MBB Preview: There's no chance to rebound from a loss in the NCAA Tournament

The only choice for Nebraska is to rebound against Texas A&M, but that's easier said than done.

Courtesy Nebraska Athletics

It was kind of amusing the day before Selection Sunday, the idea of a slightly devilish selection committee playing the role of reality TV producer—Look, we don’t script this stuff, but we will put people in high-tension scenarios to make more addictive television.

When the Nebraska men were actually paired with Texas A&M—with the women to follow—that amusement faded pretty quickly. Matt Rhule perhaps put it best.

“I can say it because I’m the football coach, I’m mad we’re playing Texas A&M both games because now the games are about the AD leaving,” he said. “It’s not about our players. Our players deserve the games to be about us.”

Can’t argue with that, but maybe the Trev Alberts angle became less acute with Nebraska quickly moving on. We’ll see.

Here the focus of everything you’re about to read is just the game, and I guess I’ll start with this: I kind of hate this matchup for Nebraska solely for basketball reasons.

The lay of the land

The Nebraska men opened as a 1.5-point favorite over Texas A&M, despite 75% of the bets coming in on the Aggies, and that number was holding as of Thursday. That could mean a couple of things, from the money wagered on each team being close to equal or the books simply feeling confident in the number and knowing they’re not too exposed by one matchup this time of year.

If you followed the football previews in the fall, you’ll know I like to take a “battleground states” approach to games. In an election, we generally know how Alabama will vote and we know how Massachusetts will vote, but what about Ohio? In a sports context, this takes the form of “which categories are up for grabs?”

To do that, I’m going to lean on Dean Oliver’s “Four Factors of Basketball.” You can read more about that here, including a pretty good test of their accuracy, but the factors are (weight in Oliver’s original formula): effective field goal percentage¹ (eFG, 40%), turnover rate² (TO%, 25%), offensive rebound rate³ (oRB%, 20%) and free throw rate⁴ (FT%, 15%).

A&M’s offense begins with a brick

Nebraska has a diverse offense that can pour points on teams in hurry, but its best foot forward, statistically speaking, has been a defense that held teams to a 46.3% eFG (13th nationally). The problem is Texas A&M is very familiar with missing shots. Its 45.4% eFG ranks 345th nationally, the third-lowest of any team in the tournament.

If you told me the Aggies initiated their offense by simply throwing the ball at the backboard, technically a shot, I couldn’t refute it. But they’re here because they lead the nation in oRB% at 41.2, a rate Fred Hoiberg called “unbelievable.” It’s the highest rate since West Virginia averaged 41.3% in 2015–16. That team lost in the first round to 14-seed Stephen F. Austin, but since then only two teams have been better than 40% for a full season: 2015–16 North Carolina (40.2%) won the national title and 2020–21 Houston (40.2%) made the program’s first Final Four since 1984.

Being this strong on the offensive glass is an essential workaround to being so poor at shooting, and here’s the result: Despite being such a poor shooting team, the Aggies rank second nationally in offensive shot quality.⁵ They miss this many shots either in spite or in service of getting the second-best shots in the country overall, and offensive rebounds, which can lead to easy shots around the rim or defensive scramble situations, are why. From a skill-first perspective, this can be an annoying way to win games, but size and athleticism can take a team pretty far.

Texas A&M’s biggest weakness might neutralize Nebraska’s biggest defensive strength—the Aggies are going to miss shots anyway—but its biggest strength pokes at a defensive weakness for NU. Despite ranking 16th in defensive rebounds per game, the Huskers rank 245th, the bottom-third nationally, in oRB% allowed (28.4%). A&M is going to get a bunch of second-chance opportunities, and it’s going to be maddening as you’re watching.

Does Nebraska have its own workaround? It probably has to be turnovers, which end possessions before a team even has to worry about boxing out, but that’s also a hill to climb. The Husker defense ranks 217th nationally in TO% while the Aggie offense ranks 23rd. Nebraska probably isn’t going to tamp down A&M’s offensive rebounds, so it might have to have a good night in the turnovers department.

