- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,382
- Reaction Score
- 23,714
There is a statistician over on the Louisville scout board posting under the name "Jneal", and the theory he's hatched is beginning to gain some traction over there and on the rivals national board. Here's the rundown: 22 of the prior 25 national championship winners have met a certain statistical criteria at the end of the regular season, and of the three outliers - 2013 Louisville, 2003 Syracuse, 2011 UConn - the former two satisfied the conditions during postseason play. So, over the last 25 years, the theory is working at a success rate of 88%, and that jumps to 96% if you add the postseason games 2013 Louisville and 2003 Syracuse played to the data set.
This theory is grounded in the belief that the three attributes nearly all championship teams possess are rebounding, defense, and three point shooting. That's where the "triple" comes from - if you can defend, rebound, and shoot the three at a high level, you're probably an elite team. Where does the "40" aspect enter the equation? Well, as the theory goes, if you shoot 40% from three, limit your opponents to under 40% shooting from the field, and grab 40 rebounds a game, you have a legitimate shot to win the whole thing. Or, put differently, if you fail to satisfy those three conditions, you're a statistical aberration that only occurs every 25 years or so.
Some years there may only be one team in the entire land that can be labeled a Triple 40 team. In 2012, for instance, Kentucky was the only Triple 40 team, and they more or less cruised to a title. Other years, there may be three or four Triple 40 teams, and they often compete in an epic game somewhere along the path to the trophy. It's not a theory that forecasts outcomes with any degree of certainty as much as it is one that separates the contenders from the pretenders, and eliminates the 99% of the country that's playing for memories rather than hardware.
I should mention, there is one caveat to the theory. There is a margin of error of 3.5 in all categories. Meaning, if you rebound 36.5 misses a game, shoot 36.5% from three, and allow your opponents to shoot 43.5% from the field, you're still technically a Triple 40 team, though not one with much conviction. Basically, it's called the Triple 40 because it has a better ring to it than the Triple 36.5.
How many teams qualify as Triple 40 this season? Four. I will reveal them in a moment, but first, let's examine how UConn fairs in each of the three categories.
Three Point Shooting:
As you can probably guess, this is the test UConn passes with the most confidence. Between Daniels, Giffey, and Napier, the Huskies possess three long-range shooters well north of 40%. Boatright and Kromah are also more than serviceable from deep, giving them five viable outside threats. When you can shoot with such potency from three - and remember, the new-age metrics value three point shooting more than just about any other offensive statistic - it spreads the floor and generates opportunities for everybody. UConn season percentage: 40.5%.
Defense:
Of the three categories, this is the one that jumps out at you at being most obviously conducive to a title winning team. All of the other metrics, whether it be kenpom, SRS, or whatever else, would seem to indicate that an elite defenses tend to be more successful in postseason play than elite offenses. "Defense wins championships" isn't just a cliche, it's a reality documented by decades of evidence.
Between Kromah and Giffey's stout defense on the wing, the shot-blocking presence of Daniels and Brimah down low, and the underrated perimeter defense of Boatright and Napier at the guard position, UConn has been extremely successful in forcing teams into difficult shots this season. In this regard, the arrival of Amida Brimah has really vaulted UConn from a good defense to a borderline elite one. The margin of error is just so much greater defensively when you have somebody roaming the paint to erase any mistakes. The absurd 17.7% block rate that Brimah is credited for, per basketball-reference, probably only tells half the story. The mere act of occupying the paint dissuades drivers and cutters, forcing opponents to settle for low-reward mid-range shots and contested threes. UConn season percentage: 39.5%.
Rebounding:
This is the element of the theory that figures to not hold up to examination on first glance. Most would figure that rebounding margin is more important than total rebounds, and to some extent those people would be right. However, what this theory emphasizes as much as anything is pace. Championship teams don't play at the excruciatingly deliberate pace that a Notre Dame or Wisconsin might, because that wouldn't be utilizing talent correctly. Generally speaking, teams who play at slow paces do so because they aren't as good as their opponent, and thus want to diminish the sample (or number of possessions) that inherently is able to identify the superior team with greater accuracy in larger quantity. There is a reason Villanova held the ball for so long against that juggernaut Georgetown team, and there is a reason Roy Williams likes to play up-tempo games (he generally has better players than whoever he's lining up against).
Dominance on the glass isn't necessarily a prerequisite for championship success, but pace certainly is. And teams who play at a slower pace - such as Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, and a whole host of other teams who you can never trust to survive the second weekend - are fundamentally vulnerable to losing to inferior teams by virtue of statistical randomness. Wisconsin and Notre Dame typically have positive rebounding margins, but a lot of the time, they can't crack that magic 40 figure because they don't play fast enough. This is actually one of the flaws in kenpom's efficiency ratings, IMO - the system is so predicated on points per possession, that pace is often discounted.
Of course, fast pace or not, you aren't reaching 40 (or 36.5) unless you can rebound the ball at a better rate than your opponents. Teams with negative rebounding margins aren't winning championships. Luckily for UConn, they are in the green (+2) this season in the rebounding department. That, coupled with the pace they play at, has combined to barely get UConn above water in this category. Why is UConn so much better on the glass this season? Well, Olander has played far fewer minutes, and he's a major liability on the glass. Nolan, Daniels, and Brimah certainly aren't world-beaters from a rebounding perspective (though they've all improved), but a lot of that is offset by the fact that Shabazz is a f'in basketball savant and he's somehow able to grab six rebounds a game simply because of his instinctual brilliance. UConn season average: 36.5 rebounds per game.
So there you have it. UConn is one of the four teams in the country with membership to the illustrious Triple 40 club. The other three? Louisville, Michigan State, and Iowa. A team like Florida is very close to breaking down the door, but they seem like one of those teams with all the ingredients of a champion that just can't overcome their shooting deficiencies (2010 Kentucky, anybody?). Arizona is in the same boat - talent and size at every position, but they just can't throw it in the ocean. More than likely, that is a fatal flaw that will haunt them down the road. Syracuse only satisfies one of the conditions, and their season average of 35 rebounds per game (172nd in the country) does not bode well for their championship hopes.
Despite these promising numbers, there are, of course, a lot of holes in the theory. The most glaring is the fact that it plainly omits SOS (though, given UConn has played a fairly strong schedule, we're probably alright there) from the equation, and the only metric it pays any credence to on the offensive side of the ball is three point shooting. Obviously, there is something to be said for being able to generate easy baskets down the stretch in the post, and the saying "Live by the three, die by the three" is likely to be resoundingly confirmed by UConn's postseason results, whatever they may be.
I did think it would make for some interesting mid-week chatter, though, and if you take nothing else from the commendable research JNeal has done, know that the composition of a team that can be dangerous in March is here. One of my favorite things to do on here is over-complicate a game, that, at its core, is pretty damn simple. But this team has guys that can guard and guys are difficult to guard on the other end. That, coupled with a few big bodies in the paint, can take you a long way in this sport. We'll see where it takes UConn.
This theory is grounded in the belief that the three attributes nearly all championship teams possess are rebounding, defense, and three point shooting. That's where the "triple" comes from - if you can defend, rebound, and shoot the three at a high level, you're probably an elite team. Where does the "40" aspect enter the equation? Well, as the theory goes, if you shoot 40% from three, limit your opponents to under 40% shooting from the field, and grab 40 rebounds a game, you have a legitimate shot to win the whole thing. Or, put differently, if you fail to satisfy those three conditions, you're a statistical aberration that only occurs every 25 years or so.
Some years there may only be one team in the entire land that can be labeled a Triple 40 team. In 2012, for instance, Kentucky was the only Triple 40 team, and they more or less cruised to a title. Other years, there may be three or four Triple 40 teams, and they often compete in an epic game somewhere along the path to the trophy. It's not a theory that forecasts outcomes with any degree of certainty as much as it is one that separates the contenders from the pretenders, and eliminates the 99% of the country that's playing for memories rather than hardware.
I should mention, there is one caveat to the theory. There is a margin of error of 3.5 in all categories. Meaning, if you rebound 36.5 misses a game, shoot 36.5% from three, and allow your opponents to shoot 43.5% from the field, you're still technically a Triple 40 team, though not one with much conviction. Basically, it's called the Triple 40 because it has a better ring to it than the Triple 36.5.
How many teams qualify as Triple 40 this season? Four. I will reveal them in a moment, but first, let's examine how UConn fairs in each of the three categories.
Three Point Shooting:
As you can probably guess, this is the test UConn passes with the most confidence. Between Daniels, Giffey, and Napier, the Huskies possess three long-range shooters well north of 40%. Boatright and Kromah are also more than serviceable from deep, giving them five viable outside threats. When you can shoot with such potency from three - and remember, the new-age metrics value three point shooting more than just about any other offensive statistic - it spreads the floor and generates opportunities for everybody. UConn season percentage: 40.5%.
