- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 584
- Reaction Score
- 3,674
Back on Feb 4, I compared our results to date against the past two years. The numbers showed that we had made “vast improvements” in terms of competitiveness, despite not seeing a huge shift in wins and losses. There were two reasons for this: our blowout losses against good teams were WAY down and our blowout wins against bad teams were WAY up.
I decidedly to run the same analysis for the whole year. Overall, the results are still very positive - though not quite as positive as back in early February. This is not terribly surprising given the overlapping injuries to Adams and Gilbert in the tail end of the season.
Performance against RPI Top 50: In 2017 and 2018, we went a combined 0-19 against RPI Top 50 opponents. 15 of those losses (~79%) were by 10 or more. Nine (47%) were by 20 or more. We rarely competed and were generally blown out.
As of Feb 4, we were 1-6 against RPI Top 50 teams, but had cut our double-digit losses in half (43% of games) and had only lost by 20 or more once (14%). We finished the year 1-10. 40% of our games resulted in double-digit losses. 20% resulted in losses of 20 or more. Overall, we held steady here on paper. The 39-point loss against Houston was certainly ugly though - worse than any loss the previous two years.
Performance against RPI 200+: In 2017 and 2018, we went 13-2. We rarely put bad teams away, winning by double digits less than half the time and by 20+ just three times (20%).
As of Feb 4, we were 9-0, had beaten EVERY team by double digits, and won 2/3 of our games by 20+. This was a huge and encouraging shift from the past two years. We only played one more game against an RPI 200+ team down the stretch: ECU on March 9th. Unfortunately, we won by 9 so the all-double-digit streak was broken. Still, the overall outcome here is incredibly positive - we won almost every game by 10+ and were three times as likely to beat a team in this category by 20+.
Performance agaist RPI 51-200: Here’s where things went downhill a bit. In 2017 and 2018, we went 16-15, scoring on average half a point more than our opponents. As of Feb 4, we were 3-3 with three double-digit wins and some close losses, averaging +5 points vs opponents. We ended the season 4-7 with two double-digit losses (as many as over the past two seasons). We averaged -.5 points worse than opponents by the end of the season - basically right in line with our average from 2017 and 2018.
The year-end conclusion is optimistic. The past two years, it was almost a given that we would be blown out by good teams and play everyone else close (even terrible teams). This year, we were more likely than not to play good teams close. And we generally made games against bad teams look like exhibitions, as we should.
Alll this more or less backs up the eye test of what it was like to watch the team this year vs previous years. We’re pointed in the right direction and I’m excited to see what Hurley and the team are going to be able to accomplish over the next few years.
I decidedly to run the same analysis for the whole year. Overall, the results are still very positive - though not quite as positive as back in early February. This is not terribly surprising given the overlapping injuries to Adams and Gilbert in the tail end of the season.
Performance against RPI Top 50: In 2017 and 2018, we went a combined 0-19 against RPI Top 50 opponents. 15 of those losses (~79%) were by 10 or more. Nine (47%) were by 20 or more. We rarely competed and were generally blown out.
As of Feb 4, we were 1-6 against RPI Top 50 teams, but had cut our double-digit losses in half (43% of games) and had only lost by 20 or more once (14%). We finished the year 1-10. 40% of our games resulted in double-digit losses. 20% resulted in losses of 20 or more. Overall, we held steady here on paper. The 39-point loss against Houston was certainly ugly though - worse than any loss the previous two years.
Performance against RPI 200+: In 2017 and 2018, we went 13-2. We rarely put bad teams away, winning by double digits less than half the time and by 20+ just three times (20%).
As of Feb 4, we were 9-0, had beaten EVERY team by double digits, and won 2/3 of our games by 20+. This was a huge and encouraging shift from the past two years. We only played one more game against an RPI 200+ team down the stretch: ECU on March 9th. Unfortunately, we won by 9 so the all-double-digit streak was broken. Still, the overall outcome here is incredibly positive - we won almost every game by 10+ and were three times as likely to beat a team in this category by 20+.
Performance agaist RPI 51-200: Here’s where things went downhill a bit. In 2017 and 2018, we went 16-15, scoring on average half a point more than our opponents. As of Feb 4, we were 3-3 with three double-digit wins and some close losses, averaging +5 points vs opponents. We ended the season 4-7 with two double-digit losses (as many as over the past two seasons). We averaged -.5 points worse than opponents by the end of the season - basically right in line with our average from 2017 and 2018.
The year-end conclusion is optimistic. The past two years, it was almost a given that we would be blown out by good teams and play everyone else close (even terrible teams). This year, we were more likely than not to play good teams close. And we generally made games against bad teams look like exhibitions, as we should.
Alll this more or less backs up the eye test of what it was like to watch the team this year vs previous years. We’re pointed in the right direction and I’m excited to see what Hurley and the team are going to be able to accomplish over the next few years.