Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="DefenseBB, post: 5304023, member: 7492"] Nothing is ever done in a vacuum, meaning using only one statistic cannot really give you complete insight for an absolute conclusion. Points per game, while not a "perfect" single statistic, is actually a very good single indicator whereas, the points allowed statistic has flaws, mainly the quality of the opponents. But let's address a couple of questions comments made: For [USER=9864]@YKCornelius[/USER], yes, have a top scoring offense did guarantee you success at winning a TITLE and getting to the FINAL FOUR, more so than having a top-rated defense guaranteed that. Having a good defense is absolutely critical but evaluating a "defense" requires more subjective assessments (like Strength of schedule and home/away games) which gets into a heavy analytical discussion. Yes, EVERY Final Four since 2000 has had a top 15 scoring offense in it, so your statement that the entire top 15 did not get past the Sweet 16 in any given year is wrong. I reran the data and there were 7 teams not ranked in the top 15 of offense that made it to the final four. So 93 of the 100 teams with TOP 15 scoring offenses made it to the FINAL FOUR. The 2007 FF had two teams that were abysmal offensively: LSU #275 and Rutgers #153 (Tennessee who won was #4 and UNC was #1). The best scoring offensive Final Four was the 2019 FF with Baylor #6, UConn #4, ND #1 and Oregon #3. The only Final Four without a top 10 team was 2022 with UConn #12, Louisville #46, SC #15 and Stanford #13. But please go and look at the data for yourself to make further claims. For [USER=13453]@NycUcWbbFan[/USER], the analysis, is a "simple" refutation of the adage "defense wins championships". The 25 years of FF participants shows a stronger correlation to the Top 15 scoring offenses winning titles more than the top 15 defenses. And I did not assert any absolute statement about future success but would agree with the continued probability that a Top15 Point scoring offense will have much better success in the NCAAT than a top 15 defense. I am not casually dismissing Geno or CD's defense observations but merely highlighting that UConn has been the pre-eminent offensive team in the sport since 2000. The problem with any stat, both offensive and defensive, is how to weigh appropriately the quality of the opponent. The conferences that UConn have been in since 2013-14 are not of elite quality (ranking 6th or 7th in conference ranking with the P5 and 5th now with the P4). While Geno schedules a quality OOC schedule to best assess the team, the majority of the schedule is played against much weaker opponents that inflate both sets of data, more so the defensive stats. Offensive is a more skilled trait so when playing teams in conference since 2013-14, the lack of skilled players means those offenses are not as good as conferences with the plethora of top ranked players (SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12 and the former PAC12). My point is there are limitations on both sets of data so while I do appreciate your retort as thought provoking, I am merely noting "gaps" in your own assertions in pointing out the UConn ORtg and DRtg. If I may ask, where did you get those stats from? An added sidenote, SC has notoriously been known as a defensive minded program, but using the simple, PPG stat also proves Dawn has very good offenses that are better than her defenses. She too, preaches both ends and is why she has had the success she's had. But the whole point is to outscore the opponent and is why she went out and got Latson this past portal season-she needs a proven scorer to add to Edwards. There are other threads that go deeper into the analysis and while this thread was about the 90+PPG per game assessment, it leads itself to the focus on why teams like Tennessee are redefining their focus to score and by using defensive pressure. I still stand by my assertion that OFFENSE is more important than DEFENSE to truly attain a title. I am not stating DEFENSE should be ignored as it is critical but the correlation on high scoring teams making the Final Four and winning the title is more evident than a defensive elite team winning it. In my mind this theoretical discussion will be played out over the next few years as very offensive minded coaches Kim Caldwell and Jennie Baranczyk try to achieve success vs. a solely defensive minded coach like Kara Lawson. Scott Rueck is another noted defensive minded coach, but his conference affiliation has severely hampered his recruiting so whether he can re-establish a national presence will be interesting. My bet is Jennie and Kim fair better than Kara but we shall see. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach