PDA

View Full Version : LUNARDI 2/22



BMAN
02-22-2016, 06:03 AM
He says we will be a play in team in Spokane region

last four in

TheGonzagaFactor
02-22-2016, 06:40 AM
He says we will be a play in team in Spokane region

last four in

I want to see Lunardi and Jerry Palm argue over our NCAA prospects. Palm, IIRC, didn't have us in at all before Saturday, this piece from Lunardi must have Palm's head spinning.

I think losing twice to a team like SMC makes it obvious that we aren't at-large quality, but if people want to act like it's not an awful loss, I won't stop them.

DixieZag
02-22-2016, 07:03 AM
Win in Vegas.

It is the only way.

CdAZagFan
02-22-2016, 07:07 AM
Win in Vegas.

It is the only way.

Wow - Lunardi has us in a pretty good draw, but I agree with Dixie. Win in Vegas and we don't have to face all the cynics like Palm.

gonzagafan62
02-22-2016, 07:10 AM
If we were to somehow sneak in the thing we woul have to win out to the title game. Even then we'd face Pepperdine or SMC. In that case we would have to win. It's tough.

LongIslandZagFan
02-22-2016, 08:24 AM
If we were to somehow sneak in the thing we woul have to win out to the title game. Even then we'd face Pepperdine or SMC. In that case we would have to win. It's tough.

Best possible scenario would be playing to finals and getting Pepperdine. Just think this team matches up better to Pepperdine than SMC.

zagfan24
02-22-2016, 08:26 AM
The problem with these "as it stands now" projections for GU is that the Zags will either a) get the auto-bid or b) have another loss to SMC, BYU, or worse.

The former makes the in-or-not question irrelevant, the latter makes the already slim margins even slimmer.

Reborn
02-22-2016, 08:27 AM
Best possible scenario would be playing to finals and getting Pepperdine. Just think this team matches up better to Pepperdine than SMC.

My exact thoughts. SMC may have to play Pepperdine now, and could certainly lose. But honestly, I do want to play SMC again. I would love to beat them in the finals after losing to them twice.

Go Zags!!!

Reborn
02-22-2016, 08:28 AM
Best possible scenario would be playing to finals and getting Pepperdine. Just think this team matches up better to Pepperdine than SMC.

My exact thoughts. SMC may have to play Pepperdine now, and could certainly lose. But honestly, I do want to play SMC again. I would love to beat them in the finals after losing to them twice.

Go Zags!!!

LongIslandZagFan
02-22-2016, 08:28 AM
My exact thoughts. SMC may have to play Pepperdine now, and could certainly lose. But honestly, I do want to play SMC again. I would love to beat them in the finals after losing to them twice.

Go Zags!!!

Until this team shows they can stop a single drive to the lane... no thanks on playing SMC

CdAZagFan
02-22-2016, 08:40 AM
My exact thoughts. SMC may have to play Pepperdine now, and could certainly lose. But honestly, I do want to play SMC again. I would love to beat them in the finals after losing to them twice.

Go Zags!!!

Yes, we can't end the season falling twice to SMC. It's only poetic justice that we beat them in the WCC tourney.

gonstu
02-22-2016, 08:43 AM
The problem with these "as it stands now" projections for GU is that the Zags will either a) get the auto-bid or b) have another loss to SMC, BYU, or worse.

The former makes the in-or-not question irrelevant, the latter makes the already slim margins even slimmer.

excellent point. In other words, where Lunardi has them now really means they need to win the tourney to get in (another loss would knock them out of even the play-in games anyway).

vandalzag
02-22-2016, 08:46 AM
Until this team shows they can stop a single drive to the lane... no thanks on playing SMC

Bennett will do nothing but pick and roll with whoever KW is attempting to guard. Only chance of defending that would be Zone them the whole time. Unless KW magically develops quickness and a desire to play defense. Maybe Few is keeping something in his back pocket, like the return of the old match up zone they used to run in the late 90's early 2000's. Pack the zone and dare SMC to hit 3's on the road. SMC is too adept at the pick (with moving screen) and roll. Zags lack a shot blocker to offset the drives and Edwards is not the answer.

gonstu
02-22-2016, 08:52 AM
Bennett will do nothing but pick and roll with whoever KW is attempting to guard. Only chance of defending that would be Zone them the whole time. Unless KW magically develops quickness and a desire to play defense. Maybe Few is keeping something in his back pocket, like the return of the old match up zone they used to run in the late 90's early 2000's. Pack the zone and dare SMC to hit 3's on the road. SMC is too adept at the pick (with moving screen) and roll. Zags lack a shot blocker to offset the drives and Edwards is not the answer.

Desire different that ability. More likely that he can't do much better defensively than he doesn't want to do any better defensively.

vandalzag
02-22-2016, 09:15 AM
Desire different that ability. More likely that he can't do much better defensively than he doesn't want to do any better defensively.

Plenty of times where he was stationary and not attempting to even react on defense. When his shots are hitting he seems to move just fine on offense. Defense and rebounding have a lot to do with desire.

seacatfan
02-22-2016, 09:36 AM
I find it nearly impossible to believe that a team playing in the first four games would be rewarded with being at home if they did manage to win that first game in Dayton.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 09:47 AM
I find it nearly impossible to believe that a team playing in the first four games would be rewarded with being at home if they did manage to win that first game in Dayton.

I get what you are saying, but they are assuming the quality of a team, and there are other teams that may benefit from not having to be in Spokane.

77Zag
02-22-2016, 09:59 AM
Gonzaga Basketball
Predictions Update
Feb 21, 2016

• After losing to St Marys 63-58 yesterday, Gonzaga is now projected to finish the regular season 22-8 (14-4 WCC).
• The odds that the Bulldogs make the NCAA tournament are now down to 60%, a decrease of 19% since yesterday.
• We now rank Gonzaga as the #23 team in the country, and the #1 team in the WCC.
• Next game: Thu, Feb 25 at #285 San Diego. Our power ratings give the Bulldogs a 96% chance to win.

Bracketology Projections
Make NCAA Tournament Get Automatic NCAA Bid Projected Seed
(if Selected)
60% 44% 12
• Gonzaga has a 1% chance to win the NCAA Tournament. That may not sound like much, but few teams even have this good of a chance.
• We project the Bulldogs with a 15% chance to make the Sweet Sixteen and a 3% chance to reach the Final Four.
• Gonzaga probably won't get an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament, although they have an outside shot. They'll likely need to earn an automatic bid by winning the WCC tournament.
• As for that automatic bid ... Gonzaga has a great chance to win the conference tournament, with 44% odds.
• If the Bulldogs can get to 26 total wins (including conference tournament wins), their odds to make the NCAA tournament increase to 100%.
More Gonzaga Bracketology | Bracketology For All Teams
Regular Season Record Projection
Current Record Projection For Remaining Games Projected
Final Record
21-7
(13-3 WCC) 1-1
(1-1 WCC) 22-8
(14-4 WCC)
• The more precise final record expectation for Gonzaga is 22.4 wins and 7.6 losses, slightly better than the rounded projection above.
• Based on our projections, the Bulldogs will most likely finish the regular season with a record between 23-7 and 22-8.
• Gonzaga has a 46% chance to win the rest of their scheduled games.
More Gonzaga Projections | Projections For All WCC Teams
WCC Tournament Projections
Get WCC #1 Seed Projected Seed Win WCC Tournament
9% 3 44%
• The odds for Gonzaga to earn the #1 seed in the WCC tournament are down 70% since yesterday.
• The chance of Gonzaga winning the WCC tournament has decreased by 9% since yesterday.



