Covering University of Colorado sports, mostly basketball, since 2010

Showing posts with label Overwrought Analysis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Overwrought Analysis. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

My Massive Basketball Preview 2015-16: On Leadership and Responsibility - OR - "I Want to Fight Somebody"

"I'm looking at last year from A to Z in terms of why did it happen? How can we prepare to not let that kind of season happen again. ... We're not happy at all about the season we had and, in fact, are a little pissed off.  So it's our watch right now, from the players in the program to the coaches in the program.  We have to take responsibility for what happened. ... We're all in it together."
- Tad Boyle, 15-16 Blue-Ribbon College Basketball Yearbook

University of Colorado Men's Basketball in 2014-15 was not a joyful experience.  A sour feeling permeated the program throughout their 16-18 slog of a season; a season of disappointment and frustration.  From presentation to product, everything was just a little... off.  It's was not Pac-12 caliber.  I was not Tad Boyle caliber.  It was not what this program should be capable of.

All that frustration seemed to come to a head in the disastrous final week of the campaign. Finishing regular season play with a sub-.500 record, 8th in the Pac-12, the team was ineligible for the NIT.  But, instead of letting the year end there, Coach Boyle took the unusual step of agreeing to play in the third-tier CBI tournament, hoping to capitalize on extra practice and playing time with an eye towards the future. It only proceeded, however, to extend the pain, as the sour feeling upended the program's apple cart.

First, the team's only scholarship senior, a bruised and battered Askia Booker, chose to quit the team, rather than play in the tournament (a decision which, in and of itself, I could spend a few thousand words discussing).  Following quickly on his heels out the door was reserve forward (and fan favorite) Dustin Thomas, who decided to transfer to Arkansas, and who also sat out the CBI run.  Then, there was the tournament itself, a run which quickly developed into a nightmare, culminating in a second round loss at the forgettable Seattle U Redhawks.  That game became a quirky little metaphor for the whole season, featuring camerawork akin to that of a dad at a pee-wee football game, a gym roughly the size of my living room, and a perfunctory second-half collapse from our heroes. The whole experience seemed to blossom into a black eye for the program, while the players the experience was supposedly meant for - freshmen Dom Collier and Tory Miller - barely played minutes above their season averages against substandard competition.  The whole thing reminded me of a poker table where a guy takes a bad beat, and just keeps throwing money at the table in hopes of getting it back. The CBI experience was Tad Boyle on tilt.

These are painful memories and uncomfortable conversations, but I've always found the clearest path to moving on to be confrontation. The simple truth: last season sucked.  From November through March, the whole thing was awful.  It was the return of the old BasketBuffs, and a very unwelcome one, at that. So, the question becomes, how did everything come to jump the tracks so quickly?  And, more importantly, how can the program respond and regain their forward momentum?

Well, the answer to the first is easier than the answer to the second.  CU lost 18 games last year, finishing 8th in the Pac-12, primarily because their defense was sub-standard.  Overall defensive efficiency had been the hallmark of the back-to-back-to-back Tournament appearances at the start of this decade, and seemed to be the foundation of a winning formula that had the Buffs, if nothing else, a shoe-in for competitive basketball for the foreseeable future.  But it slipped last season, with the team allowing an adjusted one point per possession for the first time since the NIT team of 2010-11 -- a raw Drtg of 102.3, good for 200th nationally.  You'd see it time and time again, the Buffs just couldn't get a stop when needed, with opponents taking advantage of weak perimeter defense (36%, 9th in Pac-12 play) and numerous second chances. With the supposedly improved offense turning in a performance that was, more or less, the same as we've seen before, the drop in defensive efficiency was a disaster. Beyond just the poor defense, though, team chemistry was all over the place, turnovers remained an issue as the point guard spot remained in flux (20% turnover rate for the season), and injuries chipped away at the playing time of the best players (a combination of five Buffs missed a collective total of 20 games). Everything seemed to dovetail and lead to one miss-step after another.

As to how the ship gets turned around... well, that's the first of a number of hard questions this program will have to answer. In this virtual tome, I will attempt to come up with those answers, and dissect the coming season for the 2015-16 University of Colorado Men's Basketball Team; previewing them from a variety of aspects, while predicting whether they will be able to right the ship and return to respectability. I'll look at the roster, profiling the players, and discussing how the coaching staff will look to leverage a very strong front court in a year of new rules and ticky-tack fouls. I'll look at the schedule, touching on both the non-conference and conference slates, and announce my baseline win projection for the campaign.  I'll look at the Pac-12, noting how our rivals spent the off-season, and talk about the league as a whole. Finally, I'll close with a look at the upcoming recruiting class, discussing how the program will retool headed into next season.

Those of you who have been here before know that the word 'massive' in the title is not a misnomer. I'm long-winded to a fault; consider yourselves warned. If, with that understanding, you're not dissuaded, if you love Colorado basketball too much to let a thing like 'TLDR' get in front of a good time, then grab a beer, strap in, and click below for the preview...


