Jeff Peterson Is A Total Liability
[Note: As with last week, Wednesday is the polling day of Sabbath. And so is Saturday. And Sunday. Shut up.]
Recall, if you will, our post from a couple weeks ago that stated that Iowa's biggest liability, when adjusted for tempo, was actually their defense. It didn't really make sense, given their good defensive fundamentals and penchant for drawing (kinda bullshit) charges.
And so, Gasaway's final rankings came out, and Iowa's still #10 in the conference. But there's something worth noticing:
Opp.
Pace PPP PPP EM
1. Michigan St. 63.6 1.06 0.93 +0.13
2. Wisconsin 57.8 1.08 1.00 +0.08
3. Purdue 63.6 1.02 0.95 +0.07
4. Illinois 61.1 0.98 0.93 +0.05
5. Ohio St. 60.8 1.07 1.05 +0.02
6. Minnesota 62.2 0.98 0.98 0.00
7. Michigan 61.0 1.01 1.03 -0.02
8. Penn St. 59.7 1.00 1.04 -0.04
9. Northwestern 59.6 1.03 1.07 -0.04
10. Iowa 56.8 0.99 1.07 -0.08
11. Indiana 63.2 0.93 1.12 -0.19
Yep, there's Iowa, still at #10. Except... they're down to -0.08 in efficiency margin. Yes, second worst still, but consider where they were on, oh let's say... February 17.
Opp.
Pace PPP PPP EM
1. Michigan St. 63.1 1.11 0.94 +0.17
2. Wisconsin 58.2 1.08 1.00 +0.08
3. Illinois 61.0 1.00 0.93 +0.07
4. Purdue 62.4 1.00 0.94 +0.06
5. Ohio St. 63.1 1.05 1.01 +0.04
6. Minnesota 63.4 0.98 0.98 0.00
7. Penn St. 61.2 1.01 1.05 -0.04
8. Michigan 61.0 0.98 1.02 -0.04
8. Northwestern 61.0 1.02 1.08 -0.06
10. Iowa 57.4 0.98 1.09 -0.11
11. Indiana 64.3 0.92 1.10 -0.18
That's a bit of a jump from then to now for Iowa, no? Of course, they're still at #10, but they shaved some percentage off their margin in a quick minute. And surprisingly, it looks like this was addition by subtraction.
When Jeff Peterson's hamstring went haywire, Iowa was putting the finishing touches on a listless loss at Wisconsin on February 11. After that, shit CHANGED, son. Observe (thank you, Johann Hawk):
--- Pace ------ PPP --- OPPP ---- E
Pet 58.0 ----- 0.95 --- 1.11 --- -0.16
Kel 55.8 ----- 0.99 --- 1.03 --- -0.03
As you can probably tell, "Pet" means the games with Jeff Peterson starting at point, and "Kel" means when Jake Kelly had to take over point guard responsibilities. That's an enormous difference. And sure, those numbers seem a little confusing by themselves. Did Iowa somehow get better at offense AND defense while losing depth? What the hell? What does it all mean, Basil? Allow us to introduce one more statistic to explain everything.
--- Pace --- TO/Pos --- PPP --- OPPP ---- E
Pet 58.0 ---- 24.0 --- 0.95 --- 1.11 --- -0.16
Kel 55.8 ---- 18.3 --- 0.99 --- 1.03 --- -0.03
Oh ho. And it explains everything. With Iowa cutting down on gifts to the opposition by a good 30%, all of a sudden those free points for the opposition goes down and the efficiency ratings get earned in the half court, not the full court.
And really, anyone who actually watched Kelly run the point knows that Kelly can reliably create A) space off the dribble or B) his own jumper... and Peterson can't. Peterson (who, God bless him, is by all accounts a hell of a guy and who really improved his scoring efficiency from last season) is still a turnover machine. Kelly, for his part, isn't.
If I'm putting together a starting lineup for next season, it looks a little like this:
- PG: Kelly
- SG: Tucker
- SF: Gatens
- Um, other SF: Fuller
- Token Large Man: Cole
First of all, yes, there's no Peterson. He wouldn't be starting on a decent BXI team, and once Iowa's decent... he probably won't. As for the real starting five, everyone's between 6'4" and 6'7" (except Gatens at 8'7"), but who the fuck is going to burn Iowa on a lack of inside size next season? BJ Mullens is obviously declaring, so there's... um... Coleton Iverson? Right, exactly. With Kelly as a decent point man and height where it matters, Iowa should be right in the middle of the pack in terms of efficiency next season. That should mean about 18 wins and a lot of quieter mouths 12 months from now.
Anyway, we're getting Zooked tomorrow. Get pumped.
6 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The crazy thing about that...
is that a significant part of the turnover problem was Kelly at the 2. Peterson turned it over too much as a point, and Kelly really turned it over too much at the SG spot… but somehow Kelly turns it over less, and we’ve replaced Peterson with Bawinkle, who never, ever, ever turns it over.
Kelly at the point
Not to be down on Peterson, because he is significantly better than he was last year, but I agree with Kelly at the PG…he’s just plain fun to watch. I know he’s just a freshman, but I’m not sold on Fuller just yet. Kelly/Tucker/May/Gatens/Cole? Or is that too many shooters and not enough size?
I am not a scientist...
I don’t know the details of how it works, but is there enough time this offseason to make a couple clones of Gatens? Maybe even a taller one? Someone should get started on that ASAP. It might be our only hope for getting back to Big Ten mediocrity next year.
Apparently facts are weak things when they face personal philosophies.
Until we get another PG, we still need J Pete
Because Jake cannot play 40 min/game and be anything but a limp blob at the end of the season. And we badly need another ballhandler to help us get the ball up the court.
That said, it does seem pretty obvious that the offense needs to run through Kelly a LOT more next year even when JP is healthy.

by 
















