How to Beat Purdue by 18 Points

by LVS on Mar 12, 2011 11:04 AM CST in Michigan State Spartans Basketball

(No, we can never have too many Dumb and Dumber references on the front page at once.)

Owing to the short turnaround, no full recap of last night's awesomeness. But, the four factors graph can't go without mention:

College Basketball

Two things on that graph stand out to me. This season, Purdue has rebounded 32% of their misses; in two previous games against Your Spartans, they rebounded 28% and 23.5% of those misses, respectively. Last night? 10.8% -- by far the Boilermakers' worst performance of the season. Kalin Lucas is getting all the headlines today, and my goodness deservedly so, but we can't forget just how great Draymond Green (who grabbed 38% of all Purdue's misses!), Delvon Roe, Durrell Summers, and Keith Appling were last night. Roe was colossal on defense and the boards, Summers was huge in establishing the early lead that MSU would never relinquish, and with each passing game, Keith Appling makes the Charlie Bell comparison look more apt.

Second: MSU's 63.3% FTR was their fourth-highest rate of the season. That's partially attributable to a refereeing crew that called a tight game (but also a fair one), but it also reflects MSU's aggressiveness. And in a season when when MSU has been repeatedly derided as a "pretty-boy jump shooting" team, that's noteworthy. Yes, the lead was gained largely through Lucas's otherwordly first half shooting clinic. But, once MSU had the lead, they did a great job of getting the ball inside and getting to the line -- and once they got to the line, the Spartans buried those free throws at an 80% clip.

Combine those two factors with a sterling defensive performance, reasonably good shooting, and relative caution with the bal, and you've got a complete effort fit to take down any team in the country. And, of course, the biggest thing about last night's game is that MSU now is in a position to take on those teams once again, in the NCAA Tournament.

But first, there's a Big Ten title to play for.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

As long as we can keep getting mostly productive and generally mistake free minutes from guys like Kebler, Payne and Nix, we could go pretty far if you think about it.

With a whole host of “supporting guys”, it is possible to do well without the Durrell Summers we thought we would have coming into this season

"It's a trap!"

by AdmiralAkbar on Mar 12, 2011 11:20 AM CST reply actions

Performance

Can we also give some love to Mike Kebler. The guy played terrific defense, made a crucial play down the stretch, and played 25 minutes without a turnover. This guy is an unsung hero, and we are fortunate to have him on the floor.

by donaldo on Mar 12, 2011 11:22 AM CST reply actions

Absolutely.

KJ’s tweet last night was the best:

Oh, and Mike Kebler is Rudy. If Rudy were, like, a guy who started and came up big in a huge win and dunked the ball at the end awesomely

PP-TPW.
The Only Colors

by LVS on Mar 12, 2011 11:24 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

Nix FT shooting

Was 27% last year. This season he’s at 52.9% which actually seems lower than I thought it would be. (He also has 3 more attempts with more to come I would think)

Clearly enough data to project he’ll be about an 80% FT shooter next year.

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude

by Seer on Mar 12, 2011 11:26 AM CST reply actions

And 110% senior year.

Extrapolation is fun!

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 11:34 AM CST up reply actions

"It's a trap!"

by AdmiralAkbar on Mar 12, 2011 11:45 AM CST up reply actions 4 recs

Haven't seen that one before.

Like it, though.

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 11:47 AM CST up reply actions

Quick side note

The “Pick 16” non-traditional bracket contest will count First Four games, which means you’ll have to get those in no later than early Tuesday evening. Full rules and the entry thread will go up shortly after the Selection Show tomorrow. Just want to give a little warning that the deadline will be a lot earlier than in past years due to the First Four.

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 11:39 AM CST reply actions

Does this bump up the point values of all rounds aftet the play in,

or will the first four simply be scored like the first round from last year?

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude

by Seer on Mar 12, 2011 11:40 AM CST up reply actions

First Four will count half

So if you pick a team playing for a 12 seed as one of your teams, you’ll get 6 if they make it to the round of 64, then the usual 12 for every game thereafter.

Traditional contest, I believe, is going to be run on ESPN’s site, which ignores the First Four.

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 11:43 AM CST up reply actions

Half seems like too much

I may be totally off base here… haven’t participated in your contest before, but it sounds like you’re running a contest that rewards people points based on seedings, which rewards people for picking upsets as opposed to going straight chalk.

The first four will pit 16s vs 16s and 12s vs 12s. This will effectively skew the results toward those who correctly pick the first four as there will not be any upsets but quality points for a 50-50 crap-shoot.

Just something to consider.

The sideline is always greener at MSU.

by Green 96 on Mar 12, 2011 12:37 PM CST up reply actions

You pick 16 teams and get points for what those teams do.