Monday, November 9, 2015

Monday Grab Bag: On Massive Preview Eve

Welcome to game week!  The 2015-16 basketball season finally gets underway this Friday as CU travels up to Sioux Falls, South Dakota to take on old rival Iowa Sate. For those who haven't heard, my Massive Basketball Preview - the yearly, over-wrought analysis of CU's coming basketball season - will hit the interwebs at precisely 8:30 am tomorrow morning, giving you roughly three days to read the damn thing before the Buffs hit the hardwood. It's an occasion so momentous that it has forced my grab bag back to a Monday for the first time since the week of the 2015 Pac-12 tournament.  Hope I didn't startle you...

To give you my rundown for the rest of the week, beyond just the excitement surrounding tomorrow's release of my sixth Massive Preview, I'll have a full preview up for the CU/Iowa State game on Thursday, I'll give Friday's CU/USC football game the preview treatment Friday morning, and I'll try to slip a beer pick in before kickoff Friday afternoon.  As you can see, it's a busy, busy week here at the Rumblings.

But, of course, it should be.  It's November!  It's game week! It's time to talk some hoops!  Get hype, the great game is back in our lives:

--

Today in the bag, I'm talking the football team's efforts against Stanford, the exhibition start to the women's basketball season, and previewing my preview.

Click below for the bag...


Tuesday, November 11, 2014

My Massive Basketball Preview 2014-15: Keeping it Real

PITTSBURGH 77 - COLORADO 48

You've seen that scoreline a lot over the last few months.  Coach Boyle, in all of his wisdom, has refused to let the memory of that painful day in Orlando, FL die, even posting that score throughout the program's offices.  'We can't let that ever happen again,' is the message.  It's not about shaming the kids for a rough afternoon on a national stage, just emphasizing that simply making the Tournament is not the goal; doing something with that Dance ticket is just as expected now as earning the trip.

You see, His Tadness has promised to 'keep it real' with the team, the fans, and the media.  That constant reminder of how last season ended is just part of the effort.  He's been particularly blunt this summer about the team's shortcomings, and what that could mean going forward.  The simple fact is that the 2013-14 Colorado Buffaloes didn't live up to their potential.  There were extenuating circumstances, to be sure, but a 5th place finish in the Pac-12 and a humiliating second round exit in the NCAA Tournament was not how last season was supposed to go. Naturally, given the sputter across the finish line, there are going to be questions, and Coach Boyle has been quick to posit a number of solutions.

BuffNation was treated to the highs and lows of this sport in '13-'14.  At one point last year, CU was the #15 team in the country, and viewed as a potential challenger to the Arizona Wildcats for the league title. The early efforts against Kansas and Oregon were some of the best, most entertaining basketball I've ever seen this program produce. Then, in an instant on a road trip to Seattle, everyone was treated to a lesson on impermanence.  Success is, of course, fragile, and should not be treated lightly.  Even the best teams need to be prepared to respond to dire adversity; nothing is just handed to you at this level.  But the team wasn't ready to deal with the stress.  While struggling to come to terms with a traumatic injury to one of their star players, they began to lose their way, and some truly ugly basketball followed.  The Buffs would tussle with the .500 mark the rest of the year, as, what was once a season filled with promise, turned uncomfortable. They still made the Tournament, to their credit, but what should've been a happy month for the program turned sour in a hurry.

Luckily, the disappointing end to last season is not the final word on the matter. Those '77-48' signs will come down on Friday, just as the curtain rises on the 2014-15 basketball season, and the focus will become about the present, rather than the regrets of the past. That's what 'keeping it real' is all about.  Ignoring the past - passing it off as a blip, or a result of some miss-fortune - is not going to prepare the team properly for the coming winter. There's still a lot of talent on this roster, a group that has a world of potential to capitalize upon.  They need to meet last year's mistakes head on, learn from them, and then move forward.

Believe me, as frustrating as last season was, there's a lot of promise on the horizon for 2014-15.  CU is legitimately one of the three or four best teams in the Pac-12, and look to be on the precipice of making program history by surging through to the NCAA Tournament for the fourth-consecutive time. The Buffs are as deep as ever this year, and as experienced as they've been since the start of the #RollTad era. Behind this group, the program will continue to rack up the wins, the CEC will continue to be sold out, and the banners of the University of Colorado will continue to fill the national consciousness. The state of this program continues to be strong.

--

In this virtual tome, I will attempt to 'keep it real' about the 2014-15 University of Colorado Men's Basketball Team; previewing them from a variety of aspects, and predicting whether they will be able to make that return trip to the NCAA Tournament. I'll look at the roster, profiling the players, and discussing how the coaching staff will look to deploy the best returning depth in the conference. I'll look at the schedule, touching on both the non-conference and conference slates, and announce my baseline win projection for the campaign.  Finally, I'll look at the Pac-12, noting how our rivals are dealing with a metric ton of roster turnover. Usually, I'd close with a look at the upcoming recruiting class, but CU doesn't have one, yet, so that discussion will have to wait...

Those of you who have been here before know that the word 'massive' in the title is not a misnomer. I'm long-winded to a fault. Consider yourselves warned. If, with that understanding, you're not dissuaded, if you love Colorado basketball too much to let a thing like 'TLDR' get in front of a good time, then grab a beer, strap in, and click below for the preview...


Wednesday, February 20, 2013

The Pac-12: ... And Down The Stretch They Come!

This is it, the stretch run.  Only three weeks remain in 2013's regular season, which in the Pac-12 means that there's only five games left for each team. Only five games to solidify seeding for the conference tournament, and make a case for NCAA inclusion. Talk about pressure...

A month ago, I took a look at the Pac-12 standings, and foolishly tried to make sense of the madness.  I took a stab at making some bold predictions, and whiffed on most of them.

No, the top three aren't as good as I thought they were.  Yes, ASU has proven that they have sticking power.  When did Cal decide they were any good? OH MY GOD WASHINGTON IS TERRIBLE.

As a result, no sweeping predictions today. There's just too much parity for me to go chasing curveballs in the dirt.  Instead, I'm taking a broader approach, discussing narrative and trends.  You know, what I'm good at.

Here are the current standings, along with each teams' closing schedule:
  1. Oregon - 10-3 - vs Cal, vs Stanford, vs OSU, @CU, @Utah
  2. UCLA - 9-4 - @USC, vs ASU, vs UofA, @WSU, @UW
  3. Arizona - 9-4 - vs UW, vs WSU, @USC, @UCLA, vs ASU
  4. ASU - 8-5 - vs WSU, vs UW, @UCLA, @USC, @UofA
  5. Cal - 8-5 - @Oregon, @OSU, vs Utah, vs CU, vs Stanford
  6. Colorado - 7-6 - vs Utah, @Stanford, @Cal, vs Oregon, vs OSU
  7. USC - 7-6 - vs UCLA, vs UofA, vs ASU, @UW, @WSU
  8. Washington - 6-7 - @UofA, @ASU, vs WSU, vs USC, vs UCLA
  9. Stanford - 6-7 - @OSU, @Oregon, vs CU, vs Utah, @Cal
  10. Oregon St - 3-10 - vs Stanford, vs Cal, @Oregon, @Utah, @CU
  11. Utah - 3-10 - @CU, @Cal, @Stanford, vs OSU, vs Oregon
  12. Washington St - 2-11 - @ASU, @UofA, @UW, vs UCLA, vs USC
Shake your head in amazement.  Despite all the injury woes, despite all the shaky play, Oregon still rides in front as the odds-on favorite to hold the #1 seed in Sin City.  With tie-breakers over both Arizona and UCLA, it'd take at least a 3-2 finish (and a 5-0 run from one of their rivals) to cost them the lead.  Big games against Cal and CU still loom, however, and Dominic Artis is still not back.  Without Artis, nothing is guaranteed in Eugene. 
With Artis still sidelined, Oregon desperately clings to their lead.
Speaking of Cal, where the hell did they come from? After a blasé 3-4 start to Pac-12 play, where they split every two-game set they faced, they've since rolled off five wins in six, and have raced past much of the field to not only slip into tie for a top-four seed, but Tournament consideration as well.  I know Allen Crabbe is good, but damn.  If they steal a win at Oregon Thursday night, I wouldn't put it past them to sweep the rest.  No wonder Monty is fired up
A Crabbe-fueled run has Cal riding high.  Pac-12 MVP honors await if they can finish.
While Cal has been red hot, Washington has bottomed out.  After beating the Buffs to improve to 4-0 in conference play, they lost seven of eight to crash into the bottom third.  Their lone win over that stretch?  A barn burner 96-92 home win over ASU.  I just don't get either of those teams.

Our Buffs continue to flirt with greatness.  Only four single-possession losses to Arizona, UCLA, Utah, and ASU separate CU from a sterling 11-2 mark.  If only...  Wistfulness aside, the team is about where I expected them to be entering this final stretch.  4-1 (possible) or 3-2 (likely) over the final five would be a fitting finish to a strong, not great, season.
CU has been hit-or-miss in close games this year.  Evan Gordon knows. From: ESPN
Arizona and UCLA - the preseason favorites - still lurk a game out of first.  Arizona may be the leagues' highest-ranked squad, but they hold the short stick in almost every tie-breaking scenario, having lost their only games against Oregon and Cal, in addition to the first round of the UCLA twin-bill.  It would behoove the Wildcats to win in Pauley next week to ensure themselves of avoiding the #3 or #4 seeds, and a possible rubber match with CU in the Pac-12 quarter-finals.

You can make a compelling Tournament argument for each of the top-6 squads. As of this morning, Lunardi even has all six in the bracket. What a change from last season, when the Pac-12 could only vaguely muster one or two teams worth giving a damn about.

I'm still not convinced, however, that the Pac-12 will get six bids - I just don't think it's that strong of a league. I expect one, if not two, of the top-six will get their bubble burst over the next three weeks.  Cal seems to be in the most trouble; a 3-2 finish won't do it for them, they'll need a statement win over either Oregon or CU to make the Dance.  Same with ASU, I doubt a 3-2 finish will be enough.  They'll need a road win over either UCLA or 'Zona to feel safe.
Can Lurch and the Sun Devils *ahem*  elbow their way into the Tournament?
As for the Buffs, they appear safe.  Even a 3-2 finish, assuming those two losses don't feature either Utah or Oregon St, should be enough to slip into the Dance.  High five, top-25 RPI!

Regardless, after last season's Selection Sunday horror show, where even regular season champion Washington was snubbed, it's nice to be in a situation where more than just the top few teams are carrying Tournament hopes.

From here on out, the best strategy is to just to win.  Bubble watching and schedule plotting rarely lead to the Dance, so do like Al Davis and just win, baby!  I'll tell you right now, none of the six bubble squads will be denied if they go 5-0 over the stretch run.

With carrots galore out there to keep teams interested, these final three weeks should be crazy.

I can't wait.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

The Pac-12: A 1/3rd-of-the-way heat check.

As if in the blink of an eye, the first third of conference play has passed.  I figure that this third-pole offers a convenient opportunity to assess where the Pac-12 race stands, and how I see it developing.

This is how the conference sits after the first three weeks of play:
  1. Oregon - 16-2 (5-0)
  2. UCLA - 15-4 (5-1)
  3. Arizona - 16-1 (4-1)
  4. Washington - 12-6 (4-1)
  5. Arizona St - 14-4 (3-2)
  6. USC - 8-11 (3-3)
  7. Stanford - 11-7 (2-3)
  8. Cal - 10-7 (2-3)
  9. CU - 12-6 (2-4)
  10. WSU - 10-8 (1-4)
  11. Utah - 9-9 (1-4)
  12. Oregon St - 10-8 (0-5)
The first thing to note is that Arizona and UCLA have been playing to expectations.  Good for them, and good for the reputation of the league.  The Pac-12 needs the perceived front-runners to play to their level, and, so far, they've held true to form.  I can't wait for Thursday's meeting in Tucson. 

As solid as the Wildcats and Bruins have been, however, it's the Oregon Ducks who have looked, far and away, like the conference's best team.  Of their five wins, four of them have come against the league's top-half, including blockbuster belt notches over UCLA and Arizona. Through all of that they're unblemished, and have been posting the second-best offensive and defensive numbers in the conference. Their top-of-the-table standing is unquestioned at this point.
The Matt rushed against Arizona.  Now the Ducks are the hunted.
As a bonus for the quackers, they don't have to play return games against either Arizona or UCLA.  They'll ride out the season with two huge tie-breakers in their back pocket, ensuring that the title chase will be decided on Oregon's terms.  As it stands right now, it's hard to imagine a version of the final standings that doesn't have the Ducks in the top-two.

It's easy to look at the Buffs - who were projected by many to wind up in the top-quarter - as an early disappointment.  I can make all the excuses available (front-loaded schedule, road difficulties, tilt), but the fact remains that CU has already dropped three games they should've won.  Stanford has also failed to live up to preseason hype.  All is not lost for the Buffs and Cardinal, however, and things could be much, much worse.
Boulder is not alone in their concern over a poor start to Pac-12 play.  Hair is being pulled in Palo Alto.
How much worse?  Just look at Oregon St.  Coach Craig Robinson's stalling bunch stands alone in the winless basement of the conference.  After a mostly ho-hum non-conference run, they entered conference play with hopes of competing for a solid mid-table finish.  Instead, they've bottomed out.  Granted, it's 0-5 against five of the current top-six, but, faced with a similar schedule, the Buffs were at least able to scrape out two wins.

The Beavers' collapse was probably hinted at by a late-December loss to, of all teams, Towson.  Yes, that's the same Towson Tigers who went one-for-the-season a year ago.  The Tigers are better this campaign (above .500, in fact), but I still consider a loss to Towson the rough equivalent of 'Dre losing a game of 1-on-1 to his sister.  In that light, we all should've seen the writing on the wall.
Towson's stunner in Corvallis set the tone for a horrific post-Christmas run by the Beavers. From: Towson Athletics
I watched the OSU/UCLA game last week, and found Bill Walton still talking up both the Beavers, and how competitive they will be. (Specifically, he called them "intriguing" and repeatedly said they were a "good basketball team.") Certainly, Oregon St isn't as bad as their standing indicates, but good 'ole Bill over-sold the pony.  While they should make in-roads towards .500, the start is crippling.  OSU should avoid the basement come March, but that might not matter when the butcher's bill comes due at the end of the season.  Craig Robinson, you might want to keep the movers on speed dial.

--

Re-calculating the final standings

Considering the start, I've revised my Pac-12 predictions to the following:
  1. Oregon (in a tie-break)
  2. Arizona
  3. UCLA
  4. Washington (in a tie-break)
  5. CU (11-7, 21-9 overall)
  6. Stanford
  7. ASU
  8. USC 
  9. Cal
  10. OSU
  11. Utah
  12. WSU
Expect a massive gap between the top-three and the rest of the Pac-12.  Think three with 14+ wins, and no one else above 11. The top three have shown they deserve that recognition.

There's still hope that CU could finish with the 11-7 record I predicted at the season's onset, with 9-9 as a worst-case. With seven home games remaining, is there any doubt that winning at least five is a probability?  Adding an upset over either Oregon or Arizona ('Zona is more likely) would then make for six.  Beyond that, there are three strong opportunities for road wins.  Utah, OSU, and Cal are undeniably vulnerable, even when factoring in CU's misadventures away from Boulder.  Sweep those (a leap, but not a long one), and the Buffs slide home with 11 Pac-12 wins and bubble consideration.  Not too bad, all things considered. 

Washington is kind of an enigma for me.  They don't pass my smell test, but I have no concrete reason for dropping them - they've been winning games, including their first three on the road.  That has to count for something.  Arizona St, on the flip side, reeks of fluke.  Their wins include a one-point overtime win over Utah, an overpowering comeback against a mentally broken CU squad, and a road win over the hapless Beavers.  If I were in Vegas this week, I'd be betting heavily on their under.

