RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Final Comparison

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/08/14 9:44 pm    ::: Final Comparison Reply Reply with quote



Big upsets are those where the teams are more than four seeds apart
Close Games are those decided by single digits or in overtime
Blowouts are those decided by 20 or more points

Men's games do not include the play-in games. This is round of 64 vs round of 64.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.


Last edited by pilight on 04/08/14 9:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/08/14 9:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

68.3 ppg is the highest since 2001

14 upsets is the same as last year

6 big upsets is the most since 2010

20 close games is one fewer than last year

18 blowouts is two fewer than last year

27 teams scoring 80+ is the most since 2001

9 teams scoring 90+ is the most since 2001

3 teams scoring 100+ is the most since 2001



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
Happycappie25



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 4174
Location: QUEENS!!!!


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 7:41 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

And remember we were an OT and a Circus Shot away from that number being higher.

There is very good, even basketball played just beneath the surface, just getting it seen is the issue. WBB was better than just Uconn and ND this year thanks for the graphic



_________________
"Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 8:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

On the other hand...

* 15 of the 27 times a team scored 80 or more were in the First Round, when many of the games were major mismatches and led to massive blowouts.

* Notre Dame scored 80+ in 5 games, thus they are responsible for nearly 19% of all the high scoring outputs.

* DePaul & Oklahoma final score was 104-100, so there's 2 of the 100 pt totals in 1 game where defense didn't exist.

* Of the 6 big upsets, one was #7 seed & host LSU over #2 seed West VA and another was #7 seed DePaul over the PG-less #2 seed Duke.

* BYU was basically this year's version of Marist, Bowling Green, Delaware, Missouri State.

* 3rd straight year that the National Championship game was a blowout: Baylor won by 19 in '12, UConn by 33 in '13 and UConn by 21 this year.

* All 3 games of the Final Four were blowouts: UConn by 19 over Stanford, Notre Dame by 26 over Maryland, UConn by 21 over ND


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7746
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 8:39 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Happycappie25 wrote:
And remember we were an OT and a Circus Shot away from that number being higher.

There is very good, even basketball played just beneath the surface, just getting it seen is the issue. WBB was better than just Uconn and ND this year thanks for the graphic


It sure as heck was! Getting it seen is indeed the issue, and no thanks to ESPN! I am stuck here in northern VA (NOT the DC area, the other side) and my options are limited to the local team, JMU, which is a pretty darn good mid-major in a pretty crappy conference, and whatever Comcast and ESPN choose to show me, which is mostly ACC and UConn. I did get the odd Big East game this past season for some reason, and rarely an SEC game, but they quit carrying the B1G, and the only Big 12 games I saw involved Baylor. As for the PAC-12, forget it. Satellite is not an option, for reasons involving my S/O's employment (he works at home), so I am, frankly, like a lot of WBB fans, just STUCK.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 8:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You don't get late men's blowouts because the top men's teams can't score like that. They had an even higher percentage of their 80+ games in the opening round and both of their 90+ games came there. That's why their scoring average drops so precipitously in the later rounds. The men averaged 62.8 ppg from the E8 on, the women averaged 70.3.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 9:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
You don't get late men's blowouts because the top men's teams can't score like that. They had an even higher percentage of their 80+ games in the opening round and both of their 90+ games came there. That's why their scoring average drops so precipitously in the later rounds. The men averaged 62.8 ppg from the E8 on, the women averaged 70.3.


Those are some serious WBB shaded glasses you have on. The top men's teams can't score?

Anyway, I'm just not all "WBB is a bed of roses and the game is great right now" because I really feel like there are some major issues right now. I am hoping it self-corrects but only time will tell.

And in reality, what is the big deal you are making about scoring?


TechDawgMc



Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 394
Location: Temple, TX


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 10:10 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
You don't get late men's blowouts because the top men's teams can't score like that. They had an even higher percentage of their 80+ games in the opening round and both of their 90+ games came there. That's why their scoring average drops so precipitously in the later rounds. The men averaged 62.8 ppg from the E8 on, the women averaged 70.3.


The more appropriate way to phrase that would be that the men play much tougher defense


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 10:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

TechDawgMc wrote:
pilight wrote:
You don't get late men's blowouts because the top men's teams can't score like that. They had an even higher percentage of their 80+ games in the opening round and both of their 90+ games came there. That's why their scoring average drops so precipitously in the later rounds. The men averaged 62.8 ppg from the E8 on, the women averaged 70.3.


The more appropriate way to phrase that would be that the men play much tougher defense


Except that it would not be the truth. The men play decent defense, but the inexperience shows a lot. They miss a lot of easy shots. And anyone who thinks the women don't play tough defense has never watched UConn play.

