Category Archives: Basketball

Will’s already said all that really needs to be said about Tennessee’s 83-77 overtime win over the Iowa Hawkeyes to advance to the Sweet 16 in the 2019 NCAA Tournament. The only additional takeaways from a four factors perspective are that the second half was not like the rest of the game and that overall, the Vols did just well enough to win.

What they needed to do was play inside-out, shoot well, and defend well without fouling too much. What they did was toe the line on all of that without somehow falling into the abyss. They still put up 20 threes, but most were open because they came after paint touches, and they hit them at a 40% clip. They held the Hawkeyes to 39% from the field and 33.3% from the arc, but they put them on the line 32 times doing it. Turnovers weren’t supposed to be a factor, but once again, Tennessee got overly charitable in this department, particularly in the second half.

That’s how you find yourself in an overtime game in the NCAA Tournament. But the Vols survived. And now they advance.

So, here’s a look at the four factors numbers for Tennessee’s next game against the Purdue Boilermakers. As before, the conclusions are up front, and the details follow:

Summary and Score Prediction

The goals for the Vols:

1. Rebound. Rebound. Rebound.
2. As always, play inside-out and shoot well.
3. Dial up the defensive aggression.
4. No more naps.

Four Factors: Straight-Up

Effective FG%

• Tennessee 55.2 (No. 21)
• Purdue 53.0 (No. 78)

Prior opponents:

• Iowa 52.9 (No. 77)
• Colgate 55.9 (No. 14)
• Auburn 53.9 (No. 51)
• Mississippi State 54.6 (No. 36)
• Kentucky 53.6 (No. 59)
• Ole Miss 53.5 (No. 64)
• LSU: 52.7 (No. 93)
• Vanderbilt: 50.3 (No. 198)
• Kentucky: 52.8 (No. 93)

Conclusions: Basically, Iowa.

Turnover %

• Tennessee 16.1 (No. 27) (but trending in the wrong direction quickly)
• Purdue 16.1 (No. 28)

Prior opponents:

• Iowa 17.2 (No. 83)
• Colgate 19.3 (No. 232)
• Auburn 18.3 (No. 151)
• Mississippi State 19.1 (No. 220)
• Kentucky 18.7 (No. 185)
• Ole Miss 18.7 (No. 172)
• LSU 19.0 (No. 196)
• Vanderbilt: 19.9 (No. 255)
• Kentucky: 18.5 (No. 158)

Conclusions: Basically, us. Let’s hope they’re trending in the wrong direction, too.

Offensive Rebound %

• Tennessee 31.9 (No. 63)
• Purdue 34.9 (No. 18)

Prior opponents:

• Iowa 29.8 (No. 114)
• Colgate 30.3 (No. 103)
• Auburn 33.5 (No. 39)
• Mississippi State 34.6 (No. 23)
• Kentucky 37.9 (No. 4)
• Ole Miss 31.9 (No. 64)
• LSU 37.4 (No. 6)
• Vanderbilt: 28.6 (No. 178)
• Kentucky: 38.3 (No. 3)

Conclusions: Uh oh. Basically, these guys are like Kentucky and LSU. Let’s hope they don’t shoot a lot of free throws, too.

Free Throw Rate

• Tennessee 33.0 (No. 183)
• Purdue 29.5 (No. 275)

Prior opponents:

• Iowa 42.0 (No. 16)
• Colgate 28.9 (No. 285)
• Auburn 30.9 (No. 245)
• Mississippi State 33.0 (No. 188)
• Kentucky 42.2 (No. 14)
• Ole Miss 32.8 (No. 200)
• LSU 39.8 (No. 29)
• Vanderbilt: 44.8 (No. 7)
• Kentucky: 41 (No. 22)

Conclusions: Oh, good. Basically, these guys get to the line about the same as Colgate. Time to dial up that aggression on defense, guys.

Those are the straight-up comparisons of the teams’ respective averages in the four factors, but what about the fact that those numbers are impacted in any given game by the opponent?

Four Factors: Opponent impact

Effective FG%

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s EFG% is 55.2 (No. 21), while Purdue’s defense against that is 48.7 (No. 80). They defend much better than Iowa, so expect good shots to be more difficult to find. Remember, we’re not bowling; we’re playing basketball, and if we’re not shooting as well, Purdue might just be part of the reason.

When Purdue has the ball

The Boilermakers’ EFG% is 53.0 (No. 78), while Tennessee’s shooting defense is 47.6 (No. 36). The numbers are essentially the same in this category as they were for the Iowa game during which the Vols did pretty well limiting the Hawkeyes’ EFG%.

Conclusions

Expect Tennessee to have more difficulty getting good shots against Purdue than it did against Iowa. On the other end, the starting point is pretty much suggesting that this is the same game as the one the Vols just played. Overall, they did fine defending against Iowa, and if they can eliminate that second half lapse, they’ll be better than fine in this category against Purdue. They should also be able to turn up the defense a bit due to the Boilermakers’ usual free throw rate (see below).

Bottom line, expect a bigger challenge on the offensive end for the Vols, but hopefully it’s easier enough on the defensive end to still win the EFG% game.

Turnover %

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s turnover % is 16.1 (No. 27), while Purdue’s defensive counterpart to this category is 19.2 (No. 122).

When Purdue has the ball

Purdue’s turnover % is 16.1 (No. 28), while’s Tennessee’s ability to force turnovers is 18.2 (No. 183).

