A Slower, Defensive-Approach Separates San Diego from the WCC Pack

A defensive, slower approach by Bill Grier (arms apart above) has been a key reason why San Diego is a dangerous opponent for WCC teams

No team generates more interest with me than the San Diego Toreros. They are 12-10 and 3-6 in conference, and according to Ken Pomeroy, they are most likely to finish the year hovering at .500 at 16-15 (with a projected 7-11 conference record). So, at the surface, there is nothing really to like about San Diego or really glean from them in a major fashion. Most fans think, "Oh, hey San Diego, they can surprise you, but when push comes to shove, they're just another WCC team that is fighting to avoid the cellar with Loyola Marymount, Santa Clara and Pacific." But, I think the Toreros are a team that WCC fans should take notice of for the remainder of the year

I am not here to say that San Diego is going to jettison to the top of the WCC standings. That being said, what I like about San Diego and coach Bill Grier is that he has the Toreros playing a style of ball that is remarkably different from most other teams in the conference. As typical of years past, most schools in the WCC prefer a more "offensive-oriented approach" and for good reason: they are pretty good at it. When it comes to Adjusted Offensive Efficiency according to Ken Pomeroy, four schools rank in the Top-50 (Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Francisco and BYU), two more rank in the Top-100 (Pacific at 89 and Pepperdine at 100) and two MORE rank within the Top-150 (Portland at 111 and Loyola Marymount at 123). As a conference, Ken Pomeroy rates the WCC as the fourth best conference in the nation when it comes to offensive efficiency at 108.1 (which is helped by a conference-wide 3 point percentage of 38.1 percent, best of any conference in the nation). This isn't 80's Big East basketball. The WCC is known for scoring, lots of it and in an efficient way, and that has been a primary reason why the WCC has achieved its highest conference ranking ever on KenPom.com at No. 9 (though I believe the Mountain West and Missouri Valley getting gutted due to conference re-alignment severely weakened those conferences, which were typically ahead of the WCC but now fell this season; but that's being nitpicky, as the WCC is the strongest its ever been top-to-bottom).

But, San Diego is a team that does not fit that "offensive-emphasis" mold. The Toreros rank last overall in Adjusted Offense in the conference ranking 183rd in the nation. In conference play, while they have played better, they still linger near the basement with a rating of 102.8, ninth-best in the conference play (ahead of only Loyola Marymount, who has struggled efficiency-wise after a strong start). While they do excel in the three-ball (they have the best three-point percentage in WCC play at 43.5 percent), they struggle inside the arc (9th best two-point percentage at 45.4 percent) and turn the ball over way too much (WCC high 20.2 percent turnover rate).

And yet, even though they rate as a pretty sub-par offensive team by WCC standards, the Toreros have been the most competitive team as of late, nearly knocking off Gonzaga on Thursday in Spokane, and upsetting Portland in the Rose City after the Pilots made national headlines with a 3 OT victory over a scorching BYU squad. They are nine points away from being 6-3 (with close single-digit losses to Pepperdine, USF and Gonzaga) rather than 3-6, and they suddenly look to be the kind of team that could ruin many WCC teams' postseason hopes. How are they doing it?

While you could credit it to a variety of factors, I think two major playing trends emerge: their slow tempo and defensive approach.

First off, San Diego is not the only squad in the WCC that plays at a slow tempo. St. Mary's has done this for quite some time under Bennett, and they also run a slow tempo to maximum offensive effectiveness (they rank second in offensive efficiency in conference despite playing the fourth-slowest tempo in conference play). Gonzaga, which originally started the year playing at a faster tempo, has slowed down considerably in conference play (third-slowest in conference), which has worked to their advantage in some games (BYU) and not so in others (San Diego). So, slowing it down and playing a more half-court approach isn't exactly ingenious or ground breaking on Grier's end, since many teams do it when they feel they lack depth or the faster perimeter players to do so. Furthermore, Grier's teams have typically played a slower tempo in his career at USD, as he has had only one team average over the 65 possession mark in his tenure at USD (the 2012 squad which averaged 66.1 possessions per game).

But San Diego has slowed it down considerably so, and that has worked to their advantage in many games. In two out of their last three games, the Toreros have played two sub-60 possession games (USF and Gonzaga). Both those games went down to the buzzer, as the Toreros lost by a buzzer beater to USF and they had a chance to tie at Gonzaga. For a team that lacks offensive consistency like the Toreros, shortening the game has proven to be a strong competitive equalizer for them, especially against better offensive teams (as was the case with USF). While they do have some talent in guard Johnny Dee and center Dennis Kramer, they do have some efficiency killers (Jito Kok may be the worst offensive player in the conference by far as evidenced by his 72.8 offensive rating) that'll keep them from being better than average overall. So, by limiting possessions and relying on the three point shot, the Toreros give themselves a fighting chance against the better teams in conference play. And it has worked, as the Toreros seem to be trending upward as a team, and still have valuable opportunities for possible upsets on the horizons with seven of their next nine games being at home (only St. Mary's looks to be the daunting one, and that could be tougher because the Gaels are in their element in slower-tempo games).

Contrast San Diego's approach with LMU, who has taken a higher-tempo approach to offense (second highest tempo at 69.2 in conference play). While the Toreros are 3-6 against primarily road-game loaded first half of the schedule, the Lions are 3-7 and have lost to conference leaders USF, St. Mary's and Gonzaga by double digits. While they did pull off the upset against BYU in their first conference game of the year, the higher tempo has exposed the Lions' poor offensive efficiency as a team, while the slower tempo has hid or at the very least minimized the Toreros' woes on the offensive end (remember, both teams rank 9th and 10th in conference play offensive efficiency). And how has this strategy of play affected to coaches' futures? Well, it looks like Grier may be on the way to finishing the season strong enough to merit another season, while Lions coach Max Good will have to do a lot to earn an extension at the end of the year.

So, tempo has been a key factor to the Toreros surprising success, though not the only key. The improved defense has also been a reason why the Toreros have also remained competitive, and since those two approaches complement each other nicely (defense and slow tempo) it's no surprise that they have transitioned to success on the court for San Diego. In terms of defense, numerically it's not all that impressive, as the Toreros' 110.7 defensive efficiency rating ranks seventh in conference play. That being said, their overall rating sits at 100.9, which is 108th best in the nation and the Toreros have had some really bad performances that have hurt their conference rating thus far (they gave up 1.31 points per possession in a 23 point loss at BYU). Going back to that rating though, the 100.9 mark, if the season ended today, would be the best mark for Grier since the 2009 season, when the Toreros finished with a defensive rating of 97.6, 77th best in the nation.

The mark is a nice wave of progression for Grier and the Toreros over the past couple of seasons. Grier made his mark as a defensive-coach as an assistant at Gonzaga, and he carried that in his first two years at the helm in San Diego. His first team, which went to the NCAA Tourney and upset UConn as a 13 seed, was a stout defensive squad as they ranked 49th in the nation in defensive efficiency at 95.9. However, after two seasons where his teams ranked in the Top-100 in defensive rating, they took huge steps in years three through five, as they posted mediocre defensive rating rankings of 162, 224 and 230, respectively. Suddenly, the strongest aspect of Grier's ability as a coach (the defensive side) looked to be a weakness after the initial wave of success.

However, Grier made one key hire after the 2011 season that has helped the Toreros defensively: he hired former LMU coach Rodney Tention as an assistant. Now, Tention was far from "good" as a coach at LMU. His 30-61 overall record looks bad in a variety of different lenses. But, Tention was a much better coach than people gave him credit for. For starters, Tention was actually a very decent defensive coach, and if you want to know why or how the Lions, despite being a 12-win team, came within a tip-in of beating an Adam Morrison-led Gonzaga team in the WCC Championship, the Lions' defense was the answer (remember, the Lions went 9-6 in conference play that year). In 2006, the Lions posted a defensive rating of 96.2, 60th best in the country, and in his second year, the Lions, though 13-18, still remained in the Top-100 in defensive rating at 93rd in the nation with a rating of 99.1. While things fell apart for them as a whole in 2008 (only six teams were worse overall than the Lions in 2008), Tention was actually a good defensive coach. The only problem was that he struggled to find consistency with his offense, and he opted for a style that didn't necessarily play to his teams' defensive strengths either (they ranked in the top-100 in terms of fastest tempo in his three years). And so, it made sense why things never worked out for Tention as the head man at LMU. Under Grier's staff though, Tention has seemed to help the Toreros and Grier find their mojo again on the defensive end. They have steadily improved the past couple of years, and I'm sure Tention's expertise on defense has meshed well with Grier's philosophy on defense and slowing it down (rather than speeding it up, as Tention did at LMU).

This season, the Toreros have the kind of squad that fits what Grier wants to do: slow it down, grind out opponents on the defensive end, have certain player (i.e. Gee) make some key shots, and keep games tight against opponents which may be more loaded than his San Diego squads. They still aren't as elite as his first-year squad, but it is obvious that they are making progress toward reaching that point. Tention's influence, though under the radar to most people, has been felt, especially when you look at the improvements in defensive ratings over the past three years. And, with this approach complementing their slow, half-court style, the Toreros remain different, an anomaly to what is typically seen from teams in the WCC.

In college basketball, different is good. Different is what worked for Princeton under Pete Carril, LMU under Paul Westhead and Arkansas under Nolan Richardson. And for Grier and San Diego, being different could give them a chance to replicate what they did in 2008 as soon as next season (though you never know come WCC tourney time).

Recruit Report: Evan Fitzner, 6-10, 215 pounds, St. Mary's Commit

The first post player on the recruit report belongs to Evan Fitzner, a 6-10 forward from Francis Parker High School in San Diego. Fitzner signed with Randy Bennett's Gaels on October, 8th and he should bring an interesting profile and skill set to the Gaels in 2014-2015. He is long, athletic and has very good touch from outside the arc, the perfect kind of player to fit Bennett's "shooter-heavy" system.

Fitzner was mostly looking at schools on the West Coast, as he also received offers from Arizona State, California, Hawaii, Loyola Marymount, New Mexico, Northern Arizona, Oregon State, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco, USC and Washington. Just judging by the four other WCC School offers, there was a high possibility that Fitzner was going to be playing in the WCC somewhere next season. That being said, it appears that his visit and the program in general convinced Fitzner to take his talents up north from San Diego to Moraga.

Let's take a look at some things about Fitzner.



What they Are Saying About Fitzner


From ESPN.com (71 rating, 3 star recruit)

"Fitzner possesses a long and rangy frame with very long arms. He is a good athlete that runs well and his quickness and bounce have improved around the paint area. He has a remarkable touch that extends out to 22-feet and his ball skills are impressive."

From Full Court Press.net (45th best player in SoCal area)

"Skilled forward needs strength and bulk as well as toughness to be a factor in WCC." 

From West Coast Convo

"This is a big time commitment for the Gaels as next season they will lose 6’11 center Matt Hodgeson to graduation and had already lost power forward Chris Reyes this year who transferred out earlier this season. Fitzner is known more for his shooting ability at the stretch-4 position rather than interior play, but none-the-less should get good minutes next season in his first year as a Gael."

Catholic Coast Hoops Quick Analysis

When you watch video of Fitzner, there is a lot to like. He has a good looking shot, and his form and touch has improved greatly from his sophomore season. In fact, as an outside player, he seems very dangerous, as he can find his shot easily thanks to his ability to move around well for a big man, in addition to his height. In many ways, he seems to be a combo of former Gael Daniel Kickert (who was a big man with a strong propensity to shoot from the outside) and Gonzaga forward Austin Daye (who was a good shooter from the outside for a 6-10 player). I am not sure if he has Daye's defensive ability (Daye was a very good shot blocker at Gonzaga), but he definitely shares the former first round draft pick's combo skill set of shooting and size.

