively on decent shooting lines (Justin Martin’s 3-6 from deep was really big for the team), and they kept attacking the stalwart Marquette defense at opportune times.  Martin was also perfect at the free throw line, going 6-6 including 4-4 in the waning minutes, and Semaj Christon did decent, going 5-8 (and sinking two when Xavier really needed it).  Semaj did turn the ball over five times, but he had it in his hands a lot in this game, and a couple of those were charges (Sidenote:  The refs seemed to be calling charges by last year’s rules on both sides of the ball).

Dee Davis

It has come to the point where you refer to “Good Dee” or “Bad Dee.”  Well, Good Dee showed up tonight:  7 points on 3-5 shooting, 3 assists, and 5 steals.  Oh, and Jake Thomas did pretty much nothing in this game after being a Xavier killer for two straight.  Dee may have had something to do with that…

Did you notice?

Isaiah Philmore had a solid outing.  10 points on 4-7 shooting, 6 rebounds (2 offensive), and 2 assists to zero turnovers.  He also played some great defense against Marquette’s frontcourt, which, in my opinion, ranks second only to Xavier in the Big East.  His help defense on drives to the basket left something to be desired, but I’m not really claiming that he was an All-Star.

The Defense

It wasn’t awesome.  Marquette shot 57.8% from the field, though they definitely got a favorable bounce on the rim tonight.  Also, Marquette simply made shots sometimes, including some three-pointers and jump shots that just left you shaking your head (Todd Mayo’s late-game heroics are included in this).  The main factor, though, was Marquette’s ability on multiple possessions to drive into the lane and score at the rim.  Xavier did pressure the ball well and forced Marquette into 15 turnovers, but in general, it wasn’t great defense.  It did some things very well (Gardner did not reach double digits!), but it definitely had its flaws.  After two games of getting drilled from deep, Chris Mack seemed to have changed strategies (with the 3-2 zone) to try to stop shooting and challenge Marquette on the interior.  It seems counter-intuitive to most teams playing Marquette, but it worked for Xavier.  As the game went, they started to adjust by helping more on drives into the lane, as it was Marquette’s most effective means of attack tonight.  Overall, it was an alright job (1.07 points per possession scored by Marquette), but nothing extraordinary.

Ref’s Calls

Your standard missed calls or bad calls on each side, but I included this for only one reason:  I’m glad to see that the refs didn’t put up with Gardner’s bullshit flopping nearly as much as some others do.  Good riddance.

Xavier is Going Dancing

A win tomorrow against Creighton would help with seeding, but Xavier is pretty much a lock right now.  I love it!

Big East Tournament: Xavier vs. Marquette

Stainbrook’s presence against Gardner will be missed tonight. (Joe Robbins/Getty Images North America)

So it comes down to this:  Xavier’s first appearance in the Big East Tournament.  Hopes on the line.  A spot in the NCAA Tournament virtually guaranteed with a win vs. Marquette.  A lot of sweat on Selection Sunday with a loss.  And no Matt Stainbrook, a Honorable Mention on the Big East all-conference teams (and the only center on any of the teams).

Xavier has lost its last two games without Stainbrook, after he strained his MCL early on in the Seton Hall game.  Of course, those two losses were at Seton Hall, as the team had to adjust to his absence (and worry about his health) mid-game, and versus Villanova, one of the top teams in the country.  Hardly an awful slide.  P.S. Due to finally being healthy again, Seton Hall is much better than their record.  If you doubt that, maybe you just missed them beating Villanova in the Big East Tournament.

Understandable losses or not, Xavier has to prove to the Selection Committee that they are still effective without Stainbrook.  He should be back next week for the beginning of the tournament, but undoubtedly Committee members will wonder how effective he will be after being out, even if he is reported to be 100%.  If they win without him, particularly since it’s only the RPI #84 team, they’ll at least give the idea that they don’t need a 100% Stainbrook to be a tournament-level team.  Then his return will just be an additional help.

That being said, Marquette is a particularly tough match-up without Stainbrook, because of a certain Davante Gardner, the only player on the squad who is consistently effective.  Gardner is big, at 290 pounds, and has a way of pushing around his opponents, much like Gene Teague did versus Reynolds, et. al., in the Seton Hall game after Stainbrook was out.  He also draws fouls at a very high rate (6.9 per 40 minutes, 46th in the country, and yes, it sometimes involve flopping), which is worrisome for a now short-handed frontcourt full of players with high foul rates.  Isaiah Philmore and Erik Stenger both average 4.8 fouls per 40 minutes, and James Farr and Jalen Reynolds are worse, at 5.7 and 7.6 (!), respectively.  In addition to Gardner’s ability to draw fouls, he can also put the ball in the basket at a good percentage.  He makes 78.8% of his free throws when he goes to the line and 54.8% of his two-point field goal attempts.  Put that together with a very low turnover rate (10.2%, 72nd) and a good offensive rebounding rate (9.9%, 310th), and you have an excellent offensive player.  Luckily, he isn’t really known for being even decent on the defensive end.  Xavier can’t handle him one-on-one without Stainbrook, so look for them to post-trap him every opportunity they get.  This is all well and good for stopping the big guy, but it leads to other problems:  (1) It opens up lane for Gardner’s teammates, who are athletic and good at finishing at the rim, and (2) it makes it more difficult to guard three-pointers, which a poor-shooting Marquette squad seems to have a propensity at making versus Xavier.

On the perimeter shooting front, Jake Thomas has proven himself to be a Xavier killer.  He’s a good three-point shooter otherwise, but it’s not like Brad Redford has stepped onto the court in an opponent’s uniform.  Perhaps his great shooting performance in the first game gave him confidence in the second round, which led him to take (and unfortunately make) some deeper shots that he doesn’t normally attempt.  Two other factors also probably played into consecutive rounds of hot shooting, though, both by him and by the team at large.