I expect USC to lose some questionable games, and slip below mid-table.  The coaching move has to break them down eventually, even though they've looked good in the post-Kevin O'Neill era. (*cough* JT Terrell *cough*) I like Stanford to take their place, and round out the top-six.
    I'll revisit all this in three weeks to see how wrong I am.

    Tuesday, January 15, 2013

    The Freshman 15: Josh Scott

    After only 15 games, I believe you can begin to get a sense of what kind of player a freshman starter will turn into.  How quickly have they fallen into the rhythm of collegiate life?  Has their been play consistent?  Are they showing improvement?  The answers to those questions can go a long way towards determining if a first year starter will have just a strong collegiate career, or a legendary one.  You can't necessarily build a definitive judgement off of those early results, but they often attest to a player's future trajectory.

    You can also use those first 15 games to begin to put a player's talents into perspective.  Much like last year, when I compared Spencer Dinwiddie's first 15 games with those of his recent star-guard predecessors, I'm interested in comparing Josh Scott, the star of CU's heralded 2012 recruiting class, with a recent high profile post.  With last Thursday's USC game, Scott and the Buffs crossed the 15 game mark this season, making this an appropriate time to begin that process. 

    CU, along with many other programs, have long been searching for a true "star" post player.  While there were ample recent examples to compare Dinwiddie against, there's really only one player in the post-Billups era who can hold a candle to Scott's skill and prowess in the paint.  I've had to go back over a decade, but I've dug out the stats on the one, the only, David Harrison.

    Below the fold, I'll touch on each player's narrative before discussing how Jelly compares to Big Dave, and what that means for the future.  A little history, a little analysis.  What could possibly go wrong?

    Tuesday, January 8, 2013

    SKIBALL!

    Back during the Arizona game - before the clusterfuck at the end - BuffStampede.com's hoops guru, Will Whelan, got into an interesting twitter discussion with SI's Andy Glockner about the danger of Askia Booker having a hot first half.  The implication was that Ski, a volume shooter, will hoist up an extra pile of ill-timed, reckless shot attempts if he feels he's anywhere close to hot, and that those attempts have the potential to stall an offense if they're not falling.

    While Booker ended up having a decent game (4-7 from outside, perfect from the line, and 18 points to go along with some shaky play in the collapse), the whole thing got me thinking about the machinations of all things Ski, and how his performances affect the team. He is, after all, the team's leading scorer, bringing nearly 15 points per game to the table.  Surely, the Buffs can't be afraid of using their leading scorer.  His offensive efficiency is over 100, for the love of Tad!
    SKIBALL!
    By now, I think everyone in BuffNation has gotten used to SkiSeason; the rainbow jump shots, the jump-back 10-footers, the floaters in the lane.  Many of his shot attempts raise both eyebrows and blood pressures, and there hasn't been a game gone by where I don't mentally scream "what the fuck?!" at one of his 25-foot heat-checks. He's essentially fearless, ready to pull the trigger at a moment's notice.  Upon reflection, I find kind of dig it, actually.

    I'm fond of tweeting "SKIBALL" after one of his rainbow makes, and the exclamation is more on the nose than you might think.  In the game of skee - which, Dogma assures me, is God's favorite game - you always have the option of shooting at the tiny 100 holes in the upper corners.  Unless you play every day, it's damn difficult to hit that shot consistently, but, when you do, the tickets come flying out.  The flip side is, of course, that if you miss, the ball will rattle around before settling in the 10 hole at the bottom of the board (or, if you're drunk, you could miss the board entirely, cracking the plastic cover on your friend's lane).  It's high risk, high reward.  Such is life with both skee ball and SkiBall.  If you want the tickets, you're going to have to take some chances.  He's the BasketBuffs equivalent of Dave Kingman.

    So, what about it?  If Ski is "feeling it," is he more likely to jack up shots?  Could a good first half hurt CU?  Surprisingly, not really.

    His stats are split evenly between what I'd call good and bad performances.  He's been both above and below the 40% shooting mark seven times this season.  The difference between those seven games?  Only about one extra shot per contest. When he's under 40%, Ski has taken about 14 shots per game; when he's over, he has taken about 13.  Essentially, he's an aggressive shooter, whether he's making them or not.
    When hot earlier this season, Ski carried the Buffs in Charleston.  From: CUBuffs.com
    The difference then becomes how the Buffs fare in those games.  When Ski is over 40%, CU is 7-0, riding high, and looking to all the world like a top-25 team.  When he's under 40%, the Buffs are 3-4, and look disjointed on offense.  There's a full 18% shooting gap between his performances in wins and loses.  In victory, Ski shoots 47%.  In defeat 29%.  That's a massive drop off, speaking both to the style Ski plays, and the type of opponent CU has lost to.  A hot Ski is only going to make CU better, as he's going to take the same number of shots anyway.  It's essentially like riding out hot/cold streaks at the craps table.  Since he's taking those 13.5 shots per, regardless, the only real question is whether those shots are going to go in.  For CU, that's often a matter of winning or losing.