Much like Daye though, Fitzner needs to add strength, and it'll be interesting to see if he'll be able to get inside to score points or get to the line if his shot is not falling. The Gaels will return Brad Waldow next year, but Fitzner could be a player to take the ease off him in the post, which could not only benefits Fitzner's game, but Waldow's as well. That being said, there are going to be some good big men next year in the WCC in Przemek Karnowski at Gonzaga (who'll be a junior) and Thomas van der Mars from Portland (who'll be a senior), so it'll be interesting to see how Fitzner adjusts to the nightly competition after playing at a small school in San Diego (though to be fair he has played against good AAU and tournament competition).  I don't see Fitzner making an immediate splash, but I think his shooting skill set and height will make him a decent, if not solid contributor for the Gaels in his freshman season next year, which will be sorely needed as the Gaels routinely struggle with depth on their squad.

The "Woolpert Award Watch": The Top 15 Players in the WCC Thus Far

Which WCC Player Will Win CCH's First-Annual "Woolpert Award" for the Best Player in the WCC? The list has been narrowed down to 15.

In lieu of the Wooden Award announcing their annual Mid-Season Top 25 list, I wanted to name an award on this blog for the best player in the WCC. My best idea centered on former USF coach Phil Woolpert, who led the Dons to two NCAA titles in his tenure with the Dons in the 1950's. Maybe there is already an award on Woolpert, and if there is, I can change it, but for now, Woolpert it is darn it!

Anyways, here is the criteria for the Woolpert Award player:

• Has to be at least a significant contributor on his team (Ken Pom characterizes this as at least a 20 percent usage rate). The more significant, the better their chances. I want to look at the player who is most essential to his team's success.
• Record is not the end-all, be-all, but the better the team is, the better the chances are for that player (especially if he is more of a major contributor).
• Advanced numbers will be what determines a player's candidacy. Traditional per game stats are thrown out the window here (I will write a post in due time why I don't rely solely on per game stats, and in fact use them as little as possible).
• Has to play a significant amount of games. Guys who miss significant time due to injury or suspension are not considered (sorry, but you need to play to have an impact on your team; I consider significant time if you have missed about four or more games so far, i.e. Gary Bell of Gonzaga).
• Can be a starter or bench player, but needs to have played at least 50 percent of his team's minutes (which correlates with the statement above).

Okay, here is a very early list of the Top-15 candidates who have earned their spot on the "Woolpert Watch" so far. Roughly, it comes out to 

(Note: this is not in any particular order nor a ranking. I'm just putting in guys randomly.)

1. Brad Waldow, St. Mary's
2. Sam Dower, Gonzaga
3. Brandon Clark, Santa Clara
4. Tyler Haws, BYU
5. Anthony Ireland, LMU
6. Brendan Lane, Pepperdine
7. Kruize Pinkins, USF
8. Andrew Bock, Pacific
9. Johnny Dee, San Diego
10. Kevin Pangos, Gonzaga
11. Kevin Bailey, Portland
12. Eric Mika, BYU
13. Stephen Holt, St. Mary's
14. Thomas van der Mars, Portland
15. Stacy Davis, Pepperdine

As stated before, the list above is NOT a ranking. This is just an initial list. And, much like the Wooden Award, if a player makes significant strides in the second half of the WCC season, I can also put them on the Woolpert Watch as well. Right now, I wanted to have no more than two players from a team on this list and at least 1 representative as well from each WCC squad. So while this list is a good gauge in terms of who is the most valuable player in the WCC this season, it's not an end-all, be-all list either.

If you feel I snubbed anyone, let me know and I would definitely be open to discuss about it. (Beau Levesque was a tough snub for me, but I didn't want to have three Gaels on there, especially considering they're in 3rd place as well).

I'll have a poll on the sideboard of the blog soon to take a tally of who "fans" should think should earn the award (though to be frank, I'll be awarding the vote myself, since it is a statistical award, not a fan vote...sorry guys).

Data Sheet Analysis: WCC Ratings Roundup, January 21st

Don't Understand This Chart? I'll Make Sense After Reading This Post...Hopefully

Though it's not even February yet, it's never a bad time to talk about postseason expectations. One thing I liked to do leading up to tournament time is looking up different ratings of basketball teams that are on "the bubble". In the WCC, it's usually only 2-3 teams, but nonetheless, I wanted to look at the conference as a whole and the ratings of each and see where there were major differences between ratings systems for certain teams. For a lot of the top teams in conference, the ratings were pretty consistent across the board (as I will show in a graph via the Data Sheet), but things got interesting as you look at the middle of the pack to the bottom of the WCC.

Before I go into the analysis of each team, I wanted to give people a brief synopsis of each ratings system I used leading up to the team analysis.

RPI (Rating Percentage Index)

• The most common and widely known ratings system. Used in the NCAA selection process. The formula for RPI is  (WP * 0.25) + (OWP * 0.50) + (OOWP * 0.25) (where WP is Winning percentage, OWP is opponent's win percentage and OOWP is Opponents' Opponents' Winning Percentage).

BPI (College Basketball Power Index)

• ESPN's own ratings index similar to RPI created in 2012. BPI accounts the most factors in games in comparison to the other Major Indexes, as it includes scoring margin, diminishing returns for blowouts, pace, game location, SOS beyond Opponent W-L, Wins (not really quality losses), and Key Players missing. While the positive is that it accounts all factors, the negative with BPI is that it can be the most subjective of all the ratings indexes with all the factors it accounts. For a more detailed explanation, check out this post here.

