The Bills over UM-Low by 5

[The Wiz]

 

A good win last night . It erased much of the damage done by the WSU game. I think the addition of Avila was a big plus.  While the addition of points & rebs was much needed, the team as a whole seemed to play better...it kind of came together ...it sorted of gelled (let me know when you get tired of this word...I won't stop using it  but you can let me know). We haven't arrived yet but we are headed in the right direction. For more good news on last night's game ...see my post game review at the end of the Q spread thread.

Game preview...

Time to take a step up with UMass -Lowell. This is the team that just beat Q by 10 pts a few days ago. In some ways, they are the opposite of Q. While Q was the gang that couldn't shoot straight...this is a new ball game....with a good shooting team.  Get ready for a high scoring game. Many shooters ...many ways to score. And they have a decent defense too BUT (and there is always a BUT) they come in with a C grade. What gives?...Ah something near and dear to my heart...TOs.  The River Rats..um sorry...the River Hawks have trouble holding onto the ball.  If we press them ...play a tight D , they will cough up the ball. If we can keep our TOs down this could give us big advantage and open up the spread. The Team is led by Brooks...2nd leading scorer, and team leader and national ranked  in rebs, FG% and blocks. This should be a good reb show down between Anya and Brooks. The Bills, meanwhile, are back up to C+ and have a little momentum.

One quick note here...While there has been great improvement in the report card there is one area that is still very weak...opponent rebounding...we are giving up too many rebounds....we could prevent this by knocking off 2-3 opp rebs /gm from the stats which is doable especially if Anya stays hot.

Let's take a look...

Report Card.... 

 

.................SLU..................UM-L.....................SLU......................UM-L

...........................OFF.....................................................DEF..........

PPG...........C+....................A-..............................C.........................D

FG%..........C-....................B+...............................B+......................B

3P%...........C-...................B.................................A-........................B+

FT%.........  C-..................A-..........................................

Reb...........B....................A..................................F-...16th WITN......D+

 OFF Rebs  = total Bills rebs...DEF Rebs = opp total reb

Report Card change....6 up...2 dn...+4

UP.....OFF....PPG...FT%...Reb.........DEF...PPG...FG%...3P%

Dn....OFF...FG%.....DEF...Reb

 

Top 100 In The Nation

SLU...

PPG...Jimerson ....75th...dn...tie

.........Swope.........75th...new...tie

3PM......Jimerson...22nd...dn

..............Swope......68th....new

Reb,,,,,Anya...........2nd...up

FG%....Thames.....56th...dn

Asst...Swope...71st...new

UM-L...

Reb...Brooks...30th

FG%... "  ......37th

Blks.... " .......16th

Injuries....

SLU....

Warlick....Ques....undisclosed injury

UM-L...No injuries to report

Keys to the game....TOs and rebs...we need to win both  We need to force TOs and keep their reb numbers down.  Start strong AND finish strong.

WWN2D2W....Make some shots...Target  slash...48/ 36/ 75....Win the reb battle by 4...Win the TO battle by 3...Hold Brooks and Mincey to a combined 25 pts. Anya wins the Reb battle over Brooks by 3.  Shack and no Shack (we score 80...they do not)

Bottom line...If we make them play our game, we can have the River Hawks paddling upstream.

[Bay Area Billiken]

ESPN BET has SLU -10.5, after opening -7.5, Total 164.5. ESPN Matchup Predictor gives SLU a 74.0% chance of prevailing. 

[Old guy]

Team rankings this morning gives SLU a spread of 9.5 points to win over UML with 4 stars of confidence. 

[The Wiz]

58 minutes ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

ESPN BET has SLU -10.5, after opening -7.5, Total 164.5. ESPN Matchup Predictor gives SLU a 74.0% chance of prevailing. 

A fairly large difference in the spread.  The interesting thing is my computer puts the win probability of this game at 72% about the same as ESPN's %.  A 10.5 spread on my computer would come in at 93%.  The difference is my computer thinks we have a good chance to win the game...The ESPN is saying it is pretty much a sure thing.

