Gonzaga 70, Indiana 54.

Here's the box. IU lost by 16, but was within 9 points with under four minutes remaining, so obviously on a superficial level, IU exceeded expectations. I would love to claim this game as significant progress, but I think it had more to do with an uncharacteristically awful shooting performance by Gonzaga. The Zags shot 45 percent from the field but only 3-16 from behind the arc. Unfortunately, IU's shooting was even worse, 30 percent for the game, although the Hoosiers stayed in it by shooting 6-12 from behind the arc in the second half. If there was any bright spot for the Hoosiers, that was it: maximizing possessions by taking care of the ball and making three pointers is IU's only hope for respectability. Unfortunately, the second part of that equation, taking care of the ball, was as bad as ever. IU turned the ball over 25 times in a 69 possession game. That 34 percent turnover percentage is IU's worst of the season, which is saying something. Verdell Jones missed his second consecutive game after an apparent concussion in the Cornell game, and could have been used to spell Daniel Moore, who turned the ball over 7 times in 37 minutes of play. Tom Pritchard played well, although he spent most of the game in foul trouble. Malik Story emerged, scoring 14 points on 11 shots, but there weren't too many offensive success stories for the Hoosiers.

IU enters an interesting stretch of the schedule. The Hoosiers play TCU at home on Wednesday before playing a spotty Kentucky team on the road. I don't expect a win at UK, but a competitive game might be a positive sign, while a loss to TCU probably spells disaster.

The Gonzaga game.

Gonzaga Bulldogs
Current record: 5-0
Current RPI: 2
Current Sagarin: 3
Current Pomeroy: 2
2007-08 record: 25-8 (lost to Davidson in first round of NCAA Tournament)
2007-08 RPI: 34
2007-08 Sagarin: 29
2007-08 Pomeroy: 30
Series: IU leads 2-1
Last IU win: 3/15/2007 (70-57 in first round of NCAA Tournament, Sacramento)
Last Gonzaga win: 3/18/2006 (90-80 in second round of NCAA Tournament, Salt Lake City)
Pomeroy scouting report
TV: 1:30 pm, BTN

IU won the last matchup between these two teams, in the 2007 NCAA Tournament. The Zags have lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament in the last two years, but hopes are high this year. Gonzaga's starting backcourt in that 2007 game, Jeremy Pargo and Matt Bouldin, remains intact, and 6-11 forward Josh Heytvelt, who was suspended for the previous meeting with IU, remains. As the Kennel Report noted, Gonzaga has a balanced attack, with six players averaging between 9.6 and 15 points per game. And as the Pomeroy scouting report indicates, Gonzaga has excelled at nearly everything except rebounding and free throw shooting. Everything else is great: shooting, field goal defense, taking care of the ball, forcing turnovers, you name it.

At this point, IU has defeated, with varying degrees of ease, every low major opponent, but has been humiliated by every major or borderline major program on the schedule. Gonzaga may be IU's toughest opponent to date, although Notre Dame and Wake are very good. I hate to consider anything a moral victory, but a competitive loss would be a sign of significant progress for this team. I don't expect it.

Q&A with The Kennel Report.

I exchanged some questions with The Kennel Report, a Gonzaga blog. My answers to their questions, as well as answers to the same questions by Inside the Hall, are here. Maybe next time I'll proofread a little better, and my answer to the question about defense makes clear that I didn't see the Wake game. I asked a shorter set of questions, and TKR's answers to mine are below:

1. There have been many flash-in-the-pan programs that have made a run to the Sweet 16 and quickly fell back to earth. What is Gonzaga's secret? Is it just Mark Few, or is there some other reason that the Zags have become a legitimate national power?

Wow, this is one of those questions that is probably in the eye of the beholder but Gonzaga's success has to stop and start with Mark Few. Dan Monson was the head coach when the Zags went to the Elite Eight in '99 but bolted to Minnesota the next year. Since then Few has led Gonzaga to the tournament in every year since. A big part of Mark Few's tenure at Gonzaga has been about developing talent. Guys like Ronny Turiaf, Adam Morrison, and Blake Stepp weren't huge on the recruiting scene but they blew up upon their arrival in Spokane. The staff has done a great job at recruiting this untapped talent and putting out a team that buys into the 'team' concept. The Zags have kind of left those days behind. They now recruit at a high level and it should be interesting to see how the coaching staff adapts to being a power school because the days of sneaking up on teams are long gone.

2. What should IU expect from this team? Strengths, weaknesses, concerns, etc.

We're extremely excited about this team so these answers could be a little bit swayed in the positive side...