Ken Pomeroy Ratings

• More mathematical than the above, but in my opinion very informative in terms of "pure prediction" as he states on his "Ratings Explanation" page. Pomeroy seems less concerned with past results (since he knows upsets will happen and it's impossible to predict every upset or win), but in his words "to show how strong a team would be if it played tonight, independent of injuries or emotional factors. Since nobody can see every team play all (or even most) of their games, this system is designed to give you a snapshot of a team’s current level of play." The core of Pomeroy's system is based on the "pythagorean calculation for expected winning percentage", though he has incorporated some changes to his algorithms going into this year. Overall, Pomeroy's seems to be for the most mathematically or statistically inclined, but I like it the most because I find the data accurate in reflecting a team's profile.

Jeff Sagarin Ratings

• Sagarin's ratings are not only used by the NCAA Tournament committee, but they have also been a staple among oddsmakers in terms of determining lines for basketball games (and football, as his football ratings have been part of the BCS system since its inception). While the exact formulas for Sagarin's ratings aren't exact, according to Wikipedia (yes, I am quoting Wikipedia, shoot me English Teacher Nazi) his system is "the difference in two teams' rating scores is meant to predict the margin of victory for the stronger team at a neutral venue...teams gain higher ratings within the Sagarin system by winning games against stronger opponents, factoring in such things as home-venue advantage." Thus, Sagarin is more aimed toward the NCAA Tournament as the idea of playing on a neutral court is something that is rarely important in the regular season and more important come Tournament time (where all the teams play on neutral courts).

Ken Massey Ratings

• Massey's ratings are more predicated on measuring past performance rather than predicting future results. This emphasis varies from other ratings such as Pomeroy and Sagarin (which state their goal is to predict future results, albeit in different ways). Massey states two challenges, as he looks to eliminate "noise which obscures the true strength of a team" (which includes officiating, luck, not playing to potential, etc.) and differences in schedule. Thus, strength of schedule is heavily incorporated into the ratings, though Massey only factors in score, venue and date and no other statistics or factors in the strength of schedule rating.

After looking up all those ratings on their various Web site, I composed an aggregate rating which basically was an average of all their ratings combined. That way, the aggregate rating gives a true "real" rating of each WCC team, since some fluctuate surprisingly a lot.

Okay, with that out of the way, let's analyze each team in the WCC and their ratings thus far through the season.

Gonzaga Bulldogs (16-3 overall, 6-1 in conference)

• RPI: 25
• BPI: 21
• Ken Pom: 26
• Jeff Sagarin: 21
• Ken Massey: 29
• Aggregate Rating: 24.4

BPI and Sagarin love the Zags, as they rate them at 21 in both ratings. BPI is not surprising considering all the subjective factors they take in. The Zags have huge margin of victories in many games (especially during their first 3 games in WCC play against St. Mary's, USF and Santa Clara), have been hit hard by injuries (Gary Bell and Sam Dower), and have played some tough neutral court games (Maui Classic and Kansas State in Wichita). Sagarin also takes in margin of victory, and that too probably also explains why that rating also correlates similarly with ESPN's BPI.

Massey and Pom seem less in love with the Zags, as they both rate them higher than their aggregate rating. The Zags rate 17th in AdjO and 71st in AdjD, so when you factor in both those factors, as well as their 67.4 pace factor, and the Zags rating at 26 seems about right (SMU, which is rated 25, is similar in their AdjO and AdjD difference, though is flipped, as their D is better than their O). As for Massey, which had the lowest rating for the Zags out of any of the ones listed, it relies so heavily the teams' records and opponents records, and the strength of many of the opponents outside of Arkansas, West Virgina (though that's questionable), Kansas State and Dayton isn't all that great (New Mexico State started well early on but have faded and that has hurt the Zags' strength of schedule, which in return has hurt the Zags).

BYU Cougars (13-7 overall, 5-2 conference)

• RPI: 39
• BPI: 49
• Ken Pom: 49
• Jeff Sagarin: 41
• Ken Massey: 55
• Aggregate Rating: 46.6

RPI loves BYU and it's not surprising. The Cougars played the best out of conference schedule (7th hardest in the nation) out of anyone in the WCC. Stanford, Wichita State, Utah State, Iowa State, Texas, Utah, Oregon and UMass were all on BYU's non-conference slate and all those teams are Top-100 teams in almost every rating listed above. Though the Cougars went 3-5 against them, three of those teams started out the season with double digit wins before suffering their first loss (Iowa State, Oregon and Umass) and one is still undefeated (Wichita State). Thus, it makes sense that BYU's highest rating came in the RPI.

Massey was the least loving of the Cougars (though that tended to be the trend for many WCC teams, as the conference as a whole rated low in Massey's ratings). My guess for the low ratings is the Cougars' opening conference losses to LMU and Pepperdine (who rank low in the Massey Ratings) hurt, as well as that Dec.14-Dec.30 stretch where they lost four straight. Ken Pom and BPI also rated the Cougars above their aggregate rating, which makes sense considering the Cougars' mediocre defensive rating (86th in KP) and high pace (76.0). Still, the Cougars have had a relatively easy road so far in conference play (10th rated in conference SOS on Ken Pom), so it'll be interesting to see if this improvement is legit or just the product of an easy stretch.

St. Mary's Gaels (14-5 overall, 4-2 in conference)

• RPI: 50
• BPI: 47
• Ken Pom: 56
• Jeff Sagarin: 51
• Ken Massey: 65
• Aggregate Rating: 53.8

If you want to make the NCAA Bubble Case for the Gaels, you certainly can. They sneak in when it comes to RPI and BPI. Their opening win over Louisiana Tech may have been their most underrated win of the season so far (though LA Tech's loss to Southern Miss dampened it a bit) and wins over Boise State and North Dakota State are solid wins over solid mid-major teams who have a chance to make the NCAA Tournament (albeit by winning their conference tournaments, but still a chance nonetheless).

