Grading each aspect of MU's defense; and table comparing it to all opponents' defenses

Will Buzz continue to apply pressure to try to increase turnovers at the risk of allowing some easier baskets this year? The table below shows that MU is projected to have the 17th best offense in the land this year simply based on the stats on who is returning – while the defense is projected to be a solid but not dominant 51st of 345 teams (Nebraska-Omaha replaced Centenary to keep D1 at 345).

DJO’s shot, Jae’s ability to score inside or out, and Davante getting fit, and Junior being back to 100% speed to run the offense all point to a high powered team.
Based on the table below, MU will have a better offense than all but five opponents this year; Wisconsin (3rd, yes it’s point per trip not total points), Vandy (4th), Pitt (5th), Syracuse (6th) and Notre Dame (7th). Only eight opponents are projected to have better defenses than MU, but teams do it different ways.

One key note on the table is that the overall projected defensive (column 1) and offensive (column 4) ARE adjusted for level of opponents faced, while the four columns breaking down the defense are simply the raw totals. So looking at how MU does in the four factors that determine defense, in order of importance:

1. Forcing opponents to miss shots (eFG%) = C. MU’s only true weakness last year on defense was the field goal percentage allowed. While they certainly were better than the 214th ranking this shows, they were 13th in Big East play, allowing a 51.3% eFG. This is the defensive stat that is hard to break down by player, however in conference play 2-point shots (50.8%, 14th) were a slightly bigger problem than 3-point defense (34.8%, 11th), but neither was good. Chris Otule’s emergence as one of the top 2 shot blockers in the league will be the key, and Jae Crowder was one of the top forwards in the country at blocking shots. If 6-7 Jamil Wilson can provide the same type of harassing defense that Jimmy did down the stretch, that could be a key. Vander Blue returns as the best defensive guard, so if he can give at least enough offense to get minutes, that will help on the perimeter. As the team continues to get size and length to go along with their speed, shooting defense should improve.

2. Grabbing Defensive Rebounds = B-. The overall ranking of 200th is deceiving here since the Big East teams kill each other by having to place each other. For the first time in years, MU was above average in defensive rebounds, finishing 8th in Big East play. The great news is that MU has one of the top returning defensive rebounders in the country in Jae Crowder (grabbed 18.7% of all opponents misses last year).

3. Not fouling = A-. MU was one of the best in the country at NOT putting opponents on the line, which actually is slightly more important than forcing turnovers. While some complain, I really thought MU did a great job of not yielding the “and-ones” when someone was going to score anyway, and forcing turnovers without fouling. However, Butler and Buycks were two of the top players in the country at NOT fouling, so fouls could increase with them gone, thus I lowered to an A-.

4. Forcing turnovers A. While MU was 133rd in forcing turnovers, and 6th in Big East play – forcing opposing conference teams to turn the ball over on 19.2% of all trips. Crowder was the tops at stealing the ball, followed closely by Blue, so MU should truly be one of the top steals teams in the conference and country this year. Perhaps more important is that MU can up the tempo and win a depth war this year with Todd Mayo and Derrick Wilson (who Buzz has called the best defensive freshman he has ever had) rotating in for DJO and a faster Cadougan, Blue and DJO (remember UConn steal) on the perimeter. The quickness on the front line should back them up.

In summary, if MU can just hold their tough opponents below 50% on two-pointers and 33% on three-pointers then the defense could be much better this year. And a “pretty good” defense could equal a “great” overall team with this offense.

As the table below shows, the toughest defenses MU will face this year stop teams in different ways; UConn is awesome at not fouling AND forcing missed shots, but the next best four defense we face have one dominant strength. Syracuse (not fouling), Louisville (forcing turnovers), possible Paradise Jam opponent Drexel (defensive rebounding) and Pitt (forcing missed shots).

Def 2012	Team	Conf 2012	Off 2012	FORC FG MISS	DEF REB	DON'T FOUL	FORC TO
1	Florida St. (DNP)	ACC	107	1	106	137	67
2	Kentucky (DNP)	SEC	2	9	63	38	293
3	North Carolina (DNP)	ACC	9	44	73	2	195
4	Duke (DNP)	ACC	8	11	193	32	112
5	Connecticut	BE	19	13	236	10	314
6	Louisville	BE	25	12	247	223	30
7	Purdue (DNP)	B10	53	36	66	41	88
8	Syracuse	BE	6	24	211	34	94
9	Ohio St. (DNP)	B10	1	126	26	1	27
10	Temple (DNP)	A10	32	49	45	9	172
14	Drexel (PJ?)	CAA	163	7	1	168	339
25	Pittsburgh	BE	5	21	28	62	305
29	Cincinnati	BE	36	31	110	118	55
31	Vanderbilt	SEC	4	39	168	20	308
42	West Virginia	BE	21	32	273	130	258
50	Wisconsin	B10	3	125	12	72	322
51	Marquette	BE	17	214	200	25	133
52	Seton Hall	BE	108	52	166	184	110
53	Villanova	BE	26	50	74	143	276
54	Washington	P12	29	51	161	281	134
56	Virginia (PJ?)	ACC	137	227	41	24	192
58	Georgetown	BE	49	68	176	175	303
79	South Florida	BE	99	103	227	193	328
85	St. John's	BE	138	251	222	230	13
88	Louisiana St.	SEC	223	54	280	227	174
94	Jacksonville	ASun	206	70	156	306	33
99	Notre Dame	BE	7	64	43	3	337
110	Rutgers	BE	106	99	213	292	74
112	Winthrop	BSth	288	121	119	212	103
116	Mississippi (PJ?)	SEC	60	120	130	206	229
132	Mount St. Mary's	NEC	273	92	316	187	125
141	Wisconsin Milwaukee	Horz	146	249	105	71	222
144	Drake (PJ?)	MVC	120	224	151	133	164
170	Wisconsin Green Bay	Horz	158	291	102	307	61
172	Providence	BE	70	199	285	37	211
176	Texas Christian (PJ?)	MWC	167	287	20	198	207
178	DePaul	BE	117	334	339	209	57
193	Northern Colorado	BSky	196	151	55	271	168
281	Norfolk St.	MEAC	260	135	221	325	275