| | CBB : Teaser Line Matchup |
| |
WISCONSIN OHIO ST |
|
| 119 | 49 Final 58 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
515 | WISCONSIN | +9.5 | Over 115 | 516 | OHIO ST | -1.5 | Under 123 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
|
|
All Games | 14-6 | -3.2 | 6-12 | 5-9 | 67.7 | 32.4 | 43.5% | 36.7 | 54.8 | 25.2 | 39.8% | 31.4 | Road Games | 3-4 | +1.4 | 1-6 | 3-3 | 62.0 | 26.7 | 39.9% | 32.7 | 65.4 | 34.3 | 44.4% | 36.9 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | +2.8 | 2-3 | 1-4 | 59.2 | 28.0 | 41.0% | 35.0 | 54.6 | 27.2 | 37.8% | 31.6 | Conference Games | 5-2 | +3.7 | 2-5 | 1-6 | 57.6 | 26.9 | 40.2% | 35.0 | 52.1 | 24.7 | 38.9% | 33.0 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 67.7 | 32.4 | 25-57 | 43.5% | 8-22 | 34.6% | 10-17 | 60.8% | 37 | 11 | 13 | 14 | 6 | 9 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 64.6 | 29.9 | 23-55 | 41.5% | 6-19 | 33.4% | 13-18 | 68.5% | 33 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 3 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 62.0 | 26.7 | 22-55 | 39.9% | 7-22 | 31.2% | 11-19 | 57.7% | 33 | 10 | 11 | 17 | 5 | 10 | 3 | Stats Against (All Games) | 54.8 | 25.2 | 20-51 | 39.8% | 4-12 | 31.6% | 10-14 | 70.3% | 31 | 7 | 8 | 18 | 5 | 12 | 2 | vs opponents averaging | 68.5 | 32.4 | 24-55 | 44.4% | 6-18 | 33.9% | 14-19 | 70.3% | 35 | 9 | 13 | 17 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 65.4 | 34.3 | 23-52 | 44.4% | 4-12 | 32.1% | 15-20 | 75.0% | 37 | 9 | 9 | 18 | 5 | 11 | 2 |
|
|
| |
|
|
All Games | 15-4 | -0.8 | 10-7 | 6-10 | 73.0 | 36.2 | 46.0% | 37.4 | 57.8 | 25.7 | 37.9% | 32.2 | Home Games | 11-1 | -0.2 | 6-4 | 4-6 | 76.9 | 38.8 | 48.1% | 39.3 | 54.4 | 24.6 | 34.7% | 32.7 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +3 | 3-2 | 1-4 | 64.6 | 32.4 | 47.6% | 33.0 | 58.0 | 24.2 | 38.5% | 32.2 | Conference Games | 5-2 | +1.4 | 4-3 | 1-6 | 64.0 | 31.9 | 45.6% | 34.0 | 58.3 | 25.0 | 38.8% | 33.3 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 73.0 | 36.2 | 26-57 | 46.0% | 7-19 | 37.2% | 14-20 | 68.4% | 37 | 10 | 15 | 16 | 7 | 11 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 63.8 | 29.5 | 23-55 | 41.4% | 6-18 | 32.7% | 13-19 | 67.4% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 17 | 7 | 13 | 3 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 76.9 | 38.8 | 28-58 | 48.1% | 8-20 | 38.8% | 14-20 | 66.8% | 39 | 11 | 17 | 16 | 7 | 12 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 57.8 | 25.7 | 20-53 | 37.9% | 6-18 | 30.7% | 12-17 | 68.0% | 32 | 8 | 9 | 18 | 4 | 14 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 66.8 | 31.3 | 24-55 | 43.3% | 6-18 | 33.8% | 13-19 | 69.0% | 35 | 9 | 12 | 17 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 54.4 | 24.6 | 19-54 | 34.7% | 5-19 | 28.3% | 12-18 | 65.4% | 33 | 8 | 8 | 18 | 4 | 16 | 2 |
|
| Average power rating of opponents played: WISCONSIN 74.6, OHIO ST 74.9 |
| | |
|
|
12/12/2012 | WI-GREEN BAY | 65-54 | W | -17.5 | L | 128 | U | 24-51 | 47.1% | 32 | 6 | 21-56 | 37.5% | 35 | 9 | 12/22/2012 | WI-MILWAUKEE | 74-53 | W | -26.5 | L | 124 | O | 28-59 | 47.5% | 36 | 8 | 22-50 | 44.0% | 21 | 13 | 12/29/2012 | SAMFORD | 87-51 | W | -29 | W | | - | 31-59 | 52.5% | 43 | 6 | 18-51 | 35.3% | 22 | 10 | 1/3/2013 | PENN ST | 60-51 | W | -18.5 | L | 124 | U | 22-57 | 38.6% | 32 | 4 | 24-52 | 46.2% | 38 | 15 | 1/6/2013 | @ NEBRASKA | 47-41 | W | -8.5 | L | 118 | U | 20-53 | 37.7% | 38 | 6 | 18-49 | 36.7% | 35 | 8 | 1/12/2013 | ILLINOIS | 74-51 | W | -6.5 | W | 128 | U | 28-57 | 49.1% | 43 | 13 | 18-51 | 35.3% | 24 | 9 | 1/15/2013 | @ INDIANA | 64-59 | W | 10.5 | W | 133 | U | 23-51 | 45.1% | 28 | 8 | 20-54 | 37.0% | 37 | 11 | 1/19/2013 | @ IOWA | 66-70 | L | -1 | L | 127.5 | O | 25-58 | 43.1% | 34 | 12 | 22-51 | 43.1% | 33 | 7 | 1/22/2013 | MICHIGAN ST | 47-49 | L | -5 | L | 123 | U | 16-54 | 29.6% | 35 | 9 | 18-47 | 38.3% | 35 | 10 | 1/26/2013 | MINNESOTA | 45-44 | W | -3.5 | L | 123 | U | 17-46 | 37.0% | 35 | 10 | 16-46 | 34.8% | 29 | 9 | 1/29/2013 | @ OHIO ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/3/2013 | @ ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/6/2013 | IOWA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/9/2013 | MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/14/2013 | @ MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/17/2013 | OHIO ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/20/2013 | @ NORTHWESTERN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