But, the Gaels look bad in Ken Pom and Ken Massey's ratings. In KP's ratings, their soft non-conference schedule (only two away games and two neutral games in the non-conference) and mediocre defensive efficiency (175th in the nation) hurts their case big time. As for Massey, a home loss to Santa Clara (it takes heavily into consideration home record) and a slow start in conference (4-2, unimpressive difference in Points Score and Points Allowed in Conf Play) probably is the key reason why they are barely on the bubble in his ratings.

Pacific Tigers (10-7 overall, 1-5 conference)

• RPI: 84
• BPI: 115
• Ken Pom: 121
• Jeff Sagarin: 116
• Ken Massey: 117
• Aggregate Rating: 110.6

I really believe the Tigers are due for a second-half turnaround in WCC play. Though they currently rank in the basement in the WCC with a 1-5 conference record, their RPI is surprisingly high for a last-place team, and they played well in the non-conference slate as well with good wins over Utah State and UC Irvine and tough games against Oregon and Princeton (who really is a contender to Harvard, though it is Harvard's conference to lose at this point). Furthermore, they have already played some of the toughest WCC opponents thus far, as they have played St. Mary's twice and Gonzaga in Spokane (all boosts to that RPI).

Now, I don't believe the Tigers are a top-100 team. But even when you look at their other ratings, they are obviously seen as a middle of the pack WCC team, not a last place team like the one you see currently. Even Ken Pomeroy, who has the Tigers rated the lowest out of all the ratings, still has them as the fifth highest rated team in the conference, and did rate their conference schedule as the hardest thus far for any WCC team. So, don't give up on this Tigers team yet, even though they certainly didn't do themselves any favors with that 1-5 start in conference play.

San Francisco Dons (12-8 overall, 5-3 conference)

• RPI: 102
• BPI: 121
• Ken Pom: 124
• Jeff Sagarin: 126
• Ken Massey: 114
• Aggregate Rating: 117.4

A pretty consistently rated team overall. The RPI is solid for their record, but it's not egregiously different from the other ratings like Pacific (where they had a 37 point difference between RPI, their highest ranking and Ken Pom, their lowest rating). USF was hurt from questionable losses early on, and it shows in their out of conference RPI of 177, which is third-worst in the conference. Ken Pom also rates their defense 263rd in the nation AdjD efficiency, so that is also another reason why KP has them hovering in the 120 range, well out of NIT territory and maybe even CIT or CBI consideration as well.

That being said, USF's offense is good (40th in the nation in AdjO efficiency) and they have played much better as of late with four wins in their last six conference games, and the two losses being on the road at St. Mary's and a tough loss to BYU (who is playing the best ball in conference). Those losses won't hurt, and the Dons only other conference loss is to Gonzaga on the road (though that was a BAAD conference loss as they were killed). If the Dons can keep winning WCC games against the middle of the pack (they already got a huge boon in a road win over Portland which is looking better and better with Portland's win over Gonzaga at the Chiles Center), and maybe pull one home upset over St. Mary's or Gonzaga (Winning at BYU would be tough), then I think the Dons could get a high enough status in the ratings to earn some kind of postseason berth.

Portland Pilots (11-8 overall, 3-4 conference)

• RPI: 152
• BPI: 107
• Ken Pom: 104
• Jeff Sagarin: 109
• Ken Massey: 126
• Aggregate Rating: 119.6

The Pilots earn the award for the most bi-polar team in the Ratings Roundup. RPI does NOT like Portland and rightfully so. Their projected OOC RPI is 169 and projected OOC SOS is 290. They are 7-2 against teams rated 200 or higher, but 6-6 against teams in the 51-100 range. The Pilots boast a profile with good wins over Gonzaga and Princeton, tolerable losses to Oregon State and Michigan State, and downright crappy losses to North Texas and Montana State. Portland may be a good team underneath all that fluff, but RPI is going to have a hard time seeing it, especially with those strength of schedule numbers hanging out there.

But sans RPI, the Pilots still profile as a decent team and have a good shot for the fourth spot in conference if they can use the momentum from the Gonzaga win to turn it around. Much like Pacific, they suffered from some bad losses early (though the conference strength of schedule wasn't nearly as difficult as Pacific's; it is rated as the 8th toughest so far) and while they don't excel in anything, they aren't really terrible in anything either (they rank 116th in AdjO and 123rd in AdjD according to KP). So, they'll always be a competitive team, though they'll probably lose some games they probably should win (as evidenced by losing to Pepperdine on Saturday, though that was in Malibu). While I like USF more, I think Portland has a decent chance to make a postseason berth if they can get some consistency.

Pepperdine Waves (12-8 overall, 5-3 conference)

• RPI: 118
• BPI: 135
• Ken Pom: 126
• Jeff Sagarin: 121
• Ken Massey: 113
• Aggregate Rating: 122.6

As we get to the bottom of the WCC, we start to see some trends emerge. When it comes to the top of the conference, the RPI is consistently higher than the Massey ratings. For the lower-tier WCC teams, the Massey ratings are actually better than their RPIs. Because BPI is so subjective and incorporates so many variables, it goes a variety of ways, and Pom and Sagarin are more scientific, so they kinda fall in line with BPI as well.  Pepperdine is pretty typical of what we see from the lower tier teams, though to be honest, they may be on the cusp of being a middling to borderline upper tier team, if they could just pull some sort of consistency and give fans a real idea what team they're going to be for the rest of the season.

Pepperdine suffers from many of the same problems of the lower-end WCC teams: bad OOC RPI (202, second worst in WCC), bad OOC SOS (282, third worst in WCC) and lack of quality wins (2-8 against top-100) along with some REALLY bad losses (San Jose State and Cal State Fullerton are rated 252nd and 241st respectively in KP's ratings). What boosts Pepperdine (or why you might argue in favor of Pepperdine) over Portland though is that the Waves have actually been better against teams ranked in the 101-200 range (8-4 to Portland's 6-6 mark). Add that with the fact that the Waves actually are better than average in something (86th in Adjusted Offense), and that gives the Waves a bit of an advantage over a team like Portland who is just pretty average all across the board. Yes, the Pilots have the better ratings now, but check back in two weeks and I have a feeling Pepperdine will have leaped them.

