PDA

View Full Version : Randy Bennett interview on KJR in Seattle (and KJRB in Spokane)



CroatiaZag
02-12-2009, 09:55 AM
For the most part, it was not that interesting because he waffled on a lot of his responses. Probably because of the nature of the questions and maybe Mitch threw him off by warning him that he was on in Spokane? Anyway, here were my 2 main takeaways-

- He asked him if he thought he had the best home-court advantage in the WCC. Bennett kinda affirmed but he did give some credit to K2…I think Steve Sandmeyer (co-host) was the driver of this question.

- Patty Mills has 2 broken metacarpals, supposedly a 4-week
recovery, and could be in line to make an impact in the conference tournament. The team is also hopeful that they could still get an at large bid if they need it, considering their resume outside of the games w/o Mills.
Yeah, so not that much info, but thought I would post it. Maybe someone else was paying better attention….

Rubbadub
02-12-2009, 10:24 AM
Remind me---what's their best win again? They need to do some damage in the WCC before Patty gets back or they're screwed. At their current pace, they're not going to be close to an at large.

EngineerZag
02-12-2009, 10:28 AM
Providence.

cggonzaga
02-12-2009, 10:40 AM
Remind me---what's their best win again? They need to do some damage in the WCC before Patty gets back or they're screwed. At their current pace, they're not going to be close to an at large.

What's ours? If you're thinking along those lines then why would we not be considered a long shot? Thank God we have the name recognition or I'd be somewhat surprised if we got an at large.

CDC84
02-12-2009, 10:54 AM
The Santa Clara loss might've killed SMC's at large chances. The Broncos are 197 in the RPI.

The problem that the Gaels have is that their two non-Mills losses were both 18 point wins for Portland and SCU. Total wipeouts. I have to believe the NCAA committee, when they consider the Mills injury factor, is going to look down upon that. I hope I'm wrong, because I want to see the WCC get in as many teams as possible.


Remind me---what's their best win again? They need to do some damage in the WCC before Patty gets back or they're screwed. At their current pace, they're not going to be close to an at large.


What's ours? If you're thinking along those lines then why would we not be considered a long shot? Thank God we have the name recognition or I'd be somewhat surprised if we got an at large.

A few points:

1) SMC's best win, and their only top 50 RPI win right now, is San Diego State on a neutral floor. SDSU is at 47 in the RPI. The only other top 100 win they have is Providence (66). Obviously, if they can beat Gonzaga tonight, that gives them another top 50 win.

2) The Zags currently have 3 top 50 RPI wins, including 2 top 25 RPI wins (Tennessee is at 24). People can knock down the Tennessee wins left and right, but the Vols are high in the RPI and are in 1st place in the SEC East. Those wins are holding up quite nicely.

The Zags also have victories over three other top 100 teams (SMC, Wazzu and Maryland), giving them a total of 6 top 100 wins. If they win tonight, they'll have 7 top 100 wins.

GU has gotten into the dance with ease with resumes that are far less impressive than what this year's team has compiled so far. While the resume is hardly overwhelming, the Zags are getting in the dance based on what's paper - not because of name recognition. That is, if they keep winning the games they are supposed to.

jim77
02-12-2009, 11:20 AM
Maybe tonight ST.Mary's gets their high profile win. This is gonna be a tough game....its the season for St. Mary's as far as any at-large bid. They could still win the tourney...which they have a chance of doing with Mills. Zags better bring it. We could be building our own at-large bid.

former1dog
02-12-2009, 11:20 AM
What's ours? If you're thinking along those lines then why would we not be considered a long shot? Thank God we have the name recognition or I'd be somewhat surprised if we got an at large.

As CDC points out, we have a solid at large resume. SMC didn't schedule any for sure RPI boosters outside of conference and that was to their detriment. I think that they have real problems with an NCAA berth if they don't win the WCC tourney.

It's unfortunate because I am of the opinion that they are good enough to be an at large team. St. Mary's scheduling, IMO, is a real head scratcher.

cggonzaga
02-12-2009, 11:28 AM
No offense CDC but I'm so tired of hearing about stats and records. Sometimes things just need to be looked at from the eye test. The Tennessee wins are fine but clearly the SEC is in a down year. The RPI for them is high but that's due to teams they've played, not beat. SMC will shortly not be a top 50 win. WSU, Maryland and OK St have decent RPI's but again that's more due to their conferences and not who they have beat. We have 17 wins on the season and only a possible 2 (OK St has some work to do) of those will go to the dance. That being said I know the RPI is what the committee goes off of for the at larges. Doesn't always mean the 33 best teams get in however. Yes I believe we should be in the dance but when someone is questioning another teams chances of going by stating "who have they beat", I don't think we should be offended if they posed the same question to us.

CDC84
02-12-2009, 11:31 AM
One of the great myths regarding the NCAA tourney selection process is this notion of needing "marquee" wins. The way people describe it, it's as though you need to beat teams like North Carolina, Oklahoma and UConn to make the NCAA tournament. It's simply not true. There have been scores and scores of teams who have received at large bids who don't have a single win over a big name school. Where "marquee" wins are needed, though, is when you are gunning for a high seed. But in order to get in as an at large team, all you need to do is beat a certain amount of good teams. And those "good" teams don't necessarily need to be ALL teams that are making the NCAA tournament. There are lots of teams in the RPI top 100 that won't make the dance, but they are still "good" teams. Every win is considered.

former1dog
02-12-2009, 11:33 AM
No offense CDC but I'm so tired of hearing about stats and records. Sometimes things just need to be looked at from the eye test.

I'm pretty sure the point is, is that is how the selection committee looks at things. Amongst other things, they look at conference record and position in the conference standings, overall wins and losses, overall rpi, wins and losses vs. top RPI teams and the teams record over the last 10 games.

Based on all of that data, Gonzaga has a solid resume.

CroatiaZag
02-12-2009, 11:37 AM
Here's some more info on the SMC situation:

This guy does or did write for the Mercury...interesting thoughts on the subject...

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/02/08/how-good-is-patty-mills-just-watch-smc-without-him/

and actually, here is a link to the Bennett interview I heard:

http://www.kjram.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=mitchinthemorning.xml

He throws out Kenyon Martin as a "sort-of" example.

sidebar - checkout all the good interviews on Mitch's page

rennis
02-12-2009, 11:38 AM
Based on all of that data, Gonzaga has a solid resume.

Who have you played? Who have you beaten? That's what counts.

We've played lots of great teams, beaten a handful of them, and had respectable losses in all but one of the others.

our resume is beyond solid.

cggonzaga
02-12-2009, 11:40 AM
Where "marquee" wins are needed, though, is when you are gunning for a high seed.

Or if you play in a mid major or lower conference. There have also been scores and scores of teams that have had better wins and RPI's that have been left out.

Again, I'm not stating we shouldn't be in. I still believe when playing well we are a top 5 team in the country. I also believe our name recognition is what's keeping us away from being talked about as a bubble team.

lothar98zag
02-12-2009, 11:43 AM
Or if you play in a mid major or lower conference. There have also been scores and scores of teams that have had better wins and RPI's that have been left out.
:link:

cggonzaga
02-12-2009, 11:56 AM
There have been scores and scores of teams who have received at large bids who don't have a single win over a big name school.

Being kind of fickle Lothar, don't you think? I'd like to see a link for the above comment as well but I'm sure CDC has much better things to do with his time as I do mine.

tobizag
02-12-2009, 12:08 PM
No offense CDC but I'm so tired of hearing about stats and records. Sometimes things just need to be looked at from the eye test.

the eye test? boy, i don't know how anyone could do that this year. look at how many teams play inconsistently, beating top teams and losing to conference pushovers. in my estimation, their are only a handful of teams that the "eye test" would work with, and they are uconn, unc, oklahoma and pitt. if you use the "eye test", which wake forest team would you examine? what conclusion would you draw regarding syracuse? how about florida state, xavier, louisville, texas, ucla, notre dame, miami, kentucky, purdue, michigan state, gonzaga, st mary's.....the list goes on. an eye test is too subjective.

stats and records aren't perfect, but when mated together into a balanced formula like the rpi, they work. the proof is in the pudding. sure, there are times when teams don't get in and we wonder how they could be left out (see asu last year) or when we gripe about seedings (see gonzaga's 6-seed when we lost to wyoming) but in hindsight the committee does a tremendous job. and quite frankly, it doesn't take any hindsight to know that as the product on the court each year is phenomenal. considering what college football teams (D 1) have to go through, college basketball is close to perfect.