First off, Xavier’s three-point defense against Marquette left something to be desired.  Now, against Marquette the standard and usually effective strategy is to pack it in because in general they do not have good shooters, Thomas being the only one that qualifies.  Since they are an athletic team of slashers with a good frontcourt of Gardner, Chris Otule, and company, you make Marquette beat you from the outside.  In two instances, this didn’t really work for Xavier, though in the first occasion, they had enough offensive firepower to make up for it.  What played a part was how they were defending the mediocre shooters.  Instead of offering a late contest (like they did very well @St. John’s), they were leaving them wide-open.  You don’t leave a 30-32% shooter wide-open from deep; you play off of him and then get a hand up if he decides he’s going to shoot.  If you leave him wide-open, that mediocre shooter suddenly becomes a pretty good shooter, percentage-wise, and you’re playing with fire.

Secondly, and fans often don’t want to hear this, but luck played a part.  Steve Taylor has attempted 13 three-pointers all year.  The only two he has ever made were one in each game versus Xavier.  That’s just absurd.  It also is representative of Marquette as a whole:  Twice now their players are shooting well, despite overall percentages indicating otherwise.  My bet:  That won’t happen a third time.  Without Stainbrook, that doesn’t guarantee a win, but I doubt Xavier is going to lose because of that.

From One Bird to Another

There’s a reason the Bluejay looks happier than the Golden Eagle.  The Bluejay is watching a much better team.

Sorry for the delay in posting after Xavier beat the Golden Eagles!  It was a wonderful victory, but the extended period of free time demanded for writing articles was instead taken up by getting prepared at the beginning of the semester of classes.  I’m going to give a rundown of the Marquette game, summing up the game in general and taking a look at the major points in my preview, before turning to a preview of the Creighton Bluejays, who the Musketeers face in Omaha.

First off, I’m an idiot.  I predicted “an ugly defensive grudge match” (and repeated it too in that post!), but that couldn’t be further from the truth in this game.  Supposedly, these two teams were supposed to put really good defenses on the court while their offense wasn’t quite as good.  Instead, Xavier scored an astounding 1.28 points per possession, while Marquette “only” managed 1.18 points per possession.  The outcome was so different from pregame expectations that Xavier’s offensive efficiency is now ranked higher (#35, up about 30 spots) than their defensive efficiency (#48, down about 20 spots).  Nearly everyone on both sides had an offensive rating over 100.  Let’s see how it went on my list of “Things to Watch Out For” from the game:

Davante Gardner vs. Matt Stainbrook

This didn’t quite work out like planned.  Stainbrook picked up 2 quick fouls in the first five minutes of the game and sat the rest of the half (credit to what the Xavier frontline did without him).  He wasn’t bad when he got back in and at times dictated his will, just like in previous games, but it wasn’t quite a dominant performance offensively.  He managed the following line:  7 points (2-5 FG/3-4 FT), 8 rebounds (3 offensive), 3 assists, 3 turnovers, 1 block.  On the glass, he was his usual dominant self, even if he wasn’t able to score as much as in other games.  Defensively he did a solid job against whoever he faced, but Davante Gardner in particular (unsurprisingly) proved to be a load in the paint.

Gardner held up his end of this matchup on the offensive end.  He scored 19 points on a solid 7 of 14 shooting while making 5 of 6 from the line.  At times Marquette would just get him the ball in the paint and he would somehow find a way to score despite the tight defense.  He took some questionable jump shots, and the announcers were right to point out the poor strategy, that he should get back in the post, where he was scoring so effectively.  On the other end, he and his teammates did a good job containing Stainbrook in the post.  Thanks to Stainbrook, et. al., however, he was not able to rebound too effectively, only able to grab 4, though no one else on his team had even that many.  It will be interesting to see how this matchup of two of the conference’s best bigs plays out when they meet again up in Milwaukee.  In this saga, the final tally is:

Scoring:  Advantage, Gardner / Defense:  Even / Rebounding:   Advantage, Stainbrook

Xavier’s Offensive Consistency

Xavier’s offense dominated Marquette’s defense, as I mentioned before.  Scoring 1.28 points per possession?  Ridiculous.  The offense flowed smoothly and everyone got involved.  The team’s 58.3% A/FGM mark was steady with their very respectable average, and this sharing allowed them to shoot 54.5% from inside the arc, 46.2% from outside the arc, and 78.0% from the foul line while attempting 41 shots (31 before the foul-fest in the last 44 seconds).  The Musketeers got themselves good looks on jump shots and were able to draw fouls regularly when they drove inside.  Their 12 turnovers (17.9% rate) were the one offensive blemish in an otherwise excellent night.

What about the individual performances?  Stainbrook having to go to the bench and only playing half the game in the end proved to be no problem.  James Farr lit up the Golden Eagles in his limited playing time on a perfect shooting night from the field:  3-3 on two-pointers and 1-1 on three-pointers for 10 points, including a vicious putback dunk.  Isaiah Philmore put together another low-usage high-efficiency game, making 3 of his 4 shots from the field and another 3 of 4 from the line to once again fall just short of double digits.  Dee Davis had 6 assists to 1 turnover, and though he didn’t shoot well from the field (1-5/1-3), he nailed 8 of 9 free throws to help secure the win.  Justin Martin put together another great offensive performance, scoring 15 points on the following shooting line:  4-6/1-3/4-4.  He was constantly challenging the offense, playing aggressively, and sliding into the seams in the defense, like on one of Semaj Christon’s drives to the basket where Martin was waiting in the gap for the defense to collapse on Semaj.  They did, Semaj passed it off to Martin, and he drove in for the easy lay-in.  This needs to be said:  Semaj is starting to consistently look for Martin in the offense.  With all the options on the team, the team’s assists man and star player is looking for the enigmatic small forward to score.  That’s confidence for you.

