Minnesota 59, Indiana 58.

Here's the box score. I'm not going to elaborate on the game much. Minnesota owned the first half of the first half, and IU stormed back in the next 20 minutes so that the teams could fight it out at the end. While I don't think any of the foul calls in IU's favor at the end were bad calls, I do admit that it's unusual for officials to blow the whistle so often in the closing seconds. I think officials should apply the same rules in the last 30 seconds that they apply in the first 39:30, but unquestionably, IU benefited from this rarity but could not capitalize. I have a hard time blaming Dan Dakich for much regarding this team. He's in an tough spot. But Dakich was on the bench as an assistant coach for the 1987 NCAA final. In light of that and Knight's philosophy on guarding the in-bounds man (Derrick Coleman in the 1987 game--He threw a full court pass with one second remaining that was intercepted by Keith Smart), I was surprised that Dakich had Jordan Crawford guarding the in-bounds pass instead of serving as a free safety. Perhaps Dakich feared, given how whistle-happy the officials had been at IU's end of the court, that a 5 on 4 situation might increase the risk of a foul.

I may come back later and break down the box score, but probably not. Yesterday, PJS mocked the common cliche that it's tough to beat a team three times in a season. While it isn't universally true, when the twice vanquished team is a decent, well-coached team (as opposed to a cellar-dweller), I think it applies. Now the shoe is on the other foot. As PJS reports today, Illinois has defeated Minnesota 19 times in a row, including twice this season.

Well, perhaps the only people more disappointed than IU and Purdue players and fans in yesterday's results are Jim Delany and ticket brokers. As I discussed earlier, both sides of the most intense rivalry in the conference have been down during the 11 year history of the conference tournament. Just when it looked as if the Big Ten was looking at a marquee semifinal matchup and a local school in the final, Illinois and Minnesota intervened. It will make for some compelling TV, however. Both the Illinois-Minnesota semifinal and the title game now will be essentially NCAA play-in games. I'm sure I speak for 99 percent of IU fans when I say go Gophers. Better Tubby than Squeaky.

Minnesota: Big Ten Tournament quarterfinals.

Minnesota Golden Gophers

Current record: 19-12

Big Ten record: 8-10 (plus 1-0 in BTT)

Current RPI: 101

Current Sagarin: 62

2006-07 record: 9-22

2006-07 RPI: 191

2006-07 Sagarin: 167

Series: IU leads 87-63

Last IU win: 3/5/08 (69-55 in Bloomington)

Last Minnesota win: 1/29/06 (61-42 in Minneapolis)

Big Ten Tournament meetings: 1 (2005: #5 Minnesota 71, #4 IU 55)

TV: 9 pm Friday, Big Ten Network

Pomeroy profile

Blogs: Paging Jim Shikenjanski, Gopher Nation, From the Barn

IU's last win came just over a week ago against the Gophers, and now IU must try to beat the Gophers for the third time this season. IU has accomplished that feat only once during the Big Ten Tournament era: in 1997-98, IU beat the 11 seed Ohio State three times. Before that, IU hadn't defeated a Big Ten team three times in a season since 1976, when IU beat Michigan twice in the regular season and then in the NCAA title game. During the regular season, IU was 5-0 against the remaining teams in IU's half of the bracket, so any team IU might play in the next couple of rounds will be highly motivated (IU was 4-3 against the remaining teams on the other side and 5-1 against the eliminated). Although IU is 5-0 against Minnesota, Purdue, and Illinois this year, IU is a combined 1-7 against those teams in the BTT. The only time IU and Minnesota have met in the BTT was in 2005, when "we were the four seed. We were the four seed. We were the four seed." Am I imagining this odd Mike Davis press conference moment? I try to find independent documentation on Google, and I keep finding this blog. Humor me.

The game in Minneapolis this season was down to the wire, and Minnesota was ahead by a point in the game in Bloomington with about 8 minutes left in the second half before IU outscored the Gophers by 15 down the stretch. Here's my recap of the last game. Most significantly, IU took good care of the ball against the Gophers compared to the turnover-fest in game one. Looking back at my recap of game one, my recap may seem overly giddy, but at that point Minnesota was 12-4 and thinking NCAA Tournament. The Gophers managed to vastly improve on last season, but struggled against the upper tier of the conference. Minnesota was 0-7 against the top four in the conference and 7-3 against everyone else. The killer games, the games that mean Minnesota likely has to win the tournament to get to the tournament, were the two losses to Illinois. Absent those losses, Minnesota would 20-10 (10-8) and somewhere on the bubble, at least with a chance to make the tournament with an upset or two of a top four team.