The major strength of this team is experience and depth. People around the program know that if there is a year for the Zags to make a final four run, this is it. Jeremy Pargo, Micah Downs, and Josh Heytvelt are all seniors who have been around the program for a while. They are all playing at extremely high levels. Pargo is near the top in assists per game, and Downs and Heytvelt are leading the team in scoring. Along the same lines, Gonzaga has five players averaging double figures in points so far in Pargo, Downs, Heytvelt, Matt Bouldin, and Austin Daye. Steven Gray is averaging 9.6 points a game so I expect him to join the group soon. With that kind of experience and depth, there is no doubt that on any given night, a different player can score twenty points for Gonzaga. This is a much needed change for the program because for so long we relied on that one player to win games for us (see Adam Morrison, Ronny Turiaf, Derek Raivio etc etc..)

The thing you will notice right away is the size and length of this team. Matt Bouldin and Jeremy Pargo start at the guard spots for Gonzaga and look like they should be playing linebacker for the University of Washington. They are both around 220 pounds so they can not only play on the outside but they can also go down low and back you down. The front line for the Zags is extremely long. Micah Downs is 6'8'', and Austin Daye and Josh Heytvelt are 6'11''. They are all tremendous shot blockers and, aside from the Tennessee game, have rebounded very well. Mark Few has got a couple of 7 footers on his bench as well in Rob Sacre and Will Foster. You'll probably see Sacre early and often but Foster, who is 7'5'', has only really played in garbage situations.

The glaring weaknesses for Gonzaga is their reliance on the three point shot and foul problems on the front line. As I mentioned earlier, Gonzaga has players that can shoot from all over the court and during some games, they all try to take over and shoot the long ball. The only player whose three point shot is his biggest strength is sophomore Steven Gray. He lives around the three point line and is a dagger shooter. Everyone else is a marginal three point shooter but is better at something else. This nearly killed us against in the Old Spice Classic. Another thing which has frustrated the Gonzaga faithful is sloppy fouls by our bigs. Austin Daye and Josh Heytvelt have been taken out of some games early for some bad fouls and that really hurts our depth. Our front line is big but aside from Daye and Heytvelt, not very offensively gifted. Rob Sacre is coming off injury, Ira Brown is a a great role player, and Will Foster hasn't made any huge stride in his three years at Gonzaga. If they get in foul trouble early, we will be forced to play small and that is something we don't want to do.

3. Is there any discontent among Gonzaga fans? I would guess that the program's current status is beyond the wildest dreams of fans who followed Gonzaga before 1999. But is there any grumbling about not yet reaching the Final Four, for instance?

That's a great question and something I have been trying to figure out for awhile. Gonzaga has a weird fanbase because you have the older fans who have seen the crappy days when Gonzaga was terrible and you have newer generation fans like myself who have only seen Gonzaga dominate their conference and make the tournament every year. I think I would have a great answer to your question after this year because this is the make or break year for the Zags. They have no reason not to at least make the Elite Eight and if they don't, Mark Few is going to hear it from some of the fans. After this year their will be a huge transformation in the program because Pargo, Downs, and Heytvelt all graduate along with Ira Brown. Austin Daye may bolt to the draft as well.

As of right now, you can almost taste the fear floating around Spokane right now. Everyone knows this is a talented team but is worried about the NCAA Tournament. Hopefully the Old Spice Classic victory will ease some tensions but I would have to characterize the mood in Spokane as being cautious enthusiasm.

Not to mention the fact that Gonzaga has the weight of Washington sports on it's back. The football season wasn't kind to the state of Washington, I believe the Seahawks, Cougars and Huskies have 4 wins combined between the three teams. It's basically 'Zags or Bust' up here.

Thanks, guys. I would wish you luck, but luck can only work against Gonzaga in this game.

Indiana 70, Gonzaga 57

That was a really nice win. After a competitive first half, we managed to expand our lead in the second half. Gonzaga pulled to within 3, at 38-35 at the 17:37 mark. Rod Wilmont hit a three at the 17:00 mark, and the Bulldogs never were within a possession again. Neither team shot particularly well, although IU did manage 47 percent in the second half. In the first half, IU shot only 34 percent but managed 38 percent (7-18) from behind the arc, which accounted for the lead. My quick calculations indicate a 66 possession game--nothing out of the ordinary for Gonzaga, but run-and-gun by Big Ten standards. As the Wonk notes, this was an outstanding performance for the Hoosier defense, or at least a fairly deficient performance by Gonzaga's offense. The Wonk says 67 possessions, I say 66, but in any event, something in the neighborhood of .86 points per possession for the Zags, while IU was just south of 1.0. Again, this was a quicker game than most of the games IU played during the Big Ten season, so while the 13 turnovers may look a bit high, the 19.6 turnover percentage is just a tick higher than IU's 18.9 average in Big Ten play.

The Big Ten has taken quite a bit of grief for the style of play and the number of bids and quality of seeds that the tournament committee awarded to the Big Ten. I'm not really a "conference pride guy," meaning I don't feel any particular obligation to root for Purdue or Illinois or Wisconsin in the tournament because it's "good for the Big Ten." I vaguely hope that the Big Ten does well, but it doesn't mean I will sit down on the couch and root for Purdue in the tournament. Today might be an exception. The criticism of the Big Ten has been so harsh that I would love to see a 6-0 start, even if it means rooting for the loathesome Boilers and Illini. I love that MSU managed lull a quality Big East team that averages over 67 possessions per game into a snail's pace, 58 possession game, and won comfortably. IU played at a faster pace than normal, and won comfortably. I realize that ugly, slow basketball does not always indicate good defense, but at the same time, a 49-45 score does not always indicate a poorly played game, and I'm sick of the simpletons in the media who say so.

More on Gonzaga.

IU’s defensive problems this season have been on the interior. Our 2-point field goals allowed percentage is very pedestrian, but at least for most of the season, our three point defense was the best in the Big Ten. Gonzaga, despite the aforementioned loss of Josh Heytvelt to the devil ‘shrooms, is still pretty tall, with two 6-9 guys in the starting lineup. The Zags leading scorer is Derek Raivio, who averages 18.2 points on only 12 shots per game. As the Wonk has noted, the Bulldogs don’t shoot three pointers often, but they shoot them well. Raivio is the most frequent long bomber for the ‘Zags. He shoots 6.6 threes a game and makes 41 percent. Other than the departed Heytvelt, Gonzaga has only one other double digit scorer, point guard Jeremy Pargo, who averages 12.2 points a game on 8.4 shots per game. This article from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer notes the production increases of 6-6 David Pendergraft, 6-8 Micah Downs, and 6-9 Abdulli Kuso since Heytvelt’s suspension. Pendergraft and Downs have doubled their points per game since then, which makes a look at Gonzaga’s season stats a bit misleading. For programs that play in major conferences, the latter two thirds of the season tend to be a more reliable indicator of a team’s quality because of better competition and more uniform competition as compared to other major conference teams. For Gonzaga, it’s a bit different. The Bulldogs play the bulk of their high quality opponents in the non-conference season to offset the comparatively weaker WCC schedule. Accordingly, it is tough to give as much weight to those players’ increased production as it would be if they had done so with a more "conventional" major program.

I don't have any parting thoughts of any significance in this, my last post before IU begins (and possibly ends) its 2007 NCAA Tournament appearance. By the numbers, by seed, by the Vegas odds, IU is a narrow but decided favorite. The Hoosiers should win, but a Gonzaga win would not be a momentous upset. As of noon today, the ESPN Bracket Challenge entrants favored Gonazaga by about a 55/45 margin. I love picking against the trendy upset. I don't expect great things from IU in this tournament, and I will be quite surprised if I am writing a preview this time next week, but winning an NCAA Tournament game would be a nice step and a nice reward for team and coach after a promising first season. Let's go Hoosiers.

Indiana and Gonzaga, toe to toe.

The numbers are courtesy Ken Pomeroy and Big Ten Wonk. You should know that, because you should be reading those guys anyway. The number in the parentheses is the national rank, with the Pomeroy weighted ranking as the second parenthetical number in the efficiency rankings:

Efficiency

Pace: Indiana 64 possessions per game (267/215); Gonzaga 69.4 possessions per game (82/108)

Offensive efficiency: Indiana 1.105 points per possession (37/9); Gonzaga 1.124 points per possession (22/31)

Defensive efficiency: Indiana .967 points per possession (59/42) ;Gonzaga .992 points per possession (97/79)

Pomeroy also uses some sort of method that I don't fully understand for adjusting the above statistics based upon the quality of opposition. In all of those measures, Indiana does better than its raw score and Gonzaga does worse.

Offense

Effective field goal percentage (extra credit for made three pointers): Indiana 52.4 (78); Gonzaga 54.5 (22)

Turnover percentage: Indiana 19.0 (61); Gonzaga 18.8 (51)

Offensive rebound percentage: Indiana 35.6 (91); Gonzaga 33.6 (163)

Defense

Effective field goal percentage: Indiana 46.7 (45); Gonzaga 46.6 (44)

Turnover percentage: Indiana 22.2 (101); Gonzaga 18.7 (295)

Offensive rebounding percentage: Indiana 32.5 (126); Gonzaga 29.9 (39)

So what does this tell us? Gonzaga plays faster, but Indiana is in the Big Ten, so that is understood. Both teams are efficient on offense, while IU is a bit tougher on defense. The two teams' offensive numbers are strikingly similar across the board. The main distinctions come on defense, where IU forces more turnovers and Gonzaga is a much better defensive rebounding team. Mitigating Gonzaga's advantages are IU's stronger schedule (hence IU's more favorable rating in Pomeroy's weighted stats) and the fact that Gonzaga lost its best big man because of a drug possession charge. IU is justifiably favored in this game.