The caveat here is there tends to be more variance at the beginning of the season which is why the 8th game is important (Chicago State). By the 8th game variability has dropped enough to where the accuracy increases.  I have adjusted the algorithms this year to reduce some of the variability and it seems to be working. However , the computer still wants to wait for game 8.  As we all know CBB has changed a lot in the last few years. With the Bills taking on a new coach this year  we have had a lot of turnover....not an unusual thing.  The difference now is that many more teams are having big turnover without  coaching changes. ...thus more uncertainty....more "upsets".  

There is a decent chance for the Bills to have a double digit win...especially if they follow my opening post guidelines in this thread. Again, I agree with percent chance of winning just not the "hype" in adding the extra points. The computer is taking the more conservative approach at this point.  Perhaps ESPN has been reading The Bills GDTs.

[Lord Elrond]

Computer was 2 off, not too bad. To me, a win is a win. But dang, it shouldn’t have been that close…

[Bay Area Billiken]

Even after tonight's game, UMass-Lowell is shooting .395 on 3's for the season.  Tonight UMass-Lowell shot 63.2% from 3, which was an anomaly.

The good news is SLU won the game.  

[The Wiz]

What a game...it had everything...Let's get to the meat of things...all bolded phrases are from the original post...

60.7/ 62.2 / 57.9 / 77.8....Bills slash...This is why we won....we easily made the target slash.

59  / 57.1  /   63.2 / 75......River Hawks...This is  why it was close....

Two unbelievable lines ...in the same game. I took a friend from out of town to the game and told him at the start of the game that the Bills would shoot 40% from the arc...He said...get out!  By the end of the game he was a believer.

Breaking down the spreads even further...UM-Low had 1 extra 2PM and 1 extra 3PM...we had 8 extra FTM and that was the winning stat.

I had mentioned in another thread that this could be a double Shake Shack game...both teams score 80+...not a surprise...2 good shooting teams.

(UM Low) a good shooting team.  Get ready for a high scoring game. Many shooters ...many ways to score... Turned out to be true.

A fairly large difference in the spread...Turns out I was within 2 ...the official line was 7.5 off...A couple of bookies response to me post game...we are not worthy.  A note here to the gamblers ...although these spreads are for entertainment purposes only,  when you see a difference of more than 3pts between me and the official line...be aware of an opportunity.

TOs and rebs...we need to win both...we didn't and that is why it came down to the wire...We lost the TO battle by 3(pts off TOs 18-9..UM-Lows favor) but we did nicely on rebs...Bills favor 28-22 (2nd chance pts...12-5  Bills favor)...so these 2 stats pretty much canceled each other out.

Hold Brooks and Mincey to a combined 25 pts...Final combined  total for the two... 25 pts...perfect.

Anya wins the Reb battle over Brooks by 3. .. Anya wins big time...10-1 and remember Brooks was 30th ITN with a 9.4 Reb ave...nice job KA

I will close with a few questions...questions I don't have an answer to,  but make me go... hmmm.   With 19 sec left in the first half and the shot clock off and a 14 pt lead,  why did we take a shot with 9 seconds left in the half instead of 2 seconds left....Of course the River Hawks got the reb on our missed shot and sank a 2 at the buzzer...hmmm......Also at the end of the game in the final seconds (3.5 and 1.4 sec) and the Bills with 5 fouls... did they not foul them(once or twice) and eat up some clock....hmmm.

Bottom line...This will probably be one of the Bills best shooting game of the year and we needed every last bit of it to win. The key word in that previous sentence was win.  Keep the wins coming by any margin. There are no bad wins.