In any event, the Gophers are what they are, a solid, improved team that certainly was competitive with IU for about 70 of the 80 minutes they have played this year. IU is struggling, but unquestionably can beat the Gophers again. At this point, no outcome would surprise me. IU could win 3 in a row or could lose by 20 tomorrow night. We will see.

Two down, two upsets.

It's been a good day for the dark jerseys here in Indianapolis. In game one, #9 Michigan beat #8 Iowa 55-47. In game two, #10 Illinois upset #7 Penn State 64-63 on a late putback by Chester Frazier. The only game remaining today is the most relevant to the Hoosiers, #6 Minnesota against #11 Northwestern. I will be equally nervous with either outcome. Minnesota is a respectable team that did everything but upset one of the top 4 this year. Northwestern, despite its 1-17 conference record, gave the Hoosiers fits in both matchups and should have won the game in Evanston.

In case you are wondering, no, there have never been three upsets on the first day of the BTT. In fact, this is only the third time in 11 tournaments that there have been two upsets on day one (1999 and 2002 were the others). Illinois in 1999 is the only #11 to win a game (Illinois won three, of course), so the odds are against Northwestern. Oddly enough, given that it theoretically is the closest matched game of day one, this is only the third time that a #9 seed has won (#9 Penn State in 1999; #9 Iowa in 2002). It's the seventh time in 11 tournaments that the #10 has defeated the #7.

EDIT: And Northwestern leads Minnesota 34-21 at halftime. Could be the wildest first day in BTT history.

EDIT: Northwestern couldn't hang on. Minnesota 55, Northwestern 52.

Big Ten Tournament: schedule and some history.

Here's a link to the Big Ten's BTT page, which includes a bracket. The schedule:

Thursday, March 13:

12 pm: #8 Iowa v. #9 Michigan

2:30 pm: #7 Penn State v. #10 Illinois

5:00: #6 Minnesota v. #11 Northwestern

Friday, March 14:

12 pm:#1 Wisconsin v. 8/9 winner

2:30 pm: #4 Michigan State v. #5 Ohio State

6:30 pm: #2 Purdue v. 7/10 winner

9:00: #3 Indiana v. 6/11 winner

Saturday:

1:40: Winners of first two Friday games

4:05: winners of last two Friday games

Sunday:

3:30 pm: championship

I may be in the minority among IU fans, but I like the Big Ten Tournament. It's not much of a measure of full-season excellence, and I value the regular season championship more, but before this season my main objection to the BTT was the 16-game schedule. Now that the Big Ten has resumed the 18 game schedule, even that minimal basis for objection is gone. Here's a little history:

Tournament champions

Illinois, 2 (2003, 2005)

Iowa, 2 (2001, 2006)

Michigan State, 2 (1999, 2000)

Ohio State, 2 (2002, 2007)

Michigan, 1 (1998)

Wisconsin, 1 (2004)

Most wins

Illinois, 18

Iowa, 13

Ohio State, 13

Michigan State, 11

Wisconsin, 11

Indiana, 8

Michigan, 7

Minnesota, 6

Penn State, 5

Northwestern, 4

Purdue, 4

Winning percentage

Illinois, .692 (18-8)

Iowa, .619 (13-8)

Ohio State, .619 (13-8)

Michigan State, .579 (11-8)

Wisconsin, .550 (11-9)

Indiana, .444 (8-10)

Michigan, .438 (7-9)

Minnesota, .400 (6-10)

Penn State, .333 (5-10)

Northwestern, .250 (4-10)

Purdue, .250 (4-10)

When the Big Ten Tournament was conceived in the mid-1990s, IU and Purdue had been the two best programs of the previous quarter-century. Who could have foreseen just how undistinguished those two programs would be during the first decade of the tournament? In the 25 seasons before the advent of the BTT, IU and Purdue won a combined 18 (outright or shared) Big Ten championships and one or the other was at least a co-champ in 17 of 25 seasons. In the BTT, neither team has played well. Purdue advanced to the title game in 1998, the first year of the BTT, but didn't return to the weekend until last season, and won only one BTT game from 1999 through 2006. IU has reached the weekend semifinals only four times, and like Purdue has no championships and one runner-up finish.

