What Butler's success proves

[cowboysooner]

First, it proves a statement made by billy tubbs several times that a kid that is 6'8 is big enough to play inside provided he knows what he is doing.

Second, it proves a statement made by Bob Stoops many times that there is a much wider or bigger group of kids that you can win with than what is believed by the public. Talent is important but what you do with them and the attitude they bring is also important.

Third, it proves Stevens is a good coach and that good guards are invaluable in the college game.

And lastly, it proves that defense wins championships. Only the oldest adage in sports and probably the truest of them all.

 

[coolm]

... it proves that defense wins championships. Only the oldest adage in sports and probably the truest of them all.

you just can't fight the mathematics of sports.

IF your play causes the other side to shoot the same or fewer times for a lower percentage than you then they lose (assuming 2's vs 2's).

It's just a fact. You can't argue it and the "offensive" style requires leading in more simple categories in order to equal the same success.

 

[DSMok1]

A quick look at the final top 30:

			Tempo		Offense		Defense		Pythag	
Team (Conf T/O/D/P)	Adjus	ted(Rk)	Adjus	ted(Rk)	Adjus	ted(Rk)	Adjus	ted(Rk)
Duke[1] (ACC)		65.5	(249)	123.5	(  1)	85.9	(  4)	.985	(  1)
Kansas[1] (B12)		68.6	( 99)	121.5	(  2)	87.1	(  8)	.979	(  2)
Kentucky[1] (SEC)	69.7	( 65)	116.1	( 15)	86.3	(  6)	.968	(  3)
Syracuse[1] (BE)	70.1	( 54)	118.0	(  8)	89.0	( 18)	.963	(  4)
Ohio St.[2] (B10)	66.0	(234)	118.6	(  7)	90.2	( 24)	.959	(  5)
Baylor[3] (B12)		65.8	(241)	120.4	(  3)	91.7	( 34)	.958	(  6)
Kansas St.[2] (B12)	70.3	( 47)	116.6	( 13)	88.9	( 17)	.957	(  7)
West Virginia[2] (BE)	63.3	(314)	117.0	( 11)	89.4	( 22)	.957	(  8)
Wisconsin[4] (B10)	60.2	(340)	115.6	( 17)	89.1	( 19)	.952	(  9)
Brigham Young[7] (MWC)	72.5	( 14)	117.1	( 10)	90.7	( 27)	.950	( 10)
								
Maryland[4] (ACC)	70.3	( 46)	119.3	(  5)	92.7	( 50)	.947	( 11)
Butler[5] (Horz)	64.2	(292)	110.2	( 50)	86.2	(  5)	.944	( 12)
Georgetown[3] (BE)	66.9	(188)	117.4	(  9)	92.6	( 47)	.938	( 13)
Xavier[6] (A10)		70.3	( 45)	116.3	( 14)	92.0	( 39)	.937	( 14)
California[8] (P10)	68.0	(134)	120.1	(  4)	95.1	( 73)	.936	( 15)
Purdue[4] (B10)		67.4	(162)	108.3	( 70)	85.8	(  3)	.936	( 16)
Texas A&M[5] (B12)	65.6	(246)	111.9	( 38)	88.8	( 14)	.935	( 17)
Texas[8] (B12)		72.6	( 12)	113.5	( 25)	90.2	( 25)	.933	( 18)
Missouri[10] (B12)	70.1	( 55)	111.3	( 43)	88.8	( 13)	.931	( 19)
Clemson[7] (ACC)	69.1	( 82)	110.9	( 44)	88.9	( 15)	.928	( 20)
								
Villanova[2] (BE)	72.4	( 15)	116.6	( 12)	94.0	( 62)	.923	( 21)
Temple[5] (A10)		61.2	(336)	107.8	( 75)	87.0	(  7)	.922	( 22)
Michigan St.[5] (B10)	66.1	(224)	112.9	( 28)	91.1	( 30)	.922	( 23)
Florida St.[9] (ACC)	66.7	(200)	104.6	(130)	84.5	(  1)	.921	( 24)
Utah St.[12] (WAC)	61.6	(332)	115.6	( 18)	93.7	( 58)	.918	( 25)
Dayton (A10)		66.9	(187)	107.4	( 84)	87.2	(  9)	.917	( 26)
Georgia Tech[10] (ACC)	69.5	( 68)	109.1	( 62)	88.6	( 12)	.917	( 27)
Tennessee[6] (SEC)	68.7	( 97)	108.9	( 64)	88.5	( 11)	.916	( 28)
Northern Iowa[9] (MVC)	59.8	(343)	109.3	( 61)	88.9	( 16)	.915	( 29)
Washington[11] (P10)	73.1	( 10)	112.3	( 36)	91.3	( 31)	.915	( 30)

Thoughts:
The final 4 ranked 4th, 5th, 22nd, and 30th on defense
The final 4 ranked 1st, 11th, 28th, and 50th on offense
The final 4 ranked 224, 249, 292, and 314 on pace (All SLOW teams)

The best team won (they were #1 before the tournament on Pomeroy, also.)

