Guest Contributor Ray Floriani: NIT Tip-Off Tennessee Post Game

by Ray Floriani
NEW YORK CITY -- For the second straight year the Big East finished in a runner-up position int the Pre-Season NIT at Madison Square Garden. Tennessee defeated Villanova 78-68, in what was, a very defensive oriented contest.

Why do I give NJ transit ink?
They were 10 minutes late and the fare went up.

The Scores:

Consolation:
VCU	89		UCLA	85
Final:
Tennessee	78		Villanova	68

The Four Factors for the consolation:

		FTA
	eFG%	FGA	OR%	TO%
VCU	56	26	33	17
UCLA	54	15	52	26

VCU was devastated on the glass but extremely efficient overall. The pace was to the Rams' liking (UCLA 80 possessions, VCU 76) with Shaka Smart's club owning an impressive 117-106 edge in offensive efficiency. As noted, UCLA owned the backboards largely due to Tyler Honeycutt (13 rebounds) and Reeves Nelson (10). The turnover rate was a killer for the Bruins with Honeycutt and Reeves in the mix again, combining for 8 of the 21 Bruin miscues. Another encouraging sign for VCU was inside play. The Rams scored 34% of their points from three but displayed a nice presence in the paint in Jamie Skeen. The 6-9 senior scored a game high 23 points while grabbing a team high 9 boards.

Pace and Villanova-Tennessee Notes...

Outside MSG on Black Friday

Recorded the Villanova possessions with a time per possession breakdown for this game as well. Note the "manual" play by play recording will sometimes differ from the formula -- but not by much.

Villanova -- 1st Half:
Time	# Poss	TOs	Pts	PPP
0 - 14 sec.	23	8	24	1.04
= > 15 sec.	14	0	6	0.43
1st Total	37	8	30	0.81

Villanova -- 2nd Half:
Time	# Poss	TOs	Pts	PPP
0 - 14 sec.	27	4	29	1.07
= > 15 sec.	10	1	9	0.90
2nd Total	37	5	38	1.03
Game	74	9	68	0.92

In the first half Villanova had a larger percentage of faster (under 15 seconds) possessions. Both teams got back defensively and stopped transition as fast break points were 0-0 at halftime. The longer the Villanova possessions wore on the less efficient the offense was as Tennessee just locked down defensively with the clock ticking.

The second half saw the Wildcat efficiency an improvement in the longer possessions. Most of the charted possessions were of a faster variety as Villanova was playing catch up the latter part of the half. In other words, it was no time to get tentative and hold the basketball.

Villanova's Stokes inbounding
against the Vol defense

General Notes and Observations
Have a feeling a number of Big East opponents will contact Knoxville for a game tape of the final. Tennessee stopped the Villanova guards. Even coach Jay Wright commented, "we as a staff have to figure another way to play when our guards are shut down." That is not going to happen a great deal but it is a possibility against some of the elite defenses faced in Big east play.

UCLA wanted to stop transition and stay in front of the Villanova guards. They couldn't. Tennessee had the same game plan but with better defenders they were able to. Corey Fisher suffered through a 3 point 6 turnover night on 1 of 10 shooting.

Credit Scotty Hopson, a well deserved MVP, for a great deal of the defense imposed by Tennessee. Hopson, a 6-7 guard is very long, athletic and was quick enough to stay with and bother the Villanova backcourt.

Tennessee coach Bruce Pearl noted the other night how much fun it was to prepare for VCU, a team that does a lot of interesting things. Last night, Pearl said the same thing about Villanova, how well coached they are and the intriquing things they do offensively. Maybe Pearl is just happy to be breaking down film and game planning in staff meetings, after what has transpired off the court. On the other hand Pearl probably does truthfully admire how his two opponents in New York play. Pearl did note, "Villanova is about ball screens. They do that extremely well." Tennessee was ready for the ball screens and defended them extremely well.

The other night thought Wright made a good move zoning a little each half. Again Tennessee was ready by spreading the floor and creating gaps for penetrations that would up with inside shots or passes to the wing. Overall, Villanova needed to do a better job of closing out on weak side perimeter shooters.

In Wright's estimation the Tennessee defense not only suffocated the guards but negated any chances for easy baskets. Final count saw the Vols with a 9-2 edge in transition scoring.

As tough as Tennessee's defense was, the Wildcats did not turn the ball over. They had 13 turnovers but were under 20% for the TO rate.

Mouphtaou Yarou was a well deserved All-Tournament choice for the Wildcats. Yarou scored 15 points and added 5 rebounds. His continued contributions will be needed as the weeks go on.

Impressed with Dominic Cheek. He had a 10 point 6 rebound game and showed the versatility to mix it up inside or work on the perimeter.