Rubbadub
02-12-2009, 12:16 PM
No offense CDC but I'm so tired of hearing about stats and records.

I know just what you mean. Who needs logic? I yearn for a return to the days when the NCAA field was decided via crystal ball. :)


stats and records aren't perfect, but when mated together into a balanced formula like the rpi, they work. the proof is in the pudding. sure, there are times when teams don't get in and we wonder how they could be left out (see asu last year) or when we gripe about seedings (see gonzaga's 6-seed when we lost to wyoming) but in hindsight the committee does a tremendous job. and quite frankly, it doesn't take any hindsight to know that as the product on the court each year is phenomenal. considering what college football teams (D 1) have to go through, college basketball is close to perfect.

Well put.

CDC84
02-12-2009, 01:14 PM
Or if you play in a mid major or lower conference. There have also been scores and scores of teams that have had better wins and RPI's that have been left out.

I don't have the time to do the research, but I would be willing to bet that over the last 10-15 years, there isn't a non-BCS team who failed to make the field who possessed a better resume than what Gonzaga has right now in terms of having a high RPI and not just one, but two top 25 wins. Maybe there is a team or two, but not scores. For one thing, most non-BCS teams don't get the scheduling opportunities that Gonzaga has to even pick up top 25 type wins. I wish it were otherwise.

The key word you are using here is "AND." It's one thing to have a high RPI...it's another thing to have a high RPI and beat RPI top 25 teams. The vast majority of those RPI top 25 teams are from the BCS leagues.

The non-BCS teams who have gotten messed over by the committee in the past have been Missouri Valley Conference type schools...teams who rarely get games against upper shelf BCS teams, but who consistently beat the mid and mostly low level BCS teams who will play them. Then they play in a highly competitive mid major league with similiar teams, which keeps their RPI high, but where the committee expects them to be perfect. The problem with the committee was that they would exclude teams like this in favor of BCS teams who played no one out of conference, but who managed to pickup a marquee win or two at home during league play.

Fortunately, the committee has gotten better in this area. They've made it clear to BCS folks that you better play people outside of league, and if you don't, you better do significant damage within league. The area where I think they mess over non-BCS teams nowadays is with the seeding. I still think it's absurd that Butler got a 7 seed last March. They should've been given a 4.

edcasey
02-12-2009, 01:45 PM
my quesiton is why is a seattle sports station (last I checked still in the state of washington) interviewing a california school head coach and throwing negative softball questions out in regards to a in state program.....tacky at best...but truly shows their dislike for Gonzaga

CroatiaZag
02-12-2009, 03:46 PM
my quesiton is why is a seattle sports station (last I checked still in the state of washington) interviewing a california school head coach and throwing negative softball questions out in regards to a in state program

It is the Husky flagship station, so he often takes on that persona. Which from what I've experienced is 90% anti-GU. However, he had Dan Monson on yesterday and was basically worshiping him. His show is on KGA in Spokane until 9am.

Reborn
02-12-2009, 04:15 PM
The Zags have a good resume. Winning the Maui was great. Two wins over Tennessee is always great, and beating them at Tennessee and breaking a 35 home court winning streak was AWESOME. I think that broke Tennessee's back, and they have not fully recovered but will by year's end, imo. The win at WSU and the way we won there, was excellent. You just don't do what we did to Tony Bennet's teams. I think the win at Portland was very good. Portland was playing great at the time, and it was an away game for the Zags. I don't care what you say, the St. Mary's win was good, and if we beat them tonight it will also be a very good win.

No one has played good on the road this year, so our losses on the road are not as damaging as some think. Arizona has beaten just about everyone at home, so our very close loss there was not a bad loss. The same for Utah. The BIS was not a bad loss at all, and most know we should have won that game. The Portland State was a stinker, and we are not the onlly top team who has had a stinker this year. So I don't think we will be docked to severely for that one. The bad loss, in my opinion was to Memphis. The Zags just did not look good at all.

Making the tournament is not an issue at all, so please stop wasting time and space thinking we may not. The question is how will we do there? Right now I am concerned, but there is still enough time. We'll see what happens the next eight games. They have NOT proved that they are even capable of making it to the Sweet 16 in my opinion. Let's hope things begin to change tonight. The key's are Pargo and Daye. Can they begin to play with poise, maturity and consistency?