Pomeroy preview: Indiana and Loyola

  • 12/22/2009 7:00 am in

Of the three opponents on the schedule between the Kentucky game and the start of the Big Ten slate on New Year’s Eve, the Pomeroy rankings suggest that Tuesday’s opponent, Loyola (MD), presents the biggest challenge. Let’s take a glance at the numbers (updated through Sunday’s games):


A couple of things stand out here: Loyola seems to be a respectable defensive team. They’re limiting opponents to a 42.9 effective field goal percentage, good for 27th best in the country. (Keep in mind that this number might be a bit deceiving due to a weak schedule. In their two games against top 100 Pomeroy opponents, Loyola was beaten 83-60 at West Virginia and 77-57 at Niagara.)

They’re also doing a decent job getting to the offensive glass. Their 35.9 offensive rebounding percentage is 79th in the country. Since defensive rebounding percentage has been a bit of anĀ AchillesĀ heel to this point for IU, this is definitely something to keep an eye on. (Tom Crean addressed the possibility of going to a bigger lineup as a solution for this problem on his radio show on Monday night.)

The good news for IU? Loyola turns it over at a high rate (23.1 percent), opponents are getting to the line at a good clip (44.2 percent opponent free throw rate) and their 46.5 percent effective field goal percentage is poor. Overall, Indiana holds an advantage in six of the ten categories referenced here and Pomeroy predicts a 72-66 win for the Hoosiers.

Filed to:

  • bhorns


  • Might want to post this over in the PTC thread:


  • GFDave

    Maybe Pomeroy can devise an equation that weights these stats by SOS. That would make for some interesting analysis.

  • The adjusted offense and defense numbers are adjusted for SOS, I believe.

  • GFDave

    I went over there to see and its unclear to me what the basis of the adjustments are. He explains a number of columns but not the adjusted O and D. Why? It seems those would need clarification.

    Anyway, a team's O and D FG, TO and Reb percentages are also effected by the strength of the opposition.

    Getting a little geeky here. I'm scaring myself (lol).

  • cooper

    I'd be interested to see what he considers a big lineup and who exactly he would add or take out. Being big doesn't really matter if you can't jump, block shots and rebound which none of our big men have shown the ability to consistently do. Adding another big man will take away from the offense and the ability to run.

    IU has two groups of big men, slow and plodding (TP, Capo) and raw and uncoordinated (Bawa, Jobe). Even though Creek, Elston and Watford are over 6'7 or 6'8 their games aren't big men games. However, look at the rebounding stats, the top 5 rebounders in order are, Watford, Rivers, Elston, Creek and Jones. Thats also our best offensive team so far.

    Why take out one of those guys and add TP, Jobe, or Capo? Neither of those three have shown the ability to rebound on a consistent basis and unless its a layup they haven't shown much on offense.

  • JerryCT

    I agree with yoru characterizations but respectfully disagree in one respect. Please watch this game and/or the last two on a replay and then tell me what you saw from Pritchard.

    On D: What you will see is that when the ball goes up he bodies immediately and prevents the rebound from his man. Often this enables another player to rebound . Of course other times he is helping Creek, Hull and Jones whose man has gone around them and cannot body his big man. He also disrupts the point ( eg last game ) when they set picks on our guards and then has mucho grande ground to cover to get back to rebound. No body on the team , NOBODY, does this better

    On O: He often begins the 1/2 court action with a screen away from the basket. if we shoot from there he is out of position. If we donot he is at least disruptive to their rebounders under the basket. He is a load to move and nobody moves him.

    ……………now if he could jump……….ball fake……..roll hard to the basket……..shoot the jumper….