To date, the BTT has been played in Chicago 7 times and Indianapolis 3 times. The Big Ten has committed to play the BTT at Conseco through 2012. The three previous Indianapolis based tournaments have been won by Ohio State (2002), Wisconsin (2004), and Iowa (2006). Here are the teams' overall records in Indianapolis:

Iowa: 6-2

Ohio State: 5-2

Wisconsin: 3-2

Illinois: 3-3

Indiana: 3-3

Michigan State: 3-3

Minnesota: 3-3

Michigan: 2-3

Northwestern: 1-3

Penn State: 1-3

Purdue: 0-3

Random thoughts:

• As I said yesterday, the Big Ten brass must be happy to see IU and Purdue on the same side of the bracket. If both teams win their opening games (by no means assured, especially the way IU has been playing) the conference would get not just a high-interest semifinal matchup, but would be guaranteed a local team in the title game (and the resultant full house).
• It's been ten years since the only IU-Purdue game in the BTT. #3 Purdue defeated #6 IU 76-71 in the first-ever BTT.
• IU is 1-5 against Illinois and 7-5 against everyone else. If yesterday's result has any positive, it's that IU likely will not have to play Illinois.
• Illinois has never failed to reach the semifinals, not even in 1999, when the Illini were the #11 seed but upset #6 Minnesota, #3 IU, and #2 Ohio State to reach the final. TAFKABTW informs me that Illinois did lose in the quarterfinals in 2006 as the #3 seed, suggesting that the slot is cursed. IU has indeed lost its first game the two previous times that IU was the #3 seed.
• There have been only two overtime games in BTT history: in 1999, #10 Michigan defeated #7 Purdue; last year, #6 Illinois beat #3 Indiana.
• ADDENDUM: unsurprisingly, the Wonk is on to something. Purdue in 1998 [plus Wisconsin in 2004; at least I can blame the Big Ten results page for that error] is the only #3 seed to reach the final, and no #3 seed has won the BTT. Indeed, the #3 seed is 4-6 in the quarterfinal round, meaning that the majority of the time, the third-best team in the conference has lost its first BTT game. Given the Hoosiers' stellar BTT history, I'm even more encouraged about our prospects. Of the 20 participants in the title game, 7 have been seeded lower than #3: #4 seeds are 1-2, #6 seeds are 1-0, # 8 seeds are 0-1, #9 seeds are 0-1, and #11 seeds are 0-1. I guess that means Ohio State is the real loser here: only the #5 seed has never reached the final.
• ADDENDUM: In the first six Big Ten Tournaments, every final game included a team seeded #4 or lower. But #1 has faced #2 in three of the last four tournaments, and no seed lower than #3 has reached the final.

Illinois 58, Indiana 54 (OT)

The numbers say that IU was the most efficient offense in the Big Ten this year. Unfortunately, that number seems highly reliant on the three point shot. Against Illinois, in all three matchups this season, we have struggled to find open looks, and the frustration I described in my preview post continues. I can be a bit dangerous with math, but my calculations indicate a 62 possession game (pretty slow for an overtime game) and a total for IU of about .87 points per possession. Illinois was also below 1.0, but that's just awful. Here's the ugly box score for your review.

I really despise the empty feeling of waking up on a Saturday morning on March and knowing there could be a game today but isn't. It's not as bad as the same feeling would be next weekend, but it's no fun nonetheless. As I noted in the preview post, the importance of this game was getting us out of the 7-8-9-10 seeding range. IU's seed usually is a pleasant surprise, so I have some hope, but not much, that week can sneak into a 7 seed. I have looked at it systematically, but maybe the rash of tournament upsets will help us.

With no game until at least Thursday, I hope to spend some time looking back at the season this coming week, while of course discussing Selection Sunday and the impending NCAA Tournament. I think it's fair to say most of us would have taken 20-1 (10-6) at the beginning of the season, but our early performance had us expecting more than we ultimately got. At least we know that next time we play Illinois, we will have a genuine scoring threat who can find his own shot. I think the Illini know his name.