San Diego Toreros (11-9 overall, 2-5 conference)

• RPI: 189
• BPI: 160
• Ken Pom: 150
• Jeff Sagarin: 156
• Ken Massey: 171
• Aggregate Rating: 165.2

Initially, the feeling is to say that the Toreros are the worst team in the WCC. While Pacific is last, there is the feeling that they have just been unlucky. The Tigers played some decent teams in the non-conference, and as stated before, played the toughest conference slate of any WCC team thus far. Add that with the adjustment that comes with playing in a new conference (especially a conference upgrade to the WCC from the Big West), and it makes sense why the Tigers have struggled this season. But as for the Toreros? They played two Non-DI teams (inexcusable in my mind any way you cut it), have a projected OOC SOS of 276, and are 1-9 against Top-100 teams this season. Their 189 RPI is second-worst in the conference, and by all means, it is easy to categorize San Diego as the bottom feeder in the WCC.

But surprisingly, the Toreros aren't as bad as advertised. Sans a bad loss to Illinois Chicago on a neutral court (282nd in KP's ratings), the Toreros have taken care of business against bad teams (7-1 against teams rated in the 200 plus range). Their OOC RPI isn't as bad as expected at 170 (better than both USF and Pepperdine), and the advanced guys (Pomeroy and Sagarin) like them more than most, which means statistically, they have some potential (though certainly not a lot of it). San Diego's slower pace (second-slowest in WCC) also helps them in the more variable ratings (especially BPI and KP), so I can see why they rate higher in ratings other than RPI. So, the Toreros are bad...they're just not as bad as we want to think just yet.

Loyola Marymount Lions (10-10 overall, 2-6 conference)

• RPI: 164
• BPI: 181
• Ken Pom: 161
• Jeff Sagarin: 165
• Ken Massey: 166
• Aggregate Rating: 167.4

Oh how they mighty have fallen. Remember how sky high people were riding on the Lions after they whooped BYU in Los Angeles? Remember how the Lions were threatening to make their case as the conference's second or third best team? Well those days are long gone. According to the aggregate ratings, the Lions rank as the second-worst team in the WCC, and with their 2-6 record in the WCC, the ratings seem pretty spot on in this case. The Lions aren't just bad in one set of ratings, but go for all-around effect in terms of their lower tier in the ratings (though BPI seems to be the most lackluster at 181), thus cementing their spot currently in the basement of the WCC.

If you want to find any silver linings for LMU, Ken Pom rates them the highest at 161st, noting that the overall AdjO rating at 106.1 is actually not bad at 134th in the nation despite them ranking last in the conference in offensive rating in WCC games alone (100.4 offensive rating in conference games only). And, the Lions' OOC SOS was actually better than most WCC teams in the lower tier (241st, which would rank as the 6th toughest OOC SOS in the WCC). Add that with an OOC RPI that was rated as 117th and the Lions probably have been a victim of bad luck rather than just mere bad play (though there has been plenty of that going on for Max Good's squad). RPI-Forecast projects the Lions to finish with a RPI of 158.5. While that is not a huge difference, I think that is a sign people should expect the Lions to trend up not down during this second-half stretch of WCC play.

Santa Clara Broncos (10-11 overall, 3-5 conference)

• RPI: 193
• BPI: 184
• Ken Pom: 178
• Jeff Sagarin: 184
• Ken Massey: 184
• Aggregate Rating: 184.6

Thank God Kerry Keating signed that contract extension this year or he'd be in serious trouble. I get it, he has a couple of CBI titles to his belt, but he hasn't made the NCAA tournament, kind of a big deal considering the coach the administration pushed out (Dick Davey) to make room for him had numerous on his resume. That being said, it makes sense though that the athletic department signed him to a deal so early this season: it was going to be a rebuilding year after losing Kevin Foster and a few other key players, and Even Roquemore simply isn't the player efficiency-wise to carry a team. Thus, it makes sense why the Broncos rate as the worst team ratings wise so far, even though they're holding their head above water a little bit with a 3-5 conference record.

Let's look at the good: the Broncos have played the second toughest conference schedule so far according to Ken Pom, so things are bound to get easier down the stretch (they have already played Gonzaga and St. Mary's on the road and they played BYU recently at home). Their win over St. Mary's on the road may be what plays spoiler to the Gaels' chances for an at-large bid in the NCAA Tournament, so at least they can torment their Bay Area brethren in that regard. Other than that though? 9-9 record against teams rated 100-plus (i.e. not good), 292nd in OOC SOS (worst in WCC) and 256th in OOC RPI (also worst in WCC). And, terrible losses to Cal State Fullerton (241) on the road and Rice (300!) at home. Yes, as bad as it is to hear Rough Riders (all 50 of you...sorry, just kidding), you are indeed probably the worst team in the WCC this year unfortunately. Just hope it's only a one year thing.

Candidates to trend UPWARD in ratings:

• Pacific
• Pepperdine
• Loyola Marymount

Candidates to trend DOWNWARD in ratings:

• Portland
• BYU
• Gonzaga

Recruit Report: Kyron Cartwright, 5-11, 155 pounds, LMU Commit

It's been a while, but I decided to add another Recruit Report to the list. Keeping with the guard-heavy theme as of late, I am going to profile Compton guard Kyron Cartwright, a 5-11 guard out of Compton High who played AAU ball with the prestigious Compton Magic program. Cartwright is an athletic, lefty-guard who has a strong knack to attack the hoop and score at will. Before committing to LMU in November, the senior guard also received offers from Cal State Fullerton, New Mexico and San Diego.