The Aggies (20-13) went 3-8 this season when committing 12 or more turnovers. Nebraska enters the game averaging 11.5 turnovers forced per game, so it’s not a huge jump. That’s the number—A&M turnovers—that I’ll be watching.

At their best, the Aggies have some really impressive performances this season, beating 3-seed Kentucky (twice), 2-seed Iowa State and 2-seed Tennessee while losing close to 1-seed Houston⁶ and 4-seed Auburn. They also have bad losses to Arkansas (twice), LSU and Vanderbilt.

Texas A&M will put the test to Nebraska defensively and the disparity on that half of the court is the biggest disparity of the game. It is, however, only half of the game.

It’s right there in the name of the game

They call it basketball for a reason—the team with the most baskets wins. There’s nothing more powerful than simply making shots. While Texas A&M might get two or sometimes three chances to do that on a possession, Nebraska is better at getting it right the first time.

The Huskers eFG% (53.2) ranks 61st nationally against an Aggie defense that ranks 161st (50.1). Nebraska is also better at avoiding turnovers (15.5% of possessions, 99th), than A&M is at creating them (16.5%, 186th). Those are the two most important categories in the Four Factors, and they have to be a foothold for the Huskers in Memphis.

In the other two categories, it’s edge Aggies.

We’ve seen what Nebraska is capable of when it shoots really well. The nation almost seems primed to adore Keisei Tominaga for as long as the Huskers are in the tournament—Pat McAfee is—and he’s certainly capable of earning that wonder. But it’s fair to assume A&M will throw a ton of attention his way, meaning the shot-making pressure only increases for players like Brice Williams, Jamarques Lawrence, C.J. Wilcher and Rienk Mast. Their makes and misses are likely to be the bigger ones tonight.

Of course, “shoot well” isn’t much of a game plan because it’s every team’s most basic objective and, outside of working to get good looks, isn’t all that controllable. Can Nebraska win if it has just an average shooting night? That’s the question we’re more likely to encounter Friday night. The Huskers do have a slight edge in shot quality on this half of the court, ranking 50th to A&M’s defensive rank of 94th, and should get plenty of looks from 3. The Aggies allowed 26 3-point attempts per game this season, 345th nationally and the third-highest average⁷ in the tournament.

Do those shots go in or don’t they? The Aggies are above-average defensively in the four categories above, but we won’t know until we know.

So, is NU’s tournament drought ending or not?

Anything can happen in a one-game sample. The KenPom rankings actually give Nebraska a bigger edge than the betting line right now, ranking the Huskers as the top 8-seed in the field (25th overall) while the Aggies (44th) are the lowest of the 9-seeds.

Of the Four Factors each way—so eight total categories—A&M has big edges in two categories (oRB% and TO%, both on offense) and slight edges in three others. Nebraska’s biggest advantage—a top-20 ability to limit teams’ shooting effectiveness—may not be one at all given the Aggies weren’t making many shots to begin with.

While the line has Nebraska as a slight favorite, I think the Huskers might actually be playing uphill. Just a bit. Nothing insurmountable. The more possessions on Friday, the better for NU. The Huskers can realistically⁸ help themselves there by forcing some turnovers and getting to the free-throw line while keeping A&M off it.

Nebraska didn’t get the easiest draw for picking up the school’s first NCAA Tournament win, but that will only sweeten the deal if the Huskers get it done.

1. Effective field goal percentage simply accounts for the fact that a 3 is worth three, and a 2 is worth two in its calculation. It’s better than simple field goal percentage because of that.

2. Turnovers / possessions.

3. Offensive rebounds / (offensive rebounds + defensive rebounds).

4. Free throws attempted / possessions.

5. Nebraska went 2-5 against teams in the top 25 of offensive shot quality this season.

6. The winner of Nebraska-Texas A&M likely faces the Cougars in the second round.

7. Nebraska averaged 26.1, giving it the second-highest average in the tournament, but that’s not a huge concern against A&M. The Aggies shoot 28.4% (352nd) from deep.

8. Keeping A&M from grabbing an offensive rebound on two of every five shots it takes would be a big help, but that stretches the limits of “realistic.”