The Wiz

Another painful loss...The good news is we won the TO spread (by 4). Time to check out what I said in the SLPD thread on TOs When the Bills lose the TO spread...there is an 82% chance of a loss. Conversely, when they win the TO spread they win 50% of the time. This means when you lose the spread it is almost a sure loss ...if you win the spread you have a chance to win. In other words, winning the spread you still have work to do (like making the slash) but it gives you a chance....Losing the TO spread is almost a certain loss regardless of what else you do. So we won the TO battle which gave us a chance to win. And then we shot poorly...really poor...2 of 14 (14%) from the arc....Here is what tonight's graded slash looks like....F-/ F- / F- / C-....Had The Bills just shot their own season average they would have had 4 more 3s...1 more 2 and 1 more FT...Total 15 pts. Again, they didn't need a good shooting game but just an average Bills night to win. This isn't complicated with fancy efficiency stats ....Win the TO battle and then shoot The Bills average to win games.

Maybe that should read Loyrythms

For the Dance...the NCAA Dance committee thinks 15-20% of the time...the computer thinks the rest of the time. Outside of the Dance there is very little thinking...just reacting....kind of like a snail.

MVC Ind St....76% Dance chance ...9th or 10th seed Bradley...74% NIT chance Drake....70% NIT chance. Computer says....NCAA has no special love for MVC (or any other conf that is not P6) The computer has been programmed to think like the NCAA.

Here is what I am showing.....In the Mo Valley The Bills would be 9th out of 11 teams. In the OVC we would be 2nd battling Morehead St for the conf title. As for the A-10...I have Day as a lock(4th seed)....Rich as a lock for the NIT...not yet on the radar for the Dance(still below a 50% chance) and GM with a 58% chance for the NIT.

There are many ways to measure FGA frequency. Let's start with a simple one.....FGA...Dav 65 SLU 56 = 9.....TOs... Dav 3 ...SLU..12 = 9.... FGA...UMass 61...SLU...55...= 6....TO UMass 7...SLU 12 = 5....You can see the pattern... TO's= extra opp Poss = extra FGA Of course , I like the TO spread I use because it converts the spread into points and you can really see the affect the TOs have on the game. If you will allow me to plagiarize myself from the post "The Wiz and the P-D" here is what I wrote..."TO spreads affect point spreads. This is different from the stat that is labeled points off TOs whereby you take possession of the ball and you score on a TO. The magic number in a TO spread is 2.25 pts. This calculation takes into account not just points that could be scored on a TO but the lost opportunity from the team that turned it over. The rough breakdown is the the opponent gets 1.25pts for the TO and the team that lost the ball loses an "opportunity point". The numbers are based on the teams shooting percentages and generally vary between 2 and 2.4 pts. But generally it gravitates to around 2.25. " In the Mass game multiplying the 5 TOs by 2.25 = the actual game spread. In the Dav game multiplying the 9 TOs by 2.25 =20.25 pts again very close to the actual game spread of 23 pts. There are other stats that measure efficiency. Effective Possession Ratio (EPR). A team's ability to generate shots for itself....The way this works is Off Rebs get you another possession to shoot. Get more Off Rebs and your EPR goes up....Getting a TO also gets you another possession and causes your EPR to go up. Conversely , low Off rebs and losing TOs push your EPR down. What does this mean for SLU? SLU's EPR grade =D....When we look at opponent EPR...SLU's opponent EPR grade is F....19th worst ITN. Finally, let's look at one last stat related to all of this....Extra Chance Pts . You get a point for every TO forced and every Off reb and lose a point for every TO and Off reb you lose. The SLU ECP grade is another F. One last thought, I am not a big fan of the EPR and ECU. I watch them and find them interesting but sometimes Off Rebs are down because you are just having a great day shooting and your opp can't shoot even when given extra shots. But when you are talking TOs...TO always equals bad. Bottom line...Big negative TO spreads = less possessions = less FGAs = less wins