Remaining Games & Win Odds

Feb 25

@ #285 San Diego
95.8%


Feb 27

@ #41 BYU
47.7%

gonstu
02-22-2016, 10:42 AM
Gonzaga Basketball
Predictions Update
Feb 21, 2016

• After losing to St Marys 63-58 yesterday, Gonzaga is now projected to finish the regular season 22-8 (14-4 WCC).
• The odds that the Bulldogs make the NCAA tournament are now down to 60%, a decrease of 19% since yesterday.
• We now rank Gonzaga as the #23 team in the country, and the #1 team in the WCC.
• Next game: Thu, Feb 25 at #285 San Diego. Our power ratings give the Bulldogs a 96% chance to win.

Bracketology Projections
Make NCAA Tournament Get Automatic NCAA Bid Projected Seed
(if Selected)
60% 44% 12
• Gonzaga has a 1% chance to win the NCAA Tournament. That may not sound like much, but few teams even have this good of a chance.
• We project the Bulldogs with a 15% chance to make the Sweet Sixteen and a 3% chance to reach the Final Four.
• Gonzaga probably won't get an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament, although they have an outside shot. They'll likely need to earn an automatic bid by winning the WCC tournament.
• As for that automatic bid ... Gonzaga has a great chance to win the conference tournament, with 44% odds.
• If the Bulldogs can get to 26 total wins (including conference tournament wins), their odds to make the NCAA tournament increase to 100%.
More Gonzaga Bracketology | Bracketology For All Teams
Regular Season Record Projection
Current Record Projection For Remaining Games Projected
Final Record
21-7
(13-3 WCC) 1-1
(1-1 WCC) 22-8
(14-4 WCC)
• The more precise final record expectation for Gonzaga is 22.4 wins and 7.6 losses, slightly better than the rounded projection above.
• Based on our projections, the Bulldogs will most likely finish the regular season with a record between 23-7 and 22-8.
• Gonzaga has a 46% chance to win the rest of their scheduled games.
More Gonzaga Projections | Projections For All WCC Teams
WCC Tournament Projections
Get WCC #1 Seed Projected Seed Win WCC Tournament
9% 3 44%
• The odds for Gonzaga to earn the #1 seed in the WCC tournament are down 70% since yesterday.
• The chance of Gonzaga winning the WCC tournament has decreased by 9% since yesterday.



Remaining Games & Win Odds

Feb 25

@ #285 San Diego
95.8%


Feb 27

@ #41 BYU
47.7%

well, that was depressing. but great info, thanks.

MJGoGaels
02-22-2016, 11:12 AM
Best possible scenario would be playing to finals and getting Pepperdine. Just think this team matches up better to Pepperdine than SMC.

Weird. And, the Waves and Coach Marty Wilson have just won 3 of the last 4 against the Gaels.

Agree with the general sentiment. One bid conference. Vegas will be huge.

surfmonkey89
02-22-2016, 12:08 PM
I think we'll be fine. We're only 29pts from being undefeated and ranked #1 in the country.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 12:11 PM
Weird. And, the Waves and Coach Marty Wilson have just won 3 of the last 4 against the Gaels.

Agree with the general sentiment. One bid conference. Vegas will be huge.

If the committee changes its methodology significantly, then yes. But if the Zags win until the Conference final, and it's not a "bad loss team", they could lose that game and still get in.

Zagceo
02-22-2016, 12:24 PM
I find it nearly impossible to believe that a team playing in the first four games would be rewarded with being at home if they did manage to win that first game in Dayton.

Before Dayton games…..

Davidson #10 seed 150miles from home

Don't remember this fun fact about Davidson


Prior to their Sweet Sixteen matchup, the college's board of trustees supplied students with tickets, transportation and lodging for the Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight games.

http://i914.photobucket.com/albums/ac342/ceo_500/Screen%20Shot%202016-02-22%20at%201.18.14%20PM_zpsvuhbetug.png

cbbfanatic
02-22-2016, 12:33 PM
If the committee changes its methodology significantly, then yes. But if the Zags win until the Conference final, and it's not a "bad loss team", they could lose that game and still get in.

i think some of you are putting too much emphasis on losses, and their perceived quality.

i think wins are likely more important.

maynard g krebs
02-22-2016, 12:53 PM
Plenty of times where he was stationary and not attempting to even react on defense. When his shots are hitting he seems to move just fine on offense. Defense and rebounding have a lot to do with desire.

Ironically, this post is deserving of vandalzag-type vitriol in response imo. As I posted in another thread, KW was rebounding better than anyone could have predicted, and imo defending adequately (which is imo all we could expect) until the ankle sprain. I suppose you could play through pain better, though. Rebounding down from 7.6 to 4.7, and I bet that bums him out a lot more than it does us.

GoZags
02-22-2016, 01:04 PM
i think some of you are putting too much emphasis on losses, and their perceived quality.

i think wins are likely more important.

While it's "interesting" to see what various boardmembers "think" ... I like the fact that AFTER the SMC loss the Zags still have an average of 30.67 (in the nation) in the 3 services actually used by the Selection Committee. BPI (Zags are 30) KenPom (Zags are 35) and Sagarin (Zags are 27).

Bottom line is Gonzaga needs to take care of business this week ...

seacatfan
02-22-2016, 01:10 PM
Before Dayton games…..

Davidson #10 seed 150miles from home

Don't remember this fun fact about Davidson


I remember Davidson, but 150 miles away from home isn't quite the same as having a game in your hometown. Especially after being in a first 4 game, which means you barely made it into the Tourney by the skin of your teeth. It's apples and oranges to me.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 01:13 PM
i think some of you are putting too much emphasis on losses, and their perceived quality.

i think wins are likely more important.

I haven't seen bad losses over valued. Given the context that I provided, a bad loss would be a hard thing to deal with given our lack of quality wins. The weighting changes. Winning through to the final gives us either a bump in the three major aggregates, or at least holds pretty good serve. Our BPI, Sagarin, and KenPom, to go with our 24-ish wins and the quality win are working in our favor. If someone can find a team in recent years that had that and missed the tourney, then I would be more convinced that we are in some trouble. But even then the odds aren't exactly working against us.

seacatfan
02-22-2016, 01:18 PM
I cannot fathom how some GU fans aren't nervous. They had a thin margin before the St. Mary's loss. That didn't help. Beating USD won't help, the Toreros are a near 300 RPI team. Beating BYU on the road would certainly be good, but it's not like BYU is a high RPI team and wouldn't necessarily count on the ledger as a good win. Right now the Zags are hanging their hat on beating UConn (bubble team, borderline top 50 RPI win) and UW (fading fast, barely even a bubble team at this point) and "but, but, but we have no bad losses." That's it. Not much of a resume. Other bubble teams are going to be picking up quality wins in the next couple weeks. GU doesn't really have an opportunity to beat anyone noteworthy now, they already missed their chances. It's quite possible GU will end the season with not 1 win against a team that makes it to the Tourney. Maybe UConn will make it, or maybe someone like Montana or Mt. St. Mary's will get an autobid out of a 1 bid league. There's just not much to hang their hat on.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 01:23 PM
I cannot fathom how some GU fans aren't nervous. They had a thin margin before the St. Mary's loss. That didn't help. Beating USD won't help, the Toreros are a near 300 RPI team. Beating BYU on the road would certainly be good, but it's not like BYU is a high RPI team and wouldn't necessarily count on the ledger as a good win. Right now the Zags are hanging their hat on beating UConn (bubble team, borderline top 50 RPI win) and UW (fading fast, barely even a bubble team at this point) and "but, but, but we have no bad losses." That's it. Not much of a resume. Other bubble teams are going to be picking up quality wins in the next couple weeks. GU doesn't really have an opportunity to beat anyone noteworthy now, they already missed their chances. It's quite possible GU will end the season with not 1 win against a team that makes it to the Tourney. Maybe UConn will make it, or maybe someone like Montana or Mt. St. Mary's will get an autobid out of a 1 bid league. There's just not much to hang their hat on.

It's actually not what is being said in totality. Look at BPI, Sagarin, and KenPom. Where are we? Bad losses is an important category because we don't have many quality wins AND with an absence of those that actually really does bolster our case given the context created by the other variables used as criteria.

I would hope you could accept my challenge of finding a a 24-win team ranked in the Top 30 of all 3 major aggregates, with no bad losses and at least one quality win. I really don't think you are going to find it since the criteria began changing. That's why some of us are not super worried.

GoZags
02-22-2016, 01:32 PM
It's actually not what is being said in totality. Look at BPI, Sagarin, and KenPom. Where are we? Bad losses is an important category because we don't have many quality wins AND with an absence of those that actually really does bolster our case given the context created by the other variables used as criteria.

I would hope you could accept my challenge of finding a a 24-win team ranked in the Top 30 of all 3 major aggregates, with no bad losses and at least one quality win. I really don't think you are going to find it since the criteria began changing. That's why some of us are not super worried.

I think there are some "talkative" boardmembers who clearly don't understand that "RPI" isn't used at all in determining the field. At all. Thus ... it's meaninglesss to point out "Top 50" RPI wins and losses. Coach C ... you do understand that there was a paradigm shift, and the committee uses the aggregate of KenPom, BPI and Sagarin where they once used "RPI".

That being said, the guys sure can't afford to "lay an egg" moving forward ...

seacatfan
02-22-2016, 01:35 PM
Coach, I wouldn't even know where to start looking to find a team to meet your example. Colorado St. from last year is an interesting case, you've probably mentioned it before. They were actually a good indicator that the RPI doesn't count as much as it used to. Maybe the landscape of how the committee selects teams really has changed so much that I have no idea what I'm talking about...but I'm still nervous for GU.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 01:35 PM
I think there are some "talkative" boardmembers who clearly don't understand that "RPI" isn't used at all in determining the field. At all. Thus ... it's meaninglesss to point out "Top 50" RPI wins and losses. Coach C ... you do understand that there was a paradigm shift, and the committee uses the aggregate of KenPom, BPI and Sagarin.

That being said, the guys can't afford to "lay an egg" ...

Considering that I have been referencing this in this thread and others, yes. Quality wins and losses still matter as a contributing variable, raw RPI has simply lost its power as a major aggregate.

seacatfan
02-22-2016, 01:37 PM
I think there are some "talkative" boardmembers who clearly don't understand that "RPI" isn't used at all in determining the field. At all. Thus ... it's meaninglesss to point out "Top 50" RPI wins and losses. Coach C ... you do understand that there was a paradigm shift, and the committee uses the aggregate of KenPom, BPI and Sagarin where they once used "RPI".

That being said, the guys sure can't afford to "lay an egg" moving forward ...

Okay. You should contact ESPN and tell them to stop talking about RPI and record vs. RPI top 25, 50 and 100 teams. They clearly don't get it either, because they are still talking about that stuff constantly. It sure seems to matter a lot in public opinion, if not with committee members.

GoZags
02-22-2016, 01:41 PM
Coach, I wouldn't even know where to start looking to find a team to meet your example. Colorado St. from last year is an interesting case, you've probably mentioned it before. They were actually a good indicator that the RPI doesn't count as much as it used to. Maybe the landscape of how the committee selects teams really has changed so much that I have no idea what I'm talking about...but I'm still nervous for GU.

Agree ... I'm nervous about GU as well. Here's an article (which I'd recently PM'd you) which quotes the Chair of the Committee.


The NCAA tournament selection committee sent a message Sunday: RPI is no longer relevant.

Debate has raged on for years about whether the Rating Percentage Index was an archaic metric for the selection committee to use, with critics pleading for KenPom, Sagarin and ESPN's BPI to be the new go-to.

A combination of those now are. Committee chair Scott Barnes, athletic director at Utah State, said Sunday the RPI will help pool which teams deserves to be in consideration together, but it's not a determining factor for who gets in.

http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/mens-basketball/2015/03/15/colorado-state-ncaa-tournament-rpi/24829067/

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 01:43 PM
Coach, I wouldn't even know where to start looking to find a team to meet your example. Colorado St. from last year is an interesting case, you've probably mentioned it before. They were actually a good indicator that the RPI doesn't count as much as it used to. Maybe the landscape of how the committee selects teams really has changed so much that I have no idea what I'm talking about...but I'm still nervous for GU.

Nope. And no worries, sometimes I get frustrated. My apologies if I offended anyone with my approach.

GoZags
02-22-2016, 01:44 PM
Okay. You should contact ESPN and tell them to stop talking about RPI and record vs. RPI top 25, 50 and 100 teams. They clearly don't get it either, because they are still talking about that stuff constantly. It sure seems to matter a lot in public opinion, if not with committee members.

The guys at Dawgman love talking about RPI too. Dickau loves talking about it. I hear it on ESPN just like you ... and don't understand it. Bottom line? Zags need to win the WCC tourney so folks can sleep "Selection Sunday Eve".

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 01:44 PM
Okay. You should contact ESPN and tell them to stop talking about RPI and record vs. RPI top 25, 50 and 100 teams. They clearly don't get it either, because they are still talking about that stuff constantly. It sure seems to matter a lot in public opinion, if not with committee members.

They have to drive ratings and bringing in all of that noise at this phase of metric usage would turn the regular Joe fan off. RPI is still a more convenient package. At some point, however, they will have to stop using it, as it will be more confusing than just talking about BPI, KenPom, and Sagarin. Plus, basing things off of RPI is more controversial. If you pool the Big 3, you get a more clear cut idea, and the storylines/drama aren't as good.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 01:46 PM
The guys at Dawgman love talking about RPI too. Dickau loves talking about it. I hear it on ESPN just like you ... and don't understand it. Bottom line? Zags need to win the WCC tourney so folks can sleep "Selection Sunday Eve".

This was something I almost commented on in the game thread one day. It *is* frustrating to hear supposed experts and analysts be behind the times. And don't get me started on 'The website that never left the 90's" (from a Husky lore perspective). That place is a joke.

vandalzag
02-22-2016, 01:47 PM
Ironically, this post is deserving of vandalzag-type vitriol in response imo. As I posted in another thread, KW was rebounding better than anyone could have predicted, and imo defending adequately (which is imo all we could expect) until the ankle sprain. I suppose you could play through pain better, though. Rebounding down from 7.6 to 4.7, and I bet that bums him out a lot more than it does us.

I will agree on the rebounding to a point. He has had some great rebounding games and some really poor rebounding games. But overall his numbers are good, he is after all the PF on the team so averaging 7 boards a game should be the norm, not a surprise. As far as your pain comment I never said anything like that, those were your words, but I am pretty sure my internet tough guy pain ability to post through pain (carpal tunnel is a b#$ch).
If his ankle was really that bad then the staff should be hiding him in a zone defense as opposed to having him exposed in a man to man. the ankle looked pretty good against Pacific once he started making shots, and that was after he got rolled up on in the first half. All of the kids are banged up this time of year. His defensive effort has been suspect all year. Nobody with any kind basketball IQ would say that at it's best his defensive effort is anything more than mediocre. His defense is usually offset by his scoring, but when he does not it kills this team. His approach to the game is set by his offense. When he struggles on offense he tends to disengage in the rest of the game. As opposed to Sabonis who is max effort on both sides of the court. That is easier to accept if he was the 6th man on the team, but when he is supposed to be "the guy" it takes a toll on the whole team.

As far as the vitriol nonsense your post was way to nice to be classified as on one of my vitriolic posts (I feel mine tend be more sarcastic or sardonic ), besides I think I am turning over a new leaf. I am going to start a fire Few thread and then start a hair cut thread, along with a lot of commentary on how I would have coached the game with the benefit of hindsight.
At the end of the day this is my team, not going anywhere. I do not get worked up when they lose nor do I take it personal when the team fails to live up to it's pre-season hype. The kids and staff are busting the butts to maximize the season. My only complaint is that no matter how well they play it is done in April.

Coach Crazy
02-22-2016, 02:13 PM
Last year, BYU had 23 wins, a KenPom of 35, a BPI of 31, and a Sagarin of 41. When I have some time tonight, I will look at the First Four in and First Four out over the last two or three years. I'll post what I find.

Zags11
02-22-2016, 02:28 PM
I still believe 24 wins gets us a at large bid. I'd rather not worry about it though.

23dpg
02-22-2016, 04:16 PM
I cannot fathom how some GU fans aren't nervous. They had a thin margin before the St. Mary's loss. That didn't help. Beating USD won't help, the Toreros are a near 300 RPI team. Beating BYU on the road would certainly be good, but it's not like BYU is a high RPI team and wouldn't necessarily count on the ledger as a good win. Right now the Zags are hanging their hat on beating UConn (bubble team, borderline top 50 RPI win) and UW (fading fast, barely even a bubble team at this point) and "but, but, but we have no bad losses." That's it. Not much of a resume. Other bubble teams are going to be picking up quality wins in the next couple weeks. GU doesn't really have an opportunity to beat anyone noteworthy now, they already missed their chances. It's quite possible GU will end the season with not 1 win against a team that makes it to the Tourney. Maybe UConn will make it, or maybe someone like Montana or Mt. St. Mary's will get an autobid out of a 1 bid league. There's just not much to hang their hat on.

I can't believe that some Zag fans aren't nervous. 1) due to how they've played recently against the good teams and 2) where they sit on the bubble. I think some are whistling through the graveyard.
I do still believe the Zags could make it in as an at-large team. I just think it's unlikely due to both 1 and 2.

Goshzagit
02-22-2016, 04:28 PM
Just win.

GonzagasaurusFlex
02-22-2016, 04:46 PM
I
Ironically, this post is deserving of vandalzag-type vitriol in response imo. As I posted in another thread, KW was rebounding better than anyone could have predicted, and imo defending adequately (which is imo all we could expect) until the ankle sprain. I suppose you could play through pain better, though. Rebounding down from 7.6 to 4.7, and I bet that bums him out a lot more than it does us.

I too think KW's ankle/foot is bothering him and limiting his mobility rather than him just not playing hard enough. I don't understand why he is playing 35+ minutes...really wish Coach Few would sit KW until WCC tourney.

Martin Centre Mad Man
02-22-2016, 05:09 PM
I

I too think KW's ankle/foot is bothering him and limiting his mobility rather than him just not playing hard enough. I don't understand why he is playing 35+ minutes...really wish Coach Few would sit KW until WCC tourney.

Or at least play less than twenty-five minutes against USD.

cbbfanatic
02-23-2016, 07:20 AM
While it's "interesting" to see what various boardmembers "think" ... I like the fact that AFTER the SMC loss the Zags still have an average of 30.67 (in the nation) in the 3 services actually used by the Selection Committee. BPI (Zags are 30) KenPom (Zags are 35) and Sagarin (Zags are 27).

Bottom line is Gonzaga needs to take care of business this week ...

please validate the bolded part above - you and others are so sure of it that there must be a clean source that confirms it. i did a quick (very limited) search and came to an ncaa site that didnt actually call out any indices by name, but said the committee can use basically whatever it sees fit (on the individual level). ncaa official site worked for me, but perhaps you guys have better --- i'm not trying to be snarky here, i just really dont know. i was always under the impression that they weren't married to any index, or stricken from using any index

further, outside of the overall rank, do these other indices tell a different story re: gonzaga's ability to beat quality opponents? as far as i can tell, the reason gonzaga does so much better in the kenpom/sagarin type ratings is that they do a good job of beating up on terrible teams. am i wrong? should that be a measure that is used? the ability to beat bad teams by 20+? for the sake of the game, i think not, and i hope the committee agrees, even if it doesnt benefit gonzaga in this case

when it comes down to it, if GU was having a good year, and this year's (gonzaga) resume was attached to a team like St Marys, UW, UCLA, or anyone else you guys see yourselves somehow connected to, i believe the overwhelming majority here would scoff at the resume, saying there is no way they DESERVE to be in the dance. i know a lot here are desperate to make a case, but it feels so selective and shamelessly blind to certain realities

gonzagafan62
02-23-2016, 07:56 AM
I cannot fathom how some GU fans aren't nervous. They had a thin margin before the St. Mary's loss. That didn't help. Beating USD won't help, the Toreros are a near 300 RPI team. Beating BYU on the road would certainly be good, but it's not like BYU is a high RPI team and wouldn't necessarily count on the ledger as a good win. Right now the Zags are hanging their hat on beating UConn (bubble team, borderline top 50 RPI win) and UW (fading fast, barely even a bubble team at this point) and "but, but, but we have no bad losses." That's it. Not much of a resume. Other bubble teams are going to be picking up quality wins in the next couple weeks. GU doesn't really have an opportunity to beat anyone noteworthy now, they already missed their chances. It's quite possible GU will end the season with not 1 win against a team that makes it to the Tourney. Maybe UConn will make it, or maybe someone like Montana or Mt. St. Mary's will get an autobid out of a 1 bid league. There's just not much to hang their hat on.

