Coming into this season, there were changes abound for the Loyola Chicago Ramblers men’s basketball program. The most obvious was the move to the Atlantic 10 conference from the Missouri Valley. The MVC is a proud and competitive mid-major conference that the Ramblers thrived in, but the move to the A10 was a step up for Loyola. The roster of the Ramblers also underwent a drastic change before their maiden voyage into the Atlantic 10. The likes of Cameron Krutwig were already departed and key pieces of the most recent LUC teams that found success in March Madness such as Lucas Williamson, Ryan Schweiger, and Aher Uguak left the Edgewater neighborhood. Drew Valentine had guided the Ramblers to a MVC conference tournament title and March Madness in his first season, but he would not have many of those seasoned, experienced players to help him transition to the A10.
Spoiler alert, the initial transition to the Atlantic 10 went very poorly for Loyola. Both pundits and algorithms alike thought the Ramblers would at least be competitive in their first season in the A10, but as we know they finished their first season dead last. So why was the switch to one of the Power 8 (please don’t look up the KenPom conference rankings this season, thanks) conferences such a struggle for the Ramblers? The numbers from their season help start to answer that.
For even those not well versed in basketball stats, Loyola’s turnover rate all season was a number that screamed out on their stat sheet. This season, the Ramblers turnover the ball over on 22.1% of their possessions on offense. This was the worst in the conference by a bit and put them 350th among all D1 teams this season.
Looking at Loyola’s effective field goal % for the season, we see their percentage is actually pretty good. Their 52.9% eFG % was actually 56th best in the country this season. When the Ramblers aren’t throwing the ball into sixth row of Gentile Arena, they could score it efficiently. It is the sheer quantity of those turnovers that create the issue for LUC on offense. Giving opponents all these extra opportunities to score become a math problem for the Ramblers. Even though they can score it relatively efficiently, Loyola giving their opponents more bites of the apple by gifting them extra possessions through turnovers is something they could not overcome. Loyola also didn’t have a way to cancel out those extra possessions for opponents via turnovers.
Loyola didn’t scratch out second and third opportunities of their own through rebounding, only getting an offensive rebound on 24.5% of opportunities which was 302nd lowest in the country. They also didn’t utilize a faster pace to get more opportunities on offense. Though they increased the average number of possessions per game by almost 2 compared to last year, the Ramblers still operated at a pace that was below the national average and only 16.64% of their possessions on offense were on transition. If Loyola can’t limit turnovers in the future or find ways to increase the number of shots they get on offense, the math problem of giving opponents more shots will continue to be stacked up against the Ramblers.
With the extra opportunities Loyola gave to their opponents last season on offense, a larger burden was placed on their defense in many games. Unfortunately, LUC’s defense was not only unable to thwart foes in these extra possessions, but they were also frequently unable to effectively stop opposing offenses much at all. Last season, Loyola opponents had an effective field goal % of 51.6% which falls among the bottom third of D1 teams. These opponents also averaged 107.56 points per 100 possessions against the Ramblers defense, the second highest allowed among Atlantic 10 teams.
If we examine where Loyola opponents scored this season, we see they shot slightly above average at the rim and from the perimeter against the Ramblers. The 59.64% at the rim and 34.36% Loyola allowed from three-point range aren’t huge outliers compared to the average D1 team, but they are certainly areas you would expect Loyola to better if they are to improve in the Atlantic 10 standings next season. The most pressing issue the Ramblers had on defense last season was how often they sent opponents to the free-throw line.
During the season, Loyola’s opponents shot 75.9% from the free throw line. Only 16 other D1 teams had opponents hit a higher share of their free throws last season, but there really isn’t much the Ramblers can do about this. Often referred to as “Jedi defense” by analysts, how their foes do at the free-throw line is beyond Drew Valentine and company’s control. What is in their control is how often they send their opposition to the free throw line. Opponents had a 37.5% free throw rate against Loyola last season, which was the second highest in the conference and ranked them 308th nationally. The interior defense for LUC did block shots 8.8% of the time, a respectable number. However, the rate at which that defense sent opponents to the free throw line was so detrimental that it more than cancelled out those blocks.
On the other side of the ball, we previously mentioned the decent effective field goal % Loyola had this season. Despite this, the impact of the turnover problem for the Ramblers is seen in their offensive points per 100 possessions (also known as offensive rating) of 99.2. This was the second lowest offensive rating in the conference, with only Rhode Island putting up a worse number. Turnovers will be the millstone on that rating, but there are concerning offensive numbers besides the Ramblers throwing the ball all over the court this season.
In the three most recent seasons Loyola has qualified for the NCAA tournament, one of their constants was how well they shot from the perimeter. The Final Four year saw the Ramblers shoot nearly 40% from three-point range. In 2020-21 on their way to the Sweet 16, LUC put up a 35.4% three-point %. In Drew Valentine’s first season, his squad shot an above average 37.6% from three. With the Ramblers offense not running at full optimization this season, it probably isn’t a surprise then that they shot a below average 33.43% from three-point range.
The below average perimeter shooting was highlighted frequently last season when watching Loyola, given that 40.29% of all their field goal attempts came from behind the three-point line. Now in Drew Valentine’s first season, the Ramblers took an even larger portion of their shots from three-point range. However, in the other two tournament seasons for Loyola fell between the 35-37% three-point attempt rate range. It might seem backwards for an analytics blog to suggest a team maybe not take as many threes as it did in the prior season, but unless the Ramblers add some more shooters it might be the best course of action.