Don’t have to pick how far they’ll go, you just pick a bunch of teams and get points equal to the seed for every win. (Plus bonus points for teams that make the Final Four, title game, or win it all, so picking a 1 seed isn’t completely foolhardy.) Last year the best possible set of picks would have been:

Butler (29 – 5 seed in the final)
Cornell (24 – 12 seed in the Sweet 16)
Washington (22 – 11 seed in the Sweet 16)
Michigan St (21 – 5 seed in the Final Four)
St. Mary’s (20 – 10 seed in the Sweet 16)
Northern Iowa (18 – 9 seed in the Sweet 16)
Tennessee (18 – 6 seed in the Elite 8)
Duke (15 – 1 seed champion)
Ohio (14 – 14 seed in the second round)
Murray St (13 – 13 seed in the second round)
Xavier (12 – 6 seed in the Sweet 16)
Old Dominion (11 – 11 seed in the second round)
Georgia Tech (10 – 10 seed in the second round)
Missouri (10 – 10 seed in the second round)
West Virginia (9 – 2 seed in the Final Four)
Baylor (9 – 3 seed in the Elite 8)
Wake Forest (9 – 9 seed in the second round)

So the best teams to pick tend to be distributed among first-round upsets, mid-level seeds that make a bit of a run, and the Final Four. You’re mostly trying to pick teams you think will outperform their seed.

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 12:57 PM CST up reply actions

In other words

Picking the 16v16 play-in isn’t going to help much because you’re getting 8 points and no chance of any more, about like picking an 8-9 winner (although they have a much better chance of netting you another 8 or 9 by upsetting the 1 seed). Picking the 12v12 play-in is interesting because it’s 6 if you’re right (which isn’t as good as the 8-9) but a much better chance of picking up another 12 after that.

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 1:01 PM CST up reply actions

Just saw a tweet from Jay Bilas yesterday

Tom Izzo should have a calendar with twelve months of March.

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 11:48 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

So are we probably a 11/12 seed now?

I want to keep winning, but I wouldn’t want to make our way up to a 8 or 9 seed so that we can avoid a potential second round game against a 1 seed.

by Stones1981 on Mar 12, 2011 1:00 PM CST reply actions

Lunardi already has us at a 9.

But given that he had us last in yesterday, I think he’s either wildly overreacting to whatever happened most recently or crazy.

Personally, I think we’re in the 10 range at the moment. Which is a perfect place to stay (although none of the 1 seeds really look invulnerable at this point, I think there’s little enough difference between the 1s and 2s that it would not be a disaster this year like it would most of the time).

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 1:05 PM CST up reply actions

he forgot to take his medications...plus 101 bracketology is more accurate

by spartynation on Mar 12, 2011 1:21 PM CST up reply actions

look at the 1 seeds...Kansas, OSU, ND, Pitt..

ND and PItt:- perennial chokers
OSU & Kansas:- good enough to cut the nets but can also be defeated in a second or sweet 16.

by spartynation on Mar 12, 2011 1:23 PM CST up reply actions

Lunardi is good at picking who is in, but not at actual seedings

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude

by Seer on Mar 12, 2011 3:08 PM CST up reply actions

That's not really hard.

Getting 64 out of 65 three years in a row sounds impressive until you realize that 31 are given to you (the auto-bids) and another 25-30 are stone obvious. I can almost always get at least 63 if you give me ten minutes right before the show.

(Of course, now that I’ve said that, watch me get five wrong this year. Seems like an unusually difficult year to me, lots of bubble teams clustered around the same point with different strengths and weaknesses.)

I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.

by SpartanDan on Mar 12, 2011 7:58 PM CST up reply actions

I'm surprised he's moved us up that much

but his brackets has been very odd this year. Duke went from a 1 to 2 seed yesterday with Pitt and ND moving to 1 seeds, even though they Duke won and Pitt/ND lost.

It really seems like a jumbled mess between potential 8 seeds and 12 seeds this year. I think there’s going to be a lot of variation between the projected brackets on Sunday.

by Stones1981 on Mar 12, 2011 1:25 PM CST reply actions

2,000-Point Club?

With the career high performance last night, I believe Kalin is only 31 points away from getting 2,000 for his career. Now that we’re guaranteed at least 2 more games, that is absolutely within reach. He would be only the 5th member for MSU and the first to join the club since Respert in ’95 (Smith, Skiles, and Kelser are the other members). But yeah, this year has probably tarnished his legacy…

"You can look at the dinosaur that weighs you down or you can look at the big pot of gold (and) try to say, 'You know what? I'm going to try to live up to expectations.' " -Tom Izzo, Iron Mountain Philosopher

by Ducking Delvon on Mar 12, 2011 1:26 PM CST reply actions