I'm more than nervous. I'm preparing for NIT and hopin for NCAAs. We haven't beaten one top team in our own league so depressing

GoZags
02-23-2016, 08:36 AM
]please validate the bolded part above - you and others are so sure of it that there must be a clean source that confirms it.[/B] i did a quick (very limited) search and came to an ncaa site that didnt actually call out any indices by name, but said the committee can use basically whatever it sees fit (on the individual level). ncaa official site worked for me, but perhaps you guys have better --- i'm not trying to be snarky here, i just really dont know. i was always under the impression that they weren't married to any index, or stricken from using any index

further, outside of the overall rank, do these other indices tell a different story re: gonzaga's ability to beat quality opponents? as far as i can tell, the reason gonzaga does so much better in the kenpom/sagarin type ratings is that they do a good job of beating up on terrible teams. am i wrong? should that be a measure that is used? the ability to beat bad teams by 20+? for the sake of the game, i think not, and i hope the committee agrees, even if it doesnt benefit gonzaga in this case

when it comes down to it, if GU was having a good year, and this year's (gonzaga) resume was attached to a team like St Marys, UW, UCLA, or anyone else you guys see yourselves somehow connected to, i believe the overwhelming majority here would scoff at the resume, saying there is no way they DESERVE to be in the dance. i know a lot here are desperate to make a case, but it feels so selective and shamelessly blind to certain realities

Here's a link to post 35 of this thread ... where there is a link to comments by the Chair of the Selection Committee that confirms it. You're right ... it isn't easy to find with a simple "google" search ... but in this case, it's the Chair of the Committee saying it.

http://guboards.spokesmanreview.com/showthread.php?56237-LUNARDI-2-22&p=1178601#post1178601

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 08:37 AM
please validate the bolded part above - you and others are so sure of it that there must be a clean source that confirms it. i did a quick (very limited) search and came to an ncaa site that didnt actually call out any indices by name, but said the committee can use basically whatever it sees fit (on the individual level). ncaa official site worked for me, but perhaps you guys have better --- i'm not trying to be snarky here, i just really dont know. i was always under the impression that they weren't married to any index, or stricken from using any index

further, outside of the overall rank, do these other indices tell a different story re: gonzaga's ability to beat quality opponents? as far as i can tell, the reason gonzaga does so much better in the kenpom/sagarin type ratings is that they do a good job of beating up on terrible teams. am i wrong? should that be a measure that is used? the ability to beat bad teams by 20+? for the sake of the game, i think not, and i hope the committee agrees, even if it doesnt benefit gonzaga in this case

when it comes down to it, if GU was having a good year, and this year's (gonzaga) resume was attached to a team like St Marys, UW, UCLA, or anyone else you guys see yourselves somehow connected to, i believe the overwhelming majority here would scoff at the resume, saying there is no way they DESERVE to be in the dance. i know a lot here are desperate to make a case, but it feels so selective and shamelessly blind to certain realities

Quotes have been posted as to what the committee is currently relying upon in order get the best selection process deemed necessary. Per your second paragraph, these aggregates measure total performance. St. Marys was a perfect example of a team that was ranked high early on because of beating up on bad teams in favorable situations. When they played better opponents, they struggled and dropped. But certainly not Gonzaga. You can still have a very positive result (relatively speaking) with KenPom, for instance, in a loss...because it also measures the production in those losses and and things like the strength of schedule of your opponents, and so on.

Beating terrible teams only helps you if you have a strong OOC. Otherwise it's like walking a tight rope.

cbbfanatic
02-23-2016, 09:32 AM
Quotes have been posted as to what the committee is currently relying upon in order get the best selection process deemed necessary. Per your second paragraph, these aggregates measure total performance. St. Marys was a perfect example of a team that was ranked high early on because of beating up on bad teams in favorable situations. When they played better opponents, they struggled and dropped. But certainly not Gonzaga. You can still have a very positive result (relatively speaking) with KenPom, for instance, in a loss...because it also measures the production in those losses and and things like the strength of schedule of your opponents, and so on.

Beating terrible teams only helps you if you have a strong OOC. Otherwise it's like walking a tight rope.

that quote is in the context of a very specific case of colorado state last year (who had a high rpi and were left out)... i dont think it means they dont use the rpi at all and use the other indices. to me, it says that they looked at CSU, decided the RPI ranking was more or less "gamed" and used other pieces of data to assess them instead. doesnt read as they dont use it at all anymore in assessing anyone, and instead lean towards other metrics. to me, it says they look at everything, and decide what is most telling on a case by case basis (the way it should be)

it's also just one guy's view, chairman or not, and doesnt mean everyone on the committee votes that way. to use that slanted article from a team last year that feels snubbed just goes to the "selective" comment i made above. maybe there's a spokesman review article in a few weeks that says the committee doesnt use kenpom anymore because GU had a strong kenpom rating and got left out... who knows. what i know is that official guidelines say its all in play and voters can apply the insights how they see fit

do kenpom, bpi, sagarin, etc weight non-conference results differently than in-conference? i'm asking because of your "Beating terrible teams only helps you if you have a strong OOC" comment. my hope is that they don't, but i dont know. to me, it doesnt matter if your opponent is dictated by conference or chosen, but some would disagree. i only care WHO you play (and partially when you play them), not WHY you play them. also, did gonzaga really have a strong OOC? i see a win vs UW (not ncaa caliber) and Uconn on neutral floors, and losses at home to zona and ucla, and @ smu. to me, that isnt exactly strong. not overly weak either. probably means a 4/5 seed if they were clean in conference (the merits of that are another debate entirely)

again, this argument just feels too selective to give me much comfort in its merits. it seems like the hat is being hung on blowing out bad teams, and losing close games to decent to good teams, without a top tier team on the docket... is that really something to be rewarded? i still think that if any level of GU rival had this resume, this board would laugh at their prospects, and deride the committee if they were included.

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 10:22 AM
There are more quotes than just from that article. And again, that criteria is across the board. Regardless of how one member may feel, there must be some level of majority or consensus. This ensures that criteria is not all over the board. RPI means less and less. I am confused by your insistence if you are asking the questions you are? Do you have quotes and proof that RPI is used with greater weight than the aforementioned Big 3?


KenPom uses Adjusted Offensive Efficiency, Adjusted Defensive Efficiency, Adjusted Tempo, and then has a Strength of Schedule Metric and a Non-conference SOS rating. So, yes, strength of schedule very much matters. And when you don't schedule strong, you need a lot of wins and very inflated stats to compensate. But teams traditionally have some bad losses during a season, and lose to better competition.

So for a team like HamSammich U, when those things do happen, they have a pretty significant drop. Gonzaga, even in a down year, from a scheduling perspective, was still nearly 3 full points higher on the Sports Reference SOS rating system. With KenPom, the non-conference rating for St Marys was #328 at .3424, whereas Gonzaga had a #38 schedule at .6438. Major difference. As well, their offense came back down to earth, and isn't much better than Gonzaga's. While having the SOS that they do. They may have beaten Gonzaga twice this season...but that doesn't make them a better team. That is an old way of thinking.

cbbfanatic
02-23-2016, 11:24 AM
There are more quotes than just from that article. And again, that criteria is across the board. Regardless of how one member may feel, there must be some level of majority or consensus. This ensures that criteria is not all over the board. RPI means less and less. I am confused by your insistence if you are asking the questions you are? Do you have quotes and proof that RPI is used with greater weight than the aforementioned Big 3?


KenPom uses Adjusted Offensive Efficiency, Adjusted Defensive Efficiency, Adjusted Tempo, and then has a Strength of Schedule Metric and a Non-conference SOS rating. So, yes, strength of schedule very much matters. And when you don't schedule strong, you need a lot of wins and very inflated stats to compensate. But teams traditionally have some bad losses during a season, and lose to better competition.

