Actual In-Season Improvement: Melsahn Basabe

There are a number of reasons for Hawkeye basketball fans to be excited about the player they have in Melsahn Basabe. The most obvious, is that he is just a freshman, and Iowa has three more years of him presumably only getting better. As a true freshman he has been Iowa's most consistent rebounder (outside of Archie who doesn't get regular playing time) and one of Iowa's best offensive threats.

I want to look at three categories for Basabe: scoring, offensive rebounding, and defensive rebounding to see if he has made any in-season improvements during his freshman campaign.

First, scoring:

His points per game have increased pretty consistently as the season has gone on. His Big 10 numbers also prove this point, as he is averaging 11.83 points per game compared to the 8.5 he put up in non-conference games.

Like with Cartwright, let's look at his shooting to see if he has improved that.

His effective FG% is slightly trending upward. Overall though, he is shooting 54.17% in Big 10 play compared to 54.93% in non-conference play. The Purdue game clearly hurt his Big 10 effective FG%.

Just as I did with Cartwright, I want to look at how many shots per game Basabe is taking.

I would say that that's a pretty big increase. In non-conference play Basabe averaged 5.92 field goal attempts per game. So far in Big 10 play, he has put up an average of 8 shots per game. Just like Cartwright, Basabe is putting up two extra shots per game, at the expense of another player's shots (:cough: Eric May :cough:). So, Basabe is scoring more points, but that isn't really the result of him improving his shooting. He's just the same scorer he was before, only now, he is taking more shots per game.

What about offensive rebounding?

Holy crap. Basabe has seen his trendline move from about 8% to about 17%. That's a rather large increase in the percentage of offensive rebounds he has come down with over the season. During non-conference play, Basabe pulled down 10.38% of all offensive rebounds available while he was in the game. In Big 10 play, that number increased to 18.52%. If your curious, that dip around the Drake and Louisiana Tech games is when Fran said Basabe was terribly sick with the flu.

Defensive Rebounds tell another story though.

His defensive rebounds have actually declined by about 2% over the course of the season. Looking at his Big 10 defensive rebounding rate of 22.73% compared to his 20.28% defensive rebounding rate for non-conference games, though, it looks to be the opposite. That is because the Northwestern game where Basabe grabbed 47.62% of all defensive rebounds available while on the court, is inflating his Big 10 defensive rebounding rate. Otherwise, Basabe has seen a slight decrease in defensive rebounds, but nothing too large to be worried about. He has pretty much stayed the same in this regard also.

Overall, Basabe is similar to Cartwright, in that he is shooting the same but scoring more points because he is taking more shots per game. But, he has actually improved in one of the categories that is important to a player who plays Basabe's position. His offensive rebounding continues to get better as the season goes on. His defensive rebounding has dropped off a little bit, but is still over 20% which is very good. The total package of  double digit points per game on an above 50% effective FG%, coupled with an offensive rebounding rate around 13% and a defensive rebounding rate around 20% is a very good player. Especially, for a true freshman. I look forward to seeing Basabe's improvement as the season goes on, but I also look forward to seeing his game get even better over the off season. Considering he is only a freshman this year, the Big 10 better watch out for the next three years.

Is Cartwright Getting Better?

Recently, Iowa's point guard Bryce Cartwright has been scoring more and more of the team's points. He is averaging 10.89 points per game currently, which has given off the appearance that he may indeed be finally putting it together.  Now, he has gone from 10.33 points per game in non-conference play, to 12 points per game in Big 10 play. Does that mean he's gotten better though? Not necessarily. Let's take a look.

First, we've already established that Cartwright is scoring more points per game recently. So, let's look at his effective FG% to see if he's shooting more efficiently than he was in the beginning of the season.

I added a trendline because the pattern is hard to discern otherwise. As you can see, Cartwright's shooting has been on a very very slight downward trend since the beginning of the season. When you look at his effective FG% in non-conference play and Big 10 play it tells the same story. In non-conference play he shot a 42.15% effective FG%. In Big 10 play so far, he has shot a 41.67% effective FG%. Not a huge difference, but clearly his shooting has not gotten any better.

The only other explanation could be that he is just taking more shots per game. Well, let's see.

The trendline is increasing here. So obviously, Cartwright has taken more shots per game recently. During non-conference play, Cartwright put up 10.08 shots per game. In the Big 10 portion of the schedule, he has put up 12 shots per game. Two more shots per game seems to explain the rise in points scored.

So, is that it? Is that all Cartwright should be judged on? Not quite. Since he's the point guard, it would only be fair to look at his assists and turnovers too. First, assists:

That's good to see. The trendline shows a tiny increase. Overall, Cartwright has averaged 0.16 assists per minute in Big 10 and non-conference play. So, just like with his shooting, his assist rate has remained pretty stable.

What about Turnovers?

Also good to see. However, in Big 10 play, he has averaged 0.11 turnovers per minute compared to his 0.10 turnovers per minute during the non-conference part of the schedule. That doesn't fit with the trendline. What gives? Well, it's not necessarily bad news. I lean more toward it meaning Cartwright is the same as he has been. If you look at his performances against really good Big 10 defenses in Ohio State (0.17 and 0.14 turnovers per minute) and Purdue (0.14 turnovers per minute) he turns the ball over more against them. When he plays a soft defense like Northwestern, he only averaged 0.05 turnovers per minute. Those high numbers against the good defenses are more than plenty to inflate his Big 10 average so far through only six games. After playing the rest of the Big 10 schedule that number could very well level out to around 0.10 again.

Now, I'm not trying to say anything negative about Cartwright, because I'm glad he is on this team. I can't imagine what this team would do if Fran never recruited another point guard. But, it doesn't look Cartwright has improved as the season has gone on. Good news is, he hasn't gotten worse either. There is still a little over a month of basketball left to play, which means he still has time to show some improvement. He also has the whole off season, as it definitely isn't unheard of for players to make huge strides out of season. I just wanted to see if Cartwright had indeed made strides or not. In this case it turns out not. But, hey, at least he's consistent.

Iowa vs Ohio State Recap Part II: 70-48 L

Well, that wasn't surprising.

Bullet Points!

• You know that Iowa is in trouble if Andrew Brommer is the player of the game. In all seriousness though, Brommer played great last night. He had 12 points on 8 shots and 2 free throws (both of which, he actually made!). However, scoring was only a little part of what he did against the Buckeyes. He also had 6 rebounds (3 offensive and 3 defensive), 2 assists, 1 steal, and 3 blocks. Even more miraculous, was that he only had 3 fouls in 30 minutes of play. 
• Even though Brommer had a great game, I'm not on the "Free Andrew Brommer" bandwagon yet. Cole has hit a bit of a rough stretch (which continued last night), but he still has better number's than Brommer. Cole averages slightly more points per minute, 0.29 to Brommer's 0.27. He also grabs more rebounds. Brommer has pulled down 13.27% of all defensive rebounds and 9% of all offensive rebounds while in the game this year. Cole, on the other hand has grabbed 19.08% of all defensive and 12.75% of all offensive rebounds this year. They both have shot about a 51% effective field goal percentage, but Cole makes more of his free throws. The only outright advantage that Brommer has over him is in assists. At this point, I don't really buy into the Brommer hype until he starts becoming a more consistent scorer or better rebounder. 
• Gatens failed to reach double digits in points for the first time since the UNI game. What I found interesting was his shot selection. He went 4-11 from the floor, but only took 2 three pointers, both of which he missed. 4-9 shooting from two point range, isn't a real great percentage. Now, I fell asleep trying to watch this game on my DVR, but after this game and the Minnesota game it felt like Gatens had missed a lot of two point field goals lately. So, I looked it up in my handy spreadsheet. In January, Gatens has shot a FG% of 36.67% on two point field goals. In that same time frame, he has also shot 43.33% from behind the arc. Good to see the numbers match what the eyes are seeing.
• May followed up his great performance against Minnesota, with a not so great performance against Ohio State. In 18 minutes, May went 0-2 shooting, grabbed 1 rebound, had 1 turnover, and picked up 1 foul. I said Iowa needed a big game out of Gatens and May considering Ohio State would probably game plan for Basabe this time around. Well, those two didn't have great games, and Iowa got run out of the building.
• Since I haven't seen all of this game yet, I don't know what adjustments the Buckeyes made to guarding Basabe this time around, but he still had 11 points. They weren't as efficient as usual, since it took him 10 shots and 2 free throws, but it's good to see that Basabe hasn't hit that "freshman wall" and is still giving Big 10 teams trouble. 
• Cartwright was Cartwright last night. Scoring 10 points on an inefficient 13 shots. He also had 7 assists and 5 turnovers. Cartwright would be so good if he could cut down the amount of shots it takes to get him to double digits and if he could cut down on the turnovers. He will be a Senior next year, and if he makes those improvements, Iowa will be much better.
• Sullinger was relatively quiet this time around, only scoring 13 points and grabbing 9 rebounds. David Lighty was the star for Ohio State. He had 18 points (85.7% effective FG%), 5 rebounds, and 4 assists. They just have too many good players.
• Iowa had another bad shooting performance last night, shooting a 40.9% effective FG% compared to Ohio State's 52.7%. In Big 10 play, Iowa has shot a 47.2% effective FG%, and allowed opponents to shoot a 60.06%. Yep. That's why Iowa is 0-6 in conference play.
• Looking at points per possession, Iowa scored a whopping 0.69 points per possession (easily the lowest of the year). Ohio State averaged 1.01 points per possession. Not surprisingly, as Iowa has gotten in to Big 10 play, their points per possession has dropped and their opponents has risen. Take a look:

•  Iowa lost the rebounding battle again, as Ohio State pulled down 52.7% of all rebounds to Iowa's 47.3%. On the offensive glass, Iowa grabbed 33.3% to Ohio State's 38.7%. On the defensive boards, Iowa grabbed 61.3% compared to the Buckeyes 66.7%. It's starting to look like Iowa's one real strength is starting to diminish in conference play, as rebounding has been just as bad as points per possession recently:

•  The one real positive from this game, was that Iowa was good at causing turnovers. In fact, they forced a turnover on 29% of Ohio State's possessions. The bad news was they also turned the ball over on 33.3% of their own possessions.
• For assists, Iowa finished with a 0.52 assist to turnover ratio, finishing just 17.42% of their possessions with an assisted field goal. Ohio State finished with a 0.9 assist to turnover ratio, ending 25.89% of their possessions with an assist. 

To wrap this game up, it sucked. The end.

Iowa vs Ohio State Men's Basketball Preview: Round 2

Short on time and sleep. So, let's get to it.

Iowa's Offense vs Ohio State's Defense:

Iowa is a pretty mediocre offense overall. They excel at offensive rebounding (9% above NCAA average), and they did win that battle against Ohio State last game. Iowa struggles to shoot the ball though, coming in slightly under the NCAA average in effective FG%. Last time, Iowa shot a 48.3% effective FG%, which is right around their season average.

Ohio State's defense is very good. They have held opponents to 3% below average in shooting this year. Iowa probably won't get to the free throw line very often, considering Ohio State is 81% above average at keeping opponents off of it, and Iowa is 4% below average at getting there. Ohio State has been good at limiting their opponents second chances, but last time Iowa grabbed 45.7% of their misses. So, who knows? Expect Iowa to turn the ball over early and often, as the Buckeyes are 25% better than average at forcing teams to cough it up. On paper, Iowa doesn't match up real well here.

Iowa vs Minnesota Recap

Bullet points!

• This game was a story of 2 periods for Iowa. In the first half, I was updating my like nine Twitter followers that Iowa was attempting to finish the 1st half with more turnovers than field goals made. Well, the good news was, they didn't. The bad news was, they had 8 turnovers and 8 field goals made in the the first half.
• Iowa shot 8-25 from the field and 2-11 from three point range in the first half. Good for a 36% effective FG%. Not good.
• In the second half, Iowa was hot for the first 10 minutes and then cooled off during the last 10 minutes. For the second half they shot 14-34 and 4-8 from three point range. Good for a 47.1% effective FG%, which is slightly below average, but better than 36%. They outscored the Gophers in the second half 40 to 39. Too bad they were outscored 19 to 30 in the first half.
• Overall, Iowa shot 22-59 and 6-19 from three point range. Good for a terrible 42.4% effective FG%, which is about 6% below their season average. They did make 9 of their 11 free throws. So, that was good. Unfortunately, they only made it to the free throw line 11 times. 
• Minnesota didn't shoot all that well from the field either. Iowa held them to a 45.7% effective FG%. About 5.5% below their season average. The big thing on offense for Minnesota was free throws. They got to the line 37 times! Their free throw rate (free throws attempted per field goals attempted) was an absurd 0.80 (!) because they took 46 shots from the field and 37 free throws. That is pretty much double Minnesota's season average. 
• 13 of Iowa's 23 fouls came from Cole with 5 (fouled out), Basabe with 4, and May with 4. 
• The players of the game for Iowa were Basabe and May. First, Basabe. He only took 3 shots (made 2 of them) and had 4 rebounds (2 offensive and 2 defensive) in the first half. Not a huge part of the offense. In the second half, Basabe exploded for 16 points on 6 field goals and 4 free throws. He also grabbed 9 rebounds (3 offensive and 6 defensive). He finished the night with a double-double 20 points (66.7% effective FG%) and 13 rebounds. He grabbed 14.6% of all offensive and 26.1% of all defensive rebounds. Both of which are above his season average. Hopefully we can see more of this Basabe as the season goes on.
• It was good to see May have a good game after dealing with an injury lately. Like Basabe, he was relatively quiet in the first half offensively, minus a nice fastbreak dunk. In the second half, May went 4-6 including 3-3 from behind the arc, scoring 11 points. For the game, May scored 16 points with a 75% effective FG%. 
• Cartwright had 10 points in this game, with most of them coming in the second half. I was impressed with his play in the second half, but for the game he still had at least one missed lay up that bugged me. He did go 4-5 from the free throw line, but it still took him 10 shots to get his 6 points from field goals. I'm just hoping he can be a more efficient scorer.
• Gatens scored double digits again. The problem was it took him 21 shot attempts to score those 13 points (30.9% effective FG%). Similar to the Purdue game, Gatens shot 30% (3-10) from three point range. Gatens tried to get in the paint and draw the foul against the Gophers, and it never worked. Every time he would get into the paint his shot was blocked as he went to the ground. Gatens is the best player on the team, but he has always had trouble when he's contested in the lane.
• I found it funny that Iowa's best shooter (Gatens) and Minnesota's best shooter (Hoffarber) were both cold on the same night. Unlike Gatens, Hoffarber made none of his three point attempts. He was 2-10 from the field and 0-4 from behind the arc. For once, Iowa held the opposing team's shooter in check this year. 
• The Gophers had a block party on Sunday night. Ralph Sampson III swatted 7 or 19.4% of the Hawkeyes total shots. As a team, Minnesota blocked 12 of Iowa's shots (20.3%). That along with the free throws killed Iowa in this game.
• Another thing that killed Iowa was Minnesota outrebounding them. It's not really surprising since Iowa wasn't really favored in rebounding. But, Basabe was the only one that actually seemed to stand a chance at pulling the ball down against the Gophers. Minnesota grabbed 56% of all the rebounds to Iowa's 44%. They also grabbed 42.9% of the offensive rebounds (horrible) and 69.2% of the defensive rebounds. Iowa managed to secure 30.8% of the offensive rebounds (5% below season average) and 57.1% of the defensive rebounds (12% below season average).
• Iowa finished 20% of their possessions with an assisted field goal, and 16.7% of their possessions with a turnover (thanks to only turning the ball over twice in the second half). Good for a 1.2 to 1 assist to turnover ratio. 
• Minnesota finished 28.33% of their possessions with an assisted field goal (85% of their field goals were assisted...), and 18.3% of their possessions with a turnover. Good for a 1.55 assist to turnover ratio.
• Iowa averaged 0.98 points per possession. Minnesota average 1.15 points per possession. 
• To sum it up, Minnesota free throws, blocks, and rebounding are what killed the Hawkeyes in this game.