The Illinois game (Big Ten Tournament Quarterfinals)

Illinois Fighting Illini

Overall record: 23-10

Big Ten record: 9-7 (regular season; 1-0 in BTT)

RPI: 34

Sagarin: 44

Series record: IU leads, 81-76

Let's get this out of the way: Illinois is in the NCAA Tournament. The Illini killed any "bubble" discussion with their narrow victory over Penn State yesterday afternoon. I refuse to believe that a 23-win Big Ten team with an RPI of 34 and with no losses to any team ranked lower than 89 (at Iowa, just like IU) will be left out. I don't know what the conventional wisdom is about the Illini among the chatterers today, but if you hear anyone say that Illinois is on the bubble, change the channel. They will be in even if IU wins by 30 (I hope to see that hypothesis tested). Purdue is on the bubble because of its awful losses at Indiana State and Minnesota. Illinois lacks the signature wins that IU has (Wisconsin and Southern Illinois) but in terms of avoiding bad losses, Illinois has a resume remarkably similar to IU's.

I'm glad that paragraph is over. Illinois is one of my least favorite Big Ten schools. In my experience, there isn't a fan base in the country that is more delusional about its place in the college basketball world than Illinois fans. I don't know if I coined this description of Illinois basketball, but I have used it enough that I consider it mine: "Duke's attitude, Iowa's tradition." I mean no disrespect to Iowa, a fine place with some of the nicest fans in the Big Ten. But no self-respecting Iowa fan would argue that Iowa basketball is in the top echelon of college basketball programs, or that they would be there but for a vast, worldwide officiating conspiracy. Before 2005 (to be fair, the 2005 Illinois team was one of the best and most fun-to-watch Big Ten teams I have ever seen), the most legendary team in Illini history, the 1989 Flyin' Illini, was a team that not only didn't win the NCAA Tournament, but didn't even win the Big Ten! Even Purdue wouldn't overhype a team that didn't win the Big Ten! (yes, let's see how many Big Ten fan bases I can alienate in one blog entry). To UIUC's credit, the school did produce the Big Ten Wonk, the finest and most even-handed blogger around.

The tiff between Kelvin Sampson and Bruce Weber has further escalated tension between the two schools. As anyone who follows college basketball knows, Eric Gordon of North Central High School in Indianapolis, the finest scoring guard the state of Indiana has produced in years, committed to Illinois on the eve of the 2005-06 season. At the time, Illinois was coming off that remarkable 2005 season and IU had inexplicably retained Mike Davis after he produced IU's two single worst seasons in 35 years and did so in back-to-back seasons. After IU kicked Davis to the curb and hired Kelvin Sampson, contact was made between IU and Gordon (it appears that Gordon made the first contact, but that is far from established) and on the evening of Midnight Madness 2006, Gordon "formally" switched his verbal commitment from Illinois to Indiana. Frankly, I don't think Sampson did a thing wrong in recruiting Gordon. Contrary to current conventional wisdom, I don't think he even owed Weber a phone call. The whole notion of the "coaching fraternity" sickens me a bit. These guys make north of a million bucks a year to advance the interests of their universities. I reject the notion that Kelvin Sampson should have made his duty to Indiana University subservient to his obligation to fellow coach Bruce Weber. All that said, Sampson made his own bed with the unfortunate and troubling NCAA violations at Oklahoma. Many of Sampson's critics have blurred the line between the improper calls at OU and the recruitment of Gordon in an effort to portray a general "sleaziness." I don't think that's fair. The cheating at OU was sleazy; recruiting a kid who has made a non-binding commitment is not. The NCAA has a hefty rule book that legislates everything from the serious down to the mundane issues of how much a school can pay for a kid's meal on an official visit and the page length of the school's media guide. The NCAA has not outlawed recruitment of verbally committed players. The NCAA could do that, but my suspicion is that they want kids to be able to change their minds into their senior years of high school, just like any other high school student. In any event, the Gordon recruitment is going to enliven this series for a while.