Scotty Hopson, a well deserved MVP
for starring offensively and defensively

The Breakdown by Halves and a Few Comments
The first half was a defensive tug-of-war, while the second half was an offensive show. Tennessee won both.

Opponent	Tennessee
	1st	2nd	Game
Pace	35.8	36.6	72.4
	Offense				Defense
	1st	2nd	Game		1st	2nd	Game
Rating	83.8	103.9	94.0		97.8	117.6	107.8
eFG%	32.1	43.3	37.9		42.6	58.9	50.9
TORate	22.4	13.7	18.0		19.6	16.4	18.0
OR%	37.5	31.6	34.9		38.9	40.0	39.4
FTA/FGA	67.9	56.7	62.1		66.7	60.7	63.6
FTM/FGA	42.9	40.0	41.4		44.4	35.7	40.0
ARate	37.5	58.3	50.0		80.0	40.0	56.0
Blk%	14.3	6.7	10.3		7.4	7.1	7.3
Stl%	16.7	8.1	12.3		8.4	8.3	8.4
PPWS	0.81	0.99	0.90		0.98	1.19	1.08
2FG%	35.3	50.0	43.2		46.7	50.0	48.7
3FG%	18.2	20.0	19.0		25.0	75.0	37.5
FT%	63.2	70.6	66.7		66.7	58.8	62.9
%2FG	40.0	52.6	47.1		40.0	55.8	48.7
%3FG	20.0	15.8	17.6		25.7	20.9	23.1
%FT	40.0	31.6	35.3		34.3	23.3	28.2

Comments
1. Villanova lost the battle of the boards, a crucial element if the shots are not dropping.
2. The possessions/shots were again taken largely by the backcourt, with Wayns accounting for nearly 42% of the possessions and 30% of the shots. Fisher's possession/shot split was 31/23. Both had excruiciatingly low conversion efficiency. Wayns' eFG% was 27.3%, while Fisher's was 10.0% (yeah, that's not a typo, it was that low). Tennessee took these two right out of the game.
3. Wayns' assist rate was stronger than Fisher's, but the sophomore played a low percentage of minutes (as did Fisher). First half fouls, two apiece, kept Wayns off the floor for nearly half of the available minutes. Neither finished the game.
4. The balance of the squad, Yarou, Stokes, Pena and Sutton were efficient offensively, but all, Stokes excepted, were reduced to "Role Player" status.

The 2010 NIT Tip-Off -- A log5 Look at the Last Day

Last Call at the Garden
The semi-final games have decided the match-ups for the last round in the 2010 Tip-Off Tournament. Pythagoras may have prevailed with absolute accuracy, but the exact route was not as predictable (and nevertheless very interesting), as Ray Floriani reported in the previous post. Looking ahead to the Third Place and Championship games...

	--Adjusted--
Team	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
VCU	70.2	109.6	95.6	0.828
UCLA	67.9	109.1	91.5	0.882

The teams appear to be fairly evenly matched, both have efficient offenses, with the difference coming in defense. Will Coach Howland be able to use his larger front line effectively against the smaller (but more outside oriented) Rams? The pace and log5 projection...

	Projected
	Pace	Prob.
VCU	70.1	39.1
UCLA		60.9

UCLA prefers a more deliberate pace, and will probably want something that allows them to get points out of their offensive sets. The projected pace (70+) is a bit brisk, but not outside the Bruins' comfort zone. Looking at offensive and defensive differentials I get, despite a rather high margin of confidence favoring UCLA (60.9%), a close scoring game. If VCU hits their threes (and those will come from guards Joey Rodriguez, Brad Burgess and/or Brandon Rozzell), then Bruins may well spend most of the game playing catch-up with the Rams. They will have to go for the extra possessions to make up any gap in the scoring differences. Virginia Commonwealth will want to take >40 of their FGAs from beyond the arc, while UCLA has been effective at defending the three point line. The Rams' extended cold streak from deep against Tennessee has to have folks wondering if the Rams can pull an upset. Coach Smart's team will have to shoot better.

The Championship Game
The Tennessee - Villanova Final should be the fastest paced game of the tournament, the teams going out at about 73 possessions (games have been a possession or so higher than projected so far). Tennessee is a team that can run with Villanova...

	--Adjusted--
Team	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Tennessee	70.2	108.1	88.6	0.909
Villanova	70.3	115.0	88.8	0.951

Villanova is ranked #6 on PWP, while Tennessee is #30. The margin is wide enough to account for the relatively higher confidence level for a Villanova win (see table below). Other than that however, the teams appear to be fairly evenly matched, both have stingy defenses, the difference coming on offense where Villanova holds the clear edge. Both defenses register as elite, but their opponents have tended to look outside for points. Maybe the margins of scoring were wide enough to motivate the team down in scoring to fire away, but another explanation may lie in the opposition. Both teams have loaded up on mid/low majors so far, and many low/mid major teams routinely employ offenses that stress motion offenses that rely on the three point attempt. Tennessee utilizes the inside shot for 74% of their field goal attempts and nearly 56% of their points. The Vols lose over one-in-five of their possessions before shooting, almost half (49.8%) due to steals...