Conclusions

I’ve been wrong on turnovers ever since the Vols started playing tournament teams, so I fully expect Tennessee to give away a bucketful of turnovers despite what the numbers say. It will probably come during nap time, which starts at the second-half tip and continues through the under 12:00 timeout.

Offensive Rebounding %

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s OR% is 31.9 (No. 63), while Purdue’s defense in that category is 26.5 (No. 97).

When Purdue has the ball

The Boilermakers’ OR% is 34.9 (No. 18), while the Vols’ defense in that category is 30.2 (No. 262). This is Purdue’s biggest advantage of the game.

Conclusions

That’s a huge disparity between what Purdue does best and what the Vols’ do worst. It’s downright frightening.

But honestly, since we started doing this four-factors feature months ago, I really don’t remember OR% ever having much of an impact on the outcome of any particular game.

Still, all the good EFG% defense in the world won’t matter if you just keep giving them do-overs. I’d expect the team to put some additional emphasis on defensive rebounding. They may not win in this category (although they did last year), but they need to make sure it isn’t what costs them the game.

Free Throw Rate

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s FT Rate is 33.0 (No. 183), while Purdue’s defense against that is 31.4 (No. 138).

When Purdue has the ball

The Boilermakers’ FT Rate is 29.5 (No. 275), while Tennessee’s defense against that is 34.4 (No. 224).

Conclusions

This to me says that it’s okay for the Vols to dial up the defensive pressure unless and until it starts triggering bad fouls.

Summary and Score Prediction

It should go without saying that anything can happen in a game like this, but it appears that the Vols should end the game with a better shooting percentage than the Boilermakers and Purdue should end up with more opportunities due primarily to their rebounding advantage. If Tennessee decides to get turnover-happy again, it could end a magical season.

The goals for the Vols:

1. Rebound. Rebound. Rebound.
2. As always, play inside-out and shoot well.
3. Dial up the defensive aggression.
4. No more naps.

This game is basically a coin flip. KenPom gives Tennessee a 49% chance of winning and puts the score at Purdue 75, Tennessee 74. The current line is Tennessee -1.

Go Vols.

Last year Tennessee was on the wrong side of a good story and a bad bounce, sending Loyola-Chicago to the Sweet 16 and the Vols to think about next year. For the first 20 minutes today, the Vols were the good story: total annihilation of Iowa, a can-you-top-this response to Purdue’s triumph over Villanova.

That match-up is still on, but it had to wait a lot longer than we would’ve liked.

Again, there are no bad wins in this tournament. So just the same as we didn’t have to belabor how Colgate rallied to take a two-point lead midway through the second half in round one, we don’t have to burden ourselves with the excruciating details of Iowa’s second half rally today. The high points, anyway, are Lamonte Turner splashing a three after getting the wrong end of a terrible call, putting Tennessee back up three after Iowa tied the game on the ensuing free throws.

Let’s back up, though, to talk about one detail. Grant Williams hit a shot with 10:02 to play that put the Vols up 13. Iowa was game, but the Vols still had plenty of cushion. In the last ten minutes, the Vols made two shots: Lamonte Turner’s twisting layup to put the Vols up five with seven minutes to go, and the aforementioned clutch three with two minutes to play.

And then in overtime – with Admiral Schofield apparently benching himself – the Vols scored on their first four possessions. None bigger than this one:

https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/1109884731288514560

49 points in the first half. 22 points in the second half. 12 points in overtime. And the Vols advance.

Here’s a picture to keep in mind:

PRETTY SWEET. pic.twitter.com/QHO7LxKbn8

— Tennessee Basketball (@Vol_Hoops) March 24, 2019

Fans like us sit between the people in this photo. Today makes six trips to the Sweet 16 since 2000 for Tennessee, and five in the last 13 years. It’s happened enough to make it a reasonable expectation for a Tennessee team as good as this one. And this one just won its 31st game, tying 2008 for the school record, and remains atop the program leaderboard in KenPom. There are still plenty of reasons to believe this team can be the best in school history; it’s really just one more win away from ending that argument.

In the center is Rick Barnes, who’s now made seven Sweet 16’s: one at Clemson, five at Texas, and today. Barnes also won the next game three times at Texas, and made the Final Four in 2003. He hasn’t necessarily been to this point much more than us, but he’s been beyond it far more often. I don’t know how he feels about having water dumped all over him today only because he knows how he feels about having water dumped all over him when you’re going to the Final Four.

But I can tell how the guys holding the water feel about it.

We’ll nitpick and break down and figure out how to beat Purdue. But for now – at least for today – this picture helps me remember the guys on this team weren’t just heartbroken a season ago, they were 16-16 two years ago and 15-19 the year before that.

We’ve been here, Rick’s been here and more. But for this group – best in school history or not – this is history. It was almost the wrong kind of history with the biggest blown lead in the tournament. But, just as the Vols found out last year in this thing, almost doesn’t count. So instead, this team joyously plays on.

The next part looks different than last year too.

Part of 2018’s heartbreak was how the bracket came apart: had the Vols survived Loyola, they would’ve joined No. 5 Kentucky, No. 9 Kansas State, and No. 7 Nevada in Atlanta for a trip to the Final Four. This time, No. 3 Purdue is the next man up, with No. 1 Virginia and No. 9 Oklahoma set to meet tonight to determine who gets to face No. 13 UC Irvine (EDIT: or No. 12 Oregon, who apparently I’m discounting because we all still want to believe in Cinderella). So sure, the Sooners could win tonight and make an easier on-paper path in the Elite Eight. But Purdue, as demonstrated against Villanova last night, is a monster: the Vols are favored by a point in the opening line, the Boliermakers by a point in KenPom.

We’ll get to that, in great and joyous detail. And looking ahead, it’s not just that:

Every 1, 2 and 3 seed is still alive. The only time every 1, 2 and 3 seed reached the Sweet 16 was 2009. While there are a bunch of big favorites today that look like they should win, history suggests one of them, or one of the 3 seeds will go down today.

— Chris Fallica (@chrisfallica) March 24, 2019

No. 1 North Carolina is up eight on Washington at halftime as I type. Duke, Virginia, Texas Tech, and Houston are all left on today’s slate among top three seeds. But man oh man, the potential in this Sweet 16. Maybe you didn’t like the first weekend because it lacked chaos (in the destination, because it was certainly present in the journey). But if you like great college basketball, look at what’s already out there next weekend:

• No. 2 Tennessee vs No. 3 Purdue
• No. 2 Michigan State vs No. 3 LSU
• No. 1 North Carolina (+8 at half) vs No. 5 Auburn
• No. 1 Gonzaga vs No. 4 Florida State
• No. 2 Michigan vs No. 3 Texas Tech or No. 6 Buffalo

And then, we could add a Duke/Virginia Tech rematch, another 2/3 battle with Kentucky and Houston, and No. 1 Virginia still alive too. This has the potential to be an all-time Sweet 16.

This can still be an all-time Tennessee team too. They’re going to have to be better against Purdue. But for now, for today…let’s celebrate. This team, two seasons removed from being 13th in the SEC media poll and 53 weeks removed from second round heartbreak, is going to the Sweet 16.

Keep getting better.

Go Vols.

With a crazy Round 1 of the NCAA Tournament in the books, here’s the schedule for Round 2:

For Vols fans, of course, the biggie is Tennessee-Iowa at 12:10 on CBS. Early service, it is.

Other games in the Vols’ region are Villanova-Purdue at 8:40 on TNT and a couple of games tomorrow night: Oklahoma-Virginia at 7:45 tomorrow on truTV and UC-Irvine-Oregon at 9:40 on TBS. Should the Vols advance to the Sweet 16, they’ll play the winner of tonight’s Villanova-Purdue game.

Bottom line: If you can’t be in front of your TV all day both days, at least be there tonight at 8:40, tomorrow at 12:10, and tomorrow night from 7:45 until you can’t stay up any longer.

Full disclosure: I grew up 60 miles from Iowa City, so I have a fondness for these people. Admiral Schofield may not like them, but I do. Of course, that doesn’t mean I don’t desperately want to beat the shorts off ’em tomorrow. Go get ’em, Admiral.

Here’s a look at the teams’ respective four factors numbers and what they have to say about what the Vols need to do to advance. Because this post is long and full of numbers, I’m posting the conclusions up front, details to follow:

Summary and Score Prediction

The goals for the Vols:

1. Shoot well. Play inside-out. Only take threes if they are wide open or if your name is Admiral Schofield and there’s less than three minutes on the clock in a close game. Or if it’s the last possession and your name is Lamonte Turner.
2. Defend.
3. Don’t foul. Kyle Alexander, you’re going to have to block those shots from a different zip code, son. We believe in you.

Four Factors: Straight-Up

Effective FG%

• Tennessee 55.2 (No. 21)
• Iowa 52.9 (No. 77)

Prior opponents:

• Colgate 55.9 (No. 14)
• Auburn 53.9 (No. 51)
• Mississippi State 54.6 (No. 36)
• Kentucky 53.6 (No. 59)
• Ole Miss 53.5 (No. 64)
• LSU: 52.7 (No. 93)
• Vanderbilt: 50.3 (No. 198)
• Kentucky: 52.8 (No. 93)

Conclusions: So, a little better than LSU and a little worse than Kentucky and Ole Miss shooting the ball. Good to know.

Turnover %

• Tennessee 15.8 (No. 25)
• Iowa 17.2 (No. 83)

Prior opponents:

• Colgate 19.3 (No. 232)
• Auburn 18.3 (No. 151)
• Mississippi State 19.1 (No. 220)
• Kentucky 18.7 (No. 185)
• Ole Miss 18.7 (No. 172)
• LSU 19.0 (No. 196)
• Vanderbilt: 19.9 (No. 255)
• Kentucky: 18.5 (No. 158)

Conclusions: Wow, we’ve played some teams that are terrible at protecting the ball. That thing’s valuable, y’all. Anyway, the Hawkeyes have figured out that you need the ball in order to score points.

Offensive Rebound %

• Tennessee 31.7 (No. 74)
• Iowa 29.8 (No. 114)

Prior opponents:

• Colgate 30.3 (No. 103)
• Auburn 33.5 (No. 39)
• Mississippi State 34.6 (No. 23)
• Kentucky 37.9 (No. 4)
• Ole Miss 31.9 (No. 64)
• LSU 37.4 (No. 6)
• Vanderbilt: 28.6 (No. 178)
• Kentucky: 38.3 (No. 3)

Conclusions: Wow, we’ve played some teams that are really good at offensive rebounding. Fortunately for us, Iowa is not one of those teams. Then again, neither was Colgate. Never mind.