 

[billiken_roy]

crymdog point out to me that after it was obvious that the river rats guards were hotter than hell, why did we continue to go under the screens instead of either fighting through the screen and staying with our man and or jump switching to be in the guards face?   playing relaxed defense and playing "we'll just out score you", is definitely entertaining, but it will surely bite us in the ass eventually.   as someone pointed out, it wont work against the elite D1 teams, but who knows, it may be good enough to win the A10...........most of the time. 

another thought, playing hardcore belly button defense, will tire the players.   Schertz seems determined to play a short rotation.   those two thoughts dont mesh.   either he plays more players to enable the energy to play better defense, or we continue with these high scoring nba scores that is a coin flip on winning.   eventually we will get the usual refs that love to F the billikens and will call the one shot a 3 instead of a 2 and count the shot at the buzzer.   imo there has to be some adjustment coach.   

[cheeseman]

6 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

crymdog point out to me that after it was obvious that the river rats guards were hotter than hell, why did we continue to go under the screens instead of either fighting through the screen and staying with our man and or jump switching to be in the guards face?   playing relaxed defense and playing "we'll just out score you", is definitely entertaining, but it will surely bite us in the ass eventually.   as someone pointed out, it wont work against the elite D1 teams, but who knows, it may be good enough to win the A10...........most of the time. 

another thought, playing hardcore belly button defense, will tire the players.   Schertz seems determined to play a short rotation.   those two thoughts dont mesh.   either he plays more players to enable the energy to play better defense, or we continue with these high scoring nba scores that is a coin flip on winning.   eventually we will get the usual refs that love to F the billikens and will call the one shot a 3 instead of a 2 and count the shot at the buzzer.   imo there has to be some adjustment coach.   

Roy while I respect your knowledge on this subject I would point out a couple of things 1. He is playing a short bench because he has a short bench.  The freshmen big men basically were the only ones who did not get in and one did at the end for defensive purposes.  2. UMass- L was a terrible 3 point shooting team according to Schertz on the post game show - he said they were ranked like 300 something and guys who had not made a 3 point shot this year were throwing in Hail Marys.  Now I agree the defense did not seem to help this situation but they shot 63% from the 3 that is just crazy for any team much less one ranked in the 300s.

[willie]

5 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Roy while I respect your knowledge on this subject I would point out a couple of things 1. He is playing a short bench because he has a short bench.  The freshmen big men basically were the only ones who did not get in and one did at the end for defensive purposes.  2. UMass- L was a terrible 3 point shooting team according to Schertz on the post game show - he said they were ranked like 300 something and guys who had not made a 3 point shot this year were throwing in Hail Marys.  Now I agree the defense did not seem to help this situation but they shot 63% from the 3 that is just crazy for any team much less one ranked in the 300s.

I have said this before I would like to see if the Europeans can play. Our biggest defensive liability imo is rim protection. Robbie won’t be able to stop tall centers. Obviously they haven’t done enough at practice to earn his trust. 

[billiken_roy]

12 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Roy while I respect your knowledge on this subject I would point out a couple of things 1. He is playing a short bench because he has a short bench.  The freshmen big men basically were the only ones who did not get in and one did at the end for defensive purposes.  2. UMass- L was a terrible 3 point shooting team according to Schertz on the post game show - he said they were ranked like 300 something and guys who had not made a 3 point shot this year were throwing in Hail Marys.  Now I agree the defense did not seem to help this situation but they shot 63% from the 3 that is just crazy for any team much less one ranked in the 300s.

I get it about them being out of their heads and over achieving, but at what point is it necessary to accept what's happening and adjust? 

 

First time I've disagreed with Coach's approach to a game.   

[Billfan7]

8 hours ago, The Wiz said:

I will close with a few questions...questions I don't have an answer to,  but make me go... hmmm.   With 19 sec left in the first half and the shot clock off and a 14 pt lead,  why did we take a shot with 9 seconds left in the half instead of 2 seconds left....Of course the River Hawks got the reb on our missed shot and sank a 2 at the buzzer...hmmm

I think this sequence is a big part of the reason why Larry landed in the doghouse and we didn't see him in the 2nd half.  He also had a one or 2 missed defensive assignments where he lost his man that led to wide open 3s.

