Kenpom "Luck"

[05Alum]

For smarter folks than me in the yard....... per KenPom's definition: Luck is the deviation in winning percentage between a team’s actual record and their expected record using the correlated gaussian method. The luck factor has nothing to do with the rating calculation, but a team that is very lucky (positive numbers) will tend to be rated lower by my system than their record would suggest.

We currently are ranked 312th out of 363 schools in the luck category, and in prior years Hurley has been quoted saying he seems to always have a bad luck rating.

Does this mean anything? Coincidental?

 

[LIuconn]

Kenpom make your layups and dunks

 

[REB1094]

I wouldn’t look much into it. Luck ratings on kenpom have been mostly useless other than using it to troll providence last year

 

[pj]

Bad luck means you lose the close games, but perform well when the outcome is not in doubt. Good luck is synonymous with "clutch performer."

Does it mean anything or is it coincidence -- well, that's what Hurley needs to figure out. It could be either. But if it keeps repeating the same way, it's probably not coincidence.

 

[auror]

Our smallest win is by 8 points, but we're 1-4 in games within 5 points in the last 5 minutes (win H-Villanova, loss @Marquette, @Providence, @Xavier, @Seton Hall).

Considering our power rating, we should have 2 losses or so and instead we have 5.

 

[Hurleyman216]

Coincidentally there are like 5 Big East teams that are in the 300-350 range for “luck”. Probably part of why the conference was a bit underrated during our of conference play. A lot of Big East teams lost very close out of conference games that if they had won probably would have put the Big East as the #2 conference in the country.

 

[Inyatkin]

This was going around Twitter, and everyone was basically saying that if you're in the 300s every year (like we have been) then it's not luck. But that's not really an explanation.
No one likes to accept that games within a possession or two are basically a coin flip. Instead you get talk of toughness, or poise, which are impossible to quantify.
Basically, I'd like our luck to improve.

 

[superjohn]

This was going around Twitter, and everyone was basically saying that if you're in the 300s every year (like we have been) then it's not luck. But that's not really an explanation.
No one likes to accept that games within a possession or two are basically a coin flip. Instead you get talk of toughness, or poise, which are impossible to quantify.
Basically, I'd like our luck to improve.

You watch the games. Do you ever feel like it's a coin flip when we're in tight games at the end? I sure don't.

 

[Hurleyman216]

You watch the games. Do you ever feel like it's a coin flip when we're in tight games at the end? I sure don't.

The problem is it’s a weighted coin…at least most times it seems 8 against 5. Then you start throwing in technicals with under 2 mins left in a 3 point road game, foul and free throw disparities of 10+ per game, etc. our offensive and defensive metrics say we should be a 2 loss team right now. Big East bully ball and how lopsided officiating has been is definitely part of why our “luck” number is so high. You can attribute it to being terrible under pressure, but there a a few games that shouldn’t have been within 10 points that turned into L’s and it wasn’t solely because we suck under pressure. I should also say, we got the first “good whistle” today in our Big East season to date. Ironically it came against a team where it wouldn’t have mattered if we gave up 20 more FT’s. I’m guessing we’ll get another good whistle maybe against DePaul at home or Georgetown on the road…

 

[Husky68]

You watch the games. Do you ever feel like it's a coin flip when we're in tight games at the end? I sure don't.

Agree. Against Seton Hall 2 turnovers trying to get the ball to Adama late (you could see the defenders playing the pass and not the drivers who were Newton and AJ), Adama misses point blank layup, AJ closing out on 3 point shooter and running by him allowing drive for dunk, Karaban missing open 3, SH winning on rebound. During winning time UConn doesn't make winning plays.

 

[Inyatkin]

You watch the games. Do you ever feel like it's a coin flip when we're in tight games at the end? I sure don't.

Well, that's the thing. You feel like it's not, but it probably is. A different bounce in Seton Hall and we certainly win that game.
This doesn't mean I have a good explanation, either.

 

[Icehawk]

Our record of closing out tight games is... not good. I think the trend is deep enough to say it's not "luck", what it is I don't know but sure hope Hurley figures it out.