    We think of Booker as mostly an outside shooter, and that is certainly a huge part of what makes him valuable, but he doesn't solely operate on the perimeter.  His slashes at the rim are a large component of his offensive game (he's taken twice as many two-point attempts as three-point attempts).  When opponents take away that component, turning him purely into a jump shooter, they limit both Ski and the Buffs.  Think of the teams CU has lost to.  Wyoming, Kansas, Arizona, and ASU all focused on cutting off transition and easy slashes at the hoop, forcing CU (and Ski) outside.  Percentages dropped, possessions were wasted through frustration, and loses followed.  It's a team-wide issue, but one that often manifests itself in ugly outside shots from Booker.
    Good things happen when Ski is able to attack the basket.
    In the end, I just think Ski takes a lot of "dumb" shots.  That's his game.  He takes them when he's hot, he takes them when he's not.  CU has to live with the good and the bad from "the Scrat."  When they're falling, CU wins.  When they're not...  Well, let's just hope they fall.  Coach Boyle isn't going to go up to him and say, "well, you've had a great first half, but we're going to shut you in the second because I'm afraid you'll start missing."  The team needs him to score, night in, night out, and needs to learn to play with his production waves.  With time, I believe he'll become more consistent (he's only a sophomore, remember), which will cure many of these ills.

    Tuesday, December 18, 2012

    Nervous fidgeting over finals break

    Finals break sucks.  I had gotten used to the new-normal of life with basketball, only to have it rudely ripped away for me while the team "studies" and "practices."  Lame.  I want to see the Buffs in action, damnit!

    Since basketball is now set for slow-drip until conference play starts, I've been left to pour over stat sheets to get my hoops fix.  That can only lead to one thing: freaking out over minutia.

    Ever since the champions of Charleston returned from their victorious southern swing, the team has slowly dipped into stretches of inconsistent basketball, and less-than-appetizing play.  The Daily Camera's Ryan Thorburn touched on this last week, but the primary culprits have been three factors: The Pac-12's worst turnover-to-assist ratio, anemic production from bench players (only 18% of scoring comes from the bench), and woeful free throw shooting (66.4%, 230th in the nation).

    Assist-to-turnover ratio is certainly worrying on the surface.  Turnovers have been abnormally high over the last two weeks (averaging 15 per game since returning from Charleston), and, while Coach Boyle's system has never relied all that heavily on dishing dimes (CU was in the 250's nationally in Assist/FGM each of the previous two seasons), this year has been especially bad (A/FGM of 39.2, good for 341st nationally).

    I just chalk it up as a product of an offense that emphasizes individual creativity, while still relying on underclassmen.  Juniors and seniors have dominated the backcourt in each of the previous two seasons, and it all may just be a factor of Nate Tomlinson withdrawal.  I would expect the assist-to-turnover number to improve as the year progresses, and the young players get used to their roles (especially Spencer at the point).  Essentially, I am unconcerned.

    I'm also not overly concerned with the lack of production from the bench.  Sure, only 18% of team scoring has come from non-starters, and anyone paying attention can see the team gets drastically weaker when the starters are resting, but that drop-off from the front-line is not necessarily out of the norm.  Last year, bench scoring made up only a slightly higher 24% of total production, while the Burks/Higgins year featured only 17% scoring from the reserves. 

    I just don't get the feeling that it matters in the long run. The reality is that Coach Boyle has never relied on a deep bench, with bench minutes staying largely consistent over the last three years (if trending downwards) - usually in the 26% range, good for about 250th nationally.  Boyle will try to get the reserves into the flow a little more over the next two games, but I think that's more a reaction to the level of opponent and time of year. 

    Honestly, is anyone really clamoring for more of what currently resides on the bench?  That'll just result in repeat appearances of the dreadful Talton/Stalzer/Chen/Booker/Harris-Tunks lineup that has popped up recently.  God help me if I have to watch any more of that garbage. 

    That just leaves free throw shooting.  Nothing is more aggravating than missed free throws, and that is especially true when you consider that CU is extremely dependent on production from the line.  To date, CU scores nearly 26% of its points from the free throw line (top-20 nationally), and is 5th in the country in FTA/FGA ratio.  With that level of dependency on makes from the line, a team average just over 66% is inexcusable. 

    Outside of Josh Scott, who is shooting a very respectable 76%, everyone is under-performing.  Spencer is 8% off his average from last season, Ski is an even more depressing 14% off, and Andre Roberson, who I begged to get close to 70% in my season preview, is barely cracking 50% (even worse than his freshman campaign). 

    Luckily, the free throw woes have yet to cost the Buffs a game, but they will if this keeps up. There's just no shrugging off 66% shooting from the line. 

    Still, in spite of these deficiencies, the Buffs have an excellent chance to enter conference play at 10-2, leaving them in prime position for a third consecutive 20-win season, and yet another post-season run.  It's easy to forget, but the program also played excruciatingly inconsistent ball in the doldrums of non-conference play in both '10-'11 and '11-'12, only to explode once conference play began. To be in this position in mid-December should be very encouraging by itself.

    In addition, CBS has CU with the 5th toughest schedule in the nation, which is not surprising when you consider that, as TZISK pointed out last night, CU opponents are 69-25 in games not against the Buffs, and five of the 10 opponents have received at least one AP vote this season.  That difficult schedule may have a lot to do with some of the head-scratching statistics that have emerged over the first 10 games.  The comfort and familiarity of Pac-12 play could release some of the pressure.

