As a Nats fan, it was exciting to see the Nats add Josh Bell at the end of the year in 2020. He was an all-star first basemen and a switch hitter with power, just what the Nats needed.

Expectations were high, and the Nats had come off a World Series 2 seasons prior. But Josh Bell went through a deep slump in the first 2 months of the season. It seemed like he was hitting the ball well with contact and power, but the defense just seemed to be in the right place.

Then I read an article (I forget where) that stated how Josh Bell was the "unluckiest" hitter this past season with regards to a stat I had never heard "expected outcomes".

For instance, if Player X hits the ball with 113 mph velocity, and at an angle of Y, then their batting average would be something like .300, but when Josh Bell was hitting the ball 113 mph with an angle of Y his batting average was .180

Did Josh Bell need to retool his swing? Did he need to approach the game differently? Did he just all of a sudden get bad?

No, he needed to continue his approach and know that the "expected outcomes" would eventually fall in his favor.

He went on to hit .267 (right in line with the rest of his career) with the second most HR of his career (27) despite splitting time at 1B with Ryan Zimmerman.

This first part of the season has essentially been the Josh Bell season. The Hokies have gotten open shots, defended very well and are in the top 40 in the nation in both offensive and defensive efficiency (something only 19 teams can say), but theyre 9-7.

Ive seen some point to the schedule for VTs skewed metrics, but VTs strength of schedule is top 50 (47) and their non-conference strength of schedule (150th) is MILES ahead of the non-conference strength of schedule for the Sweet 16 team in 2018-19 (325th)

So what gives? Does VT need to make adjustments? Does they need to change their approach? Did they all of a sudden get bad at the game of basketball?

No, of course not. They have just been repeatedly on the wrong side of expected outcomes.

I saw no change in the quality of shots that VT got last night against Notre Dame. They werent any easier or harder than any of the 7 games VT has lost. Defensively they werent out of position any more or less than they usually are.

So why did Notre Dame score 73 points?

Well, because they turned the ball over 3 times, and 1 of those was a shot clock violation when a shot missed the rim (they really need to change how thats logged). So in all but 2 possessions in a 61 possession game, they got a shot/foul.

Notre Dame took 57 shots in a 61 possession game. They shot 40% from 3. They had 3 turnovers. They got to the FT line 18 times.

They lost by 6.

So why did VT score 79 points in a 61 possession game?

The shots fell...its as simple as that

Notre Dame gave their best shot to VT, and the expected outcome when you do everything so well would be a very high expectation of winning

And yet, they lost. VT was finally on the right side of an expected outcome.

They didnt do anything differently, they didnt play a bad team. Had nothing to do with being pressured or not. They simply made the shots they had been missing. If Alleyne shot his normal percentage for this season VT loses another one by 5 or so points and we are sitting here wanting to fire MY.

But the shots go in because MY stuck with Alleyne and didnt lose him for the season. And VT gets their own expected outcome