More on the individuals later.

The Gonzaga game (NCAA Tournament first round)

Gonzaga Bulldogs
Overall record: 23-10
West Coast Conference record: 11-3 (plus 2-0 in the tournament)
RPI: 60
Sagarin: 46
Series record: tied at 1-1

Eight years ago, Gonzaga was nothing but a delightful mid-major feel-good story. The Bulldogs reached the Elite Eight in 1999 and nearly defeated eventual NCAA champ Connecticut in the regional final. After that, coach Dan Monson left for Minnesota, and most expected that Gonzaga would be relegated to the dustbin of history like other mid-major darlings such as Ball State, Santa Clara, Miami of Ohio, Valparaiso, etc. Instead, while playing in the West Coast Conference and at a school that was barely known to the average sports fan a decade ago, Gonzaga has become a legitimate basketball power, even to the point that some have referred to the 'Zags as "Duke West" because of the media's adulation of this admirable program. Who would have guessed that Gonzaga would still be going strong in 2007 while Monson's career lies in ruin?

How have they done it? I really don't have a clue. Some have suggested that Few was the brains behind the whole operation in the first place. That could be true, or it could be after-the-fact rationalization. Whatever Monson contributed to the initial success of Gonzaga, it is clear that Mark Few is an excellent coach and, as importantly, has been willing to turn away power conference programs that have sought his services. Many mid-major schools have meager fan following, subpar academics, or various other flaws. Gonzaga, while it shares a state with two Pac-10 schools, seems to be the only show in town in Spokane, and despite recent success, neither Washington nor Washington State is a traditional basketball power. In other words, Gonzaga has an easier path than a school like Butler, which shares its city with the Colts and Pacers and its state with Indiana, Notre Dame, Purdue, and a host of respectable mid-majors with glass-slipper tournament histories (Indiana State, Evansville, Ball State, and Valparaiso have all made runs to the Sweet 16). Could it be the funny name? Really. Most Jesuit universities in the United States seem to bear the name of their home cities (e.g., Dayton, Detroit, St. Louis) or the names of one of the co-founders of the Jesuit order, St. Francis Xavier or St. Ignatius Loyola . Can't swing a dead cat in this country without hitting a "Xavier" or "Loyola." Instead, the university's founders made the fortuitous decision to name the school for St. Aloysius Gonzaga, an Italian nobleman who gave up his riches and rights of inheritance to join the Jesuit order and died in his early 20s. Would the 'Zags be the 'Zags if the school had been named "the University of Spokane" or "Loyola (Washington)"? Well, sure, they literally would not be "the 'Zags," but would they be in the position they are now? I don't know, but the funny name seems as good an explanation as any for why Gonzaga has been able to not just maintain its position at the top of a non-power conference, but has become a legitimate national power that generates interest and television ratings.

Gonzaga again.

IU plays Gonzaga for the second consecutive year in the NCAA Tournament. Last year, the Bulldogs eliminated IU in the second round after IU's first round win over the evil Steve Fisher and San Diego State. Clearly, Gonzaga is not the team they were last season. Adam Morrison is gone. Gonzaga did not win the WCC in the regular season but managed to defeat Santa Clara in the conference tournament. The game will be in Sacramento, not to terribly far (by western US standards, at least) from Gonzaga's campus in Spokane. The selection committee has dispatched IU to the western US several times in recent years, at least for the first couple of rounds. This year, IU is in the West region and will play out west if they advance to the Sweet 16. Sacramento should conjure up some nice memories for IU fans: IU beat Utah and UNC-Wilmington in 2002 on the way to the Final Four. That year, of course, IU was in the South and played at Rupp Arena in Lexington for the Sweet 16 and regional final.

Off the top of my head, IU played out west in 2006 (Salt Lake City), 2002 (Sacramento), 2001 (San Diego), and 1995 (Boise). That's five times in IU's last 11 NCAA appearances and four of the last five. It's well past time for us to control our own destiny by finishing as a top four (preferably number one) seed next season. More on this matchup and the tournament later.

I was a bit surprised by the seed. It is now even more frustrating that we lost that game to Illinis Friday night, because a win probably would have given IU a sixth seed and avoided playing UCLA in the second round in California (if IU beats Gonzaga.