First, they're kind of bumslayers.

Well not really, but it's worth noting that their 10-6 Q1 record isn't as strong as it looks at first glance. They're 8-1 in Q1 games against NET 21-75, and 2-5 against 1-20. Their best Q1 wins are Arkansas neutral in December and Texas Tech home in January. They haven't beaten a top 20 team since January. Neither have we probably, but I'm not here to negotiate against us. We're 4-5 against S16 teams and they're 1-4. Also probably not meaningful but our record vs common opponents is 3-0 vs 2-2 and our scoring margin is +36 compared to their margin in those games.

Second, I've made this point before, but I want to emphasize how much taller we are. Their 8-man rotation averages 6'6". Ours averages 6'8". We're 2 inches taller almost at every position. Boswell is the only guy who is shorter. Otherwise we're guarding 6'4" guards with 6'6" guards. 6'6" forwards with 6'9" forwards. 6'11" Cenac and Sakho with 7'1" and 7'2". They're almost exactly as tall as VCU, to a man. This is not everything, but it's also not nothing. We saw how effective our defense was against VCU. Our worst game of the season was against Michigan, one of the only teams that can neutralize our height advantage. And Uconn to an extent. Even Wisconsin and MSU are relatively tall teams. We tend to shut down short teams. Note Houston's only win over a S16 team is Arkansas, which is a short team. Note one of our best wins of the year, Purdue, is a fairly short team

Okay next. Houston has the #10 kenpom offense. As others have noted, they shoot a lot of midrange 2s. Making midrange 2s is NOT why they are the #10 offense. They are 204th in 2P% and 127th in 3P%, so they shoot not great not terrible. They (1) offensive rebound well and (2) don't turn the ball over almost at all. They are literally #1 in the country with 8.4 TOs per game. Part of that benefits from being #351 in tempo, but the point remains. Adjusted for tempo they might be even more elite at offensive rebounds since they're 35th in that without regard for tempo. They've had 1,224 FG misses this season and 462 offensive rebounds (38%).

How this relates to us? Well we're not going to turn them over. If Houston has anything close to 10 turnovers that's a huge win for us. Offensive rebounding is an opportunity though. Given how good we are at rebounding in general and how much taller than them we are, MAYBE we can really make a difference on the boards.

Third, as we know they are elite on defense. But they foul a LOT - #224 in fouls despite the slow tempo. #289 in opponent FTA despite the slow tempo. But, this pays off in being #85 in steals (despite the slow pace) and #56 in forcing turnovers (despite the slow pace). They are elite in 2P% allowed at #11 and great at 3P% allowed at #47. They do ALLOW a lot of offensive rebounds- #184 despite the pace. Their opponents have missed 1,139 FGs and have 378 offensive rebounds (33%)


Okay so I looked at their losses to try to figure out how to beat them.

I mentioned earlier that shutting them down on offensive rebounds is an opportunity for us. But note that this is NOT required. The fewest offensive rebounds they've had in any of their losses is 9 against Iowa State and 11 against Texas Tech. If they end up with anything less than 10 we're probably in a great spot. Also it goes without saying that GETTING offensive rebounds is a huge opportunity for us too- this is how we can neutralize their FG% defense (as we have done all year). Also we have to find a way to keep our turnovers down. Strong with the ball. Make them foul you to strip the ball away from you.

So how did teams beat them? Here are some quick summaries. I'm not going to call out FG% or rebounding or turnovers when they're close to equal, just the true difference makers:

-Tennessee: by getting to the line. 29 FTA to 11 FTA. That's kind of it. Most other stats were fairly equal.
-Texas Tech: Rebounds by a count of 44-28. I should note that TT is actually one of the shorter teams Houston played, so who knows what happened here. They don't have a player over 6'9" and their starting guards are 6'1" and 6'2". But it can be done. This resulted in 2 more FGA and 9 more FTA.
-Iowa State: 22 FTA to 11 FTA, 3 point margin of victory. Most other stats similar.
-Arizona (#1): 31 FTA to 22 FTA. Also 44 2PA and made 50% of them. Held Houston to 12 for 30 from 2. Note Arizona is tall.
-Kansas: 20 FTA to 9 FTA (noticing a pattern). Also Houston only shot 21% from 3. This is how you blow them out. I watched this game and Houston took a surprising number of low-quality 3PA early in possessions. Note Kansas is tall. Tre White MVP in this game, I might add
-Arizona (#2): FTA 27 to 14. All else roughly equal honestly.

So we see the pattern. If you can get to the line and make shooting 80% FT an abnormally large part of your offense, you can beat these guys. If you win rebounding or win shooting % then you can comfortably beat these guys.

To try to summarize, how about: if our FTA margin plus rebounding margin plus turnover margin is something like +15, we're in really good shape.

Here's that stat for their six losses:

Tennessee: +17 (+18 / -1 / +0)
Texas Tech: +19 (+9 / +16 / -4)
Iowa State: +11 (+11 / -4 / +4)
Arizona: +14 (+9 / -2 / +7)
Kansas: +12 (+11 / +5 / -4)
Arizona: +14 (+13 / +1 / +0)

Probably we're not going to do that with turnovers, so for us it needs to be FTA and rebounds. Be +10 FTA and +5 rebounds and hold on to the ball.

If we look up at halftime and they're outrebounding us, or god forbid FTA are 7-6 or something, that's probably a bad sign.

Also worth noting that the median number of 3PA by Houston's opponent in their 6 losses is 17. We average 31. I'm not saying don't shoot the three, but we have to be careful not to settle. POUND THE BALL INSIDE.

Oh, and get Tomi 1 made FT and 1 assist! (we're 12-1 when this happens)