 

[SeattleHoop]

Our luck is bad at the end of games because although Hurley recruits well he has not brought in the same type of guards that Calhoun brought in. Those dudes had nerves of steel, which is everything in tight games

 

[superjohn]

Well, that's the thing. You feel like it's not, but it probably is. A different bounce in Seton Hall and we certainly win that game.
This doesn't mean I have a good explanation, either.

It's not though. You can explain away a bad bounce in a game or two but Hurley's record is 9-22 in 5 points or less games since he's been here. We're good at blowing teams out and we're awful in close games.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I don't need KenPom's model to tell me Hurley sucks at the end of close games.

 

[djct1999]

Its simple. The problem is execution. Who on this team can create their own shot? To win close game consisently, you need an alpha to isolate and score the ball. Instead, we rely on our system. The game speeds up, the rims get tight, and we seem to get uncomfortable. Sure, the refs don't help. Case in point, Seton Hall. Hurley wasn't even there. Still had the same problem. Thats the players inability to execute in crunch time. Nothing else.

 

[CTBasketball]

Providence was one of the luckiest teams in the country last year, as rated by KenPom. They went to the Sweet 16. We got bounced in the first round.

I’d rather be Providence last year.

 

[McLovin]

Based on what it sounds like KenPom “luck” factor means, he should change the metric to a more appropriately named “clutch” factor.

Unfortunately, it is true that we are probably 312th most “clutch” school in the country at this point. It can change, but lacking in the clutch during the Hurley tenure has been much more than “bad luck”…

 

[Chin Diesel]

The problem is it’s a weighted coin…at least most times it seems 8 against 5. Then you start throwing in technicals with under 2 mins left in a 3 point road game, foul and free throw disparities of 10+ per game, etc. our offensive and defensive metrics say we should be a 2 loss team right now. Big East bully ball and how lopsided officiating has been is definitely part of why our “luck” number is so high. You can attribute it to being terrible under pressure, but there a a few games that shouldn’t have been within 10 points that turned into L’s and it wasn’t solely because we suck under pressure. I should also say, we got the first “good whistle” today in our Big East season to date. Ironically it came against a team where it wouldn’t have mattered if we gave up 20 more FT’s. I’m guessing we’ll get another good whistle maybe against DePaul at home or Georgetown on the road…

Agree. Against Seton Hall 2 turnovers trying to get the ball to Adama late (you could see the defenders playing the pass and not the drivers who were Newton and AJ), Adama misses point blank layup, AJ closing out on 3 point shooter and running by him allowing drive for dunk, Karaban missing open 3, SH winning on rebound. During winning time UConn doesn't make winning plays.

Its simple. The problem is execution. Who on this team can create their own shot? To win close game consisently, you need an alpha to isolate and score the ball. Instead, we rely on our system. The game speeds up, the rims get tight, and we seem to get uncomfortable. Sure, the refs don't help. Case in point, Seton Hall. Hurley wasn't even there. Still had the same problem. Thats the players inability to execute in crunch time. Nothing else.

I feel like the bad luck coin is 50/50 against UConn on both sides where one side is horrible officiating (which admittedly UConn coaches have to learn how to adapt within the game on officiating style) and poor playmaking/execution.

 

[InTheRed]

This was going around Twitter, and everyone was basically saying that if you're in the 300s every year (like we have been) then it's not luck. But that's not really an explanation.
No one likes to accept that games within a possession or two are basically a coin flip. Instead you get talk of toughness, or poise, which are impossible to quantify.
Basically, I'd like our luck to improve.

They are not a coin flip at all. Teams with great guard play, guys who can both score and create, will win more of these close games than they lose. We have struggled in this area under Hurley and it has led directly to losing close games.

 

[Palatine]

Remember Cole missing two free throws at the end of Creighton that allowed them to tie and win in overtime. Was that luck or choking? Impossible to say.

 

[UCfor3]

Our guards have not been up to snuff in recent years. Good point guard play and backcourt experience will go a long way in helping to improve execution at the end of games. Not the only reason, but it hasn't helped.