Free Throw Rate

• Tennessee 32.9 (No. 184)
• Iowa 42.0 (No. 16)

Prior opponents:

• Colgate 28.9 (No. 285)
• Auburn 30.9 (No. 245)
• Mississippi State 33.0 (No. 188)
• Kentucky 42.2 (No. 14)
• Ole Miss 32.8 (No. 200)
• LSU 39.8 (No. 29)
• Vanderbilt: 44.8 (No. 7)
• Kentucky: 41 (No. 22)

Conclusions: Uh-oh. Somebody figure out what we did right against Vanderbilt to hold them to only six free throw attempts and push repeat, stat.

Those are the straight-up comparisons of the teams’ respective averages in the four factors, but what about the fact that those numbers are impacted in any given game by the opponent?

Four Factors: Opponent impact

Effective FG%

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s EFG% is 55.2 (No. 21), while Iowa’s defense against that is 51.4 (No. 204). This appears to be the biggest advantage for the Vols. Good news, although I will point out once again that our good EFG% is due more to two-pointers than threes. Working inside-out is especially important tomorrow, as Will points out that not only is Tennessee’s offense better inside the arc than outside it, Iowa’s defense is better outside it than in it.

When Iowa has the ball

The Hawkeyes’ EFG% is 52.9 (No. 77), which means they generally don’t shoot as well as Colgate. Tennessee’s shooting defense is 47.7 (No. 39), so as long as the guys can do so without getting into foul trouble, they should be able to defend.

Conclusions

Tennessee generally shoots well, and Iowa generally doesn’t defend well. On the other end, Iowa is merely okay at shooting the ball, while Tennessee is mostly good at defense. If language was math, this would be the formula:

uT(gsw) – uI(gddw) >= uI(mOk) – uT(mG)

To me, that looks like a positive result. For any Iowa Hawkeyes fans that have found their way here, this is a joke. But if you want to post it all over the Iowa boards as an example of redneck ignorance, feel free. Just as long as you click on an ad while you’re here. They’re contextual, so I’m sure you can find a tractor you like at a nice discount.

Turnover %

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s turnover % is 15.8 (No. 25), while Iowa’s defensive counterpart to this category is 18.2 (No. 189).

When Iowa has the ball

Iowa’s turnover % is 17.2 (No. 83), while’s Tennessee’s ability to force turnovers is 18.3 (No. 181).

Conclusions

We should protect the ball fine in this game, but so should they.

Offensive Rebounding %

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s OR% is 31.7 (No. 74), while Iowa’s defense in that category is 29.1 (No. 222).

When Iowa has the ball

The Hawkeyes’ OR% is 29.8 (No. 114), while the Vols’ defense in that category is 30.2 (No. 259).

Conclusions

It appears from these numbers alone that neither team rebounds the ball particularly well. Expect all missed shots to just go out of bounds. Hawkeyes fans: This is also a joke. Ads are over there.

Free Throw Rate

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s FT Rate is 32.9 (No. 184), while Iowa’s defense against that is 28.5 (No. 64). Like Colgate, to the extent they defend, they do it without fouling much.

When Iowa has the ball

The Hawkeyes’ FT Rate is 42.0 (No. 16), while Tennessee’s defense against that is 33.8 (No. 209). This appears to be the biggest advantage for Iowa.

Conclusions

It does not appear that turnovers or rebounding will have much impact on the outcome of this game. I’d expect both teams to just sort of do what they do in those categories and end up at something approximating a stalemate.

But each team has an apparent advantage over the other in the other two categories that matter most. The Vols look better-positioned in EFG% on both sides of the ball. Hopefully, that translates into a better shooting percentage than the Hawkeyes and that in turn translates into more points than them from the field.

On the other hand, the Hawkeyes appear to have an advantage at getting to the free throw line. We don’t know how to get there (Grant Williams is really the only exception), and the Hawkeyes are not going to show us even if we stop and ask for directions. They have a renewable FastPass, and they’re keeping it in their own greedy little corn-calloused hands.

The problem with the Hawkeyes possibly getting to the foul line much more often isn’t just the free points for them but the foul trouble for us.

Can Kyle Alexander stay off the bench and on the floor?

Will our shorter-than-most rotation bite us in the behind?

Will John Fulkerson and Derrick Walker save the day?

Intrigue!

Summary and Score Prediction

The goals for the Vols:

1. Shoot well. Play inside-out. Only take threes if they are wide open or if your name is Admiral Schofield and there’s less than three minutes on the clock in a close game. Or if it’s the last possession and your name is Lamonte Turner.
2. Defend.
3. Don’t foul. Kyle Alexander, you’re going to have to block those shots from a different zip code, son. We believe in you.

KenPom gives Tennessee a 74% chance of winning this one and puts the score at Tennessee 83, Iowa 76.

Go Vols.

When last we met, ’twas overtime in Dayton, and we started asking ourselves, “Can Josh Richardson – Josh Richardson – be the alpha for this team?” Five years and two coaches later, Josh Richardson is the leading scorer for the Miami Heat, and Tennessee is aiming to be the the alpha in college basketball.

The Vols looked like it – as much as a No. 2 is supposed to against a No. 15 – for significant stretches of the first half against Colgate. In the second half, Jordan Burns decided he wanted a piece of that action for himself, and took it until Admiral Schofield wrestled it away in the final minutes.

Winning is the only thing that matters now, so no need to belabor yesterday’s performance specifically. A tip of the cap to Jordan Burns. But how does yesterday’s performance play into what this Tennessee team will do with this tournament, with a not-dissimilar opponent from Iowa City headed our way next?