[White Pelican]

12 minutes ago, Billfan7 said:

I think this sequence is a big part of the reason why Larry landed in the doghouse and we didn't see him in the 2nd half.  He also had a one or 2 missed defensive assignments where he lost his man that led to wide open 3s.

That's what I thought too. It was telling that with the team shorthanded, he didn't play in the second half.

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, billiken_roy said:

I get it about them being out of their heads and over achieving, but at what point is it necessary to accept what's happening and adjust? 

 

First time I've disagreed with Coach's approach to a game.   

As I said in earlier posts, there were things one could question and I agreed that the defense was not helping the situation.

[SLUMS81]

Our switch to a zone defense in the second half resulted in a nice run and got us to our 21 point lead.

We then went back to man to man, were clearly tired with a short bench, and gave up the lead.  
I’m not sure I understand the near-universal use of man to man defense, even when it is not working.

[Minerva N. Owl]

10 hours ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

Even after tonight's game, UMass-Lowell is shooting .395 on 3's for the season.  Tonight UMass-Lowell shot 63.2% from 3, which was an anomaly.

The good news is SLU won the game.  

I was very surprised to hear Coach S In the post-game interview say that, coming into the game, UMass Lowell was not a very good 3-point shooting team. Here's the shooting stats for UMassL:

Prior to playing SLU, UMassL was 36% from 3, ranked #110 (out of 350+), just ahead of Kansas and North Carolina ... so, actually pretty good.

But on closer inspection, UMassL has been very inconsistent from 3: against Gonzaga and Washington they were 3-16 and 2-16, but three previous times they shot lights out from 3. It would have been more accurate to say that UMassL is very erratic from 3: sometimes awful and sometimes lights out. Given what we've seen so far the Bills on D, it's not too surprising, I think, that we got the hot-from-3 version of UMassL.

The Bills snuck out with the W, but it will definitely help to learn how to defend the 3.

As Captain Obvious would say, giving up 90 points on 63% shooting from 3 is not a good recipe for winning.

[cheeseman]

38 minutes ago, Minerva N. Owl said:

I was very surprised to hear Coach S In the post-game interview say that, coming into the game, UMass Lowell was not a very good 3-point shooting team. Here's the shooting stats for UMassL:

Prior to playing SLU, UMassL was 36% from 3, ranked #110 (out of 350+), just ahead of Kansas and North Carolina ... so, actually pretty good.

But on closer inspection, UMassL has been very inconsistent from 3: against Gonzaga and Washington they were 3-16 and 2-16, but three previous times they shot lights out from 3. It would have been more accurate to say that UMassL is very erratic from 3: sometimes awful and sometimes lights out. Given what we've seen so far the Bills on D, it's not too surprising, I think, that we got the hot-from-3 version of UMassL.

The Bills snuck out with the W, but it will definitely help to learn how to defend the 3.

As Captain Obvious would say, giving up 90 points on 63% shooting from 3 is not a good recipe for winning.

I guess I heard what Schertz said wrong but I know he said they were a poor 3 pt team

[The Wiz]

13 minutes ago, Minerva N. Owl said:

I was very surprised to hear Coach S In the post-game interview say that, coming into the game, UMass Lowell was not a very good 3-point shooting team. Here's the shooting stats for UMassL:

Prior to playing SLU, UMassL was 36% from 3, ranked #110 (out of 350+), just ahead of Kansas and North Carolina ... so, actually pretty good.

But on closer inspection, UMassL has been very inconsistent from 3: against Gonzaga and Washington they were 3-16 and 2-16, but three previous times they shot lights out from 3. It would have been more accurate to say that UMassL is very erratic from 3: sometimes awful and sometimes lights out. Given what we've seen so far the Bills on D, it's not too surprising, I think, that we got the hot-from-3 version of UMassL.

The Bills snuck out with the W, but it will definitely help to learn how to defend the 3.

As Captain Obvious would say, giving up 90 points on 63% shooting from 3 is not a good recipe for winning.

Minerva...you took the words right out of my mouth....I was about to write the same thing ...so instead I will just add on a little.