Cartwright is currently rated as the 18th best player in the State of California according to ESPN.com, and Full Court Press.net rated him as the 30th best player in the SoCal region. Along with forward commit Elijah Stewart, Cartwright should be able to have an immediate impact on Max Good's LMU squad next season (especially since long-time guard Anthony Ireland will be gone as well).


What they Are Saying About Cartwright


From ESPN.com (72 rating, 3-star recruit)

"Cartwright is a slick left-handed point guard who is tough to stop in transition. He has an excellent pull-up jumper and he gets tremendous lift on it. He has a high-level burst as well and can toss in the occasional runner as well."

From Scout.com (2-star rating)

"Kyron Cartwright, 5-10 JR PG Compton (Calif.) High, is one of the top point guards in the west for 2014. A quick lefty with range to the stripe, excellent vision and very good ball skills overall, Cartwright is perhaps the most under-recruited prospect in the West Coast junior class." 

From FullCourtPress.net (ranked 30th best player in Southern California)

"Speedy PG has no problem evading defensive pressure.  Will be a pleasant addition to Max Good’s Lions next Fall."

Catholic Coast Hoops Quick Analysis

It has been a bit of a rough conference season for head coach Max Good. After starting 2-0 with a big win over BYU to start conference play, the Lions have slumped, losing six straight WCC games. The Lions main struggles have been on the offensive end, as they rank last in offensive efficiency in the WCC, and last in categories such as free throw rate and 3-point percentage. Already, it seems like Lions fans are already looking toward next year, a shame since the WCC season started with so much promise for Good and the Lions.

That being said, next year's recruiting class has some enticing players, and Cartwright leads the pack. Check out the video above (it's a scouting video courtesy of Full Court Press.net's scouting service), and you can get more details about Cartwright's profile as a recruit. He is very quick off the dribble and he has good touch around the rim as well. His smaller frame is a bit of a concern, but his speed may already be "starter-worthy" as he regularly torched defenders from what I have seen on tape. Furthermore, he is also a left-handed player, and if Manu Ginobili has taught us anything, lefties who are quick off the dribble can be extremely dangerous and difficult players to defend. I think Cartwright has that kind of speed that will make him a tough outing for opposing WCC guards on a nightly basis.

The main issue with Cartwright is he is almost TOO left-hand dominant (as that was noted in the video), as you rarely see him drive with the right in the video above. And, while his pull up jumper looks good, you do not get a lot of looks at it, and I am curious about his range, as it did not have a lot of shots of him shooting from beyond the arc. From the reports I have seen, I don't think Cartwright is a long-range specialist by any means, but if he can have a decent shot from outside, that will only make his offensive game more dangerous since he is so strong dribbling past defenders and getting to the hoop. He doesn't need to be Kevin Pangos from beyond the arc, but if he can be simply average, it will help his ability to make an impact on this Lions squad in 2014-2015.

Overall, Cartwright looks to be a solid addition to this Lions squad, and with Ireland gone (as noted above), Cartwright will get a shot to earn major minutes in the backcourt as a freshman next year at LMU along with Evan Payne, who'll be a sophomore. I am not sure if Cartwright will be as good a shooter as Ireland, but his ability to drive and create fares pretty similarly to the four-year player, so this definitely is a nice pickup by Good. While his on-court success has been inconsistent this year and in the past few years as well, Good has made inroads in his recruiting and really hit the Los Angeles/Southern California area hard this year, as he also got a commitment from Stewart, a Westchester High School product. It'll be interesting to see if the Lions will turn things around and help Good keep his position at LMU. If he does stick and survive this season, he and the Lions could be very dangerous next year with Cartwright and a solid recruiting class coming to campus next Fall and a more experienced group returning as well (they only lose 3 seniors).

Matt Carlino, Super-Sub, and the Cougars' Turnaround in WCC Play

Despite his diminished role, Matt Carlino and the BYU Cougars Have Flourished with Him Coming Off the Bench

For many BYU and WCC basketball fans, guard Matt Carlino evokes a wide disparity of emotions. Some love his entertaining, shoot-first, shoot-second, mentality, and it has led to some memorable performances (for example, his 28-point outburst a year ago against Santa Clara and his 26 point performance in the Cougars' win over Stanford, a much bigger win in retrospect than it was thought at the time). However, efficiency wise, Carlino' struggles with consistency has often done his team more harm than good. In his frosh season, Carlino posted a 95.8 Adjusted Offensive rating on a usage rate of 26.1 percent. In his sophomore year, he let go of the ball a little bit, as his usage rate dropped to 24.2, but it didn't affect his rating significantly, as it still remained under 100 (which is usually about average) for the second straight year (99.2). The consensus was simple: as entertaining as Carlino could be, his inefficient style certainly didn't do the Cougars any favors, and he wasn't exactly the kind of player the Cougars could build around for consistent success either.

Nonetheless, due to his experience, Carlino remained a mainstay in the Cougars rotation in the beginning of the year. He started the first 14 games at point guard for the Cougars, and they struggled to find major, lasting success on the court. While they pulled off big wins over teams like Stanford and Texas, they also started off poorly in conference play, dropping their first two conference games of the year against Loyola Marymount and Pepperdine (both on the road but still damaging losses nonetheless).

After the loss to the Waves, head coach Dave Rose made a gutsy decision: he made the junior Carlino a bench player. The results for the Cougars? They are 5-0 in WCC play since Carlino was removed from the starting lineup. The Cougars have scored less than 1.20 points per possession in a game only once (against USF), and the recent stretch has been a big boost to their conference-only numbers, as they rate as the top offensive team in the WCC according to Adjusted Offensive rating (118.2). They lead in three WCC offensive categories according to Ken Pom (AdjO, Offensive Rebounding percentage and Tempo), and they rank in the Top 3 in four offensive categories as well (eFG percentage, turnover percentage, free throw rate and two point percentage). Furthermore, unlike some teams in conference (such as St. Mary's and USF), BYU has showed proficiency not only on the offensive end, but defensive end in conference play as well. They are second in the WCC in Defensive Efficiency (103.5) and rank third in categories such as opponent offensive rebounding percentage and opponent free throw rate, and second in opponent two-point percentage. After a stretch where the Cougars lost four straight games and many thought they were definitely NIT-bound, they have turned it around since the lineup-change and could make a case as an At-Large Tournament team if they finish as expected (Ken Pom projects them to finish with a 20-11 record) or slightly better. That was hard to imagine after they started 0-2 in conference after their loss to the Waves in Malibu and looked significantly behind conference favorites Gonzaga and St. Mary's (now they are ahead of St. Mary's in terms of getting an at-large bid).