General Outlook....I am not going to discuss the TO issue ...at least not here. If you want to follow that ...check the thread..."The Wiz and the SLPD" on the board. For this post , I would like to talk about point spreads. Point spreads are most commonly used in the betting world. But in the analytical world, they are used as a measuring device, like a ruler or a tape measure. I am always amused when the spread is off some board members start to complain about the computer being broke or it doesn't know what it's doing. When it draws up the forecasted spread , it is reviewing all the data of all the teams and assessing where The Bills are in the D1 universe. If the spread is off on the downside (we do worse than expected) we under preform and the computer looks for the reason. On the upside, when we overperform(do better than expected) then the computer looks for what went right. Imagine going into a hardware store and buying a 4ft board. When you get home , you measure the board with the tape measure you have had for years and the board is only 3 ft long. Would you blame the tape measure...would you say it was faulty or would you use it as a tool to understand that the store may have under performed and given you a too short board. Currently we have been under performing...which sets up a downward trend. The computer job is to spot those trends and locate where the issues are in the data. It is the job of the coaching staff to try and fix it and make changes... it is the job of the message board to discuss the fixes and changes( in a civil manner). Let's take a look at the game Game Preview....Loy come in as a B team The Bills are on the bottom as a C- team. While the game spread is big this is not a auto win for Loy. Loy has some weaknesses ..if we exploit them we can win. One weakness is they shoot poorly from the FT line...another big weakness is poor 3P defense...That could play into our strength. They are an F team when defending the 3. We are a B+ team from the arc. In our last game it lined up like this ...a B+ team shooting against an F team and we finish with a C+...not the outcome you would hope for. At the FT line, Loy came through with a 60%...unfortunately , we shot a horrible 42%...we need to do better on the slash to win. Finally, the TO spread rears its head one more time. We turned them over 9 times ...not great but better than we have been doing recently. But we had 14 TOs which led to a negative 5 TOs...an 11 pt swing in a 7 pt Loy win. Match them on TOs and we're back in this game. Let's take a look at this game's report card.... Report Card.... The card is positive....2 up and 1 down......The good news is we were up in 2 Off categories...the bad news is we recorded our 1st F on the card....of course the real bad stat continues to be opp TOs...F-...14th W ITN .................SLU............Loy................SLU.........................Loy ...........................OFF..........................................DEF............. PPG..........D+..................C-..................F+...........................B FG%..........D+.................B....................D-............................A 3P%...........B+..................C+................D+...........................F FT%..........B.....................D-..................................................... Reb...........D.....................C+..................D...........................B- OFF Rebs = total rebs...DEF Rebs = opp reb UP...............Off....3P%...FT%....Def....none Down.........Off....none......Def....PPG Top 100 In The Nation SLU Min /gm...Jimerson ...43rd...dn Loy Ast...Norris...65th FG%...Adelekun...63rd Blks...Rubin...17th Injury /Illness report and misc The Bills....None Loy....None Keys to the Game.......Stop Alston and Watson....Watson is their 3P guy and Alston is their inside guy. We did a good job on Alston the last time we played the Ramblers. Not so much on Watson who scored 24 pts including over 70% from the arc (5-7). The Bills need to make 3s and FTs...Last time we played Loy, we shot a below average 34.6% from the arc and only slightly better from the FT line...42%...Last game we actually had too many TOs...14...that needs to come down. Don't dribble into their shot blocker ...Rubin...17th ITN. WWN2D2W...Target slash...48/40/75....Hold Loy to 70 pts....Match Loy on TOs....Hold Watson to 12 pts....Alston to 10...Beat Loy on 3P% and FT%...Out score them from the arc. Hold Rubin to 1 blk....limit Norris to 2 FTAs Bottom line....If we can match them on TOs and make the slash, we could ramble off with a win.

Oh Bills, I don't think we are in Chaifetz anymore.

I feel like I am too busy to be The Wiz.

That would be a Commodore 64...with a souped up 8 bits

Perhaps The Wiz is with Dorothy.....Follow the yellow brick road.