Now let’s talk about Semaj’s day.  It was succinctly described by one message board poster:  “28 POINTS ON 10 SHOTS!”  Semaj managed only 2 assists (and his first turnover in three weeks!) because he was able to score so effectively himself up against a purportedly good defense.  This was hands-down the best game of his college career.  He was 5 of 7 on two-point field goals and 3-3 from three-point range.  For a player criticized for his shooting, those three-pointers stand out.  The first was a catch-and-shoot basket on the wing after he was demanding the ball.  The next two?  Marquette had tied the game 69-69 with less than 5 minutes to play after coming back from an 11-point deficit.  Semaj responded on the other side by pulling up for a three-point shot on the wing well behind the line and nailing it as the shot clock was running down.  Marquette missed a jumper on the other end, and after a TV timeout, Semaj was heavily guarded on the same wing as the last two attempts with the shot clock once again running down.  He created some space with the dribble and then turned to sink the heavily contested pull-up shot.  It was just remarkable shooting and incredible confidence from a player who hesitated to shoot from three-point range for most of his career.  Those threes put Xavier up by 6 and the Musketeers kept the lead through the rest of the game.

Battle of the Boards

Since Marquette’s offense was also lighting it up, especially from 3 (11-27), Xavier’s offense alone would not guarantee the win.  That’s okay, though, because they dominated the glass by a 39-20 margin.  The Musketeers grabbed 44.0% of their own misses while holding the Golden Eagles to only 17.6% of theirs.  That is a hard margin for any team to overcome and it helped Xavier secure the game.  As usual this season, the rebounding was a team effort.  Six players grabbed at least one offensive rebound, led by Stainbrook with 3 in just 22 minutes and Farr with 2 in just 12 minutes.  Dee actually managed to grab 2 himself on the offensive end to continue Xavier’s possession.  On the defensive end, they held Marquette to one shot through that same team effort.  Martin picked up 7 defensive rebounds, probably helped by his need to play a few more minutes than normal at the 4 this game, but his rebounding from the wing has helped Xavier to win every battle of the glass since the Bowling Green game.  Stainbrook picked up another 5 on this end in his limited time, and Jalen Reynolds picked up 5 defensive rebounds in just 13 minutes.  The game seems to be slowing down for Reynolds, as he finally played some quality minutes this season, keeping Erik Stenger (3 minutes) generally on the bench despite the Stain’s foul trouble and playing more minutes than Farr for the first time this season despite Farr having a really good offensive game.

The defense could have been better, admittedly, but sometimes teams just make shots.  Xavier packed it in against Marquette to neutralize their athleticism and the strong play from their bigs because they were supposed to be (and really, they are) a bad shooting team.  The Golden Eagles defied the scouting report on them and hoisted up and made more shots from deep than they have in any game this season.  Xavier kept packing it in despite the shooting performance because (1) it was unlikely that they would stay that hot and (2) spreading out the defense would open opportunities for Marquette’s stronger options inside.  They did stay that hot from 3, though, but Xavier’s offense was so efficient and their work on the glass so dominant that they managed to secure the win.

On to Omaha!

Xavier is up against the number one offense in the country playing on their home floor in front of a packed house.  Previous Xavier squads became familiar with this setting and had gone up there and lost to lesser squads.  This time, though, the Bluejays are really, really good.  They complement that elite offense with a good defense, one that holds opponents to just one shot, doesn’t send opponents to the line, and does a decent job of contesting shots.  Points will not come easy against this smart, disciplined crew.  If Xavier can overcome Creighton’s strong defensive rebounding to get second-chance points, it would go a long way toward victory.

The offense though is the showcase here, so I’ll turn to that.  For starters, the Bluejays are good at holding onto the ball but mediocre at getting offensive rebounds, so they will at least get that first shot , just not the second (if Xavier’s toughness on the glass continues).  Also, they don’t get to the line much at all compared to other schools, holding a FTA/FGA ratio of 32.2%, so Xavier’s defense must be smart and not give them free trips, because they usually aren’t looking for them with all their jump shots.  They are so efficient because they shoot so well and because they are patient, waiting to find the best look.  Their three-point percentage is 43.3%, the best in the nation, and they are good within the arc too at 52.5%, for an overall effective field goal percentage of 58.1%.  That’s tough to defend against, especially the three-point shot.

And what makes it tougher?  National Player of the Year candidate Doug McDermott gets buckets.  The 6’8” forward (their biggest player) has one of the highest usage rates in the country at 32.5% and ranks even higher on percentage of team’s shots when on the floor, 35.9%.  It’s okay that he’s the guy they go to so often, because he doesn’t turn it over before the shot and his true shooting percentage is 61.7%.  That is made possible through a 51.2% mark on two-pointers, 42.9% on threes, and 90.6% from the line.  He actually draws fouls at a really good rate, 7.0 per 40 minutes, but he himself rarely gets into foul trouble (2.2 called per 40 minutes), the recent DePaul blowout being one of the lone exceptions.  McDermott is such a prolific scorer that his 19 points against DePaul is tied for his second lowest mark this season.  Even with his sprained AC joint in his right shoulder, he will be tough for Xavier to stop.

Martin could definitely see time guarding him, as Martin’s weakness is lateral quickness, which quick perimeter players exploit.  McDermott is much more savvy than quick, so Martin’s physical deficiency won’t be exposed but he has to play smart.  Philmore could see time defending him too, and he would be fairly effective guarding the All-American in the post, but he isn’t a very good defender at the three-point line.  Xavier probably won’t be able to employ their same strategy against Creighton as they did against Butler to lock down Dunham, because the role players on the team are such good, smart shooters that overplaying McDermott could prove fatal.  In the end, you don’t really lockdown Doug McDermott (unless you’re George Washington, I suppose); you just pray you can contain him while his role players do minimal damage.  Speaking of role players, Grant Gibbs will be out for about a month with a dislocated kneecap.  Truthfully, the 6th-year senior wing is more than just a role player.  The team’s glue guy and an efficient scorer when called upon, he is one of the team’s leading assists men, and the offense often runs through him a la Stainbrook to allow McDermott to go to work off the ball.  His absence will hurt, though key reserve guard Devin Brooks, whose assist rate is actually higher than Gibbs’, could prove to be a vital player to fill that void.

