The Power of Scoring Runs Part 1: What Made Michigan Wolverines Men's Basketball the National Champion?

Part 2: Arizona Basketball, Scoring Runs, and the Power of Offensive Pressure

Part 3: UConn and the Power of Consistent Offensive Runs

Part 4: Illinois Basketball and the Value of Consistency

Part 5: What the Final Four Revealed About Winning Basketball

In basketball, consistency is often discussed in broad terms. Coaches talk about effort, discipline, habits, and execution. Analysts point to efficiency numbers, shooting percentages, or turnover margins. But when you really study winning basketball, one thing keeps surfacing over and over again: runs.

Not just the explosive 10-0 “Kill Shot” or 20-0 “Double Kill Shot”  that bring crowds to their feet, but the smaller stretches that quietly shift momentum and ultimately decide games.

So as we evaluate the game of basketball, questions always come up.

• How can we be better?

• What factors influence change?

• What can be predictors of success?

These are the questions I found myself thinking about while studying the concept of scoring runs. Many basketball fans and coaches have seen the 10+ point scoring run statistics popularized by Evan Miyakawa and the growing discussion around “Kill Shots” in basketball. The numbers surrounding 10-0 runs, what many call “Kill Shots,” are eye-opening:

• Teams with at least one 10-0 run win 71% of the time.

• Teams with more Kill Shots than their opponent win 81% of the time.

• Teams with two 10-0 runs win 88% of the time.

• A single 15-0 run correlates with an 86% win rate.

• A 20-0 (“Double Kill Shot” or “Avalanche”) pushes that to 91%.

Those statistics are impossible to ignore. But they also led me to another question.

What about the runs that happen before the Kill Shot?

As a coach, I constantly think about how teams can influence their ability to create these momentum swings. But one question continued to stand out:

Can smaller scoring runs — specifically 7-to-9-point runs — also predict success?

The runs that don’t always make highlight reels, but quietly bend the game in your favor.

A 10-point run requires a significant stretch of dominance. If a team relies entirely on 3-point shooting at the national average of roughly 34%, it could take around 11 possessions to erase a 10-point deficit without allowing the opponent to score. Using 2-point field goals at an average efficiency of 45%, it could take closer to 13 possessions.

A 7-point deficit, however, is much more manageable. At the same average percentages, it could take:

• 8 possessions using three-point attempts

• 9 possessions using two-point attempts

That changes the conversation. Three successful offensive possessions and two defensive stops can suddenly become a meaningful momentum shift creating a 7 to 9 point run. Considering many programs already track “kills” which is three consecutive defensive stops, something not even needed to create the run.

So I started wondering:

Could the smaller runs actually be the foundation of consistency?

So I decided to study the four teams that reached the Final Four: Michigan Wolverines, Arizona Wildcats, UConn Huskies, and Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball teams.

Michigan’s Offensive Run Profile

To explore it, I dug into the Final Four teams and tracked every scoring run throughout the season. I charted both 10+ point runs and the often-overlooked 7-to-9-point runs, then compared them to outcomes, shooting percentages, and efficiency metrics.

The first team I studied was the NCAA National Champion: Michigan.

Michigan finished 37-3 and consistently controlled games through sustained stretches of momentum. Over the course of the season, they averaged:

• 1.63 runs of 7-to-9 points per game (65)

• 1 run of 10+ points per game (40)

Defensively, they allowed:

• 0.85 opponent runs of 7-to-9 points per game (34)

• 0.1 opponent runs of 10+ points per game (4)

As expected, those numbers improved in wins and declined in loses.

In wins, Michigan averaged:

• 1.76 runs of 7-to-9 points

• 1.08 runs of 10+ points

• Allowed opponents to shoot just 37.5%

In losses:

• Michigan did not record a single 7-to-9 or 10+ point run

• Opponents averaged 1.67 runs of 7-to-9 points

• Opponents shot nearly 49.4%

Season Averages

Situation	7-9 Runs	10+ Runs	Opponent 7-9	Opponent 10+	OFG%	DFG%
Avg Overall	1.63	1.00	0.85	0.10	.507	.384
Avg Wins	1.76	1.08	0.78	0.11	.512	.375
Avg Losses	0.00	0.00	1.67	0.00	.446	.494

Every time Michigan recorded a 10+ point run, they won. Every time they had more 7-to-9 point runs than the opponent, they overwhelmingly won. Even in games where both teams had explosive runs, Michigan’s ability to consistently stack smaller momentum stretches tilted the game back in their favor.

That consistency showed up everywhere statistically.

After organizing the play-by-play data and comparing outcomes, several statistical patterns emerged.

Statistical Category	Wins	Losses	Win %
10+ point run or more	25	0	100%
Both teams had a 10+ point run	3	0	100%
More 7 to 9 point runs in games with a 10+ point run	22	0	100%
Opponent had a 10+ run but Michigan had more 7 to 9 runs	3	0	100%
More 7 to 9 point runs with no 10+ point run	5	0	100%
No 7 to 9 point runs	2*	3	40%
Opponent had more 7 to 9 point runs	2	4	33%

*Both wins occurred when the opponent also failed to record a 7-to-9-point run.

Efficiency, Pace, and Consistency

Michigan’s advanced metrics help explain why these scoring runs mattered so much.

Stat	Number	National Rank
Net Rating	39.7	1
Offensive Efficiency	128.2	4
Defensive Efficiency	88.5	1
Turnover %	16.3	159
Pace	71.0	22

Interestingly, they were only 159th nationally in turnover percentage which would normally create concern. On paper, that flaw should have hurt them more. However, their elite shooting efficiency provided enough offensive cushion to survive occasional mistakes. Their playing fast, ranked 22nd nationally in pace, contributed to more opportunities to create momentum in which they continuously capitalized on defensive stretches where opponents stalled offensively.

Ultimately, the data showed a simple but powerful trend:

When Michigan won the war of runs, they won the game.

The Wolverines combined efficient offense, quality shooting, defensive consistency, and tempo to create scoring stretches that overwhelmed opponents. While the 10+ point “Kill Shot” remains an important metric, the 7 to 9-point run may be just as valuable in understanding how momentum develops throughout a basketball game.

Consistency created opportunity, and opportunity created a championship.