FIBA U19 2011 World Championship -- A Pause Before the Medal Rounds (part 1)

Sorting Out Group E & F Action
When the Argentines tagged the Brazilians with their second consecutive loss to close the last day of Preliminary Round 2 action, they had sprung the last surprise in group round games that seemed to have more surprises than "usual" outcomes. Team USA beat the powerful Lithuanian squad one day only to lose to Croatia the next. The Russian squad, once the powerhouse of Europe had to back into the Quarter final round by beating host Latvia and then hope (and pray?) that Argentina could beat Brazil, the only team they could tie with at the end of Group E play that would give them a spot in the medal rounds. Australia recovered from a Group A (first preliminary round) loss to host Latvia to sweep their next four opponents, and match Team USA's single loss performance through the two preliminary rounds. With both preliminary rounds (Group A & B play and Group E play) in the books, this is how the Group E side of the bracket sorted out...

Group E
	Record				Pts/Poss
	W	L	Pts	Seed	Off	Def	Diff
Australia	5	1	11	E1	1.08	0.86	+0.22
Poland	4	2	9	E2	1.00	0.94	+0.06
Argentina	4	2	9	E3	0.96	0.96	-0.01
Russia	3	3	7	E4	1.09	1.01	+0.07
Brazil	3	3	7	E5	1.04	0.92	+0.12
Latvia	2	4	8	E6	0.91	0.96	-0.05

A Few Adjustments to the Metrics
The four teams that will advance out of Group E are listed above as "E1" through "E4". The FIBA site is rife with basic and per capita stats. Standings through most of group play has ranked the teams by points, and when two or more are tied, the site ranks by the margin between "Points For" and "Points Against" -- a misleading stat as readers here know. I decided to control for possessions and compute an efficiency margin, much as I (and many others) have done for the NCAA's Division 1 conferences over the past several seasons, and a different picture emerges for Groups E & F. Though the six Group E teams were tied going into the second preliminary round, the cross over play between Group A and Group B teams has sorted the field out...with a few wrinkles.

The Mighty Emus
Tabbed here and elsewhere as a dark horse going into the tournament, Australia recovered from an early stumble to dominate the competition in Groups A and E. In taking the #1 seed out of Group E, they have managed to draw some attention in FIBA and in the MSM. Those who have followed Division 1 basketball, and especially those at St. Mary's, Vanderbilt and Saint Louis are already familiar with the talent pool Australia has developed over the past decade. Brazil's collapse, loss to Argentina (who managed to jump Russia in the standings in the process) and consignment to the #9 - #12 Classification Rounds is the yang to Australia's ying in Group E. Losing to Russia on Tuesday meant that Wednesday's game with Argentina would determine who earned the last spot in the Quarter final round. The difference column at far right emphasizes how well the Brazilians have performed throughout group play. Badly timed losses coupled with misfortune of losing to the one team Brazil would lose a tie-breaker suggests how well-intentioned procedures can have unintended consequences. As I put the efficiency differences and the four factors together for Groups E & F it was very clear there is a great disparity between the teams bound for the medal rounds and those consigned to the #13 - #16 Classification Rounds. If we assume the two brackets (Groups E & F) will produce a pool of reasonably competitive teams, how would the four Group E teams compare to each other if I only considered the games they played with each other? Treating the four teams as a mini-conference, I came up with these results...

Group E Quarter Final Teams
	Record			Pts/Poss
	W	L	Pts	Off	Def	Diff
Australia	3	0	6	1.08	0.84	+0.24
Poland	2	1	5	0.99	0.99	+0.00
Argentina	1	2	3	0.96	1.07	-0.11
Russia	0	3	3	1.03	1.15	-0.13

The results suggest that Argentina and Russia were not as competitive with the top two teams in the group, Australia and Poland, as the overall results would suggest. The mini-conference results reenforce Wednesday post game impressions that going into the Quarter Final round Australia is indeed the team to beat. How does Group E compare to Group F? I will take a similar look at Group F shortly. The standings are different from Group E.

FIBA U19 2011 World Championship -- Eighth Final Round Preview

And Then There Were 12
The first preliminary round of the FIBA U19 World Championship Tournament has finished, and the top three teams from each of the four groups will advance and be reseeded into two groups (E & F) of six teams each.

The reseeded groups E (groups A & B) & F (groups C & D) will take their first round records (and points) into second round play. Showing each team's points per possession and efficiency margin (offensive points per possession - defensive points per possession) should provide a hint of things to come in the second round:

Group E
	Record			Pts/Poss
	W	L	Pts	Off	Def	Diff
Brazil	2	1	5	1.11	0.90	+0.21
Australia	2	1	5	1.14	0.85	+0.29
Poland	2	1	5	1.06	0.90	+0.16
Russia	2	1	5	1.12	0.98	+0.14
Latvia	2	1	5	0.91	0.89	+0.02
Argentina	2	1	5	0.89	0.92	-0.03

One might expect that with randomly drawn four team groups, the distribution of reseeded teams from each group might fairly distributed even as well. Not so with Group E. Though all six teams advance with identical records, a look at each team's points per possession counters the strong inference that second round play will be tightly contested. Brazil, Poland and Russia sport large difference margins in part because each beat up on the #4 team, Tunisia, in the group. Tunisia is headed to the first set of classification games, along with Taiwan (Group B), South Korea (Group C) and China (Group D -- a mild surprise), while those three will continue with match-ups against the Group B contingent. Group B leader Australia, has three games that should be very interesting. Four teams will advance out of Group E, and from the point difference it seems that Group A will be heavily represented. As for Group F...

Group F
	Record			Pts/Poss
	W	L	Pts	Off	Def	Diff
USA	3	0	6	1.15	0.85	+0.30
Lithuania	2	1	5	1.16	0.84	+0.32
Serbia	2	1	5	1.03	0.94	+0.09
Croatia	2	1	5	1.00	0.95	+0.05
Canada	1	2	4	0.99	1.11	-0.12
Egypt	1	2	4	0.86	1.12	-0.26

I had assumed, before the start of tournament play, that two losses would consign a team to the classification round. Not so apparently, as both Group C and Group D contribute a team with a 1-2 record. Canada's loss to Lithuania may have been expected, but the loss to an unexpectedly tough Croatian team rates a mild surprise. A look at the points per possession (ppp) shows that Croatia had a small, but nevertheless positive difference margin. Lithuania was stunned by that Croatian team on the first day of tournament play, which accounts for their 2-1 record. Team Lithuania is stronger than the record implies. Though all three second preliminary round games will be tough for Team USA, expect the game with Lithuania (played on Tuesday), to hint at how far the USA team has come in the last three-plus weeks. Serbia's game with Lithuania on Monday (7/4) should tell us whether Team Lithuania peaked in the exhibition tournament which preceded the FIBA World Championship.

Games of Interest
The aforementioned USA-Lithuania rematch aside, other games of the Eighth Final Round that should prove interesting include Australia-Russia (Monday 7/4), Croatia-Serbia (Tuesday 7/5), USA-Lithuania (Tuesday 7/5) and Australia-Brazil (Tuesday 7/5), Serbia-Canada (Wednesday 7/6 -- these two may be fighting over a spot in the medal round), USA-Croatia (Wednesday 7/6) and Australia-Poland (Wednesday 7/6 -- could decide whether Australia makes it to the medal rounds).