The Three & Tennessee

The Vols were 9-of-26 (34.6%) from the arc against Colgate; too many, some will say. And it’s true, the Vols are 22-1 when they take less than 22 threes, 8-4 when they take 22+. But for every bad – 8-of-22 at LSU, 7-of-25 at Kentucky, 7-of-27 vs Kansas, 9-of-28 at Auburn? There’s also this: 10-of-21 vs Kentucky in Nashville, 8-of-22 vs Kentucky in Knoxville, 6-of-23 vs Mississippi State in Knoxville, 9-of-23 at Florida, and 12-of-29 vs Gonzaga.

And Tennessee’s second-highest percentage from the arc on the year is…Auburn in the SEC Tournament, where if you said the Vols would hit 8-of-15 (53.3%) coming in, we’d have praised their patience and assumed we cut down the nets.

The three isn’t Tennessee’s outright strength. But it’s not always Tennessee’s outright enemy. All those great memories we’ve made this year? At the end of games, they look like this:

• Grant Williams makes a play, or
• Somebody hits a three

And often the one leads to the other, which is really where Tennessee’s best basketball lives: a touch for Grant, then a good shot or good ball movement. At times Colgate crashed four guys on Williams; he has to pass, and those guys have to take that open shot. Admiral Schofield hits 41.6% on the year, Jordan Bowden 36.1%. Those guys need to shoot that shot.

Just maybe not against Iowa.

The Three & Iowa

The Hawkeyes allow just 32.3% from the arc, 59th nationally.

The Hawkeyes allow 53.6% inside the arc, 306th nationally.

They’re not just some group getting hammered inside: Iowa is 63rd in opponent free throw rate. But when you put their two-point defensive numbers together with the assist rate they allow (58.3%, 316th nationally), this is a team you slice up with good ball movement.

Tennessee’s assist numbers have gone down as the competition has gone up in the last month. The Vols have nine games on the year with less than 15 assists; seven of them have come in the last 11 games overall, including only 13 assists vs Colgate. That’s a good number to think about for Iowa: when opponents have more than 15 assists, Iowa is 7-9. When it’s 18+, Iowa is 2-7. And when opponents have 15 or fewer assists, Iowa is 16-2.

There’s a pacing issue here as well. In the Big Ten, Iowa is second overall in tempo and first in shortest offensive possession length. But they’ll only be the seventh-fastest team Tennessee has faced this year.

The Vols should be able to get the shots they want against this defense. Will the same be true on the other end of the floor?

The Defense Must Improve to Reach a Championship Level

There are no guarantees. In the first round, some elite offenses met their match: farewell to Iowa State (#10 offense KenPom), 6-of-22 from the arc against Ohio State; our friends from Starkville (#15 offense) watched Liberty shoot 12-of-25 (48%) from the arc. And on the other end of the spectrum, Top 10 defenses from Wisconsin (#3), Kansas State (#6), and VCU (#7) all went out in the first round.

The Hawkeyes are 14th in offensive efficiency, putting them right next to Mississippi State; Villanova, who could be next, is 16th. Tennessee has seen better from Gonzaga, Auburn, Kentucky, and LSU, but the Hawkeyes are still potent.

The biggest talking point in this match-up should still be what Tennessee’s offense can do inside the arc against Iowa’s defense. But if the Hawkeyes get hot from the arc, like Colgate, the narrative can change in a hurry. Iowa shoots 36.5% from the arc, 66th nationally. Their real strength has been getting to the free throw line: 16th nationally in free throw rate, led by 6’9″ Tyler Cook. If you watched them play Cincinnati, you know size is definitely a factor: Cook and 6’11” Luka Garza will go hard to the offensive glass, and much of Iowa’s offense runs through them. And the rest of these guys will put it up from three, again, much like Colgate:

• Jordan Bohannon 76-of-199, 38.2%
• Joe Wieskamp 58-of-134, 43.3%
• Nicholas Baer 45-of-116, 38.8%
• Isaiah Moss 45-of-109, 41.3%

It may surprise you to know Tennessee has won each of its ten worst performances defending against the three. Colgate’s 51.7% was second on the year, behind South Carolina hitting 14-of-23 (60.9%) in Knoxville. Some of Tennessee’s best wins are on that list, including Kentucky in Nashville, Louisville, at Ole Miss, and Gonzaga. The Vols have been good enough to not just survive against hot-shooting teams, but beat some of the best teams on their schedule and in the nation.

But in March, it only takes one of these going wrong to end you. Colgate flirted with it yesterday, Iowa may again tomorrow. And Tennessee, a seven-to-nine point favorite depending on who you ask, may again just overcome it on the offensive end, or make the plays, again, down the stretch.

Tennessee’s offense is that good. If the Vols are looking to cut down nets, they’ll have to be better on the defensive end. Iowa would be a good place to start.

The Vols and Hawkeyes go right away on Sunday: 12:10 PM ET, CBS. Louisville awaits.

Go Vols.

Tennessee’s NCAA Tournament history goes something like this: after the field was expanded to 64 teams in 1985, the Vols didn’t make the Sweet 16 until 2000. With the turn of the century came better basketball: Tennessee played its way to the second weekend in 2000, 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2014. The Vols can make it six times in the last 20 years with wins on Friday and Sunday; that math sends every senior to the Sweet 16 at least once on average. Three other times since 1985, the Vols lost in the second round despite receiving a seed projected to make it to the second weekend: 1999 (No. 4), 2006 (No. 2), and last season (No. 3).