    In retrospect, I should probably just shut up, trust in Tad, and be happy.

    Tuesday, October 30, 2012

    My Massive Basketball Preview, 2012-13: #IsItNovemberYet?

    "Jaws dropped and syllables spilled out, to be rearranged into meaningful thoughts at a later date." (- Jim Margalus)  

    I've struggled since the final moments of the Pac-12 championship game to turn my incoherent syllables of joy into meaningful thought about the state of the program.  I guess today is that later date to rearrange them into a cogent narrative...

    To whet your appetite, both for this preview, and the forthcoming season, I encourage you to take a look at the wrap-up video from LA, courtesy of BuffVision and RootSports:

    Wasn't that fun?  Doesn't it make you want to jump up and start singing the fight song right now?

    The hoops program is dominating conference opponents, bringing home titles, and representing well in the post-season.  The football program... well, that's just better left unsaid.  BuffNation, we need to be honest with ourselves: we're a basketball school now.  

    I can already hear the howling: "but football brings in more money, and basketball can't even get more than 3,000 fans to attend their season kickoff!" If it was based on money spent, or other financial factors, even obvious hoops schools like UCLA, Kentucky, and Kansas would have to be considered football schools.  Absurd.  Football is expensive, and cost is therefore not a fair indicator.  As for attendance, I think 3,000 fans at BuffsMadness was a good start, considering it was the first event of it's kind, it sprung up out of nowhere, and was poorly advertised during the lead-up.  No, the difference between basketball school and football school is all mental.

    Seriously, what has dominated your thoughts all summer?  I bet a plurality of Buff Nation spent more time daydreaming about Coach Boyle and winning than they did focusing on the football team and negativity.  Let me put it another way: collegiate athletics is just a large marketing tool used to make money and sell the academic brand.  What do you think is a better way to sell CU right now: Folsom, beautiful as she may be, half-filled with forlorn and bored football fans, or the CEC, jam-packed and simmering with excitement?  Saturday's in Folsom, when things are going right, are special beyond description, but those days are five years removed at this point.
    Winning is more fun than losing.
    I'm not saying the change will be permanent, or even long-lived.  Colorado, the state, is, to it's core, a football mad society (much like the rest of the country, for that matter).  But, for the time being at least, we're a basketball school.  Almost every positive mention of CU athletics for the last three years has come from the basketball side of things, and we need to embrace that fact.  

    If those of you in the old guard are still up in arms over any hoops junky trying to wrest the football loving mantle from this university, just remember that the children born immediately after the Buffs last bowl victory are sitting in 3rd grade classrooms.  Those born after the last hoops post season victory?  Well, most of them have still yet to learn to walk.  The athletic perception of this school now resides with the fortunes won or lost on Sox Walseth Court. 

    --

    Conference champions, lone Pac-12 team to advance past the opening round of the NCAA Tournament, biggest home court advantage in the West...

    The 2011-12 Buffaloes have been labeled by many as the best team in program history.  That's a lofty standard to live up to.  The funny thing is, going into last season, the consensus was that the program was going to take a slight step backward from the Alec Burks lead 2010-11 squad.  Instead, the program took a massive, and almost entirely unexpected, leap forward.

    Things rarely go according to plan, but that tired old saying can also work to your benefit. Despite losing 75% of offensive production from the previous season, the Buffs turned in a bravura sequel to the joys of 2010-11. They proved countless doubters and pundits wrong, while raising the bar for basketball along the Front Range.

    But, it almost never happened.

    It's hard to remember in the after-glow of a championship, but the Buffs finished 6th in the Pac-12 last season.  By the start of March, they were floundering in a sea of bad play, and at risk of slipping out of even the NIT before they took off for LA
    "You look back on it and think, 'How the hell did we do that?' We lost three of four games going into [the Pac-12 tournament]," coach Tad Boyle said. "We were going in there seeing if we could beat Utah [in the first round]. Then we got on a roll and our guys started believing." (-link)
    Such are the vagaries of March that a starburst 5-game win streak can turn an above-average team into one of the 32-best in the land.  The lesson, of course, is that predictions are funny things, just as often wrong as right.  You can spend every waking hour looking at statistics and correlating factors, yet still end up miles off base.  That won't stop me from trying, however.

    How does this team try and advance the program further than the previous two seasons?  How does Coach Boyle live up to the expectations that he has worked so hard to create?  Is the specter of a backwards step about to become a reality?

    In this, the third annual Massive Basketball Preview, I aim to answer those questions, and prime any and all for the upcoming season.  I'll break down everything from the players, to the schedule, and the conference at large.  You won't find a more exhaustive look at this team anywhere; leaving no stone unturned, this beast lives up to the word massive.  I hope you aren't going anywhere for a while...

    So, grab a beer, strap in, and click below for the preview...

    Tuesday, October 16, 2012

    2012 vs 2006

    I saw an interesting question posed during yesterday's Kyle Ringo twitter chat: who would win a game between the 2012 and 2006 Buffs? For the record, Ringo responded that he thought the '12 iteration of the Buffs would win 6-3, but I think that question deserves some fleshing out.