SLU's defensive woes compounded by inability to force turnovers Stu Durando Jan 26, 2024 On Jan 26 at 851AM I put up the UMass spread thread on this board. My lead topic as always was "General Outlook" where I discuss things going on with the Bills team that need extra emphasis. In that post , I explained the problem of TO spreads particularly are inability to force opponent TOs. Later in that same day the above headline appeared in the St L Post Dispatch. Either great minds think a like or it was just a coincidence. In any case, Stu brings this up to Ford ...and Ford agrees that this is part of the defensive problem that needs to be fixed. This is good because in order to fix a problem you first have to acknowledge it. Of course those who are regular readers of my posts know that I have been harping on this stat for weeks. TOs are always in my forecast because they are an important stat. But I only harp on a stat when it consistently affects our ability to win over time. And this stat does that this year. After the UMass game, we are now 14th worst ITN for the season and 4th WITN in the last 3 games in opponent TOs. This issue is about TO spreads...the difference between your TOs and the opposing team's TOs. Usually, the problem is a team is not protecting the ball or being careless with passes and their own TO count is high. But in this case, the issue is we don't force TOs which is creating a negative spread. The problem came to the forefront against La Tech when you had a black swan event(a black swan event is a term used in statistics meaning an extremely rare event or anomaly) . In that game Tech had NO TOs ...something that might happen once in a decade or so. From there on we have just continued to trend down. How does this affect the game? TO spreads affect point spreads. This is different from the stat that is labeled points off TOs whereby you take possession of the ball and you score on a TO. The magic number in a TO spread is 2.25 pts. This calculation takes into account not just points that could be scored on a TO but the lost opportunity from the team that turned it over. The rough breakdown is the the opponent gets 1.25pts for the TO and the team that lost the ball loses an "opportunity point". The numbers are based on the teams shooting percentages and generally vary between 2 and 2.4 pts. But generally it gravitates to around 2.25. So how does this work? Let's look at the UMass game. In that game, we had 12 TOs and UM had 7....TO spread= 5....TO spread factor...2.25.... 5x 2.25pts =11pts....the exact difference in the game. Coincidentally, UMass points off TOs was 11pts...that number doesn't take into account points Bills scored off of TOs or lost opportunities on the 12 Bills TOs. So the TO spread is a better indicator of game outcome. How does this affect games... When the Bills lose the TO spread...there is an 82% chance of a loss. Conversely, when they win the TO spread they win 55% of the time. This means when you lose the spread it is almost a sure loss ...if you win the spread you have a chance to win. In other words, winning the spread you still have work to do (like making the slash) but it gives you a chance....Losing the TO spread is almost a certain loss regardless of what else you do. At this point I pushed the computer and asked ...what would it take to win the game in a losing spread? The answer for the Bills would be to shoot 54%+ from the 3P line....Not likely very often. Bottom line....Close the TO spread...win games.

I mentioned in the opening post in this thread that we aren't bad in TOs (C+)...but we are horrific (F- 16th worst ITN) in opponent TOs. It is the extremely low total (again 16th worst ITN) that is causing the TO spreads / differences that are putting us in an impossible situation to win. When we lose the TO spread the computer estimates our only chance to win is to shoot 54%+ from the arc. That won't happen very often.

In the general outlook in my original post in this thread , I went into detail about the importance of matching them in TOs. We didn't and we lost. When we don't match the other team in TOs, we have an 82% chance of losing. The computer thought we would lose the TO battle by 1 or 2 TOs....equivalent to 2-5pts. We actual had 5 extra TOs worth 11 pts, the exact margin of the game. In the upcoming Loyola game spread thread, I will go into greater detail about how the TO spread works but for now the only number you need to remember is 82%....the chance for a loss when we TO over the ball more than the opponent.

That's why we are in the PP.