Of course, only the 2010 squad made it through to the Elite Eight, and almost made it to the Final Four. Making it to a regional final thus becomes a clear indicator of an all-time season at Tennessee, no matter what preceded it. In this year’s case, better basketball but no hardware came before a chance to play through the geographically-friendly confines of the South region as its No. 2 seed.

In Knoxville, winning two games puts you on a great list. Winning three puts you atop it. And we’ll hang your own banner for winning four; two of them if you win six.

It all starts today, though thankfully Tennessee starts tomorrow, which gives us 16 games before we become emotionally compromised, no matter what happens to your bracket. Tennessee’s past history and present seed point to the Elite Eight as a reasonable goal; the team atop the region being number one in KenPom by a healthy margin also presents one scenario where you just get beat by a better team at region’s end.

Anything can happen between now and then. And make no mistake: this Tennessee team is definitely good enough to envision another scenario where it wins the whole Fulmerized thing.

For now, let’s take a look at Tennessee’s path to the Elite Eight in comparison to its predecessors who were seeded high enough to get there. Last year stands out because of the chaos that happened in Tennessee’s region: KenPom No. 1 Virginia down to a No. 16 seed in round one, KenPom No. 4 Cincinnati down to Nevada in round two. The Vols at No. 3 fell to Sister Jean in round two. But that path wasn’t looking easy at all when the tournament began. It’s always going to be harder to make the case for an Elite Eight from a No. 3 seed. Let’s look instead at Tennessee’s other two No. 2 seeds.

Round One

• 2006 Greensboro: Winthrop (KenPom 80)
• 2008 Birmingham: American (KenPom 149)
• 2019 Columbus: Colgate (KenPom 127)

All geographically friendly, but not all opponents created equal. Bruce Pearl’s first team was 19-3 (10-1), lost at Alabama, then won at Florida to secure the SEC East and get to 20-4 (11-2). From there, yuck: back-to-back home losses to Arkansas and Kentucky, a road win at Vanderbilt, then one-and-done in the SEC Tournament to South Carolina. The committee still awarded a No. 2 seed, but Winthrop almost pulled the upset. But…

The 2008 Vols handled American 72-57 behind four threes from JaJuan Smith. This year, Colgate checks in at 127th in KenPom, the highest of the No. 15 seeds (Montana 137, Abilene Christian 146, Bradley 161) but nothing as scary as Winthrop on paper. KenPom likes the Vols by 15 points.

Round Two

• 2006: No. 7 Wichita State (KenPom 36 pre-tournament)
• 2008: No. 7 Butler (KenPom 26 pre-tournament)
• 2019: No. 7 Cincinnati (KenPom 32) or No. 10 Iowa (KenPom 36)

Before Wichita was Wichita, they were a No. 7 seed that hadn’t won an NCAA Tournament game since 1981. They won two by beating the Vols in the second round in 2006, turning back a five-point Tennessee lead with under six minutes to play. Mark Turgeon left for the Texas A&M job the following year, leading to Gregg Marshall’s arrival. On that day in Greensboro, the Shockers hit 50% from the floor and 9-of-16 60% from the arc; that’ll get you beat.

The real seeding travesty was 2008. Butler was 29-3 on Selection Sunday and ranked 11th in the AP poll, but was given a No. 7 seed opposite the Vols. This was Brad Stevens’ first year as head coach, and they almost pulled it off: Tennessee won 76-71 in overtime, closing the game on a 10-3 run.

This year Cincinnati presents a challenge in geography. But if you remove that from the equation and I asked who you wanted to play in the second round among No. 7 seeds Louisville (17th KenPom), Wofford (21st), Nevada (25th), and Cincinnati (32nd)? You’d probably agree with Mr. Pomeroy. Iowa is the second-highest No. 10 seed in KenPom, but behind the Gators, who couldn’t be matched up with Tennessee in the second round.

The geography is good for Tennessee in general, bad for Cincinnati specifically, but the potential second round opponents are about what you’d expect from a 7/10 match-up. And the Vols avoided getting into it with an under-seeded mid-major for the second year in a row.

Potential Sweet 16 Opponents

• 2006 Washington DC: No. 3 North Carolina (KenPom 8), No. 11 George Mason (KenPom 25)
• 2008 Charlotte: No. 3 Louisville (KenPom 11)
• 2019 Louisville: No. 3 Purdue (KenPom 10)

Speaking of under-seeded mid-majors, George Mason would’ve been the foe had the Vols closed against Wichita in 2006. They ultimately went through No. 1 seed UConn to get to the Final Four.

Tennessee’s seeding in 2008 is, again, well-discussed at this point. The Cardinals were a bad match-up, though in KenPom all the No. 3 seeds were bunched together that year. There was no easy road through Charlotte anyway: No. 1 North Carolina was waiting in the Elite Eight. 2008 remains the only year all four No. 1 seeds advanced to the Final Four.

This year, in KenPom, Purdue and Texas Tech are 9th and 10th, the class of the No. 3 seeds. Houston, a big winner in NET, is 15th; LSU is 18th, but probably not an option for the Vols with both coming from the SEC.

Further down the list, Villanova is 26th in KenPom, but they get no prize right away: St. Mary’s is 30th, easily the highest-rated No. 11 seed (Ohio State is second at 44th).