So for a team like HamSammich U, when those things do happen, they have a pretty significant drop. Gonzaga, even in a down year, from a scheduling perspective, was still nearly 3 full points higher on the Sports Reference SOS rating system. With KenPom, the non-conference rating for St Marys was #328 at .3424, whereas Gonzaga had a #38 schedule at .6438. Major difference. As well, their offense came back down to earth, and isn't much better than Gonzaga's. While having the SOS that they do. They may have beaten Gonzaga twice this season...but that doesn't make them a better team. That is an old way of thinking.

all i am referencing is a guide of how the selection committee operates, straight from the NCAA, directed at the consumer. it doesnt call out any statistical index individually, and says voters can apply whatever inputs they feel best represent a given teams achievement. everything else feels very anecdotal and selective to me. you clearly disagree, and believe you know exactly how they evaluate teams. i dont pretend to know that much, just rehashing the only source i consider to be in the ballpark of "definitive"

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 01:24 PM
all i am referencing is a guide of how the selection committee operates, straight from the NCAA, directed at the consumer. it doesnt call out any statistical index individually, and says voters can apply whatever inputs they feel best represent a given teams achievement. everything else feels very anecdotal and selective to me. you clearly disagree, and believe you know exactly how they evaluate teams. i dont pretend to know that much, just rehashing the only source i consider to be in the ballpark of "definitive"

The source you are talking about only the assigns the ability for fluidity and adaptation. But again, as I said, there are rules for certain voting that requires some unanimity. When a committee spokesperson is referencing the selection process, he is not using one set of criteria for one team, and them another set for another. RPI is no longer used a primary indicator, the way it used to be. It is archaic, and others have come around to this understanding. If you look at GU's KenPom, Win total, BPI, and Sagarin, they are very squarely in the safe zone.

The following are teams from last year's play in games that were at large bids:

Dayton
27 wins
BPI #29
Sag. #42
KenPom #37

Ole Miss
21 wins
BPI #40
Sag. #54
KenPom #50

Boise State
25 wins
BPI #53
Sag. #51
KenPom #42

BYU
25 wins
BPI #31
Sag. ##41
KenPom #35

Gonzaga's profile is better grouped. In fact, teams in Gonzaga's current shoes, last year, are BYU (KP) which had an 11 seed, Georgia (BPI) which had an 10 seed, and NC State (Sagarin) which had an 8 seed.

john montana
02-23-2016, 01:39 PM
They may have beaten Gonzaga twice this season...but that doesn't make them a better team. That is an old way of thinking.

I get stats coach, and think Bennett's schedule is horrendous and is terribly unfair to his players...

but in my book, when you beat a team twice, you are the better team.

Zagdawg
02-23-2016, 01:53 PM
The question in my book is ......can they beat us 3 times? That is the important number.

;)

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 02:02 PM
I get stats coach, and think Bennett's schedule is horrendous and is terribly unfair to his players...

but in my book, when you beat a team twice, you are the better team.

Even if college basketball were only between SMC and Gonzaga we still wouldn't have enough information to make that distinction. What if a team's only two wins are against Gonzaga? They are the better team? No. We need to be more critical of the criteria we use.

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 02:04 PM
The question in my book is ......can they beat us 3 times? That is the important number.

;)

If we meet them in the Finale and we are still relatively close to our Big 3 aggregate rankings and grouping, then it really doesn't matter. We'll most likely be a play in game contestant, but we'll be in.

Zagdawg
02-23-2016, 02:15 PM
As we are aware-- anything can happen in the conference tourneys-- a couple of teams that are not supposed to win inevitably do and a couple teams get bumped out.

I don't want our guys to be put in that situation.

Just win the tourney and go dancing.

cbbfanatic
02-23-2016, 02:36 PM
But again, as I said, there are rules for certain voting that requires some unanimity.

can you please share these rules... dont think i've seen them yet. You're also kind of starting to backtrack off of your earlier comment to the tune that the rpi is totally worthless... now its just not the major piece of guidance it was in the past (which i dont think anyone would disagree with)

again, all i am referencing is the ncaa, and their guidelines for tournament selection.

in the end, it doesnt matter what metric you like, its worrying that gonzaga has done very little against the relative beef of their schedule, except not get blown out. when you're talking more about your losses than your wins, you should be worried.

and the win count is nice and certainly meets the minimum hurdle, but there just isnt any meat to it. very hollow, from most objective angles.

need to win in vegas

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 03:09 PM
can you please share these rules... dont think i've seen them yet. You're also kind of starting to backtrack off of your earlier comment to the tune that the rpi is totally worthless... now its just not the major piece of guidance it was in the past (which i dont think anyone would disagree with)

again, all i am referencing is the ncaa, and their guidelines for tournament selection.



I said RPI is archaic and not a primary indicator, worthless doesn't necessarily contradict that. You play a lot of semantics. The following is part of the voting process:

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2016-02-18/march-madness-bracket-how-68-teams-are-selected-division-i


in the end, it doesnt matter what metric you like, its worrying that gonzaga has done very little against the relative beef of their schedule, except not get blown out. when you're talking more about your losses than your wins, you should be worried.

Incorrect. It does matter what metric you like, and they disprove your statement. They haven't done very little. You can't place value in the quality or lack thereof of a win and then disallow the quality of play as defined by the statistics that comprise that quality win or lack thereof. Being worried based on your reasoning is about the same as a child being scared of their closet at night because the boogeyman might get them.


and the win count is nice and certainly meets the minimum hurdle, but there just isnt any meat to it. very hollow, from most objective angles.

You're actually not displaying objectivity or looking at many of the angles that are substantiated metrics. Considering the strength of their schedule, their record is not hollow. That would be SMC.

Also, still really confused as to how you can justify your position if you don't have even a rudimentary understandign of the metrics in question? To me, comprehension should precede any sort of critique. I'm all for input, but you seem to overstepping a bit here.

CdAZagFan
02-23-2016, 03:56 PM
Watching Alabama/Kentucky and Lunardi is on at halftime and was asked about the Zags. He said if they lose at BYU then they will have to win the WCC tourney. Makes it sound like if they win at BYU they may have a shot at an at-large bid...

Coach Crazy
02-23-2016, 04:00 PM
Watching Alabama/Kentucky and Lunardi is on at halftime and was asked about the Zags. He said if they lose at BYU then they will have to win the WCC tourney. Makes it sound like if they win at BYU they may have a shot at an at-large bid...

It really depends on where that lands them, but this would not be outside the realm of possibility. It really depends on how much of the depth of the KenPom/BPI/Sag rankings are protected. Gonzaga has a nice grouping, at the moment. Last 10 or last 7 is also going to be something that gets looked at.

gonzagafan62
02-23-2016, 04:06 PM
It really depends on where that lands them, but this would not be outside the realm of possibility. It really depends on how much of the depth of the KenPom/BPI/Sag rankings are protected. Gonzaga has a nice grouping, at the moment. Last 10 or last 7 is also going to be something that gets looked at.

They cannot look at last ten anymore. That's been taken out of the criteria a few years ago

cbbfanatic
02-24-2016, 07:15 AM
I said RPI is archaic and not a primary indicator, worthless doesn't necessarily contradict that. You play a lot of semantics. The following is part of the voting process:

http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2016-02-18/march-madness-bracket-how-68-teams-are-selected-division-i



Incorrect. It does matter what metric you like, and they disprove your statement. They haven't done very little. You can't place value in the quality or lack thereof of a win and then disallow the quality of play as defined by the statistics that comprise that quality win or lack thereof. Being worried based on your reasoning is about the same as a child being scared of their closet at night because the boogeyman might get them.



You're actually not displaying objectivity or looking at many of the angles that are substantiated metrics. Considering the strength of their schedule, their record is not hollow. That would be SMC.