General Outlook....We are stuck in the PIG pen and trending down. There is still plenty of season left (1/3 of conf play is over) but we need a few wins. We let one slip away with Dav. We have another opportunity with UMass. As you can see by the spread , the computer thinks this will be a close game. Of course, the computer thought the last game would be close. We have a leaking spot in our D and unless it is fixed, it will continue to wreck spreads ...sometimes in a big way such as Dav or SIU. I am talking about opponent TOs which lead to negative TO spreads. Let me show you some stat grades in this upcoming UMass game....TOs...SLU C+...UMass B...so far not too bad...but wait ...there is more ...opponent TOs....UMass ..A-....SLU...F- ..16th worst ITN...If those grades play out on Sat we could lose by 20 pts...if we can match them on TOs the game is a tossup. Point of information...UMass gives up an average of 11.1 TOs /per game and we usually rack up about 11/gm...so this is not pie in the sky stuff...It is doable. Fix this and we will start winning again. Leave it loose and we will continue to trend down. Let's take a look at the game.... Game Preview....We are still clinging to a C-... a loss will knock us down a notch. UMass comes in with a B. They are a better team than Dav BUT they do have some weaknesses. They are not a very good 3P or FT team. We need to take advantage of that. Dav wasn't a great shooting 3 team either missing a number of shots EXCEPT when we left them open. This will be a little bit different look than the average A10 team where you see a 4 guard lineup with a big guy. The Minutemen will use 2 big guys in their lineups. Their main men are Cohen who leads in PPG , FG% and is 2nd in rebs.....and Cross who leads in Rebs and is 2nd in PPG.... Stopping them will also give us a chance to win. I mentioned UMass wasn't very good from the arc ...close in they are an excellent B+...we will have to watch our fouls. Let's take a look at this game's report card.... Report Card.... The card is negative...No up and 2 down......The good news is that the defense did not go down...the bad news it is in bad shape .................SLU............Mass................SLU.........................Mass ...........................OFF..........................................DEF............. PPG..........D+..................A-..................D-...........................C FG%..........D+.................B....................D-............................B 3P%...........B.....................D..................D+...........................C- FT%..........B-....................D..................................................... Reb...........D.....................B+....................D...........................B- OFF Rebs = total rebs...DEF Rebs = opp reb UP...............Off....none.....Def....none Down.........Off....FG%...3P%......Def...none Top 100 In The Nation SLU Min /gm...Jimerson ...41st...dn Mass Rebs....Cross...73rd Injury /Illness report and misc The Bills....None Mass....None Keys to the Game.......Slow down Cohen and Cross....Make some 3s...Force some TOs...No open shots from the arc...protect the ball, no careless giveaways. WWN2D2W...Target slash...46/37/75....Hold Mass to 72 pts....Come within 1 on TOs and Rebs....Hold Cohen to 13 pts...Beat Mass on 3P% and FT%...Out score them from the arc. Keep their top 3 scorers to 37 pts...hold Cross to 6 rebs. Bottom line....If we can make a few 3s and force a few TOs, we can turn this thing around in a Minute man.

Yes ...In Crews's final season 2015-16...C16. It went from 35 sec to 30 sec.

I can't address the spirit or chemistry of the team but I can show you the numbers. If you have been following my posts over time around the board , you will note that I have been harping on TO spread...the difference between the TOs we commit and the TOs the opponent commits. My contention is as soon as we close the TO gap we can compete with anyone. In the Dayton game, the Flyers had 8 TOs , we had 10...a close spread of 2. The only reason we lost the game to 14th ranked Day is because they had an extra 22 FTA. They were lucky to win that game. Now contrast that with the Dav game . We had a decent 12 TOs but they had only 3....those extra 9 TOs were worth about 20pts. The inability of the Bills to pressure the other team into TOs is a death blow to winning games.

The good news is the report card grades on defense held steady and didn't drop....the bad news is those grades are in a bad place now ...D- PPG, D- FG%, D+ 3P%, D Reb...The one stat that doesn't show up on the card but I have been talking about it for weeks is opponent TOs. After the Dav game we have fallen to F- 16th worst ITN for the season....In last night's game, Dav had 3 TOs...SLU is 2nd worst ITN on opp TOs in the last game played....ie #361. Interestingly, the one team that finished below us was WY a team we beat earlier in the year when the Cowboys turned the ball over 19 times.

Ha ha...I am The Wiz not a fairy god mother who can grant wishes. Unfortunately, there is no program to go back in time. You have to reprogram each team ...1 team at a time...a little time consuming....I have already granted 3 wishes...C15 , C16 and the current team...use your wishes wisely.

Yes, ...the fact that someone would ask about comparing one of the worst teams in recent history shows we are not in a good place. Up until the Crews era, I had the regular grading system and at the bottom was just the letter F. It was during Crew's tenure that I had to come up the F+ and F- to micro manage the bad numbers. We need to turn the ship around. The good news is that in this new age of NIL and transfers it can be done quickly.

I did...but the computer couldn't take the energy. I had to use a Windows 95 to get back.