A date with Purdue in Louisville would be lots of fun; the Boilermakers are a shade closer to the arena than the Volunteers. And, again, I think it’s what you have to expect in a 2/3 Sweet 16 match-up, if we get it: both teams are really good. You can nitpick a couple of things as always, but I think this bracket is reasonable. We can worry about Virginia if/when we both get there, but Tennessee’s road to the program’s second ever Elite Eight is one this team is capable of handling.

Enjoy the ride.

March Madness is officially here. Here’s our list of games today and tomorrow for Round 1 of the NCAA Tournament. The following are the games in the Vols’ region.

Of the eight games in the Vols’ region, two of them are tonight, and the rest are tomorrow. The two most important are Tennessee-Colgate tomorrow at 2:45 on CBS and the next game up for the Vols (assuming they win) between Iowa and Cincinnati. That one’s on CBS at 12:15 tomorrow.

The rest of the bracket

Much of the fun this time of year, of course, is rooting for your bracket, so we’ve included a full schedule of all Round 1 games below. And if you just want to root for upsets to clear the path for Tennessee, hey, your prerogative.

If you’re reading this before the games tip, be sure to enter your bracket into our GRT group.

The 2-seed Tennessee Volunteers take on the 15-seed Colgate Raiders Friday at 2:45 ET in the first round of the 2019 NCAA Tournament, and the winner advances to meet either Cincinnati or Iowa sometime Sunday.

In the history of 2/15 matchups, the 2-seeds hold a 128-8 (94%) record, so it’s not unreasonable to expect the Vols to advance. But here’s the thing. The NCAA Tournament is designed not only to funnel the best teams to each other in the late rounds, match them up head-to-head, and see who survives. It’s also designed to give a ton of lower-seeded teams the opportunity to avdance by upsetting better teams. So the goal for good teams isn’t just to coast to the second weekend and then see what you can do. You also have to avoid upsets to lower-seeded teams along the way.

Those upsets often come in the form of bad matchups, so let’s take a look at the teams’ respective four factors numbers to see if there’s any reason to be worried.

Four Factors: Straight-Up

Effective FG%

• Tennessee 55.3 (No. 20)
• Colgate 55.9 (No. 14)

Prior opponents:

• Auburn 53.9 (No. 51)
• Mississippi State 54.6 (No. 36)
• Kentucky 53.6 (No. 59)
• Ole Miss 53.5 (No. 64)
• LSU: 52.7 (No. 93)
• Vanderbilt: 50.3 (No. 198)
• Kentucky: 52.8 (No. 93)

Conclusions: Watch out. These guys can shoot, and they’re better from the arc than from the field. The good news is that they don’t take an Auburn-ton of three-pointers, so this doesn’t appear to be Vols kryptonite. They average 9 made threes per game, so they’re not likely to hit 15 of them like we saw in the SEC Tournament championship game, but still, it’s a danger to avoid.

Turnover %

• Tennessee 15.9 (No. 25)
• Colgate 19.3 (No. 232)

Prior opponents:

• Auburn 18.3 (No. 151)
• Mississippi State 19.1 (No. 220)
• Kentucky 18.7 (No. 185)
• Ole Miss 18.7 (No. 172)
• LSU 19.0 (No. 196)
• Vanderbilt: 19.9 (No. 255)
• Kentucky: 18.5 (No. 158)

Conclusions: Different game, same story. The paper says Tennessee protects the ball, and its opponent does not. That same story has recently too often ended with the Vols giving way too many turnovers, though, so . . . twist!

Offensive Rebound %

• Tennessee 31.6 (No. 75) (Vols have been trending the right direction in this category)
• Colgate 30.3 (No. 103)

Prior opponents:

• Auburn 33.5 (No. 39)
• Mississippi State 34.6 (No. 23)
• Kentucky 37.9 (No. 4)
• Ole Miss 31.9 (No. 64)
• LSU 37.4 (No. 6)
• Vanderbilt: 28.6 (No. 178)
• Kentucky: 38.3 (No. 3)

Conclusions: Good news for the Vols here, as Colgate is not nearly as good at getting their own misses as Tennessee’s recent competition.

Free Throw Rate

• Tennessee 33.4 (No. 175)
• Colgate 28.9 (No. 285)

Prior opponents:

• Auburn 30.9 (No. 245)
• Mississippi State 33.0 (No. 188)
• Kentucky 42.2 (No. 14)
• Ole Miss 32.8 (No. 200)
• LSU 39.8 (No. 29)
• Vanderbilt: 44.8 (No. 7)
• Kentucky: 41 (No. 22)

Conclusions: The good news here is that Colgate is, as you’d guess, neither Kentucky nor LSU. The bad news is that Auburn wasn’t, either.

Those are the straight-up comparisons of the teams’ respective averages in the four factors, but what about the fact that those numbers are impacted in any given game by the opponent?

Four Factors: Opponent impact

Effective FG%

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s EFG% is 55.3 (No. 20), while Colgate’s defense against that is 50.6 (No. 162). That’s about like Auburn. The Vols’ excellent EFG%, by the way, is built on two-pointers, not three-pointers.

When Colgate has the ball

The Raiders’ EFG% is 55.9 (No. 14), which makes them even better than Auburn in this category. Tennessee’s shooting defense is 47.4 (No. 35).

Conclusions

I know this is Colgate. I know this is a 2/15 matchup. And I know that Tennessee is like a 15-point favorite. But I don’t like this. At all.

Turnover %

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s turnover % is 15.9 (No. 25), while Colgate’s defensive counterpart to this category is 18.0 (No. 212).