While Rose's decision to move Carlino to the bench has obviously had positive effects for the team as a whole, it has also improved Carlino's numbers surprisingly. While some players who come off the bench play starter's minutes, Carlino has actually seen a decrease in minutes and has been used less in major lineups than before. Here is a list of the most used lineups for the Cougars in the past 5 games according to Ken Pom:

PG	SG	SF	PF	C	Pct
5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	12 Josh Sharp 6-7  185  Jr	33 Nate Austin 6-11  230  Jr	11.0
5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	0 Eric Mika 6-9  220  Fr	33 Nate Austin 6-11  230  Jr	10.1
2 Matt Carlino 6-2  175  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	0 Eric Mika 6-9  220  Fr	33 Nate Austin 6-11  230  Jr	6.2
2 Matt Carlino 6-2  175  Jr	20 Anson Winder 6-3  195  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	33 Nate Austin 6-11  230  Jr	4.4
2 Matt Carlino 6-2  175  Jr	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	33 Nate Austin 6-11  230  Jr	4.3
2 Matt Carlino 6-2  175  Jr	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	12 Josh Sharp 6-7  185  Jr	33 Nate Austin 6-11  230  Jr	4.1
5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	12 Josh Sharp 6-7  185  Jr	0 Eric Mika 6-9  220  Fr	3.5
2 Matt Carlino 6-2  175  Jr	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	0 Eric Mika 6-9  220  Fr	3.1
2 Matt Carlino 6-2  175  Jr	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	12 Josh Sharp 6-7  185  Jr	0 Eric Mika 6-9  220  Fr	2.9
5 Kyle Collinsworth 6-6  210  So	23 Skyler Halford 6-1  180  Jr	24 Frank Bartley 6-3  200  Fr	3 Tyler Haws 6-5  200  Jr	0 Eric Mika 6-9  220  Fr	2.8
				UNKNOWN	2.5

While Carlino has been primarily used in six of the ten lineups listed, he has not been used in the the top-two most played lineups. Thus, Carlino is not a "Ginobili-type" in the sense that he is a starter simply coming off the bench due to aesthetic or "strategic" reasons. Rose has preferred sophomore Kyle Collinsworth at the point for more of the critical minutes in the past five games, as evidenced by him running the point in the top-two most used lineups. It's hard to argue with the success as the Cougars are 5-0 in this span and playing some of their best ball of the season during this stretch.

But, this shakeup has turned out well for Carlino in terms of him improving his efficiency on the court. In the 14 games Carlino started this year, he only had five games where he posted offensive ratings in the triple digits. In the five games that Carlino has come off the bench, he has posted four games with ratings over 100, including a 150 rating against Santa Clara where he put up 15 points and 9 assists in only 24 minutes. Thanks to the recent stretch, his adjusted offensive rating has boosted up to 100.7 which would be a career high, and his turnover rate has dropped to 16.9 percent, which would be a career low, if the season ended today.

If you think about it, it is surprising Rose did not resort to this strategy sooner. Carlino, with his high usage rate (team high 28.1 percent) and high shot percentage (29.1), is the kind of player that can really spark a squad off the bench. He can bring instant offense in a short period of time, and he has the potential produce highly efficient numbers in a short period of time. However, when his minutes spread out, his efficiency becomes more inconsistent, because high-shot, high-usage players don't carry consistent success over a long period of time unless they're truly elite players (example: Carmelo Anthony can pull it off, but Ricky Davis cannot). While Carlino is good, he is not that kind of player skill-wise or athletically to do it over 30-plus minutes. But in 25 minutes and under? Carlino is the kind of player that can not only boost a team's offensive output, but also allow the starter's to get rest without the coaching staff worrying about the offense taking a step back with them on the bench. Carlino's role when he was a starter was always questionable because he wasn't the kind of player efficiency-wise that could carry a team, but in more limited minutes and as a sixth man? He's been the kind of player that has made BYU the most dangerous team right now in the WCC as well as a legitimate threat to challenge top-dog Gonzaga in the WCC Championship race.

Of course, Carlino is not the sole reason the Cougars have experienced success. Tyler Haws has also been a key reason for the Cougars' wave of success as he is posting a 116 offensive rating with a usage rate of 26.4. Furthermore, Collinsworth, with his size (6-6) and efficient play 109.5 rating and 24.6 assist rate) has filled in admirably in the starting point guard spot as only a sophomore. Despite those standout performances however, it is obvious that Rose has found the right formula for the Cougars to achieve WCC success centering on his decision to have Carlino coming off the bench. Carlino is the kind of player that can not only torch opposing WCC reserve guards, but he can also match up decently well against starters when in a pinch, which makes his role as a reserve more valuable than as a starter. Sure, his minutes have gone down (his minutes percentage has fallen to 68.4 percent, down from 71.8 a year ago), but his role serves the Cougars much better now than it did in the first 14 games of the year, and their record in that stretch has confirmed that. That may be tough to swallow for the former UCLA commit (after all, nobody would outright prefer to be a bench player than a starter), but if the Cougars ride this current rotation to a NCAA Tournament appearance, I'm sure Carlino and the Cougars program will be satisfied in retrospect with the changes that may have tapered from the pre-season expectations (which was for Carlino to probably be the team's centerpiece).