 

[DSMok1]

What the Duke and Butler do:

Duke:
Category  		Offense  	Defense  	D-I Avg
Effective FG%:  	50.5 [92]  	[B]43.6 [7][/B]  	48.8
Turnover %: 		[B]16.4 [15][/B] 	21.3 [116] 	20.4
Off. Reb. %: 		[B]40.3 [7][/B] 	32.1 [149] 	32.7
FTA/FGA: 		37.9 [158] 	34.0 [97] 	37.7

3P%:  			38.5 [25]  	[B]28.3 [2][/B]  	34.2
2P%: 			47.0 [201] 	44.0 [36] 	47.7
FT%: 			[B]75.9 [8][/B] 	68.7 [162] 	68.9
Block%: 		9.8 [215] 	9.8 [131] 	9.2
Steal%: 		[B]7.9 [17][/B] 	10.0 [148] 	9.8

3PA/FGA:  		33.0 [154]  	[B]25.4 [11][/B]  	32.6
A/FGM: 			52.8 [189] 	48.7 [56] 	53.5

And Butler:
Category  		Offense  	Defense  	D-I Avg
Effective FG%:  	51.0 [80]  	46.6 [68]  	48.8
Turnover %: 		18.8 [90] 	21.9 [75] 	20.4
Off. Reb. %: 		30.8 [232] 	[B]27.8 [18][/B] 	32.7
FTA/FGA: 		[B]46.9 [16][/B] 	34.6 [110] 	37.7

3P%:  			34.2 [172]  	31.7 [60]  	34.2
2P%: 			50.9 [60] 	46.1 [108] 	47.7
FT%: 			73.8 [32] 	67.9 [111] 	68.9
Block%: 		10.4 [258] 	6.5 [288] 	9.2
Steal%: 		8.2 [34] 	10.9 [78] 	9.8

3PA/FGA:  		39.8 [36]  	31.6 [130]  	32.6
A/FGM: 			54.9 [127] 	50.6 [94] 	53.5

Duke guards the ball and gets offensive rebounds; on defense they prohibit 3 pointers. Butler does everything solidly, but particularly gets defensive rebounds. And they rely a lot on the 3, unfortunately for them.

 

[Cheno]

So according to the statistics the #1 offensive team (Duke) won the national championship. So offense wins championships. I'm being facetious but I've never understood the motto "defense wins championships".
IMO, balance wins championships. It's just as important to be a good efficient offensive team as defensive team.

 

[oSuJeff97]

So according to the statistics the #1 offensive team (Duke) won the national championship. So offense wins championships. I'm being facetious but I've never understood the motto "defense wins championships".
IMO, balance wins championships. It's just as important to be a good efficient offensive team as defensive team.

Obviously you have to have some balance... you can't be #1 in defense and #100 in offense and win it all.

But Duke was #4 in defensive efficiency. Is there really a significant statistical difference between #1 and #4 in overall defense?

Duke won because they (like Butler) could really defend... but they could just score a little bit more.

All things considered, I would put my money on the team that is top 10 in defensive efficiency and top 50 in offensive efficiency, but not vice versa.

That was Butler's profile this year (#5 defense, #50 offense), and they were about 3 inches away from being national champs.

The flip-side of that was OU last year... they were #6 in offensive efficiency and #36 in defensive efficiency and they didn't make the Final Four.

 

[campbest]

So according to the statistics the #1 offensive team (Duke) won the national championship. So offense wins championships. I'm being facetious but I've never understood the motto "defense wins championships".
IMO, balance wins championships. It's just as important to be a good efficient offensive team as defensive team.

You have to be good in both areas, but I will take the superior defensive efficiency over the offensive.

 

[DSMok1]

You have to be good in both areas, but I will take the superior defensive efficiency over the offensive.

Statistically, and according to all studies I have seen, both offense and defense are equally important.

 

[MNsooner]

So we can say it proves a bunch of stuff we already know? Smart teams that play good defense and offense will win games.

 

[okcsooner83]

When will OU start playing defense? I wish Coach Capel would go visit with Coach K and discuss how to coach defense.

 

[stoops4pres]

The flip-side of that was OU last year... they were #6 in offensive efficiency and #36 in defensive efficiency and they didn't make the Final Four.

I get your point, but I think its fair to point out that they lost to UNC who arguably put on the best tourney performance this decade. Regardless of any increase in defensive efficiency--or being in the Top 10 on defense and top 50 on offense instead--I don't think it would have mattered too much; it would have taken a true virtuoso effort on defense to stop that high octane UNC offense.

Had BG not been hurt in that 2 game stretch (vs. Texas and KU), OU's chances of getting a 1 seed, and ultimately reaching the Final 4 would have increased favorably, despite not being one of the tops in defensive efficiency. But I see what you're saying from a general perspective.

 

[Cheno]

I get your point, but I think its fair to point out that they lost to UNC who arguably put on the best tourney performance this decade. Regardless of any increase in defensive efficiency--or being in the Top 10 on defense and top 50 on offense instead--I don't think it would have mattered too much; it would have taken a true virtuoso effort on defense to stop that high octane UNC offense.

Exactly. You can't use last years OU team as an example as they were beat by a totally offensive minded team that ended up winning it all.

I just don't understand this "defense wins championships" mantra. Balance wins championships. Who is the last "defensive" team to win the national title? Michigan St in 2000? But even that team was an offensive minded team for a Izzo team but defense was definitely what they hung their hat on.

 

[oSuJeff97]

Regardless of any increase in defensive efficiency--or being in the Top 10 on defense and top 50 on offense instead--I don't think it would have mattered too much; it would have taken a true virtuoso effort on defense to stop that high octane UNC offense.

Perhaps... but you also have to consider that UNC team didn't even play a really good defensive team until it got to Michigan State in the finals.

The Spartains were the only team that UNC played that was top 10 in defensive efficiency in the entire tournament:

Radford - 164
LSU - 57
Gonzaga - 18
OU - 36
Villanova - 15
Michigan State - 10

I'm not saying the still wouldn't have won, because they were clearly the best team... but it would have been interesting to see if one of the elite defensive teams from '09 could have slowed them down.

Exactly. You can't use last years OU team as an example as they were beat by a totally offensive minded team that ended up winning it all.

I just don't understand this "defense wins championships" mantra. Balance wins championships. Who is the last "defensive" team to win the national title? Michigan St in 2000? But even that team was an offensive minded team for a Izzo team but defense was definitely what they hung their hat on.

You're right. You most certainly need balance to win.

But even if they have balance, teams will always do one thing better than the other... And if I had to choose, I would pick the team that defends a little bit better, versus the team that can score a little bit better.

 

[stoops4pres]

Perhaps... but you also have to consider that UNC team didn't even play a really good defensive team until it got to Michigan State in the finals.

The Spartains were the only team that UNC played that was top 10 in defensive efficiency in the entire tournament:

Radford - 164
LSU - 57
Gonzaga - 18
OU - 36
Villanova - 15
Michigan State - 10

I don't agree with you in the fact that Mich State was the only "really good defensive team" UNC faced... Villanova and Gonzaga were only 5 and 8 spots behind Michigan State, respectively. They were really good defensive clubs as well.

No one knows how UNC would have done had they played slightly better defensive ball clubs, but playing 3 teams ranked in the Top 20 is pretty good itself, and UNC still didn't have much trouble with them. Here are their results vs. those 3 ball clubs:

Vs. Michigan State (10th in defensive efficiency): 89 points 45.9% FG 41.7% 3's 7 TO's

Vs. Villanova (15th): 83 points 40.3% FG 50% 3's 12 TO's

Vs. Gonzaga (18th): 98 points 52.9% FG 57.9% 3'S 9 TO'S

So out of 3 Top 20 defensive efficiency clubs, you can see UNC's numbers speak for itself. Their numbers would probably be slightly worse had they played a team say in the Top 5 in defense, but not by much. My point being: You have some truth to your theory, but I don't think using OU was a great example; I doubt anyone would have stopped UNC, OU could have very well reached the Final 4 despite being ranked 36th defensively had they been placed in a different region (which most likely would have happened had BG not been hurt). You bring up some good points though.

 

[Cheno]

You're right. You most certainly need balance to win.
But even if they have balance, teams will always do one thing better than the other... And if I had to choose, I would pick the team that defends a little bit better, versus the team that can score a little bit better.

I'd take a team that scores really good and plays good defense over a team that plays really good defense and just scores good. UNC being a great example. They scored at will on a very good defensive team in Mich St.
I mean they scored 89 points with only 7 turnovers. Michigan States defense did absolutely nothing to them. Good offense trumps good defense. Offense has the advantage because they know what they are going to do....defense you are forced to react to the offense. Some teams do it better than others.
Again, I'm not debating defense isn't key and very important....I'm just saying the addage of "defense wins championships" is hogwash.
Balance wins championships. As I said a "defensive team" hasn't won a championship since Michigan St did in 2000. I guess the saying should be "Defense wins championships once a decade".

 

[DSMok1]

Dean Oliver's take on "Defense Wins Championships". He sees no evidence of that in the NBA.

 

[oSuJeff97]

I'd take a team that scores really good and plays good defense over a team that plays really good defense and just scores good. UNC being a great example. They scored at will on a very good defensive team in Mich St.
I mean they scored 89 points with only 7 turnovers. Michigan States defense did absolutely nothing to them. Good offense trumps good defense. Offense has the advantage because they know what they are going to do....defense you are forced to react to the offense. Some teams do it better than others.
Again, I'm not debating defense isn't key and very important....I'm just saying the addage of "defense wins championships" is hogwash.
Balance wins championships. As I said a "defensive team" hasn't won a championship since Michigan St did in 2000. I guess the saying should be "Defense wins championships once a decade".

Agreeed.

How about this one... "great teams win championships..."

 

[Sid]

i'd take a team that scores really good and plays good defense over a team that plays really good defense and just scores good.

^ 101