When Colgate has the ball

Colgate’s turnover % is terrible at 19.3 (No. 232), but as we’ve been saying all year, Tennessee’s not especially good at forcing turnovers, either. The Vols’ number here is 18.2 (No. 188).

Conclusions

My new favorite soapbox is reminding folks that basketball is not bowling or golf. It’s not just you against you, it’s you against you and an opponent actively engaged in attempting to make you look bad. Tennessee failed on both counts last Sunday. They weren’t their best selves. But Auburn also had something to do with how poorly Tennessee played. The Tigers are especially good at creating turnovers, and that made the Vols look like they couldn’t even accomplish the most fundamental goals of basketball, like dribbling or passing to teammates.

All of that is to say this: If and when Tennessee gets beat in this year’s tournament, it’s going to fall to either (1) a great team, or (2) a team with the kryptonite composed of both terrific and abundant three-point shooting and an ability to create extra possessions through turnovers (and/or offensive rebounds). Colgate has the shooting ingredient, but without the ability to create turnovers, they don’t have the kryptonite.

Offensive Rebounding %

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s OR% is 31.6 (No. 75), while Colgate’s defense in that category is 26.9 (No. 113).

When Colgate has the ball

The Raiders’ OR% is 30.3 (No. 103), while the Vols’ defense in that category is 30.3 (No. 266).

Conclusions

From these numbers, I wouldn’t expect offensive rebounding to have much to say about the final outcome of this game.

Free Throw Rate

When Tennessee has the ball

Tennessee’s FT Rate is 33.4 (No. 175), while Colgate’s defense against that is 28.6 (No. 65). To the extent they defend, they do it without fouling much.

When Colgate has the ball

The Raiders’ FT Rate is 28.9 (No. 284), while Tennessee’s defense against that is 34.4 (No. 223).

Conclusions

This looks like a jump-shooting game to me.

Summary and Score Prediction

All signs point toward a game decided by shooting percentage. I’d be surprised if either offensive rebounding or free throw rate impacts the game very much on either side. Instead, this one looks like a game between two teams that can really shoot the ball well. While that’s disconcerting coming off two recent losses to a hot-shooting Auburn squad, the good news for the Vols is twofold: (1) Tennessee defends better than Colgate; and (2) unlike Auburn, Colgate doesn’t appear to have anything else (such as the ability to walk away with Sams Club-sized box of turnovers) to go along with their excellent shooting.

The goals for the Vols:

1. Shoot as well as they usually do, which means shooting much more from the field than from the arc.
2. Keep Colgate below its usual shooting efficiency by tightly defending all jump-shooters, especially those behind the arc.
3. Don’t do anything uncharacteristic in any of the other categories.

KenPom gives Tennessee a 92% chance of winning this one and puts the score at Tennessee 83, Colgate 68.

Go Vols.

The Raiders come to us from the Patriot League, where they started 13-10 (5-5). And then, bang: eight straight wins to finish the season, then a clean run through the conference tournament. Including all three Patriot League tournament games, Colgate won seven of its last eight by double digits.

Before all that they lost at Syracuse by 21, at Penn State by 11, and at Pittsburgh by 14. KenPom has them at 129th overall; our closest comparison there is Georgia, but I wouldn’t think of Colgate in terms of a team we beat by 46.

Colgate knows how to score. Five games with 30+ three-point attempts, 39.1% on the year (13th nationally). And they share it:

• 6’0″ Jordan Burns: 70-of-183 (38.3%)
• 6’8″ Will Rayman: 64-of-143 (44.8%)
• 6’10” Rapolas Ivanauskas: 42-of-97 (43.3%) (!)
• 6’3″ Jack Ferguson: 53-of-128 (41.4%)

They’re efficient inside the arc too: 53.9%, 46th nationally. Burns is a great facilitator, 28th nationally in assist rate, and just scored 35 in the Patriot League final. And they get good work inside the arc from 6’9″ Dana Batt and 6’8″ Malcolm Regisford. This team has good size and uses it well at all points on the offensive end.

Colgate doesn’t give or take at the free throw line. This will be interesting when dealing with Grant Williams. The Raiders are 284th in free throw rate, and 65th on the defensive end of that equation: they don’t foul, and they don’t get fouled. That suggests far more jump shots, especially when you have 6’8″ and 6’10” guys taking that many threes. Only 16% of Colgate’s points come via the stripe, and only 17% of their opponent’s points.

Playing Tennessee could change all this, of course. When playing above their level in non-conference, the Raiders were -20 in free throw attempts vs Syracuse, -14 vs South Florida, -11 vs Penn State, and -9 vs Pitt. That’s a comforting stat, if Tennessee is disciplined enough to take advantage of it and not get into another three-point shooting contest.

Turnovers have been an issue. The Raiders give it away on 19.3% of possessions, 232nd nationally, and allow a steal on 10.5% of possessions, 327th nationally.

Colgate should have a hard time stopping Tennessee’s offense, no doubt. But the best way for Tennessee to win is consistent with the best basketball they’ll need to advance: lock it down defensively. Do not allow a team that’s won 11 in a row and loves the three to get hot. Do not allow a team that’s won 11 in a row and loves the three to get hot. Do not allow a team that’s won 11 in a row and loves the three to get hot. Do not.

The Vols haven’t been far enough up the bracket to be in this situation often, but did a nice job of it last year with Wright State: teams seeded 14-16 have some happy-to-be-here in their DNA. The sooner you bring it out, the better.