As is par for the course in the muddled middle, both teams held serve at home in the two previous meetings this season. Between the hostile fan greeting and the anemic offense, IU's 51-43 loss in Champaign was the toughest game of the season to watch. Offensively, IU was brutal, with 43 points on 44 shots and 6(!) free throw attempts. IU had only 8 assists. What is interesting about that game is that Illinois was nearly as bad on offense, which I suppose suggests that IU was doing something right on defense. The two teams' field goal percentage (overall and from three), rebounds, assists, and turnovers were practically identical. The difference is that IU was whistled for 20 fouls but shot only 6 free throws. Illinois committed only 9 fouls but shot 20 free throws. That's not intended to be an indictment of the officials (in college basketball, one could write an entire blog about nothing else) but to point out the statistical difference.

IU won the rematch, 65-61 in Bloomington. Again, the two teams' stats were uncannily similar, even in free throws this time (IU shot 23 to the Illini's 20). IU shot just a tad better from the field and from the line and took care of the ball just a bit better than the Illini (14 turnovers compared to 17 for Illinois). IU's offense still wasn't pretty: only 9 assists on 23 field goals. To my rough calculation, even in the game at Bloomington, IU was at exactly 1 point per possession, below the season average. Because of the unfortunate drunk driving incident, Illinois is not the same team it was for either of this year's IU games. But Illinois will have the crowd today in Chicago, and this will be a tough one. It's a game that does have some importance for IU's NCAA seed. I am hopeful that a win and a strong showing against Wisconsin could put IU into the 6-seed range. The 7-8-9-10 range makes it much more difficult to reach the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament. Obviously, the #2 and #1 seeds are the best teams in the country, meaning they are tougher to beat and less likely to fall in the first round. Two wins in the BTT likely would guarantee IU a seed in the 4-5-6 range, which is much better.

History: this will the sixth BTT matchup between IU and Illinois. The Illini are 4-1 against the Hoosiers in the BTT. In 1999, IU was the #3 seed (before this year, that's the only time IU has ever been seeded as high) and lost to the #11 seed Illinois, 82-66, which despite a poor regular season defeated #6 Minnesota, IU, and #2 Ohio State before losing to Michigan State in the final. In 2000, in the 4/5 game, Illinois defeated IU on a Cory Braford three pointer in the closing seconds, 72-69. In 2001, IU managed its only win. The #4 seeded Hoosiers upset the #1 Illini 58-56. In 2003, the teams again played a nailbiter in the semifinals, with Illinois prevailing 73-72. In 2004, in the second round, top-seeded Illinois graciously served as Dr. Kevorkian for IU's only losing season in the last 37 years, winning 71-59. It is worth noting that IU leads the all-time series against every Big Ten school except Purdue. Illinois is the only Big Ten team within striking distance, and the Illini's dominance of the Hoosiers in these BTT matchups is the main reason why. Since the advent of the BTT, IU and Illinois will have played 22 times, an average of more than two games a season.

Tournament begins tomorrow.

As I discussed in an earlier post, the Big Ten was very stratified this year. Ohio State and Wisconsin lost only two games to anyone other than each other. Minnesota, Northwestern, and Penn State won only two games against anyone other than each other. The middle six generally held serve against each other. So does that make tomorrow more interesting or less interesting? #8 Michigan plays # 9 Minnesota, #7 Michigan State plays #10 Northwestern, and #6 Illinois plays #11 Penn State. By seed, there has been at least one first day upset in every BTT except 2001 and 2005. This year, the bottom three really are the dregs of the conference. Will one of the underdogs win? The conventional wisdom among bracketologists is that OSU, Wisconsin, and IU are locks, with Illinois and Michigan State in fairly good shape. Oddly, two teams playing on day one are in good shape, while the teams in the 4/5 game, Iowa and Purdue, seem to be in trouble. All of these games have NCAA implications. Michigan might play itself into the tournament if they beat Minnesota and then try to upset OSU, which they nearly did last weekend. Illinois and Michigan State may play themselves out of the tournament if they lose their openers.

BTT history.