 

[uconngb]

You watch the games. Do you ever feel like it's a coin flip when we're in tight games at the end? I sure don't.

Yes, I do. Heads they win, tails we lose

 

[methodology]

It's not though. You can explain away a bad bounce in a game or two but Hurley's record is 9-22 in 5 points or less games since he's been here. We're good at blowing teams out and we're awful in close games.

Wow. That’s not exactly a small sample size either. Hurley needs to grow in this area going forward. His teams seem to lack composure and play timid/tight in these situations

 

[Chin Diesel]

Remember Cole missing two free throws at the end of Creighton that allowed them to tie and win in overtime. Was that luck or choking? Impossible to say.

Cole was luck, more of a roll the dice, since he was shooting below 80% from the FT line. You get a shooter in the 70's and missing one FT is the norm. Make it end of game situation and you are tempting fate.

Donyell missing two FT's in the E8 game? That was a choke.

 

[pj]

It's not though. You can explain away a bad bounce in a game or two but Hurley's record is 9-22 in 5 points or less games since he's been here. We're good at blowing teams out and we're awful in close games.

He's 89-52 at UConn overall so that would make him 80-30 (73% winning percentage) in the non-close games.

Jim Calhoun's career winning percentage was 70%. If Hurley can be as good at winning close games as he is at winning blowouts, he'll be a Hall of Famer.

 

[Echo Hawk]

Interesting topic. Ken Pom is a little over the top with this statistic because you are dealing with human behaviors. Teams get hot then go cold for no apparent reason. Players have injuries that you never know about. They get sick and play. Players choke. Players get hot. And very human coaches make really bad decisions. Bench players come off the bench and have the game of their life. All of these things are opaque, among others, and are not part of any data set that Ken Pom or anyone else can see.

What is interesting to me, using this team as an example, is how a team that looks unbeatable can lose 5 of 6 in a row when the bookies say they should win every one easily. You can't point to any non injury reason. It just happens. You can say that another coach under the same exact conditions would have stopped the bleeding and had a different outcome. Ask anyone in Buffalo this week if they should have won that game.

 

[Chin Diesel]

It's not though. You can explain away a bad bounce in a game or two but Hurley's record is 9-22 in 5 points or less games since he's been here. We're good at blowing teams out and we're awful in close games.

And several/many of those games UConn held leads that slipped away. I'd venture to say out of those 31 games, more of those games were games where UConn led and the lead flipped than games where UConn was down 10-15 points and clawed their way back to a "good" back door loss.

 

[JustbrewitMan]

It's not though. You can explain away a bad bounce in a game or two but Hurley's record is 9-22 in 5 points or less games since he's been here. We're good at blowing teams out and we're awful in close games.

Thank god Coach K retired. And other teams are giddy that Coach B soldiers on...


"...Mike Krzyzewski, Cliff Ellis, and Jim Boeheim have a combined 137 years of coaching experience between them; they have combined to go 73-86 in close games in the last five seasons. Coaching experience had even less relevance to the story than player experience; we should immediately throw this narrative out the window..."

What matters most in winning college basketball’s closest games?

Coin-flip games in sports: a land of contrasts. Coin-flip games in college basketball: probably both luck-based and skill-based.

statsbywill.com

 

[Tenspro2002]

And several/many of those games UConn held leads that slipped away. I'd venture to say out of those 31 games, more of those games were games where UConn led and the lead flipped than games where UConn was down 10-15 points and clawed their way back to a "good" back door loss.

The other side of this, however, is the fact that we had a lot of games that were 3-5 point margins in the second half where we expanded the lead late, turning what would have been "close" wins into blowout wins.

Last month we led at Butler by 4 points midway through the second half. If we had held on to win by 4, would that be a better win, more indicative of Hurley's coaching prowess, than blowing them out by 22? Obviously not. It's unfair to penalize Hurley by winning by "too much."

What would be more informative is to look at games that were within 5 points at, say, 5:00 left in the game, and see what the outcome was. (You could add any games that were outside of that margin where there was a lead change, let's say.)