Given that this most recent Loyola side took a lot of threes and made less than the average team, it isn’t surprising that they both did not get to the free-throw line much and the struggled hitting them when they got there. It’s tough to get to the line consistently when you are taking a bunch of threes, with the Ramblers having a below average 31.1% free throw rate. Their shooting at the free throw line was an even worse, definitely not nice 69.7% during the season. Free throws can help paper over warts on offense but having limited chances to cash in from the free-throw line and being unable to do so when there only further emphasized Loyola’s offensive short comings this season.
With that laundry list of issues that faced the Ramblers this past season, is there anything that maroon and gold scarf clad fans can take as positives from the season? Certainly! We discussed the good effective field goal % LUC had this season earlier. This is a result of the efficient shot mix that Loyola had. Over 80% of the shots Loyola took this season came either at the rim or from three-point range. These are typically the most efficient shots for a team, so Drew Valentine has the Ramblers offense getting analytically preferred looks at the hoop. Furthermore, less than 20% of Loyola’s shots came from the analytics boondoggle of the mid-range last season.
While we discussed how Loyola weren’t great shooting threes this season, some players had perimeter shooting seasons worse than we would have expected. Sheldon Edwards had less of a sample because of the games he missed in February, but Edwards shot 26.9% from three-point range this season. In his previous season at Valparaiso, he shot 35.1% from three-point range while taking over 62.67% of his shots from beyond the perimeter. We’ve seen Edwards be a plus perimeter shooter in his career, so if he gets more consistent time then we would expect him to do that for Loyola as well.
If we would expect to see Sheldon Edwards positively regress to an above-average perimeter shooting, we also could also expect Braden Norris and his surgically repaired thumb to positively regress from an above-average shooter back to a flame thrower from deep. In his first three seasons at Oakland and Loyola, Edwards shot 47.8%, 40.5%, and 43% from three-point range respectively with at least 130 attempts every season. He returned to being a mere mortal three-point shooting wise this season, “only” hitting 35.8% from deep. If he can turn back into the lethal three-point threat next season and Edwards can go back to shooting an above average percentage then it will go a long way in improving the Loyola offense.
The perimeter shooting for Loyola was below average this past season, but for the shot that might be analytics favorite, the Ramblers were above average scoring at the rim. LUC scored on 63.44% of their shots at the rim last season, with only Dayton, George Washington and Richmond hitting a higher percentage of shots at the basket. They also took a plurality of their shots at the rim as we mentioned earlier. Continuing to take advantage of their shots at the rim can help spark a turnaround for Loyola next season.
Switching from the macro to the micro level, there were a few players that stood out among the rest of the roster during the season. The biggest revelation for the Ramblers was D2 transfer Philip Alston. Overall, Loyola was 11.46 points per 100 possessions better when the Columbus, OH native was on the court. In a year where LUC struggled from three-point range, Alston was able to hit 40% of his threes. We might nit-pick his 21.3% attempt rate from three-point range, as we wouldn’t expect a huge regression in his accuracy if he took more. He does well drawing fouls, with his 51.4% free throw rate being by far the highest of any Loyola player this past season. It is a bit surprising to see Alston is a 40% three-point shooter but only a 69.2% free-throw shooter so you would hope he could improve the number of freebies he knocks down. His 8.8% offensive rebound rate would indicate plenty of strength to compete with the talented post players you find in the A10, but his 57.2% field goal % on shots at the rim suggest he might need to develop a bit more touch at the rim. Alston was one of the few bright sparks in a tough season for the Ramblers and with some improvements in the areas mentioned above, you could see him on an A10 All-Conference team next season.
While Philip Alston was the clear standout from the previous Loyola season, there were also a few other aspects of to be hopeful of for players we assume will be back next season. Sheldon Edwards had some DNP-CD’s during the season, but really came on to have a huge impact for Loyola in the last few games in the season. Over the entire season, Loyola’s offense rating was 7.44 points per 100 possessions better when Edwards was on the court compared to when he was off. His assist rate was a very respectable 14.9%. Despite reportedly getting those DNP-CDs because of his defense, his 3.3% block rate and 3.6% steal rate put him in my oft-referenced above 2% block and steal rate to possibly suggest a player has the athleticism for defense on the next level. With a year in the program under his belt, Edwards could be a more consistent contributor to the Ramblers next season.
One of the players who helped Loyola score efficiently at the rim this season was Tom Welch. Taking over 75.94% of his shots at the rim, the 6’8″ post player was able to score a nearly unstoppable 80.2% of those shots. We had also previously discussed how despite a noticeable regression in his three-point shooting, Braden Norris still shot an above average 35% from three-point range. Even with a thumb injury impacting him during the season, we see the playmaking we would expect from the veteran guard in his 21.3% assist rate. Continued impact from Welch in the paint and Norris in his playmaking and perimeter shooting duties can help lift the Ramblers fortunes.
You may have noticed that in this section where we share optimism for likely returning players for Loyola, there were only four players we discussed. Given you are nearly at the end of 2,000+ words discussing the season of the 15th place Atlantic 10 team, you also probably know you always need five on the court. With the list of faults, we spent most of this article discussing and only four players on the Loyola roster we can see differing sized glimmers of hope for, we can conclude there was a dearth of talent on the Ramblers roster this season. It seems this is something that the LUC coaching staff and I agrees upon, given they are listed in every tweet sent out by the various portal updates Twitter accounts for who has contacted players in the portal. If the Ramblers can solidify their roster through the portal and help build upon the pieces they already have, we could see a stark improvement next season. At the very least, it would be very difficult for the season to go worse for Loyola.
A10 Stats 
Leave a comment