    Already you can see where this is headed, as I've invoked the seminal year of the Hawk error when discussing the current on-field horror.  I'm not doing this to be mean.  It just struck me, however, that after considering the question that I was looking back fondly on the 2006 season.  Such is the depths that this turd of a season has flung me into. 

    The two squads are already kind of similar. Both lost to CSU and an below-average 1-AA school in consecutive weeks; each notched their first win against a Mike Leach lead team, causing the Dread Pirate to bemoan the effort of his players.  One thing '06 has, so far, over the current CU vintage: a second win.  Whether the 2012 Buffs can reach that mark is yet to be seen.  I, at least, think it would be an interesting game, and one that's fun to think about.

    Accordingly, I'm going to give the scenario the full preview treatment, from stat breakdown to prediction. After giving it a moments thought, my conclusion might surprise you.

    Click below for a look back at the year that was 2006...


    Tuesday, September 25, 2012

    Quick Post: Can momentum be maintained?

    I need more information.  That was my overall feeling once the euphoric wave from Saturday wore off. The upset pulled in Pullman was a fantastic win no matter how you look at it; from a morale perspective, to performance growth, to simply relieving the mounting pressure.  It's harder to understand, however, what the long term impact will be.

    The questions, tinted with optimism, came fast enough.  Is this the turning point?  Is this the watershed moment?  For me, it's a question of whether the real Buffaloes are the team that played extremely well in the second half on Saturday, of if they're closer to the team that played heartless football in Fresno a week ago.  The answer is almost certainly somewhere in the middle, but I'm not yet ready to say exactly where.  As to longer-term contextuality, there are plenty of steps on the road to respectability, and Saturday certainly could be one of them, but the destination is not guaranteed.  This Saturday's matchup with UCLA will go a long way to telling us what kind of team the 2012 Buffs really are, and in what direction they are headed. 

    It was just last season that the Buffs manhandled Arizona at home, leading many in the program to loosely "guarantee" an end to the infamous road losing streak the following weekend in Los Angeles.  The result of all that momentum and positive feeling?  A mostly humiliating 45-6 loss to UCLA.  While the Buffs followed up on that stutter step with a cherry-busting win in Utah the subsequent Friday, that UCLA loss shows the danger of leaping to conclusions.

    The saying in baseball has always been, "momentum is only as good as tomorrow's starting pitcher."  In football, I'd change that to "next Saturday's opponent."  The Buffs proved that by stealing a win from a fellow Pac-12 cellar dweller just seven days after reaching a nadir.  UCLA will be a different story this weekend.

    Washington State, much like Arizona last season, is a horrific football team right now.
    • The Cougars are the only Pac-12 team with a worse defense than CU (they give up an extra half yard per contest).
    • Their pass defense is particularly atrocious, as it's 3rd worst in the country with 346 yards allowed per game.
    • They can't run the football to save their lives.  In addition to only gaining 16 rushing yards in Saturday's second half, they sit next to last in national rush yards per game with less than 60 yards per contest.  Even Texas Tech at their Air Raid worst was rarely that bad.  You'll cough up a lot of leads playing like that...
    • Washington St has a modern culture of losing.  While CU has struggled in recent years, the Cougars haven't been to a bowl game since 2003.  Additionally, they've only won four conference games since the start of the 2008 season (CU has nine).
    Comparatively, UCLA is a quality opponent, capable of causing trouble in the Pac-12 South, and desperate for a win after stumbling against Oregon State.  If CU can continue the upward trend of growth, despite a big jump in competition, I'll be in a happy place regardless of the final numbers on the scoreboard.

    This rebuilding project is bringing new meaning to the word "comprehensive," so BuffNation needs to find joy in the little things.  I was already pretty happy with the overall performance Saturday before the 21-point 4th quarter comeback.  A similar effort, even in a losing cause, will suffice for another week.  The team can't afford any regression now.

    They have to keep the ball rolling.

    Wednesday, September 12, 2012

    The game that killed the football program

    How did we get here?  How did the once proud University of Colorado football program fall to the point that a mid-level FCS program can completely out-play the Buffs in Folsom Field?  It's a simple question to ask.  The complete answer is much less simple.  As in many things, it is far too nebulous and complex to succinctly describe in less than a book.

    What I can pinpoint, emphatically, is the first moment the train began jumping the tracks.  There is one game, above all others, that I keep recalling as the beginning of the end.  Before kickoff, CU was still a national power.  While not perfect, the program was still capable of competing with the best in the land.  After its 60 minutes, it lay broken and vulnerable.

    No, not 70-3.  The real answer is CU's 30-16 loss at Iowa State on November 12th, 2005.  And I was there.

    Let me take you back seven years to the scene of the crime...

    Thursday, February 24, 2011

    Buffs in a position to make a run in Kansas City

    Don't look now but last night's win over Texas Tech puts CU in a good position to make a deep run in the conference tournament next month.  While CU has struggled somewhat in conference play, they face a winnable 3-game stretch run, and could set themselves on course to make some noise in Kansas City.
    No time for celebrating, there's still something to play for!

    The key would be to landing the #5 seed in the conference, buying them their best shot at making the conference semi-finals.  While the Buffs are currently in 8th place, with the middle teams as bunched as they are, a quick vertical leap up the standings is not only possible, but even likely considering the remaining schedules of those involved.

    Don't believe me?   

    Click below for the proof.