Also, still really confused as to how you can justify your position if you don't have even a rudimentary understandign of the metrics in question? To me, comprehension should precede any sort of critique. I'm all for input, but you seem to overstepping a bit here.

still waiting on those "rules" you mentioned. i'd love to see them.

outside of that, we're not making any progress here...

Zags11
02-24-2016, 07:47 AM
I get stats coach, and think Bennett's schedule is horrendous and is terribly unfair to his players...

but in my book, when you beat a team twice, you are the better team.

I disagree here in a sense. Its all about matchups. Yes, aot of the time what you said rings true but times matchups are better then records. Its like a fighter who beats up a "better" fighter multiple times but overall the losing fighter was better.

Zags11
02-24-2016, 07:47 AM
They cannot look at last ten anymore. That's been taken out of the criteria a few years ago

Has it? Nice to know.

Coach Crazy
02-24-2016, 08:26 AM
They cannot look at last ten anymore. That's been taken out of the criteria a few years ago

I was under the impression this was part of the commentary for BYU last year.

gonzagafan62
02-24-2016, 08:43 AM
Nah I remember distinctly that they do not allow that to be part of the criteria anymore. I cannot find a link to it, but I do remember them saying this. Somewhere in the 2011-13 range they eliminated it.

Coach Crazy
02-24-2016, 08:44 AM
Nah I remember distinctly that they do not allow that to be part of the criteria anymore. I cannot find a link to it, but I do remember them saying this. Somewhere in the 2011-13 range they eliminated it.

Interesting. Well, I'll take your word on it for now. No need to find a link. I just want people in this discussion that aren't petulant and ignorant.

Zagceo
02-24-2016, 08:52 AM
They cannot look at last ten anymore. That's been taken out of the criteria a few years ago

the smoke filled room in the very back might have a finger on one side of the scale remembering these numbers. Basketball is a numbers game. ;-]


-Gonzaga game on CBS drew the best overnight rating in 10 years for a Sunday NCAA Tournament regional final.The network announced Monday the 9.9 overnight rating.
The Elite Eight doubleheader, including the Louisville-Michigan State game, averaged an 8.6 overnight rating/18 share, a 10 percent increase from last year.
Through the Elite Eight, the NCAA Tournament is averaging 7.2/15 across TBS, CBS, TNT and truTV. That's an 11 percent boost through the same period last year.

gonzagafan62
02-24-2016, 08:52 AM
Interesting. Well, I'll take your word on it for now. No need to find a link. I just want people in this discussion that aren't petulant and ignorant.

Lol nah. If I say something incorrect I'd like to be corrected and I'm sure you would as well for information purposes. I understand lol. I wouldn't give bad info on purpose an usually post off memory. So it can be cloudy but I'm relatively sure that this info is correct

Coach Crazy
02-24-2016, 10:20 AM
Lol nah. If I say something incorrect I'd like to be corrected and I'm sure you would as well for information purposes. I understand lol. I wouldn't give bad info on purpose an usually post off memory. So it can be cloudy but I'm relatively sure that this info is correct

As much as I hate being wrong, I need to take the medicine when necessary. I am talking about when people don't know what they are talking about, but continue on in the discussion with dogmatic, circular reasoning. It bothers me. It shouldn't, but it does.

gonzagafan62
02-24-2016, 12:04 PM
As much as I hate being wrong, I need to take the medicine when necessary. I am talking about when people don't know what they are talking about, but continue on in the discussion with dogmatic, circular reasoning. It bothers me. It shouldn't, but it does.

Lol definitely understand your positioning. :) no worries here coach.

seacatfan
02-24-2016, 12:13 PM
Hey 62 I have the same recollection as far as the "last 10 games" being taken out of consideration as a criteria recently.

MDABE80
02-24-2016, 12:20 PM
Gonzaga means more. Politics, money, name, Few.........just does. Even a decent record should get us in. We're (surprisingly) better off than many teams I thought would be a lock. Standing back though......... with this program's track record over the years, I think we likely have a better chance than most even in this down year. . We're not a 10 or 12 loss disaster........We'll see, of course after the WCC tournament , but I think we'll be invited. Most everybody likes Few. Politics do matter. All thing even though, if GU is an 8 loss team and someone else is too, the nod likely goes to GU.

77Zag
02-24-2016, 12:45 PM
I also have to believe that the NCAA and CBS would want to see Wiltjer and Sabonis in the field. Benjamins rule the day.

Go Zags - Beat SDU!

gonzagafan62
02-24-2016, 01:14 PM
Hey 62 I have the same recollection as far as the "last 10 games" being taken out of consideration as a criteria recently.

Yeah I remember it being taken away a few years ago. A sliding team Iowa) in 14 was like 2-8 (or something awful) in their last ten and for some reason I remember everyone sayin "you can't base it off last ten anymore)

Therefore giving an even bigger advantage to major schools that are mediocre. Of corse iowa Made tourney as a 11 seed play in and got beat by Tennessee who went on to S16 I believe after they beat Mercer who beat Duke.

roundup
02-24-2016, 07:46 PM
There are more quotes than just from that article. And again, that criteria is across the board. Regardless of how one member may feel, there must be some level of majority or consensus. This ensures that criteria is not all over the board. RPI means less and less. I am confused by your insistence if you are asking the questions you are? Do you have quotes and proof that RPI is used with greater weight than the aforementioned Big 3?


KenPom uses Adjusted Offensive Efficiency, Adjusted Defensive Efficiency, Adjusted Tempo, and then has a Strength of Schedule Metric and a Non-conference SOS rating. So, yes, strength of schedule very much matters. And when you don't schedule strong, you need a lot of wins and very inflated stats to compensate. But teams traditionally have some bad losses during a season, and lose to better competition.

So for a team like HamSammich U, when those things do happen, they have a pretty significant drop. Gonzaga, even in a down year, from a scheduling perspective, was still nearly 3 full points higher on the Sports Reference SOS rating system. With KenPom, the non-conference rating for St Marys was #328 at .3424, whereas Gonzaga had a #38 schedule at .6438. Major difference. As well, their offense came back down to earth, and isn't much better than Gonzaga's. While having the SOS that they do. They may have beaten Gonzaga twice this season...but that doesn't make them a better team. That is an old way of thinking.

Lol Coach Crazy is the king of manipulating advanced stats to fit his preconceived notions about Gonzaga. Nice touch with Ham Sandwhich U. Really highlights your objectivity in this purely statistical analysis.

At this point, why even watch the games. Just keep plugging in stats until you convince yourself Gonzaga has won the NCAA championship. What actually happens on the court is clearly a mere side note. If any one questions you, proceed to berate them with said statistics and be sure to throw in a few humble brags about sitting in John Wooden's office back in your coaching days. Applying your metrics, I'm sure all of your teams were really undefeated.

I'm going to stick with the results on the court.

Zagceo
02-24-2016, 09:22 PM
Lol Coach Crazy is the king of manipulating advanced stats to fit his preconceived notions about Gonzaga. Nice touch with Ham Sandwhich U. Really highlights your objectivity in this purely statistical analysis.

At this point, why even watch the games. Just keep plugging in stats until you convince yourself Gonzaga has won the NCAA championship. What actually happens on the court is clearly a mere side note. If any one questions you, proceed to berate them with said statistics and be sure to throw in a few humble brags about sitting in John Wooden's office back in your coaching days. Applying your metrics, I'm sure all of your teams were really undefeated.

I'm going to stick with the results on the court.