12/12/2012 | SAVANNAH ST | 85-45 | W | -22 | W | 116.5 | O | 28-59 | 47.5% | 48 | 20 | 20-54 | 37.0% | 21 | 20 | 12/15/2012 | UNC-ASHEVILLE | 90-72 | W | -25.5 | L | 145 | O | 36-61 | 59.0% | 32 | 12 | 25-59 | 42.4% | 32 | 17 | 12/18/2012 | WINTHROP | 65-55 | W | -27.5 | L | 131.5 | U | 22-57 | 38.6% | 36 | 5 | 19-50 | 38.0% | 38 | 14 | 12/22/2012 | KANSAS | 66-74 | L | -5.5 | L | 140.5 | U | 20-65 | 30.8% | 37 | 13 | 25-49 | 51.0% | 41 | 19 | 12/29/2012 | CHICAGO ST | 87-44 | W | -36.5 | W | 144 | U | 33-58 | 56.9% | 48 | 10 | 13-49 | 26.5% | 22 | 14 | 1/2/2013 | NEBRASKA | 70-44 | W | -21 | W | 129.5 | U | 29-59 | 49.2% | 43 | 9 | 17-56 | 30.4% | 32 | 14 | 1/5/2013 | @ ILLINOIS | 55-74 | L | -3 | L | 143 | U | 20-60 | 33.3% | 30 | 16 | 28-58 | 48.3% | 40 | 18 | 1/8/2013 | @ PURDUE | 74-64 | W | -8 | W | 134.5 | O | 31-55 | 56.4% | 38 | 13 | 26-67 | 38.8% | 32 | 6 | 1/13/2013 | MICHIGAN | 56-53 | W | -1.5 | W | 137.5 | U | 22-50 | 44.0% | 30 | 12 | 18-47 | 38.3% | 30 | 13 | 1/19/2013 | @ MICHIGAN ST | 56-59 | L | 1 | L | 132.5 | U | 19-47 | 40.4% | 25 | 14 | 22-50 | 44.0% | 34 | 13 | 1/22/2013 | IOWA | 72-63 | W | -10 | L | 137.5 | U | 27-52 | 51.9% | 34 | 17 | 22-62 | 35.5% | 40 | 14 | 1/26/2013 | @ PENN ST | 65-51 | W | -12.5 | W | 127.5 | U | 21-48 | 43.7% | 38 | 8 | 17-47 | 36.2% | 25 | 4 | 1/29/2013 | WISCONSIN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/2/2013 | @ NEBRASKA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/5/2013 | @ MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/10/2013 | INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/14/2013 | NORTHWESTERN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/17/2013 | @ WISCONSIN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/20/2013 | MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | WISCONSIN: Head coach Bo Ryan's Badgers may not be able to match up to Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State and Ohio State in this year's Big Ten but they should be favored against the rest of the competition. Wisconsin's defense and slow tempo is legendary, holding opponents to a Division-I low 53.2 PPG, and that shouldn't change even without last year's leader Jordan Taylor, who had a team-high 14.8 PPG and 4.1 APG. Now it's time for Ryan Evans (11.0 PPG, 6.8 RPG) and Jared Berggren (10.5 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 1.7 BPG) to lead this team from the inside out. Despite standing at 6-foot-10 and playing center in a lot of Ryan's lineups, Berggren is also a threat on the perimeter, averaging 1.3 threes per game last year, where he will be especially needed considering sniper Josh Gasser, who played 34.1 MPG last year and nailed 45.2% of his shots from beyond the arc, is out for the year with a torn ACL. At 6-foot-7, freshman SF Sam Dekker will be a perfect addition to Ryan's style of play, giving this team a lengthy and flexible roster that should continue to play lockdown defense. | | OHIO ST: Ohio State will be very different looking this year, without Jared Sullinger and William Buford, but Thad Matta's Buckeyes should still be able to hang with the best of the best in the nation. Deshaun Thomas (15.9 PPG, 5.4 RPG) is a threat both on the perimeter and in the post from the forward position and he should benefit from more opportunities. Point guard Aaron Craft (8.8 PPG, 4.6 APG, 2.5 SPG) may be the best pure point guard in the Big Ten, and there's no doubt he should be able to improve now as an upperclassman. The Buckeyes missed out on a number of top recruits, but this veteran-led squad should still be dangerous, especially if Lenzelle Smith Jr. (6.8 PPG, 4.6 RPG) takes the necessary steps forward in his junior campaign. |
| | Follow Rusty Miller on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/rustymillerap
|
| Last Updated: 4/18/2024 9:09:37 AM EST. |
|
|
| |
|