IvyBballFan
Masters Student
Posts: 479
Age: 77
Loc: Central Florida
Reg: 11-19-09
|
03-07-10 04:27 PM - Post#78129
In response to Brian Martin
This [Princeton] is only an average team offensively. That is why their record is remarkable...
The defense has been outstanding enough to make up for offensive struggles.
Brian is correct. This is pretty much the type of data I was alluding to. Princeton’s FG team percentages were just slightly above D-1 average, and their points/possession was just slightly below D-1 average. OTOH, they shot FT’s well. However, both their offensive rebounding efficiency (0.297) and their turnovers per possession (0.231) were below the 20th percentile of D-1 teams. These are important team performance deficits that reduced the team’s opportunities to score. Still, the Tigers could end up as a 20W team with a winning percentage over .700. I find this remarkable.
I appreciate the comments about the implication that we are discussing the possibility that players may individually be over- or underachieving. I’m not about to go there. This is about what teams do as a unit. Sometimes one hears it phrased as “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.†The whole is winning, and the parts are the various facets of the game. In fact, this may indeed be about coaching. Teams with the Tigers’ level of team offensive performance do not generally win this much, even with solid defense. Considering the Tigers’ noted deficits in team offensive performance, their ~.700 winning percentage looks great to me!
As for relative strength of the league this year, multiple posters have done a very good job of addressing that. Below are the last decade’s combined non-conference winning percentages for the eight Ivy teams. It’s not as good as using league RPI, but it supports others' data. The average without this year is .420. The improvement in 2009-2010 over the last two years was ~0.065; 16% better! Other than 2006-07, the only year that exceeded 2009-2010 was the three-way tie year. I didn’t detect any meaningful fall-off in quality of opposition from 2007-09 and 08-09, but I didn’t study it in super-detail.
(Year) non-Con Win%
(1999-00) 0.394
(2000-01) 0.362
(2001-02) 0.539
(2002-03) 0.411
(2003-04) 0.330
(2004-05) 0.463
(2005-06) 0.404
(2006-07) 0.482
(2007-08) 0.408
(2008-09) 0.404
(2009-10) 0.471
Certainly, the ‘90’s were better than these past ten years, and 2001-02 stood out. If I may summarize what I have read above, many would agree that, as a league, we did climb back from the depths of the past couple seasons for one year, not too new heights, but too a more customary altitude.
Man, we may get three 20W teams. That’s never happened before. The three top teams will have 67-68 W's. That’s never happened before. The league winner set a new record for total regular season wins by an Ivy team. Three Ivy teams not only duked it out for the top spot (four three-point games and one more sub-double-digit game), but also may see post-season action. That is a pretty rare occurrence for us. Does anyone see an era returning like the ‘80’s when there were seven straight years in which 10 or 11 wins took home the autobid?
Moreover, this year, teams played reasonable non-con games with respectable D-1 opponents, such as Alabama, Boston College, Siena, Colorado, UConn, Depaul, Georgetown, Kansas, St. John’s, Syracuse, VaTech, and William&Mary.
There has already been a lot to like in the Ivy League’s 2009-10 season, and we’ve got at least two games left.
|