	Projected
	Pace	Prob.
Tennessee	73.0	33.8
Villanova		66.2

The offensive/defensive differentials and pace suggest nearly a 10 point margin of victory (for Villanova). Slowing Villanova's offense down while keeping his Volunteer offense in uptempo mode would be a huge challenge for Tennessee Coach Bruce Pearl. A half-court approach however, would require a skilled point guard who could run the team effectively while directing the attack. Something outside of the Volunteers' comfort zone I suspect, and given the lack of a truly effective point guard, something of a work in progress with the Vols at this point. Both teams will go inside at every opportunity, thereby exposing their low post players to more opportunities for fouls and foul trouble. Both teams routinely win the battle for the boards, for Tennessee offensive rebounding provides second chance opportunities that are vital given their very average shooting efficiency for field goals. Who controls the boards, and more importantly, how many fouls (and on whom they are called) may a key to determining the outcome of the game.

The 2010 NIT Tip-Off -- A log5 Look at the Championship Bracket

The Championship Bracket
Now that the consolation pods play is in the books, the four regional pod winners meet in Madison Square Garden to play the semi-final games and Championship game and so complete the championship bracket. Using the log5 method, we can calculate the probabilities for semi-final winners and the probabilities for each of the tournaments final four teams. The four pod round winners (in alphabetically correct order), with their regional pod, seed and conference affiliation:

Team	Region	Seed	Conf.
Tennessee	South	#2	SEC
UCLA	West	#4	Pac-10
Villanova	North	#1	Big East
VCU	East	#5	CAA

In basic tournament fashion, #1 will play #4 and #2 will play #3. VCU eliminated the #3 seed (Wake Forest of the ACC) and has taken that spot. Below is a quick reference table for the offensive and defensive efficiencies (adjusted per Ken Pomeroy's site), along with the Pace (approximate possessions per game) and Pythagorean Winning Percentage (PWP). Note all possession-based stats are current through 11/22/2010.

 

New York City
	Adjusted
Team	Pace	Adj Off	Adj Def	PWP
Tennessee	69.3	109.0	89.4	0.907
UCLA	67.6	109.2	91.1	0.890
Villanova	70.1	114.4	88.9	0.948
VCU	69.4	110.4	96.2	0.829

The adjusted stats suggest the games in New York City will be very competitive. Given that all the teams have defensive ratings somewhere in the 90s or below, the shots should be contested and the scores close (even if the offensive/defensive splits suggest differently).

"log5ing" the Semis
The seed match-ups for the semi-finals (Wednesday night) below suggest the winners should be Tennessee (seeded #2) and Villanova (seeded #1):

Tennessee vs. VCU
	PWP	Win Prob.
Tenn.	0.907	66.8
VCU	0.892	33.2

Using pace and adjusted efficiencies, the game should be played for between 70 and 71 possessions, with Tennessee winning by about 3-5 points. The Vols tend to turn the ball over while Virginia Commonwealth's defense tends to force turnovers, so keep track of this stat if you are watching the game; it could be a decisive factor, especially if the game is close. Tennessee does not shoot the three particularly well (that means they are terrible at it), while VCU's defense tends to defend the line...indifferently at times. Can the Vols exploit that weakness? The Vols tends to get to the line (it might be all of the home games, given the time of year) frequently, while the Rams are fairly average about fouling -- they are not particularly aggressive defenders.

Villanova vs. UCLA
	PWP	Win Prob.
Villanova	0.948	69.2
UCLA	0.890	30.8

This side of the bracket appears less competitive, but the 'Cats really took it to the Bruins in the 2009 NCAA second round. Coach Ben Howland has to remember the manhandling his players took at the Wachovia Center in Philadelphia. Through the weekend the numbers were closer. Expect the 'Cats and Bruins to play for about 69-70 possessions (just slightly fewer than the Vols and Rams), with the margin of victory only slightly larger (about 6-7 points). Expect Villanova to control the boards. The Wildcats are strong and aggressive when it comes to the boards. This has not been an obvious problem for UCLA because they have shot very well from the field so far. Should that change in the Garden however, it could spell trouble for the left coasters. Turnovers are another area to watch. The 'Cats are not especially aggressive defensively so far this season, a departure from seasons past. They have not forced turnovers at the same rate as prior seasons (they are excellent at protecting the ball by the way), but the Bruins are not particularly careful with the rock, and have turned it over on between one-in-five and one-in-four possessions.

Probabilities For the Bracket
The probabilities for each team for each round (two round bracket)...

	Probability to win...
Team	Semis	Final
Villanova	0.692	0.355
Tennessee	0.668	0.128
UCLA	0.308	0.087
VCU	0.332	0.026

Though it is just two rounds, I was a little surprised Villanova was so heavily favored -- relatively, note the the ratio is nearly 3:1 over the next closest team, Tennessee. The PWP is still a bit early and hardly an absolute predictor. Check out my post on the Washington DC and Winstron-Salem pods. Hampton, a team that was projected to lose both of it's consolation pod games.

Further Reading...
log5 Explained by Dean Oliver
The Official NIT Tip Off Site
The Consolation Brackets with sites, teams, dates and game times. Home team bolded.
A Look at Two Consolation Pods
A Preview of the Consolation Pods

NIT Season Tip-Off -- A Post Pod Look

The Field Sorts Out...
The four NIT pod sites completed their two round elimination games Monday through Wednesday (11/15-11/17), with the four teams that logged 2-0 records in the pod rounds advancing to New York City to settle matters on the floor of Madison Square Garden. The end of pod play does not, however spell the end of the tournament for the 12 teams that will not advance to New York. For those teams, the field has been reorganized, three teams were selected to host a second set of games and the remaining nine teams were assigned to the three pod sites. The redrawn field (Pod hosts listed first, other alphabetized) is:

New York City (NIT Champ)	Conf.		Winston-Salem, NC	Conf.
Tennessee	SEC #2		Wake Forest	ACC #3
UCLA	Pac-10 #4		Belmont	Atl. Sun
Villanova	Big East #1		Marist	MAAC
Virginia Commonwealth	CAA #5		Winthrop	Big South
Washington DC	Conf.		Springfield, MO	Conf.
George Washington	A-10 #7		Missouri State	MVC #6
Boston University	Am. East		Arkansas State	Sun Belt
Hampton	MEAC		Pacific	Big West
Nevada	WAC #8		Pepperdine	WCC

For all but New York City (the Championship bracket), the pod host is the first team listed under the pod location. The first eight teams were seeded by the NIT before the first pod. The original seed is listed for those teams after their conference affiliation. All pods except New York City are "consolation pods", so the rounds will not be single elimination, but rather two games scheduled against two of the other pod members. That explains why every pod has (at least) one pair of teams from the previous pod assignment. Those "paired teams" are not scheduled to play each other. Each team in the tournament, win or lose, is guaranteed four "unique" opponents.

What We Learned From the Pods
1. This is a "real tournament", even if it was seeded...strangely. Though designated a pod host and given a #3 seed in the field (of 16), Wake Forest still had to earn it's ticket to New York City and the Championship Bracket. And that the Demon Deacons could not do, as Virginia Commonwealth beat them by a convincing 21 points, 90-69 on Tuesday (11/17) and swiped the Deacons' ticket to Madison Square Garden. That could not have been fun for the Wake faithful. (Too) Many of the early season invitationals grant their pod hosts a pass to the "Championship Bracket" irrespective of whether they win their pod outright.
2. Nevada is officially rebuilding. The 2010 edition of the Wolfpack is gone and the perennial WAC powerhouse is something of a paper tiger, as the Pacific Tigers, followed by the Pepperdine Waves demonstrated on successive nights in West pod action. Pepperdine, which beat Nevada by a point, 76-75, won seven games (total) in 2010, and is projected to finish last in the West Coast Conference again this season. Nevada will play their consolation games in Washington DC.
3. George Washington will really miss Lasan Kromah. Announced on the eve of pod play, the sophomore guard and All A-10 Rookie Team player is out indefinitely with a sprained left foot. The Colonials dropped a nine point decision to Boston University (76-67), but blew Marist off the floor (79-59) the next night. A long recuperation period by the sophomore scorer is going to force Coach Karl Hobbs to lean on the other returning players (Tony Taylor, Joseph Katuka, Andre Ware, Jabari Edwards) to pick up a larger share of the offense. Projected (preseason) to finish around the middle of the Atlantic-10 Conference, a recuperation that stretches into conference play could really hurt the Colonials' chances to build on the progress last season.
4. Tennessee had a strong pod or really has some work to do. Probably both. The Volunteers dealt themselves Belmont (of the Atlantic Sun Conference) as their first round opponent, and managed a nine point win despite leading by only one, 77-76, with 0:36 left. The Vols scored the last eight points at the line, as the Bruins, who hit 7-22 from beyond the arc up to that point, missed a pair of three point attempts (and a two point attempt), could not rebound those misses and had to fall back on possession fouls to regain the ball. Against their second round opponent, Missouri State of the MVC, Tennessee managed to carry the day by four points. The game was a tug-of-war for the lead though the Vols pushed the bulge out to double digits once -- for some two minutes -- in the first half. The Bears took their last lead, 36-33, about five minutes into the second half, and though they could only hold it for a single possession, they were not, through the end of the game, more than two possessions away from a tie or lead. Maybe Tennessee's Bruce Pearl was distracted with other matters.

The Schedules...
The consolation pods will play out on Monday and Tuesday (11/22 & 11/23) of next week. The Championship Bracket is scheduled for Madison Square Garden. On Wednesday (11/24) the semi-finals will be played at 7:00 pm (Virginia Commonwealth vs Tennessee) and 9:00 pm (UCLA vs Villanova). The finals (and third place game) are scheduled for Friday, 2:00 pm (Third Place) and 5:00 pm (Championship).

What We Anticipate
From a log5 and offensive/defensive efficiencies perspective, it Wake's woes may not be over. And the same could be said for Tennessee. The Springfield Consolation Bracket could well be the strongest of the three consolation brackets, as two experienced West Coast teams tangle with two heartland squads in what might be a Bracket Buster Tournament in November. I will post break downs for each consolation bracket, along with the Championship Bracket later this weekend.

Further Reading...
The Official NIT Tip Off Site
The Consolation Brackets with sites, teams, dates and game times. Home team bolded.

The 2010 NIT Tip-Off -- a Second Look

Mixing in Pomeroy
As ESPN and other media outlets were pushing the invitational tournament out the door last August I posted an overview and quick analysis of the NIT Tip-Off Tournament, Villanova's early season invitational tournament. In the past two weeks the first round matchups have been officially announced and additional statistical data has been developed (primarily by Ken Pomeroy & the folks at the Basketball Prospectus), so it seems appropriate to revisit the NIT field and review the pod matchups.

The Field -- a Quick Review
Recall the field, sorted by region, with the host team listed first as it appeared in my Auguat post:

(North) Villanova	Big East		(South) Tennessee	SEC
Boston University	Am. East		Arkansas State	Sun Belt
George Washington	A-10		Belmont	Atl. Sun
Marist	MAAC		Missouri State	MVC
(East) Wake Forest	ACC		(West) UCLA	Pac-10
Hampton	MEAC		Nevada	WAC
Virginia Commonwealth	CAA		Pacific	Big West
Winthrop	Big South		Pepperdine	WCC

My overview/analysis relied heavily on 2010 season-ending possession-based stats from Ken Pomeroy's web site. In the past week (or so) the Basketball Prospectus has published it's preview for the season, a work that provides a preview for all 345 D1 teams. Ken Pomeroy has also released his Pythagorean Winning Percentage (PWP) and project "starting" offensive and defensive efficiencies for every team in D1. So, armed with new numbers, it is time to take another look at the field.

For each pod site, I have given the revised possession-based information for each team.

The East Region
The NIT folks locked up the pod hosts over a year ago. I have to think this would have made more sense for the 2012 or 2013 tournament, after Wake Forest's new head coach Jeff Bzdelik had time to settle in and assemble "his" team. The teams are paired according to their first round games (Wake vs Hamption and Virginia Commonwealth vs Winthrop)...

	2011 Projected
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Wake Forest	70.1	104.2	98.3	0.6603
Hampton	66.7	90.1	99.4	0.2456
VCU	68.0	109.9	96.1	0.8234
Winthrop	65.2	93.5	99.3	0.3335

The preponderance of previews project a lower division ACC conference finish for the Deacons. While Wake Forest will take their first round game (versus Hampton) by a comfortable margin (according to Pomeroy -- and to a very high degree of confidence too), but they have to pray that Winthrop will upset Virginia Commonwealth, as a second round match-up with Shaka Smart's VCU squad is the upset special for this tournament. A "log5 take" on the second round match-up between the Deacons and Rams suggests a Rams win to a 70.6% certainty. While I did not factor for home court advantage, Joel Coliseum cannot match New Mexico's Pit for intimidation, and even the Pit would be hard pressed to overcome a 2-to-1 log5 winning margin. Yikes. The pod losers will be routed to a consolation bracket to be hosted at the campus of one of the losing schools. Maybe Wake will host one of the consolation sites.

West Region
UCLA's rebuilding job is apparent by the PWP (as computed by Pomeroy). Which (again) points to the problem of locking up the pod hosts a year or more in advance of the tournament...

	2011 Projected
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
UCLA	66.3	111.5	95.1	0.8617
Pepperdine	67.1	98.3	101.1	0.4474
Nevada	68.7	98.5	104.3	0.3405
Pacific	62.6	105.6	98.7	0.6846

I wrote in the August post that the pod scheduler would resist the temptation to schedule by name and match-up Nevada with UCLA in the first (rather than second) round. No one listens to me anyway. The Pacific-Nevada game should be pretty good, but the Wolfpack is much depleted, and though they are "officially" the #8 seed in the tournament field, they will not survive Pacific. This pod could be the second "most likely" second round upset in the tournament if it comes to a UCLA-Pacific match. Pacific is not favored (at this point -- that could change based on early games...), theirs and UCLA's PWPs hint at a close second round game with UCLA holding a 74.2% certainty of winning. Should seed holds through the first round however, UCLA has to be heavily favored to brush aside any challenge from the Wolfpack.

South Region
The revised numbers turned Tennessee's pod into the most challenging of the field, though the Vols remain the strong favorite...

	2010 Adjusted
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Tennessee	68.3	110.4	90.9	0.9028
Belmont	69.3	105.0	96.7	0.7191
Missouri St.	65.5	109.2	96.4	0.8085
Arkansas St.	67.0	97.5	99.0	0.4571

I observed in August the Belmont-Missouri State game would most likely be the best of the tournament...in the first round anyway. Tennessee, it turns out, will face Belmont in the first round, while Missouri State drew Arkansas State. Both the Bears and Red Wolves return substantial percentages of their 2010 minutes and points, but Pomeroy calls the Missouri State-Arkansas State game for Missouri State (by 11 points) to an 84% "certainty" (that's pretty strong). Tennessee takes their game (according to the log5 forumula) game with Belmont (by 12 points) to a 87% certainty. I was a little surprised Coach Bruce Pearl did not take Arkansas State as their first round opponent, but Belmont will help the Vols' RPI more than Arkansas State. The second round game should go to the Vols also, with a log5 calculated certainty of 68.7% (cannot adjust until games are played), Wake-VCU aside, this is probably the most competitive second round game involving a pod host.

North Region
The games are scheduled for the Pavilion, a shame since they may have been able to sellout the Well Fargo Center (or whatever they are calling the Wach this season), but probably could not get the facility for two consecutive days...

	2010 Adjusted
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Villanova	70.3	114.0	93.5	0.9079
Marist	65.9	94.0	104.3	0.2316
George Washington	67.0	102.2	97.2	0.6398
Boston University	68.3	103.0	99.9	0.5853

The first round match-ups will pit Villanova against Marist, with George Washington, the A-10's representative in this tournament, matched with Boston University. The Wildcats are favored (log5 formula) with a 98% certainty (a 25+ point margin), probably the most decisive first round in the tournament. The GW-BU game will be more competitive (probably the most competitive game of the first round), with Pomeroy (and log5) favoring George Washington by a point, at 56%. 56% is not quite toss-up territory, but very close as suggested by the computed one point margin. Should seed hold, expect Villanova and GWU will face off for the second round and pod win, with Villanova favored to an 84.3% certainty. That would be the least competitive second round game in the field.

The Semi-Finals and Beyond
The official bracket confirms the committee is looking for a Tennessee - Villanova final. Villanova was seeded #1 in the field, while Tennessee is seeded #2. Villanova will meet #4 seed UCLA while Tennessee drew #3 seed Wake Forest (hmmm). Virginia Commonwealth, should the Rams upset Wake, will draw Tennessee, which ought to be a good matchup for the favored Vols. Staying with Pomeroy's preseason PWP, Tennessee is projected to win with a confidence of 66.7%. Neutral site computations are a bit easier. Expect a last update with some log5 projections after the pod winners are settled.

Further Reading...
My August "Too Early" post.
The Official NIT Tip Off Site
Other Early Season Invitationals with teams, dates and sites. From CBS.

The 2010 NIT Tip-Off -- A Too Early Look at the Field

Filling Out the Field
News about early season invitationals for the 2011 season have been leaking out in dribs and drabs for the past two months. The NIT Tip Off, operated by the Metropolitan Intercollegiate Basketball Association, owners and operators of the post season NIT, was inaugurated in 1985 as a counter move to the dwindling prospects for post season event (and later purchased by the NCAA as part of the settlement of MIBA's anti-trust law suit against the NCAA). From the first season, the event attracted a field of the top schools, and continues to do so every season. A move to the pod schedule format a number of years ago gives the tournament's preliminary round(s) a look and feel similar to a number of TV and impresario backed events like the Paradise Jam, the Legends Classic among others. Like the Legends Classic, the preliminary rounds are hosted at four separate sites -- the four top seeds. Unlike the Legends however, the pod hosts, heavily favored by high-major status and home court advantage, must win in order to advance to the Championship rounds (semi and finals) in New York City. The pod hosts for this edition of the tournament are Villanova (North), Tennessee (South), Wake Forest (East) and UCLA (West). The pod rounds (the preliminary rounds) will match the host and three invited teams to two games at the host site. First round winners at each pod site will play a second round game to determine who advances to New York City for the semi-final round. The three teams at each site who do not advance to New York City will play two additional Consolation Round games at site of the three highest seeded teams.

The Field
Four of the six above the "Red Line" conferences, the ACC, Big East, Pac-10 and SEC, are represented and will host the four sites for the preliminary rounds. The 12 "visiting" teams are drawn from conferences generally local to each pod site. The field, sorted by region, with the host team listed first:

(North) Villanova	Big East		(South) Tennessee	SEC
Boston University	Am. East		Arkansas State	Sun Belt
George Washington	A-10		Belmont	Atl. Sun
Marist	MAAC		Missouri State	MVC
(East) Wake Forest	ACC		(West) UCLA	Pac-10
Hampton	MEAC		Nevada	WAC
Virginia Commonwealth	CAA		Pacific	Big West
Winthrop	Big South		Pepperdine	WCC

The teams are listed alphabetically within each region. The field definitely has a "bi-coastal" flavor, as the Big East, ACC and Pac-10 have many members located along the Atlantic and Pacific coastal region. Note however that the conference affiliation for each of the three "guests" in those three pods also have strong representation along the left and right coastlines. A product no doubt, related to the host sites. I wanted a bit more detail about the participants in each of the preliminary round sites, so tracked down RPI, won-loss records and returning minutes/points from the team sites, and some possession-based stats from Ken Pomeroy's web site. For each pod site, I have given the record information, followed by the possession-based information.

The East Region
The breakdown suggests this could be a very interesting mini-tournament. In the same way that throwing a party in the middle of a remodeling project is interesting...

	2010 Season			2011 Returning
	RPI	W	L	Mins.	Pts.
Wake Forest	39	19	10	32.9	34.1
Hampton	283	14	18	66.8	59.1
VCU	136	22	9	82.7	85.3
Winthrop	160	17	13	69.7	73.9

Pod hosting for a team with an RPI (2010) of #39 makes good sense. Looking no farther, one could tease out a seed arrangement that would have Wake Forest play Hampton and Virginia Commonwealth (VCU) play Winthrop (of the Big South Conference) in their first round game. Consider however that Wake hired Jeff Bzdelik barely four months ago, and the former Colorado (of the Big 12) coach has had to replace over 65% of his minutes and points from last season's squad. And wait, it gets worse...

	2010 Adjusted
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Wake Forest	69.9	106.5	91.4	0.852
Hampton	67.5	94.3	99.2	0.358
VCU	68.9	113.5	96.1	0.870
Winthrop	65.4	89.5	95.7	0.316

Coach Bzdelik's Colorado struggled during his tenure, but pace and adjusted offensive efficiency were about the same as Wake's over the same period...but Wake Forest had a much better defense. VCU on the other hand appears to be in pretty good shape. I was a little surprised by the Rams' strong Pythagorean Winning Percentage (PWP), but the squad did win the post season CBI Tournament to close out the 2010 season. All things equal (while checking out Wake's and VCU's PWP), I would favor Wake by just under whatever they get for home court advantage. VCU's coach, Shaka Smart, however, enters his second season as head coach with over 80% of his squad's minutes and over 85% of their points coming back. Coach Bzdelik may not be able to run full practices with his squad until mid October, but I have to think he is breaking down VCU film now. This could be a very bumpy beginning to his tenure at Wake.

West Region
Like Wakes' Coach Bzdelik, UCLA's coach, Ben Howland, has something of a rebuilding job in 2011, so the timing for accepting an NIT Tip-Off hosting job is interesting...

	2010 Season			2011 Returning
	RPI	W	L	Mins.	Pts.
UCLA	137	14	18	53.4	52.3
Nevada	73	19	12	21.5	12.3
Pacific	128	20	11	66.4	70.5
Pepperdine	303	6	23	99.6	100.0

This region also looks like the host will attempt to entertain while undertaking an rebuilding project. Based on RPI alone, one would think the match-ups would be Nevada versus Pepperdine and UCLA versus Pacific in the first round. Since UCLA hosts however, they get to pick their cupcake, so I suspect the Bruins will take the Wave, while Nevada and Pacific play the under-card match. This West however, is almost as muddy as the East. Nevada may have the better RPI, but second year Coach David Carter faces a rebuilding job even more extensive as Wake's Coach Bzdelik. Presumptive top seed? No actually. In fact the Wolfpack may have a tough time getting by the Tigers in the first round (assuming they are matched with Pacific). Pacific, coached by 24 year veteran Bob Thomason (21 years at Pacific), returns nearly 2/3 of the Tigers' 2010 minutes and over 70% of their points.

	2010 Adjusted
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
UCLA	65.6	105.8	99.2	0.679
Nevada	70.0	111.4	101.3	0.749
Pacific	61.9	104.3	96.3	0.714
Pepperdine	66.7	95.0	109.3	0.167

Looking past the first round games, a Pacific--UCLA match-up would put two teams with very similar profiles head-to-head. They have similar offensive and defensive efficiencies (Pacific is actually a bit better). Coach Howland has no problem with a slightly lower possession rate, should Pacific control the tempo. And again, Pacific's Pythagorean Winning Percentage is higher than UCLA's. Should the Bruins and Tigers survive the first round, this second round match may come down to the Pauley Pavilion's intimidation factor. Will the Tigers be able to filter out the distractions and focus on the game? Pacific's Coach Thomason has a 15-9 record versus Nevada, a 5-2 record versus and incredibly, a 0-0 record versus UCLA.

South Region
Tennessee is probably in the best spot as one of the host sites...

	2010 Season			2011 Returning
	RPI	W	L	Mins.	Pts.
Tennessee	14	25	8	57.1	51.0
Arkansas St.	202	15	14	92.2	92.9
Belmont	135	19	12	80.9	76.6
Missouri St.	90	20	12	89.3	94.6

The RPI-based first round would most likely pit Tennessee against Arkansas State, and Missouri State against Belmont, with the winners -- Tennessee and Missouri State -- facing off for the trip to the Big Apple. The Vols return over half of their minutes (57.1%) and points (51.0%)...just barely, but how challenging, despite the high percentage of returning minutes and points, would either Belmont or Arkansas State be to either the SEC or the Missouri Valley school? As for the second round game, looking just at the table above, it would seem to be at least as competitive as either the East or West Region/pod. But looks can be deceiving...

	2010 Adjusted
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Tennessee	68.7	108.9	88.5	0.916
Arkansas St.	67.5	97.7	100.5	0.420
Belmont	70.2	101.9	97.9	0.615
Missouri St.	65.5	110.8	98.7	0.792

On paper a first round match-up of Belmont and Missouri State may be the best of the three that would be played over the two days. Both return substantial portions of their squad's minutes and points. While pace can be overblown at times, the nearly five possession difference between the Missouri State and Belmont could be trouble. If Belmont is behind, the Bruins might chafe at the Bears' more deliberate pace. Or if the Bears are beind, they may struggle to stay with the Bruins. In either case, the Vols' pace falls between the Bruins and Bears, so the Vols should have little trouble adjusting if the other team controls the pace.

North Region
Many of the details are sketchy at this point. The dates for the preliminary rounds, and for Villanova, even the site -- will this be moved to the Wells Fargo (nee Wachovia) Center downtown, or will the 'Cats host this on campus at the Pavilion? The Wells Fargo Center would make sense...

	2010 Season			2011 Returning
	RPI	W	L	Mins.	Pts.
Villanova	11	25	8	66.0	62.5
Boston University	144	21	14	43.5	50.9
George Washington	148	16	15	75.3	70.9
Marist	334	1	29	93.9	97.0

Villanova has a connection to each of the other teams in the pod. Boston U Coach Patrick Chambers was an Associate Head Coach at Villanova just two seasons ago. The Terriers were a last minute addition to the Puerto Rico Tip-Off field last November. Though BU has a lot of minutes to replace from last season's squad, I doubt the Wildcats and Terriers will be matched in the first round. That first round opponent will most likely be the Red Foxes of Marist. Head Coach Chuck Martin did stints as an assistant for Bruiser Flint at Drexel, and at St. John's under (former) Coach Norm Roberts. Marist was the destination for former Villanova center Casiem Drummond, who later moved on to Georgetown College in Division 2. While some in the 'Nova Nation may not be happy about Marist's 334 RPI, with 92% of the Red Fox 2010 minutes returning, chances are good Marist will finish with a higher RPI this season.

	2010 Adjusted
	Pace	Off.	Def.	PWP
Villanova	72.4	116.6	94.0	0.923
Boston University	71.2	104.0	97.4	0.679
George Washington	68.2	102.6	96.6	0.665
Marist	64.0	88.1	111.2	0.064

The first round match-ups here therefore, will most likely be Villanova and Marist, with George Washington, the A-10's representative in this tournament, matched with Boston University. Should seed hold, expect Villanova and GWU to face off for the second pod win. For the past three or so pre-seasons Villanova and George Washington have waived the second NCAA-sanctioned exhibition game in favor of an opportunity to conduct a closed scrimmage with each other. Coach Hobbs and Wright are extremely familiar with the other's personnel and style of play (and coaching). I suspect if the 'Cats (and Colonials) participate in a closed scrimmage this pre-season it will not be with each other.

The Semi-Finals and Beyond
I suspect, should the pod hosts' hold through the preliminary rounds, that Villanova and Tennessee will the match-up the NIT would want for the final. The semi-final then would match Villanova with either Wake Forest or UCLA, with Tennessee getting the other.

Further Reading...
The Official NIT Tip Off Site
The Tip-Off Brakets (.pdf format)
Other Early Season Invitationals with teams, dates and sites. From CBS.