Defense:
Of the three categories, this is the one that jumps out at you at being most obviously conducive to a title winning team. All of the other metrics, whether it be kenpom, SRS, or whatever else, would seem to indicate that an elite defenses tend to be more successful in postseason play than elite offenses. "Defense wins championships" isn't just a cliche, it's a reality documented by decades of evidence.
Between Kromah and Giffey's stout defense on the wing, the shot-blocking presence of Daniels and Brimah down low, and the underrated perimeter defense of Boatright and Napier at the guard position, UConn has been extremely successful in forcing teams into difficult shots this season. In this regard, the arrival of Amida Brimah has really vaulted UConn from a good defense to a borderline elite one. The margin of error is just so much greater defensively when you have somebody roaming the paint to erase any mistakes. The absurd 17.7% block rate that Brimah is credited for, per basketball-reference, probably only tells half the story. The mere act of occupying the paint dissuades drivers and cutters, forcing opponents to settle for low-reward mid-range shots and contested threes. UConn season percentage: 39.5%.
Rebounding:
This is the element of the theory that figures to not hold up to examination on first glance. Most would figure that rebounding margin is more important than total rebounds, and to some extent those people would be right. However, what this theory emphasizes as much as anything is pace. Championship teams don't play at the excruciatingly deliberate pace that a Notre Dame or Wisconsin might, because that wouldn't be utilizing talent correctly. Generally speaking, teams who play at slow paces do so because they aren't as good as their opponent, and thus want to diminish the sample (or number of possessions) that inherently is able to identify the superior team with greater accuracy in larger quantity. There is a reason Villanova held the ball for so long against that juggernaut Georgetown team, and there is a reason Roy Williams likes to play up-tempo games (he generally has better players than whoever he's lining up against).
Dominance on the glass isn't necessarily a prerequisite for championship success, but pace certainly is. And teams who play at a slower pace - such as Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, and a whole host of other teams who you can never trust to survive the second weekend - are fundamentally vulnerable to losing to inferior teams by virtue of statistical randomness. Wisconsin and Notre Dame typically have positive rebounding margins, but a lot of the time, they can't crack that magic 40 figure because they don't play fast enough. This is actually one of the flaws in kenpom's efficiency ratings, IMO - the system is so predicated on points per possession, that pace is often discounted.
Of course, fast pace or not, you aren't reaching 40 (or 36.5) unless you can rebound the ball at a better rate than your opponents. Teams with negative rebounding margins aren't winning championships. Luckily for UConn, they are in the green (+2) this season in the rebounding department. That, coupled with the pace they play at, has combined to barely get UConn above water in this category. Why is UConn so much better on the glass this season? Well, Olander has played far fewer minutes, and he's a major liability on the glass. Nolan, Daniels, and Brimah certainly aren't world-beaters from a rebounding perspective (though they've all improved), but a lot of that is offset by the fact that Shabazz is a f'in basketball savant and he's somehow able to grab six rebounds a game simply because of his instinctual brilliance. UConn season average: 36.5 rebounds per game.
So there you have it. UConn is one of the four teams in the country with membership to the illustrious Triple 40 club. The other three? Louisville, Michigan State, and Iowa. A team like Florida is very close to breaking down the door, but they seem like one of those teams with all the ingredients of a champion that just can't overcome their shooting deficiencies (2010 Kentucky, anybody?). Arizona is in the same boat - talent and size at every position, but they just can't throw it in the ocean. More than likely, that is a fatal flaw that will haunt them down the road. Syracuse only satisfies one of the conditions, and their season average of 35 rebounds per game (172nd in the country) does not bode well for their championship hopes.
Despite these promising numbers, there are, of course, a lot of holes in the theory. The most glaring is the fact that it plainly omits SOS (though, given UConn has played a fairly strong schedule, we're probably alright there) from the equation, and the only metric it pays any credence to on the offensive side of the ball is three point shooting. Obviously, there is something to be said for being able to generate easy baskets down the stretch in the post, and the saying "Live by the three, die by the three" is likely to be resoundingly confirmed by UConn's postseason results, whatever they may be.
I did think it would make for some interesting mid-week chatter, though, and if you take nothing else from the commendable research JNeal has done, know that the composition of a team that can be dangerous in March is here. One of my favorite things to do on here is over-complicate a game, that, at its core, is pretty damn simple. But this team has guys that can guard and guys are difficult to guard on the other end. That, coupled with a few big bodies in the paint, can take you a long way in this sport. We'll see where it takes UConn.