Things I’m Wondering About:

How will Creighton guard Semaj?  The sophomore guard has been on an absolutely tear, establishing himself as possibly one of the best point guards in the country and justifying the talk of the NBA.  He is both highly athletic and highly skilled, a combination that could prove challenging for Creighton’s smart and cohesive yet non-athletic defense.  His three-point shooting of late has just made it more challenging, because in a small sample size, he’s at least giving the suggestion that he will punish you if you play off of him and pack it in.  And there’s probably something to that, not necessarily at his 45.5% clip so far, but it does not seem wise to let Semaj shoot open three-pointers.  Will the Bluejays trap and double-team him?  With how the other Musketeers are playing, that could be very risky.  Will they play something like a box-and-1 in order to pressure him while keeping it packed in?  Better hope this is a poor night for Xavier’s three-point shooting.  Will they play him straight up and just try to limit him?  Might be the best option.

How will defensive matchups in general work?  In terms of size, these are very different teams, which will make for some crazy matchups.  Semaj and McDermott when they’re on offense I already mentioned.  McDermott is the team’s biggest starter, but I can’t imagine him guarding Stainbrook on defense.  His teammate, 6’7” 225-lb Ethan Wragge, doesn’t seem to be a much better option.  Bench player 6’11” 230-lb Will Artino could see more time, because it seems like Stainbrook would have a field day against the starters whenever he can get space.  On the other side, though, who will the Big Stain guard?  Or who will Philmore or Farr guard, for that matter?  Creighton plays a bunch of wings, with Wragge and 6’9” 245-lb Zach Hanson (6.7mpg) as the only more traditional bigs on the team.  It should make for a lot of anxiety for both coaches.

Can Xavier win or at least play tough in a hostile road game against a really good opponent?  Alabama was the one road game Xavier has played this year.  The Crimson Tide are only a decent team, though, and I’m not sure how many SEC fans are aware that basketball exists before football season Is over.  It was a great road scalp to pick up, but the atmosphere (and the opponent) just doesn’t compare to what Xavier will face tomorrow night.  If they lose this game by 10 (the starting Vegas line), no one would be surprised.  But, they’ve been playing very well, both on defense (okay, ignore the Marquette aberration) and on offense, with everyone sharing the ball and scoring at a decent clip.  They could win this game, and it would be huge for both conference standings and the tournament resume.  I’m interested to see what happens, and I honestly don’t know what to expect.

The Golden Eagles Come to Town

Davante Gardner, a beast in the paint, presented without comment. (Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

In part two of the Big East primer, I commented that Marquette was a solid overall team, with a great defense but it was questionable how much the offense could improve with poor shooters and a bunch of upperclassmen.  In part three of the primer, the tournament capsules section, I noted that they simply hadn’t done enough in the non-conference schedule to feel good at all about their tournament chances at the beginning of the conference schedule (the loss @Creighton having already happened).  That’s normally a recipe for a dangerous team:  Decent quality mixed with desperation.

But after the very understandable loss in Omaha (I pray that Xavier is not due a similar fate), the Golden Eagles didn’t exactly wow the world with their performance against the Big East punching bag, DePaul.  On their home court, they only won by 10 against a straight-up bad team.  Not only that, Marquette did not experience their first lead until there were less than 8 minutes in the game, despite holding the Blue Demons to the following multi-minute scoring droughts prior to that:  2 minutes, 5 minutes, 2 minutes, 3 minutes, and 6 minutes.  This just makes clear both how good Marquette’s defense was (though at least some credit has to go to how bad DePaul was on offense) and how bad their offense was for much of the game.  Maybe they’re not desperate enough yet.  Now I’ll give them some props.  They only scored 0.84 points per possession through the first 31 minutes against the 150th “most efficient” defense in the land, but they figured things out late and scored 1.53 points per possession in those last nine minutes.  Still, especially after a beatdown at the hands (feathers?) of the Bluejays, this is not the kind of game that makes the conference season look promising for the pre-season favorites to win the Big East.

So, which Marquette offense is going to show up?  I couldn’t tell you, but I’ll at least predict this:  This is going to be an ugly, defensive grudge match.  They got taken behind the woodshed by Creighton but still managed to hold the #1 offense in the country to 1.05 points per possession in Omaha.  The defense is going to show up.

Things to Watch Out For:

Davante Gardner vs. Matt Stainbrook

Gardner was the only who played really well on the offensive end against DePaul, which is no surprise, as that’s the story of the whole season.  At 6’8″ and 290 pounds, he is an absolute load in the paint.  He has a nationally ranked usage rate of 26.1% and still manages an excellent offensive rating of 118.7.  He converts two-pointers at an efficient rate (57.3%) and gets to the line at a decent rate, shooting okay there (69.3%), all while not turning the ball over and grabbing about 10% of his team’s misses.  On the defensive end, he’s a solid shot blocker, though his partner in the post, Chris Otule, is the real shot blocker on the team.

Opposite Gardner stands Xavier’s own massive human being, Matt Stainbrook.  At 6’10” and 263 pounds he has a height advantage but doesn’t have as much weight to throw around.  The 40 pounds he’s shed as Xavier though have allowed him to be much more agile on both ends of the court.  Stainbrook’s offensive rating is right behind Gardner’s at 116.2, but his direct usage rate isn’t quite as high.  I say “direct,” because the offense usually runs through him, even if he doesn’t always get credit,  The Big Stain’s shooting numbers are similar to Gardner, though he doesn’t get to the line as often, but he is an excellent passer out of the post.  On the glass, he is a good step above Gardner on both ends, and he is a better shot blocker too.

Since we can rule Georgetown’s Josh Smith out for his inability to play defense or see starter’s minutes, this right here is the matchup at the center position in the BIg East.  This will be the first of two installments of the conference’s two best centers going at it, trying to lead their teams to victory.

Related note:  Reid Forgrave of Fox Sports asserted that Xavier has the best front line in the conference.  When I looked at the different teams, Marquette looked to be one of the only squads that could compete for that claim.  It should be interesting to watch what happens in the paint, even when the two giants aren’t in the game.

Xavier’s Offensive Consistency

Other than the mediocre mark against Wake (1.01 points per possession), Xavier has scored the ball fairly well since the Cincinnati game.  Their ratio of assists to made field goals is among the better marks in the country, as they share the ball very well and turn to whatever options are working best at the time.  This could be Semaj Christon taking on the scoring load for a period, like when he dominated the latter part of the first half against Butler.  It could involve Stainbrook finishing repeatedly in the post rather than passing it back out, like through much of the second half of the same game.  Justin Martin could go on some scoring spurts to keep the offense moving, as he has in the last couple of games.  Everyone knows the offensive onslaughts that James Farr can bring about off the bench, and a cool Myles Davis is bound to come out of his slump at some point.  Or Dee Davis could seize the opportunities given to him by the defense and put up some points, like in the second half of the Butler game where he scored all of his 12 points.  The team is unselfish, ready to turn to whoever is hot at the moment or whoever has a mismatch to exploit.  The question arises though:  Will they be able to find someone that is meeting that description during the game up against a stout Marquette defense?  Will there consistently be someone to turn to or will the Musketeers encounter some of the scoring droughts that they have experienced and that Marquette has forced upon teams?  And if that scoring drought happens, I’m curious to see how Semaj is going to respond.  Recent results are very positive.

Battle of the Boards

This is a tight matchup.  Xavier has been a good defensive rebounding team this season, but Marquette has been a notch better on the offense glass, grabbing 37.1% of their own misses.  This seems to happen with athletic teams that can’t shoot (see:  Cincinnati, University of).  On the other side, neither is as good, but Xavier holds a small advantage and they have actually performed very well on the offensive glass in recent games, other than the most recent game against Butler.

It should be a great game!  Xavier is the better team, in my opinion, because while Marquette might have a slight edge on the defensive end, the Musketeers’ offense is just so much better.  Combine that with the home court advantage, and I think Xavier will secure the victory.  However, remember my prediction:  “an ugly, defensive grudge match.”  Xavier’s offense isn’t exactly elite yet, and though it should be able to outperform Marquette’s offense, I think the Golden Eagles’ defense will work to keep it close.

Big East Primer, Part 3: Tournament Capsules

Can Marquette overcome the disappointing non-conference season to secure an at-large bid? (Getty Images/CollegeBasketballTalk.NBCSports.com)

In the last two installments of this three-part series, I covered first the high-upside teams and then the low-upside teams in the Big East.  Now I turn to each team’s current tournament resume, going in order of their projected RPI (I’ll list the three most likely).  In a true round-robin format, the projected RPI is important to keep in mind, as every team will have multiple opportunities for good or decent wins, but the teams that have already had success in the non-conference don’t have to worry as much about it (I’m looking at you, Villanova).  For the purpose of labeling the quality of wins, I will also use projected RPI, not current RPI, as mid-season RPI numbers are often not the best.  Only one game in, conference records aren’t that helpful yet, so I will list teams’ projected record.

When I mention opponents’ ranks, there will be some duplicates, as the ranks are projections that I rounded to the nearest whole number.  Also, keep in mind that projected RPIs are based off probabilities and thus subject to fluctuation.  Finally, I will mark particularly good qualities of a resume in green and particularly bad qualities in red, with everything else being left normal.

7/11/15                    VILLANOVA

Current Record:  12-1
Projected Conference Record:  14-4
Expected OOC SOS:  55 (11-1, projected 12-1 with game vs. Big 5 rival #115 Temple)

Kenpom Rank:  8
Sagarin Rank:  7

Record vs. 1-25:  2-1 (2 neutral wins, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  0-0
Record vs. 51-100:  3-0 (1 home win, 2 road wins)
Record vs. 101-200:  4-0 (3 home wins, 1 neutral win)
Record vs. 201+:  3-0 (3 home wins)

2 good wins, 0 bad losses

Villanova is as close to a lock for the NCAA tournament as you can get, after going nearly undefeated against a good schedule that involved three top 25 opponents.  They notched top 25 victories on a neutral court against #7 Kansas and #19 Iowa, and the loss to #18 Syracuse at the Carrier Dome is understandable.  That being said, they are still poised to do more.  Projected 14-4 overall in the conference (escaping with an overtime win at Butler helped), they are favored to win every individual game against conference foes except @Creighton.  With the Wildcats’ impressive non-conference performance, other teams with reasonable tournament hopes could really benefit from a win against them, but Villanova will be disinclined to offer charity while in pursuit of one of the top seeds.

19/24/30                    CREIGHTON

Current Record:  11-2
Projected Conference Record:  13-5
Expected OOC SOS:  156 (10-2)

Kenpom Rank:  14
Sagarin Rank:  14

Record vs. 1-25:  0-0
Record vs. 26-50:  0-1 (1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 51-100:  4-1 (2 home wins, 1 neutral win, 1 road win, 1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 101-200:  3-0 (2 home wins, 1 road win)
Record vs. 201+:  4-0 (4 home wins)

0 good wins, 0 bad losses (Note:  They have two wins and a loss against opponents with a good chance of breaking into the top 50)

Creighton’s SOS in the non-conference impresses no one, though a 10-2 record involving 5 top 100 non-conference opponents is pretty good.  They have notched some solid wins so far, headlined by a neutral court victory over #55 Arizona State and a home court victory over #52 California.  Plus, the conference schedule should improve their SOS to a level of respectability.  Where they really stand out is advanced metrics.  These contribute to a team’s resume, but more importantly, they signify a good probability of future success.   The Big East has plenty of opportunities for strong competition, and if Creighton comes close to their projected record, they will have collected some good wins for the tournament resume by the end.