I, too, was confused by the statement that UM-L was not just a bad shooting 3P team but the worst in D1...It just ain't so. If you look at the report card in my original post I have UM-L as a grade B on 3P%.   And I like that you used erratic in describing the 3P UM-L shooting.  The only thing I would add  is you could then describe the Bills 3P defense as erratic also... sometimes good and sometimes bad.

Part of the problem is that we are dealing with a small sample size.  Data in a small size tends to be erratic. That is why I like to wait until 8 games are played. After 8 games, teams start to reveal who they really are.

The takeaway here is that when you are dealing with erratic data and what you are doing is not working , you need to switch horses.  It could be changing your defense or something as simple as changing the tempo of the game.  You can't keep doing the same thing and hope for different results. When data is erratic there is no mean to revert to.

Bottom line was that we won and hopefully learned something from this game.

[papal]

jimmerson has to get around screens and defend the three; even at the risk of  player he is guarding blowing by him.  also bench is shorter when Casey is hurt and Thames is having health issue.

[billikenbill]

11 hours ago, Billfan7 said:

I think this sequence is a big part of the reason why Larry landed in the doghouse and we didn't see him in the 2nd half.  He also had a one or 2 missed defensive assignments where he lost his man that led to wide open 3s.

Larry had a sloppy turnover and missed defensive assignments. The problem on the end of half play was that Swope went too early. The play was clearly for Larry to shoot a three. He didn't adjust to the time problem and took the shot. Swope started his move at about the 12 second mark instead of waiting until 6 or 7 which set that problem in motion. Also, not fouling when you have a foul to give makes no sense at all. Would love to know the thinking behind it.

[White Pelican]

I too wondered about the timing of Larry's shot. The play got him WIDE open but as you said, too early. Even had he made it, they still obviously had time. In a game that went to the buzzer, that whole sequence was huge.

Agreed about the foul thing. None of the coaches suggested it? Or does the boss not want to? And I am firmly in the school of fouling if you're up three at the end. Especially with fouls to give.

[willie]

13 minutes ago, White Pelican said:

I too wondered about the timing of Larry's shot. The play got him WIDE open but as you said, too early. Even had he made it, they still obviously had time. In a game that went to the buzzer, that whole sequence was huge.

Agreed about the foul thing. None of the coaches suggested it? Or does the boss not want to? And I am firmly in the school of fouling if you're up three at the end. Especially with fouls to give.

Minnesota lost to Wichita State yesterday by not fouling. 

[cheeseman]

14 hours ago, billikenbill said:

Larry had a sloppy turnover and missed defensive assignments. The problem on the end of half play was that Swope went too early. The play was clearly for Larry to shoot a three. He didn't adjust to the time problem and took the shot. Swope started his move at about the 12 second mark instead of waiting until 6 or 7 which set that problem in motion. Also, not fouling when you have a foul to give makes no sense at all. Would love to know the thinking behind it.

Correct me if I am wrong but if you fouled then they simply would get the ball closer to the basket.  I assume you are talking about the last play of the game.  The farther they are away from the basket the more likely they would run out of time.

[cheeseman]

38 minutes ago, willie said:

Minnesota lost to Wichita State yesterday by not fouling. 

Crean addressed that during the post-game show and he said  he was taught by other very successful coaches to trust your defense and not foul in that situation.  I have heard others say this same thing so I guess they have all figured out that the odds are in their favor not to foul.  Like any probability there will be a few times it does not work out - they claim they are simply playing the odds.

[willie]

21 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Crean addressed that during the post-game show and he said  he was taught by other very successful coaches to trust your defense and not foul in that situation.  I have heard others say this same thing so I guess they have all figured out that the odds are in their favor not to foul.  Like any probability there will be a few times it does not work out - they claim they are simply playing the odds.

I don't buy it. How many times have you seen someone hit the 3 to force overtime. Many. How many times have you seen a team make 1 throw ,miss the second ,get the rebound and score. Never.