2021-2022 B1G Basketball thread

[medinabuckeye1]

This is a pleasant surprise. 


If the Buckeyes lose and Iowa wins tonight that would mathematically eliminate the Buckeyes from contention for a top-4 seed in the BTT.

[ELA]

Doing what I can to will Joey Brunk into 20 and 10

Cue the Rudy clapping gif

[MaximumSam]

Cue the Rudy clapping gif

Clearly Holtmann was trying to save his secret weapon for the tourney

[ELA]

Kind of feels like basketball is now just who shoots better from 3

[ELA]

Big 33-32 run after falling behind by 11

[MaximumSam]

Kind of feels like basketball is now just who shoots better from 3

It really is - most sports reward working closer to the goal. Having a gimmick that rewards you for being far away from the goal leads to this. 

[ELA]

It really is - most sports reward working closer to the goal. Having a gimmick that rewards you for being far away from the goal leads to this.

And I'm not sure what the answer is.  Moving the line back just leads to ugly basketball.  I'm not opposed to the line, but guys are too good at it now for it to be worth 1.5 points, and it punishes good defense.  Purdue made a great defensive play last game, and the ball bounced to Houser.  He got a clean look, but from about 6 feet behind the line, and swished it.  And it didn't feel like a prayer.  Like if every QB could throw 70 yard ropes and football turned into teams trading deep shots, it would be awful.  But we let it happen to basketball.  Much like baseball, we've learned the best parts of the game are actually super inefficient.  I love watching a guy run his man through 3 screens to get a clean 12 foot look.  Not a thing anymore.

In college we used to take a shot every time MSU made a 3.  Back then, 8 in a game was on the high end.  Now?  You would die

[ELA]

South Alabama upset by bottom seeded Little Rock in the first round of the SBC tourney.  They were a predictive metrics darling.  KenPom picked them to win the SBC tourney from the #5 seed

[ELA]

Also worth noting in the transfer portal era.  MSU left two scholarships open.  You can't tell me some halfway decent MAC senior wasn't worth a flier

[bayareabadger]

So now we have this team exceeding expectations by more than a little. What to expect next season? The Badgers will lose their best player, and he won't be easily replaced, even if Chucky Hepburn becomes the star that I think he will be. And what about drama? There's been a fair amount of it under Gard. Is that just bad luck, or is that the way he rolls? And if so, maybe it doesn't matter if the teams flip back and forth between meeting expectations and exceeding them. But that feels a little like giving up, unless the expectations start higher.

I don't totally know what it means to be the "right guy" for the program. He's the guy for the program right now. He's going to stop being the guy until he misses the tournament twice in a row. And looking at those expectations for next year, they should at least be solid. Hepburn will be a star. Crowl likely will be too. Wahl is a do-everything guy who is probably a top-10 defender and pure post guy in the conference. From that base, you should be tournament good, before considering any transfers.

Giving up? I'm not sure what's being given up. Wisconsin is a program without a birthright. In the natural equilibrium, Wisconsin is at the bottom of the middle of the pack, or lower. Geography, history, style, facts on the ground, this makes every success precious and each year a battle against the reality of this league. The "expectations" game is a fraught one, and often silly. The expectation is to make the dance and push to be in the top echelon of the league. And if you do that much of the time, good things happen. Barring the glacial shift of prolonged success, Wisconsin best will always be what it is, working for a high floor so the ceiling is closer.

Through nearly seven seasons, Gard will have two conference titles, two sweet 16s in four tries, six NCAA quality teams.That's pretty good. Barring a disaster, he'll likely have two more years before the next big turnover to what's no unknown, and he aced that test the last time. If he's not here, I dare say whoever is runs things a lot like Greg, and will be hoping for his level of success. 

[Brutus Buckeye]

Izzo looks like he is trying to eat his own face. 

[bayareabadger]

Also worth noting in the transfer portal era.  MSU left two scholarships open.  You can't tell me some halfway decent MAC senior wasn't worth a flier

Is that really the issue? This team has a bunch of guys probably at the level of that MAC senior.

But they don't have the 1-2 special guys, who can elevate in that big moment. Maybe MAC senior could do that, but not so likely. 

[Brutus Buckeye]

That "we don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan" chant right there at the end would have provoked another HC from that state into fisticuffs. Izzo? Nah, he didn't skip a beat. 

[bayareabadger]

And I'm not sure what the answer is.  Moving the line back just leads to ugly basketball.  I'm not opposed to the line, but guys are too good at it now for it to be worth 1.5 points, and it punishes good defense.  Purdue made a great defensive play last game, and the ball bounced to Houser.  He got a clean look, but from about 6 feet behind the line, and swished it.  And it didn't feel like a prayer.  Like if every QB could throw 70 yard ropes and football turned into teams trading deep shots, it would be awful.  But we let it happen to basketball.  Much like baseball, we've learned the best parts of the game are actually super inefficient.  I love watching a guy run his man through 3 screens to get a clean 12 foot look.  Not a thing anymore.

In college we used to take a shot every time MSU made a 3.  Back then, 8 in a game was on the high end.  Now?  You would die

I find this part fascinating because it's the sort of evolution toward rewarding the most basic skill. Like, it's the end result of having the 3, but a version of the sport without 3s is frankly hard to watch. 

I find two elements of it more interesting. The first is that the 3-point revolution, for better or worse, helped the team ball aspect. The way post play and iso-slashing had evolved, a lot of the game became particularly staid. Working your way for a nice 12-footer had its perks, but now that's often phased out for a nice 21-footer. And with more space, the passing and ball movement seems better. Another element that I think is understated is people got smarter and started having people not take shots they liked but were bad. I remember watching some old Pistons-Lakers game. And in the second quarter, you had Rick Mahorn and Kurt Rambis firing up long hooks or turn around jumpers. Just not great shots, but that was just part of it. We shifted toward saying "you do what you do well" which funnels the ball in different ways.