29/36/45                    GEORGETOWN

Current Record:  9-3
Projected Conference Record:  11-7
Expected OOC SOS:  25 (8-3, projected 8-4 with neutral game vs. #16 Michigan State)

Kenpom Rank:  33
Sagarin Rank:  32

Record vs. 1-25:  0-2 (1 neutral loss, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  1-0 (1 neutral win)
Record vs. 51-100:  1-0 (1 neutral win)
Record vs. 101-200:  3-1 (3 home wins, 1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 201+:  4-0 (4 home wins)

1 good win, 1 bad loss

Georgetown has played a pretty tough non-conference SOS, and it has not gone that well.  They aren’t in as bad of shape as some perceive it, but they definitely haven’t met expectations (and the loss to #180 Northeastern will not help their resume).  They got outplayed by their two top 25 opponents, #16 Oregon and #7 Kansas, but they did manage to notch a good win against #26 VCU.  Their efficiency statistics are also solid, suggesting that they might be able to gather some more good wins in the second half of the season.  The 11-7 finish projected for them would be a good mark, and they do still have a great opportunity against Michigan State in their future.  All in all, they have a pretty good chance at an at-large bid.

38/47/57                    XAVIER

Current Record:  11-3
Projected Conference Record:  10-8
Expected OOC SOS:  80 (10-3)

Kenpom Rank:  35
Sagarin Rank:  38

Record vs. 1-25:  0-1 (1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  2-1 (1 home win, 1 neutral win, 1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 51-100:  1-0 (1 road win)
Record vs. 101-200:  4-1 (4 home wins, 1 neutral loss)
Record vs 201:  3-0 (3 home wins)

2 good wins, 1 bad loss

Xavier is undefeated on shore.  You heard that right.  They lost all three of their games in the Battle 4 Atlantis, falling to #19 Iowa, #40 Tennessee, and #109 USC.  Before making that trip, though, they did secure a good home win against Tennessee, and after returning, they claimed another against #41 Cincinnati on a neutral court.  The Musketeers have encountered some bad luck when it comes to their SOS, as none of their Kenpom top 100 opponents are projected to finish in the RPI as well as their Kenpom ranking would suggest (#85 Wake Forest being projected 115.7 in the RPI being the most notorious example).  It is what it is, though, and their non-conference SOS is still mildly respectable.  The Musketeers have set themselves up well for the conference schedules despite the Atlantis Catastrophe.  They are projected 10-8, which, in a league of a bunch of solid-to-good teams, would lead to a number of resume-worthy wins and probably enough for a tournament bid.

56/67/79                    BUTLER

Current Record:  9-3
Projected Conference Record:  8-10
Expected OOC SOS:  175 (9-2)

Kenpom Rank:  52
Sagarin Rank:  58

Record vs. 1-25:  0-2 (1 neutral loss, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  0-1 (1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 51-100:  1-0 (1 home win)
Record vs. 101-200:  4-0 (1 home win, 2 neutral wins, 1 road win)
Record vs. 201+:  4-0 (3 home wins, 1 road win)

0 good wins, 0 bad loss

Butler has what no one wants:  missed opportunities against every good team they have played.  They also have what everyone wants:  no bad losses.  They lost by two in regulation to #8 Oklahoma State on a neutral court.  They followed that up the next night by losing in overtime to #41 LSU on the same neutral floor.  And just a few days ago, they dealt with another missed opportunity after an overtime home loss to #11 Villanova.  The only team worth mentioning that they have beat is #76 Princeton at home, hardly the win you want to hang your hat on, though the Bulldogs will definitely have more opportunities in their conference schedule.  People often praise Butler for playing these good teams close, but they’ve also let some bad teams keep it interesting through to the end.  They needed overtime to beat #121 Vanderbilt at home.   They went on the road to play #268 Ball State and won by only one.  They needed free throws on a neutral court to seal the deal against #143 Washington State.  I don’t dislike Butler in any way (like some Xavier fans do).  I only mention these to give perspective to what Butler has done this year.  They’ve been just as lucky in avoiding bad losses as they’ve been unlucky in missing good wins.  There’s a reason they’re only ranked #52 by Kenpom, despite losing by only seven points combined to Kenpom’s 4th, 8th, and 36th best teams.  They play to their competition, whether good, bad, or mediocre, which honestly should make for some really interesting basketball in this conference schedule.  They’re projected 8-10, which won’t be good enough to make the tournament.  With their ability to keep any game close, who knows what will actually happen?  At this point, though, they haven’t really done anything for their tournament resume, and the weak non-conference SOS and the poor advanced metrics rankings by Kenpom and Sagarin will not help them much at all.

64/76/88                    ST. JOHN’S

Current Record:  9-4
Projected Conference Record:  8-10
Expected OOC SOS:  104 (9-3, projected 10-3 with home game vs. #210 Dartmouth)

Kenpom Rank:  61
Sagarin Rank:  69

Record vs. 1-25:  0-2 (neutral loss, home loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  0-1 (road loss)
Record vs. 51-100:  0-0
Record vs. 101-200:  6-1 (4 home wins, 2 neutral wins, 1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 201+:  3-0 (3 home wins)

0 good wins, 1 bad loss (Note:  Penn State has a decent chance of breaking into the top 100)

St. John’s hasn’t defeated a team in the top 106.  That makes a tournament bid to be a bit of a challenge.  The close loss against #18 Syracuse at Madison Square Gardens still has to sting for fans, and the overtime loss to #106 Penn State could hurt on the tournament resume.  Their struggles to put away bad teams efficiently haven’t helped either, leading to their advanced metrics rankings in the 60s, and unlike Butler above them and Marquette below them, they can’t claim even a decent win in the RPI 51 to 100 range.  The underwhelming non-conference strength of schedule isn’t helpful for a potential bubble team either.  Add that all together, and an 8-10 finish is far under what is needed to make the tournament.  As I said in the first part of this series, though, St. John’s is the model for “upside.”  If their impressive collection of talent becomes more cohesive, they have the ability to go on a tear through part of the conference schedule and potentially change their destiny.