If you wanted to talk about the pace of the games, then you would have a point. The men's games are painfully slow. The women's final had 34 more more possessions than the men's. Of course that's part of the same equation. When your team has trouble scoring you slow the game down trying to find good shots.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11105



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 10:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The men have a 35-second shot clock, and that makes a huge difference in pace of play ...



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 10:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Just with running the shot clock down on every possession, a women's game has 12 more possessions than a men's game due to the 30 second vs 35 second differential.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 10:50 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
The men have a 35-second shot clock, and that makes a huge difference in pace of play ...


The women's final had 30% more possessions (142-108). That's more than just an extra five seconds on the shot clock. If you actually watch the men's games, you would see the teams that reached the F4 all played a very deliberate, slow moving style of game.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8152
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 11:08 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

[quote="pilight"][quote="TechDawgMc"]
pilight wrote:

The men's games are painfully slow. The women's final had 34 more more possessions than the men's. Of course that's part of the same equation. When your team has trouble scoring you slow the game down trying to find good shots.


In the few games I saw, mainly the ones involving UConn, I would say the pace was slow because of the defenses. For example, Kentucky had trouble with the perimeter defense of UConn, and UConn had trouble with the interior defense of Kentucky. That resulted in lots of mindless dribbling around the outside and a bunch of impotent relay passes that didn't translate into assists.

The men's game is mainly thunderbutt basketball with little of the sophistication of the Jewish teams of the 1930's and 1940's. The players don't appear to be better offensively than those of the 1960's and 1970's, but collectively they are a lot bigger. In contrast, some of the defenses, including that jumping jack height, were quite impressive.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 11:28 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

[quote="GlennMacGrady"][quote="pilight"]
TechDawgMc wrote:
pilight wrote:

The men's games are painfully slow. The women's final had 34 more more possessions than the men's. Of course that's part of the same equation. When your team has trouble scoring you slow the game down trying to find good shots.


The men's game is mainly thunderbutt basketball with little of the sophistication of the Jewish teams of the 1930's and 1940's. The players don't appear to be better offensively than those of the 1960's and 1970's, but collectively they are a lot bigger. In contrast, some of the defenses, including that jumping jack height, were quite impressive.


You mentioned the players being so much bigger and athletic than they used to be...and I have been wondering about something. Have the players (mostly the men) outgrown the original court dimensions? Is a 94' x 50' court really big enough now? Is the width of the lane too small seeing as many of the guys now have wingspans that can reach outside both sides while standing in the middle? Is the basket height of 10' still viable or does it need to go up?

Is the sheer size of the guys clogging up the court thus making it that much harder to move around and execute true fundamental basketball?

This really isn't an issue with the women's game, but if the court is made bigger, what kind of an impact would it have on women's basketball? You could keep the basket 10' for women.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8152
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/14 1:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

[quote="purduefanatic"][quote="GlennMacGrady"]
pilight wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
pilight wrote:

The men's games are painfully slow. The women's final had 34 more more possessions than the men's. Of course that's part of the same equation. When your team has trouble scoring you slow the game down trying to find good shots.


The men's game is mainly thunderbutt basketball with little of the sophistication of the Jewish teams of the 1930's and 1940's. The players don't appear to be better offensively than those of the 1960's and 1970's, but collectively they are a lot bigger. In contrast, some of the defenses, including that jumping jack height, were quite impressive.


You mentioned the players being so much bigger and athletic than they used to be...and I have been wondering about something. Have the players (mostly the men) outgrown the original court dimensions? Is a 94' x 50' court really big enough now? Is the width of the lane too small seeing as many of the guys now have wingspans that can reach outside both sides while standing in the middle? Is the basket height of 10' still viable or does it need to go up?

Is the sheer size of the guys clogging up the court thus making it that much harder to move around and execute true fundamental basketball?

This really isn't an issue with the women's game, but if the court is made bigger, what kind of an impact would it have on women's basketball? You could keep the basket 10' for women.


PF, I've had exactly that thought about court dimensions in the men's game for about 20 years.

The court, whose dimensions were set in the 1890's when a 6-2 player was a giant, is simply too small for men. Players can run a fast break in just a few steps, there is little space for all those hulks to spread out offensively for picks and cross-court passes, the 3 second paint has expanded into the unlimited zone for 60 years, and above-the-rim play has become trivial instead of exciting.

The men's court should be 15 feet longer, proportionately wider, and the basket should be raised 9-12 inches.

This would result in a more spread out offense and a less densely packed defense, which will be more conducive to sophisticated two- and three-man game basketball -- the basketball of Nat Holman and even Pete Carril. Scoring would increase and dunking would become a precious rarity.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin