DON'T JUMP!!!

FOUR FACTORS FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAME

Effective Field Goal %

ISU = 60.8%

DU = 25.9%

Turnover %

ISU = 16.4%

DU = 27.4%

Offensive Rebound %

ISU = 38.2%

DU = 28.6%

Free Throw Rate

ISU = 29.2%

DU = 34.5%

I don't want to write a whole lot about these, because last night was one of those games where advanced statistics don't really tell you much more than what you already know. Drake was dominated on both ends of the floor, shot horrendously, played incredibly poor defense, could not hold on to the basketball, and got beat on the boards. It was an all around thrashing.

In retrospect, it was probably the program's worst loss in a game like this since Drake was taken down by 42 in a 101-59 loss to the Iowa Hawkeyes in December of 2001.

BUT WAIT, DON'T JUMP!!!

It's hard to keep your head straight after a game like that. If you're like me, I completely expected a great game. The spread seemed fairly close, neither team was ranked, and basically everyone involved expected a tough fight.

Then we got absolutely thrashed, seemingly out of nowhere. I know I'm reaching pretty far ahead, but I feel like it is fair to say that Iowa State is extremely unlikely to reach the NCAA Tournament. Therefore, to get rolled by 48 by a non-tournament team makes you wonder what exactly Drake can achieve this season? Should we even expect to avoid playing Thursday night in St. Louis anymore?

To attempt to answer these questions, I conducted a crude study of past "unexpected blowouts", a term that I think is more than fair to use for last night's outcome. I wanted to understand how often these unexpected blowouts occur, and what type of impact they have on a team's season. Before digging into the analysis, I first must define what I coined an unexpected blowout:

• Game played in November (i.e. VERY early in the season)
• Spread of ten points or less
• Neither team is ranked
• One team wins by more than 35 points

Essentially, I wanted to isolate the conditions that occurred leading up to and throughout last night.

I then scoured game logs and spreads in each November from 2000 to 2009 using my criteria. I isolated fifteen different games that met my criteria:

• 2009. Washington State def. San Diego by 37. Spread of 2.5.
• 2008. Tennessee Tech def. Louisiana Monroe by 38. Spread of 6.
• 2008. Idaho def. UC Irvine by 54. Spread of 1.
• 2007*. George Mason def. Drexel by 47. Spread of 7.5.
• 2007*. Kent State def. St. Louis by 41. Spread of 5.5.
• 2006. New Mexico def. Colorado by 41. Spread of 9.5.
• 2006. Hawaii def. Oregon State by 44. Spread of 8.
• 2006*. VCU def. Elon by 42. Spread of 9.
• 2006*. Butler def. Tulane by 40. Spread of 2.
• 2005. New Mexico def. Mississippi by 53. Spread of 5.5.
• 2005. Florida State def. Purdue by 40. Spread of 10.
• 2003. Pennsylvania def. Indiana State by 38. Spread of 6.5
• 2002. Vanderbilt def. Georgia Southern by 36. Spread of 10
• 2002. DePaul def. Central Michigan by 36. Spread of 7.5.
• 2000. St. Louis def. East Carolina by 36. Spread of 8.5.

* Denotes that the winning team went to the NCAA Tournament

Now, one thing I think is clear in these unexpected blowouts is that sometimes it turns out that the winning team ends up being phenomenal, seemingly out of nowhere. Nobody knew who Eric Maynor was in November of 2006, but by the time VCU upset Duke in the first round of the NCAA Tournament in March of 2007, it became fairly reasonable to look back and realize that the spread of 9 against Elon was probably inappropriate.

And that is certainly possible now. There probably exists a scenario where Diante Garrett is Big 12 player of the year and he leads the Cyclones to 20+ wins and a tournament berth. That said, I think that scenario is extremely improbable, and think it is prudent to take the perspective that Iowa State will be a solid or very good team this year, but not elite.

In looking at the data from the results above, it actually did not look materially different in the impact on won/loss records. That said, when drawing final conclusions I will leave those teams out because I tend to think that it's easier to get blown out by a tournament team than a non-tournament team.

So, back to the numbers. For all of the teams listed above, here were their average finishes:

Wins = 12.4

Losses = 17.1

Conference Wins = 5.9

Conference Losses = 10.7

Conference Win% = 0.356

Not so hot. Still, what would you expect from a team that gets beat by 35+ when expected to compete? It seems that, on average, teams that have this phenomenon occur to them go on to subpar performance for the remainder of the year.

But wait! Don't jump! Not just yet! While the vast majority of teams that were unexpectedly blown out proceeded on to subpar seasons, there were a few examples of teams that were able to put the loss behind them and proceed on to anywhere from okay to great seasons:

• 2002 Central Michigan = 24-7 (14-4), NCAA Tournament Berth
• 2002 Georgia Southern = 16-13 (8-8)
• 2006 Tulane = 17-13 (9-7)
• 2007 St. Louis = 16-14 (7-9)

I think we should throw out the final two teams on the list, because they were blown out by NCAA Tournament teams (I spoke on this above). That leaves two remaining teams:

The 2002 Georgia Southern was able to turn their season around, finishing midpack in the Southern Conference -- nothing that you would call great, but certainly a turnaround for them after such a horrendous start.

The team I do want to focus on is the 2002 Central Michigan Chippewas. They started off 2-0 on some tight wins against George Mason and Illinois State, and then they were absolutely throttled by DePaul by 38. The halftime score of that game was actually 48-22, not all too different from last night's halftime score (45-21 ISU). It was certainly a backbreaking defeat, and at the instant it happened, likely made the Chippewas think their season was going to take a massive dive.

But they were able to turn things around. With tremendous talent, including now NBA-veteran Chris Kaman, they rattled off multiple win streaks and won the MAC conference tournament, got an 11 seed and even beat Creighton in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.

Is that our future? Most likely not. But what Central Michigan had that several other teams on the list didn't was superior talent. We do have that. Are we going to put it together? Only time will tell. But, just because we were throttled last night doesn't mean the season is over. There is precedent for success and rebounding after such a tough loss. Hopefully we can regroup, rebound, and start a little streak of our own to distance ourselves from such a poor display.