67/78/90                    MARQUETTE

Current Record:  8-6
Projected Conference Record:  9-9
Expected OOC SOS:  133 (8-5)

Kenpom Rank:  48
Sagarin Rank:  57

Record vs. 1-25:  0-2 (1 home loss, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  0-3 (2 neutral losses, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 51-100:  1-1 (1 neutral win, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 101-200:  0-0 (Seriously, you couldn’t at least schedule better bad teams?)
Record vs. 201+:  7-0 (6 home wins, 1 road win)

0 good wins, 0 bad losses (Note:  George Washington has a decent shot of making the top 50 and could be counted as a good win)

Like Butler, Marquette lost to all the good teams they played (except for a neutral win over a solid #53 George Washington squad).  Unlike Butler, some of those games weren’t even close.  Being blown out by #6 Ohio State is an early season game that Big East fans remember fairly well.  The loss to #6 Wisconsin wasn’t as close as it appears by the score.  Then we just saw them lose big on the road to #26 Creighton.  There have been some close games though.  The Golden Eagles weren’t quite able to catch up to #55 Arizona State on the road after the Sun Devils built an early lead.  They made it back into the game on a neutral floor against #27 San Diego State, only to falter toward the end.  They built a decent lead on #39 New Mexico, only to give it up, then regain it, then fade down the stretch.  This Marquette squad certainly had opportunities, like Butler, but they also had twice as many losses total.  To their credit, though, they more easily put away bad teams (like the Wisconsin game, some games weren’t as close as they appeared).  Still, it’s difficult to build a resume with that many losses, metric rankings only a shade better than Butler’s, and a single solid win.  A 9-9 conference record just won’t be enough, most likely.  They will probably have to win a couple more.

81/94/107                    PROVIDENCE

Current Record:  10-4
Projected Conference Record:  7-11
Expected OOC SOS:  223 (10-3)

Kenpom Rank:  78
Sagarin Rank:  79

Record vs. 1-25:  0-2 (neutral loss, road loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  0-0
Record vs. 51-100:  0-1 (neutral loss)
Record vs. 101-200:  6-1 (3 home wins, 2 neutral wins, 1 road win, 1 home loss)
Record vs. 201+:  4-0 (4 home wins)

0 good wins, 1 bad loss

Providence’s best non-conference win is going to end up being #119 La Salle or #121 Vanderbilt, both on a neutral court.  The home loss to #133 Seton Hall to start the conference schedule was also certainly a big blow to their tournament chances.  A non-conference SOS in the 200s is also a serious negative on their resume.  Underwhelming efficiency rankings just contribute to the tale of woe, both as resume lines and as predictors of their chances of boosting their resume.  Obviously, a 7-11 finish in conference won’t be enough to make the tournament (for any team really), but the Friars really have to do much better than that in order to attain a good enough record against top 50 teams.  Most likely, though, their hopes lie in setting up the best possible seeding for the conference tournament, where they can make a desperate run at the automatic bid.

122/138/155                    SETON HALL

Current Record:  10-4
Projected Conference Record:  6-12
Expected OOC SOS:  284 (9-4)

Kenpom Rank:  114
Sagarin Rank:  95

Record vs. 1-25:  0-0
Record vs. 26-50:  0-0
Record vs. 51-100:  1-2 (1 road win, 1 neutral loss, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 101-200:  3-0 (2 home wins, 1 neutral win)
Record vs. 201+:  6-2 (5 home wins, 1 road win, 2 home losses)

0 good wins, 2 really bad losses

Seton Hall is the only team in the Big East who did not have a single non-conference game against a projected top 50 RPI opponent.  #57 Oklahoma is at least close enough to potentially break into the top 50, but the Pirates would still have only one, fewer than any other Big East team.  They also put eight RPI 200+ teams on the docket, more than any of their conference mates (and Marquette, the only team that’s close in numbers, balanced their schedule out with five top 50 opponents).  When a team schedules like this, they’re really taking a chance.  If you only play one decent team, you’re going to have a tough time building a tournament resume.  If you schedule eight RPI 200+ teams (ten RPI 150+ teams), you really increase your chances of a really bad loss.  For starters, your non-conference SOS is going to be in the toilet.  And that doesn’t even take into account how well you now have to perform.  And how did Seton Hall perform?  They lost against the only decent team on their schedule in devastating fashion.  It was an astounding amount of bad luck and choking combined, but still, when you put you put all your eggs in one basket, you make the job really tough.  They then went out and lost to two of those awful teams they had scheduled.  Beat up by injuries, their efficiency statistics aren’t that good either, and a 6-12 conference record projection is pretty fair, considering.  With player coming back from injury, this conference season could be really interesting (especially after they already snagged a road win against Providence), but at this point, the Pirates are looking to position themselves as well as they can seeding-wise in preparation for the conference tournament.