I received a question in the Davidson spread thread from @SLU_Nick that I thought was interesting enough to create a new thread. Here it is... @The Wiz - what would the spread br if this team played the Crews/yarbrough/bartley team? Can the computer pull that one off? At first as was just going to give a simple ...no , the computer can't go back in time and play an old team....but then I thought while the computer can't do it on its own ...it might be able to do it if I helped it. I decided to give it a try. There were a lot of issues in trying to do that but one thing was I had the data base from back then....If I could convert the present day data back a decade I might be able to do the comparison. This led to a series of questions.... First (putting on my Doc Brown DeLorean hat) would going back in time upset the space time continuum. I decided it would be OK since things were a mess in the present. The next issue was how to convert the data into 2014-2016...The algorithms that I use now are different. The NCAA was different... 11 teams less . Even the game was different...a shorter 3P shot. But again, I not only had the data base from then but had the algorithm changes over the years. I could unwind the data using the changed rithms and go "back to the future". Once I was able to go back, I had to decide what to do? @SLU_Nick mentioned Yarbrough and Bartley teams. That really didn't help because they both played on 2 Crews teams...Crews 2014-15 and Crews 2015-16...these will be known going forward as C15 and C16. ...both bad teams but not the same. What to do?...Let's have a game between C15 & C16...again the space time continuum comes into play again as some of the same players are on both teams and are playing against themselves. But if the Delorean can do it so can the computer ...So we set the clock back to April 2016 and play the game at Chaifetz ..where both teams are the home team. C16 wins the game by 2. C16 turns out was the better team...While both C15 and C16 both had 11-21 records ...I had C15 with only 10 wins as 1 of the wins was not a D1 team. In addition C16 had a better SOS (B) than C16 (B- ). Further, C16 competed in an A10 conf that had 4 teams with 25+ wins....The C15 A-10 had only 2 teams with 25+ wins. So C16 with a tougher schedule , a better A-10 conf and 1 more win was the better team of the 2 bad Crews team. Overall grade C16...C-....C15 ..D. Next game was our current team against the C15 team.... Some other issues ....C15 played 31 games ...we have played only 19. ...Adjusting 3P shots for the 2 different time periods....etc. In this game, the Ford team wins by 3...btw the C16 game against Ford's current team ends in a tie...I didn't want to play the OT out ...The key piece of info was that the C16 team was equal to the present day team. Bottom line...The C15 team was worse than the present day team...however the season isn't over yet...I will leave it up to Nick if he wants to revisit this topic at the end of the season and see if the conclusion is different. We now return to 2024 using 1.21 gigawatts.

This post game analysis should be relatively easy....2 key issues ...Slash line miss and opponent TOs. 1...Slash line miss...There have been a number of slash line misses this season....These misses are not about pie in the sky unrealistic A+ shooting expectations....but a failure to make Billiken season averages.....Just do your own average for the season. In tonight's game, we missed a whopping 22 three pt shots....15%..3Pt% .... less than half of what we normal make. Not good...On an average night we would have made 6 more 3s...18 pts...an impossible stat to overcome. 2...TOs...More specifically TO spread...the difference between our TOs and our opponent's TOs. The problem isn't so much how many TOs we have ...we have a slightly above average C+ in team TOs. But when we look at opponent TOs we are a horrible F rated team. I have not even figured in tonight's 3 TOs but when I do it will show we are one of the worst Div 1 teams in opponent TOs. This stat led to the related factor of pts off TOs...21-0 in favor of Dav Bottom line...The inability of SLU to force TOs on opposing teams is why we have a losing record this season.

I agree...Dav is a C- 3P shooting team....below average by anyone's standards. I also agree that you can't just give a flat number of 3s like 8.3/gm. You have to look at it and ask-- were these the right shots to take. In other words, when should I take a 2 and when should I take a 3. In Davidson's case they should have passed on some of those 3s as it was costing them points on missed shots. The risk/reward formula is simple. You take your 3P% and multiply it by 1.5. If the product is less than your 2P% shooting rate , you shouldn't be taking as many 3s or at least redirecting the shots to better 3P players. Let's look at the Dav case. 3P%x1.5=50.1%...Dav is hitting 52.3% from 2...The breakeven point is 34.9%....this means they are inefficiently shooting 3s and should be taking less or redirecting shots to players who are shooting 35% or better. While we are on the subject, we should take a look at SLU. SLU is shooting an excellent 37.4% from the arc....we are shooting 48% from inside the arc(grade D). We are a 3P shooting team. But further than that are a couple of more points. #1... Most 3P shots should be taken by players who are shooting more than 32%. For the most part this is happening. Unfortunately, Dalger was shooting 27.3%...so at least with this stat , it will be addition by subtraction....ie this stat (2P/3P ratio) should improve(addition) now that he is gone(subtraction). Btw, this is not a knock on Dalger ...I liked his hustle and toughness...just pointing out the facts. #2 ...We need to improve 2P shooting dramatically . Just because you can make 3s doesn't mean you should overlook 2s especially the bunnies and short stuff. The good news is this number is starting to trend up. Finally, one data item I find annoying is the lack of reporting on 2P info. It is missing from most box scores and some data bases. This stat is vital to determining who shoots 3s and how many the team should take as a whole. Perhaps one day it will be included in box scores.