Most recent entries

  • Your 2016 kPOY: Brice Johnson
  • Spiking the football on the 30-second shot clock
  • Sweet 16 probabilities
  • Need scheduling help?
  • 2016 NCAA tournament log5
  • 2016 Big West tournament preview
  • 2016 WAC tournament preview
  • 2016 Sun Belt tournament preview
  • 2016 American tournament preview
  • 2016 Big Ten tournament preview
  • The good stuff

    At other venues...
  • ($)
  • Deadspin
  • Slate

  • Strategy
  • Whether to foul up 3 late
  • The value of 2-for-1’s
  • Whether to foul when tied (1, 2, 3)
  • Who's the best in-game coach?

  • Philosophy
  • All points are not created equal
  • Brady Heslip’s non-slump
  • The magic of negative motivation
  • A treatise on plus-minus
  • The preseason AP poll is great
  • The lack of information in close-game performance
  • Why I don’t believe in clutchness*

  • Fun stuff
  • The missing 1-point games
  • Which two teams last lost longest ago?
  • How many first-round picks will Kentucky have?
  • Prepare for the Kobe invasion
  • Predicting John Henson's free throw percentage
  • Can Derrick Williams set the three-point accuracy record?
  • Play-by-play Theater: earliest disqualification
  • Monthly Archives

  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • July 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • July 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003

  • RSS feed

    Why I won’t give up on Washington (or Kentucky)

    by Ken Pomeroy on Friday, February 25, 2011

    For ever and ever, analysts have put an emphasis on a team’s performance on the road when evaluating them. But is there such a thing as an otherwise great team being inherently bad on the road, even when taking home-court advantage into account? I don’t know the answer to that nor, I suspect, does anybody else. Oh you might think you know, but I’d like to suggest those people reconsider this idea.

    Don’t get me wrong, teams that play well on the road are generally going to be very good teams. That’s why one can predict a team’s home performance pretty well based on its work on the road. (More with respect to scoring margin than W-L record, though. Last season there was correlation of 0.39 between D-I teams’ home and road winning percentage. There was a correlation of 0.54 between their home and road scoring margin. This shouldn’t be surprising since outcome is less reliable than performance.)

    Last season, the top five teams in terms of scoring margin in conference road games went a combined 41-1 in conference home games. You can flip it around, too. The top five teams in terms of home scoring margin went 26-14 in conference road games, though that’s dragged down by the 3-6 mark that VCU posted on the road in CAA play despite a dominant effort at home. Should one have put more weight on VCU’s road play when evaluating their postseason chances? Perhaps they were a paper tiger, and their performance was inflated in games where a friendly crowd was cheering for them.

    The only way to really test that idea is to actually look at their postseason performance. It’s a small sample and one team doesn’t come close to proving anything. However, those that want to emphasize road play don’t have help in this case. VCU lost to Old Dominion in overtime in the CAA championship game, then won five in a row to win the CBI, including two road wins. 

    Outliers like VCU are the interesting cases. Especially the ones who played well enough at home to suggest they should also be dominant on the road, but who ended up underachieving in hostile arenas. There are still a few games left, but we have two such examples this season. One of those is Washington. With last Saturday’s loss at Arizona, the Huskies concluded their conference road schedule at 4-5. They are unbeaten at home with remaining contests against Washington State, USC, and UCLA.

    Despite the poor results away from whatever they’re calling UW’s home arena these days, Washington has actually outscored its opponents by 26 over nine games. (For reference, Ohio State has outscored its eight Big Ten road opponents by 29.) Still, averaging just a bit less than +3 points per game in road margin of victory looks odd when combined with the Huskies +20.3 average win margin at home.  Even accounting for the opponents’ home-court advantage, the Huskies have turned in some stinkers as the visiting team.

    Kentucky is in a worse predicament than Washington, having gone just 1-6 on the road, while winning all six SEC games at Rupp Arena. The Wildcats have been outscored by a total of nine points in their seven conference road games, while winning their home games by an average of 19.5.

    It’s easy to forget now, but a team with a similar profile last season was Duke. In going 8-0 at Cameron, the Blue Devils outscored ACC opponents by an average of 19.9 points per game. On the road, Duke went 5-3 including a lopsided loss to N.C. State, who won just four other conference games. Duke outscored opponents on the road by just 3.3 points per game. In addition, they lost their only two true road games in non-conference play, including a lopsided loss to eventual first-round loser Georgetown in the middle of conference play. Duke, of course, would go 9-0 in the post-season which included wins over Baylor and Butler, who both played close to home.

    The most extreme recent example of excellent home play not translating to the road was 2009 Missouri. They rolled through eight Big 12 home games unbeaten, outscoring foes by an average of 19.8 points per game. On the road they were 4-4, and slightly lucky to get four wins since they were outscored by an average of 2.9 points per game. The Tigers won the Big 12 tournament and as a three-seed, fell to UConn in the national quarterfinals.

    Don’t get me wrong, based on their road play, you wouldn’t consider either Washington or Kentucky an elite team. The Wildcats shouldn’t be getting taken to the wire by Ole Miss or Arkansas. The Huskies shouldn’t get handled by Oregon State. However, there’s no shame in last-possession losses at Florida or Alabama or Arizona, and the Cats’ and Dawgs’ relatively poor road play has been compounded by a dose of bad fortune.

    Every team is going to play some games above their average level and some games below their average level. If you assume those games occur at random (after you’ve factored in home-court advantage, of course), then you’ll have your occasional case like Washington or Kentucky that experiences these bad performances disproportionately on the road. Is this indicative of some fundamental flaw in both of these teams? Is there any reason to ignore stellar home performance at the expense of disappointing (and somewhat unlucky) road play?

    The recent examples of Duke, VCU, and Missouri would indicate that’s a mistake. Look, I’m sure it’s true that bad road teams tend to lose early in the NCAA tournament. But it’s not because there aren’t any home games in the tournament. It’s because bad road teams also tend to also be underachievers in general.

    Write off Washington and Kentucky if you must. But don’t do it because they can’t win on the road. You’re arbitrarily ignoring a significant part of their schedule, which in this case happens to be the part each team has played the best in (even when accounting for home-court advantage). If the basketball committee’s job is to select the best teams, I think they should have some empirical evidence that indicates that road games deserve more weight in identifying the best teams. I’ll keep an open mind, but until such evidence is presented, I remain skeptical.