146/163/180                    DEPAUL

Current Record:  8-6
Projected Conference Record:  4-14
Expected OOC SOS:  206 (8-5)

Kenpom Rank:  133
Sagarin Rank:  135

Record vs. 1-25:  0-1 (1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 26-50:  0-2 (1 home loss, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 51-100:  0-2 (1 home loss, 1 neutral loss)
Record vs. 101-200:  3-1 (1 home win, 2 road wins, 1 road loss)
Record vs. 201+:  5-0 (5 home wins)

0 good wins, 1 bad loss

DePaul has performed better than in recent years, and they did schedule some top 50 and top 100 teams, but they’re still the worst team in the conference.  I can’t even imagine them making a desperate run in the Big East Tournament.

Why the Big East is Better than the A10, Part 2: This Season

In this post, I broke down why in team-to-team matchups, the Big East is clearly a better conference than the Atlantic 10 for Xavier (especially as it relates to tournament resume).  That’s even more true if you consider the prestige factor, which helps a lot with TV money and recruiting, but I didn’t even delve into that for the post back in March.

Now, however, there have been Xavier fans asserting that this season specifically, the Atlantic 10 is better than the Big East.  Mike DeCourcy of Sporting News also posed the question of which was better on the national media level, though he at least didn’t reach a conclusion, citing how early it was to really judge (Though the article title does say “Very Possibly.”  Way to go out on a limb, Decourcy).  Over on Xavier Hoops, some fans are expressing their (justified) frustration at how well the A10 is doing this year, right after Xavier leaves.  They are at least sensible enough to know that the Big East is still better, but the original poster in that thread, GoMuskies, aptly put how annoying it is:  “All these years we’re in the league, and the bottom feeders lost to low majors left and right and made us look like shit when it came time to start looking at the RPI. So what happens? We leave, and THIS is the year the A-10 decides to start off 12-1. ”  UMass (UMass!) got off to a 10-0 start, and even Fordham is statistically having their best season since 2008!

Okay, so the A10 is doing well this year, the very moment that it doesn’t help Xavier one iota.  Still, where does the perception come from that the conference is suddenly better than Xavier’s new one, just because they are having a good year?  My theory:  The A10 is doing better than the Big East relative to their respective expectations, so people are unconsciously translating that to doing better in the absolute sense.

Marquette came into the season as one of the headline teams of the conference, only to lose to every good opponent they’ve faced except Kenpom #63 George Washington (Hey, they beat an A10 team!).  This is why they have a Kenpom ranking of 44th but an RPI of 105th.  That’s right; at this moment, a loss to Marquette is a “bad loss.”  We’ve discovered that they can’t shoot the ball worth a damn, leading to a stagnant offense in many games that their good defense can’t always make up for.

Georgetown was another headline team, and the results have been mixed.  The season-opening loss to Oregon on a neutral court was a missed opportunity, but where they are still hurting in the perception department is the loss to Northeastern two games later.  The win over a decent Kansas State and a good VCU team are still a little shrouded in that loss, I think, as people’s opinion of them changed drastically after the Northeastern game (since apparently good teams don’t ever lose to bad teams).  Getting beat up by Kansas, even if they are a really good team, didn’t help, but the Hoyas are still ranked #32 in Kenpom and #54 in the RPI.

Seton Hall seems to be losing players left and right, not to mention two that never showed up on campus in the first place.  Providence is hurting from a season-ending injury to Kris Dunn (though at least he’ll be able to medically redshirt) and the once indefinite but now season-long suspensions of two talented freshmen.  St. John’s hasn’t been bad, but they haven’t looked as good as their talent suggests.  We won’t go over what happened in Atlantis with Xavier, but they’ve looked much better recently.

Meanwhile, UMass had that hot start that I mentioned.  Dayton got a really good win over Gonzaga (though overall they’ve only been okay).  George Washington has had a good season so far (10-1).  SLU hasn’t beat anyone worth mentioning, but they’ve played two really good teams close.  And, some of the bottom-feeders might not be as awful as they normally are.  VCU is the only team that might be failing to meet expectations.

Villanova and Butler are doing much better than preseason expectations, though, but apparently that doesn’t carry as much weight if preseason headliners aren’t doing well.  Never mind that Villanova is doing better than any BE team’s preseason expectations.  If Georgetown and Villanova switched uniforms, the Big East would appear much better, I suppose.  By appearances, then, the Big East seems a little weaker than expected, while the Atlantic 10 is surpising people.  But here in the real world, how good conferences actually are is not based off their performance relative to expectations.  And when you consider performance by itself, the Atlantic 10 just cannot match up to what the Big East has done, plain and simple.  Want data?  Of course you do!  Here we go:

RPI Conference Rank:  Big East 3rd vs. Atlantic Ten 7th

Kenpom:  BE 4th vs. A10 10th

Sagarin:  BE 3rd vs. A10 8th

The aggregate numbers fall overwhelmingly in the BIg East’s favor.  But, wait!  That’s not fair to the A10.  Everyone knows the basement of the conference sucks, but that shouldn’t detract from what the top and the core of the conference are doing.  And that’s true.  So let’s do Kenpom team-by-team matchups, like I did in the first article:

Kenpom:

#5 Villanova vs. #20 UMass – Significant edge BE
#16 Creighton vs. #24 SLU – Solid edge BE (Note: BE #2 is slightly better than A10 #1)
#32 Georgetown vs. #33 VCU – Even
#44 Marquette vs. #58 Dayton – Good edge BE
#46 Xavier vs. #63 – Good edge BE
#53 Butler vs. #70 RIchmond – Good edge BE
#55 St. John’s vs. #78 St. Joseph’s – SIgnificant edge BE (Note: BE #7 is better A10 #4)
#71 Providence vs. #105 St. Bonaventure – Okay, this is starting to get out of hand (Note: BE #8 is even with A10 #6)
#133 Seton Hall vs. #112 La Salle – Significant edge to A10 (You win this one, A10!)
#139 DePaul vs. #142 George Mason – Even (Victory was short-lived, I suppose)

So, the BIg East is clearly better than the A10.  Can we stop this foolishness?  I can’t believe I even had to do a post to prove this…