I know it makes me a bit of a pariah among college basketball fans in general and a full-fledged blasphemer in the traditionalist wing of the IU fan base, but I like the Big Ten Tournament. Certainly, I’m glad that the Big Ten doesn’t consider its tournament winner the “conference champion” (I believe that the ACC and Big East both consider the tournament champion to be the conference champion) and I don’t like that it takes away from the number of regular season conference games. Unlike one-bid leagues, the winner of the automatic bid nearly always would have been in anyway (in the nine year history of the BTT, Iowa’s 2001team is the only champion that entered the tournament on the bubble, and still may have been in had they lost to IU in the 2001 final on the strength of their three previous wins in the tournament). On the other hand, ten Big Ten games, all televised, all on neutral courts, in a four day span. What’s not to like? The games on days three and four almost always feature quality matchups, as does the 4-5 game on day two. Days one and two often have significant bubble implications.

The Big Ten has a nice summary page setting forth the history of the tournament. Here’s some info divined from that:

Tournament champions

Illinois, 2 (2003, 2005)
Iowa, 2 (2001, 2006)
Michigan State, 2 (1999, 2000)
Michigan, 1 (1998)
Ohio State, 1 (2002)
Wisconsin, 1 (2004)

Most wins

Illinois, 16
Iowa, 13
Michigan State, 10
Ohio State, 10
Wisconsin, 9
Indiana, 8
Michigan, 6
Minnesota, 6
Penn State, 5
Northwestern, 4
Purdue, 3

Winning percentage

Illinois, .695
Iowa, .650
Michigan State, .588
Ohio State, .556
Wisconsin, .529
Indiana, .470
Michigan, .400
Minnesota, .400
Penn State, .357
Northwestern, .307
Purdue, .250

Last to lose a BTT game for the first time: Michigan, which won its first four before losing to Ohio State in the 1999 quarterfinals. As far as the NCAA is concerned, none of that ever happened, but if we actually disregarded all of the games played by OSU, Michigan, and Minnesota at various points, we wouldn’t have much left.

Last to win a BTT game for the first time: Iowa in 2000. Penn State won its first earlier in the same day.

Miscellaneous:

• Wow, has Purdue been awful in the Big Ten Tournament. The Boilers have had four NCAA Tournament teams during the BTT era, but after advancing to the final game of the first BTT, Purdue has only one win in the last eight tournaments, a 2001 win in the 8/9 game over Minnesota. Purdue’s current six-game losing streak is the longest in BTT history.
• This is no surprise to anyone who has followed the BTT, but Iowa is the main outlier. The wins and winning percentage rankings pretty closely follow conference performance during that period. Purdue is a bit low, but Iowa, ranking #2 in wins and winning percentage and tied for first in number of titles, has overachieved in the BTT.
• Along those lines, Steve Alford, in seven Big Ten tournaments, has all 13 of Iowa’s wins, more than any other coach. Tom Izzo is second with 10 wins, but he has been at Michigan State since the BTT’s inception(he’s the only Big Ten coach who can say that). Bo Ryan has five wins in the BTT. He has been at Wisconsin only since 2002. Illinois’s 16 wins are allocated among three coaches: Lon Kruger (6), Bill Self (5), and Bruce Weber (5). Ohio State’s Jim O’Brien won 7 BTT games, as did Mike Davis. Bob Knight’s only BTT win was against #11 Ohio State in IU’s first BTT game in 1998.
• Illinois won its first BTT game every year until 2006. IU, which lost its first game only in 1999, 2000, and 2005, is second only to Illinois in first-game performance. Of course, that stat does not distinguish between teams with and without a first round bye.
• Of the #1 seeds, only Michigan State in 1999 and Illinois in 2005 won the tournament. It is fitting that only Iowa has defeated two #1 seeds. Minnesota, Penn State, Indiana, Ohio State, and Wisconsin have all defeated one top seed.
• The class of 2001 was the fourth year of the Big Ten Tournament, meaning that the league's seniors had experienced the tournament every year. Since then, only three senior classes have failed to win a Big Ten Tournament game in their four years: Penn State '05, Purdue '05, and Purdue '06.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Nice BTT article.

As promised, more to come on the Big Ten Tournament. For now, here's a link to a fun Teddy Greenstein article from the Chicago Tribune article with highlights and even an all-time all-tournament team for the six Big Ten Tournaments that have been played in Chicago. Again, note that the three tournaments played at Conseco are not part of the article. The Chicago media is sued to pretending that nothing important happens in Indiana, but at least this article is up-front about it.