And you are rooting for or against Zags making deep tourney run?

roundup
02-24-2016, 09:37 PM
Deep run, if they get in. I usually root for the Zags if they are not playing SMC. Good for the conference.

GonzagasaurusFlex
02-24-2016, 11:04 PM
....... ,They may have beaten Gonzaga twice this season...but that doesn't make them a better team. That is an old way of thinking.

I'm with roundup on this. That is just crazy talk. Losing sight of the forest due to the statistics trees. Why even watch the games if you believe stats alone determine the "better team"

ZagaZags
02-24-2016, 11:29 PM
If Gonzaga can win the last two regular season games, we can hang our hopes on USF beating Saint Mary's in San Francisco, for GU to win the WCC title & #1 seed. The odds of this happening is probably very low. Saint Mary's has choked in the past...

http://kararuns.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/so-youre-telling-me-theres-a-chance-gif.gif?w=551

jkwhsu
02-25-2016, 03:50 AM
Lunardi is wrong. We have 4 home losses, no signature wins and no wins against the RPI top 25, 1-3 against the top 50 and a dismal 2-7 against the top 100. There are so many teams with good wins and we have none. We are not getting in as an At-large bid this year.

We must win the WCC tournament & get the automatic bid. I'm confident that we can do it. I can't see us losing to SMC 3 times this year.

jkwhsu
02-25-2016, 03:55 AM
By the way, you don't want SMC or BYU to lose any more games this year except against us. Bad losses by them makes our resume worst in the eyes of the selection committee. We just need to take care of business & win the WCC tournament.

Coach Crazy
02-25-2016, 08:51 AM
Lunardi is wrong. We have 4 home losses, no signature wins and no wins against the RPI top 25, 1-3 against the top 50 and a dismal 2-7 against the top 100. There are so many teams with good wins and we have none. We are not getting in as an At-large bid this year.

We must win the WCC tournament & get the automatic bid. I'm confident that we can do it. I can't see us losing to SMC 3 times this year.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/mens-basketball-selections-101-selections

We have a quality win, no bad losses, just outside of the Top 30 for KenPom, sub-30 (Top 30) for BPI and Sagarin, and are going to be in the 23+ win range. Our home record as a stand alone means bupkis. It is integrated into other variables that are an aggregate, thus lessening the weight of that raw statistic.

Can I make a request that everyone please review the criteria from all the links that have been provided, and throw out your opinions that do not reconcile with said criteria? It doesn't help progress the discussion.

Coach Crazy
02-25-2016, 09:00 AM
I'm with roundup on this. That is just crazy talk. Losing sight of the forest due to the statistics trees. Why even watch the games if you believe stats alone determine the "better team"

I'm not saying that. I am saying that all the games that have been played are just as important as the head-to-head matchups. I am using statistics that explain the other games we have watched being played. You guys have to stop treating my reference of stats the way you do, when you're using stats from the games against St. Mary's. It's contradictory. I'm not losing sight of the forest, I am focusing on more than just one tree. As I asked before, what if St. Mary's only two wins (the whole season) were against Gonzaga? That makes St. Mary's the better team? No. So, the head-to-head has to have limited to weight, and a certain context to which it is effective.

We need to continue expanding our expertise and though processes as fans.

Mr Vulture
02-25-2016, 10:43 AM
BPI and KenPom are more important to the committee than RPI, which isn't used until seeding. I think that if we win our last two games this weekend and make the conference championship game, we will be in. The thing about this year is that it is a very mediocre bubble so no bad losses and good numbers will help make the difference. Of course, the preferred method is to win the conference tournament.


Lunardi is wrong. We have 4 home losses, no signature wins and no wins against the RPI top 25, 1-3 against the top 50 and a dismal 2-7 against the top 100. There are so many teams with good wins and we have none. We are not getting in as an At-large bid this year.

We must win the WCC tournament & get the automatic bid. I'm confident that we can do it. I can't see us losing to SMC 3 times this year.

Coach Crazy
02-25-2016, 10:48 AM
BPI and KenPom are more important to the committee than RPI, which isn't used until seeding. I think that if we win our last two games this weekend and make the conference championship game, we will be in. The thing about this year is that it is a very mediocre bubble so no bad losses and good numbers will help make the difference. Of course, the preferred method is to win the conference tournament.

Thanks, bro. Support for the sane side is appreciated, man.

gonstu
02-25-2016, 10:48 AM
FWIW:

New Lunardi (2/25): Zags first out.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Bracket Matrix also has zags out (second out):

http://bracketmatrix.com/

BULLDOG#1
02-25-2016, 11:00 AM
I can't see us losing to SMC 3 times this year.

I can. If SMC follows their game plan and doubles down on Sabonis if Wiltjer goes cold.

Or if their shooters go nuts.

B Wayne
02-25-2016, 11:30 AM
FWIW:

New Lunardi (2/25): Zags first out.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology



Bracket Matrix also has zags out (second out):

http://bracketmatrix.com/
A WSU friend of mine sent that to me and made quite the pithy statement. He said if you're a high school senior or younger, you've never seen that!

DixieZag
02-25-2016, 04:57 PM
I guess we may as well win tonight and Saturday.

It's going to take 3 special games in a row.

I'd also not mind seeing SMC lose a game this wknd and possibly passing them again.

Zags11
02-25-2016, 05:23 PM
FWIW:

New Lunardi (2/25): Zags first out.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Bracket Matrix also has zags out (second out):

http://bracketmatrix.com/

Yea but with 2 wins this week we will be back in!

gonstu
02-25-2016, 10:26 PM
Yea but with 2 wins this week we will be back in!

Does a BYU win really carry that much weight though?

It will be very tough but I will say zags are due to win a big game. Still, I would trade a win in Provo for a win in Vegas and another shot at the Gaels.

ZagaZags
02-25-2016, 10:30 PM
Does a BYU win really carry that much weight though?

It will be very tough but I will say zags are due to win a big game. Still, I would trade a win in Provo for a win in Vegas and another shot at the Gaels.

Nice meeting you tonight, Stu. I went back to your section at the half but didn't see you.
soccerdud & CEO were in your section tonight. Nice seeing them too.

cggonzaga
02-25-2016, 10:59 PM
If Gonzaga can win the last two regular season games, we can hang our hopes on USF beating Saint Mary's in San Francisco, for GU to win the WCC title & #1 seed. The odds of this happening is probably very low. Saint Mary's has choked in the past...

http://kararuns.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/so-youre-telling-me-theres-a-chance-gif.gif?w=551

Don't we share the league title if we both win out? I know they get the number 1 seed though.

Zags11
02-25-2016, 11:08 PM
Does a BYU win really carry that much weight though?

It will be very tough but I will say zags are due to win a big game. Still, I would trade a win in Provo for a win in Vegas and another shot at the Gaels.

I think it would. If we have 23 wins, and win two in wcc tournament then we have 25 wins. Win or lose title game we will be in IMHO

DixieZag
02-26-2016, 02:09 AM
I think it would. If we have 23 wins, and win two in wcc tournament then we have 25 wins. Win or lose title game we will be in IMHO

In that scenario, it will depend heavily upon how many upsets occur in conference tournaments. A bunch of upsets = no chance.

Coach Crazy
02-26-2016, 07:17 AM
In that scenario, it will depend heavily upon how many upsets occur in conference tournaments. A bunch of upsets = no chance.

This is one of the questions I have. And I just need to sit down and figure out how to determine the needed saturation based on our current positioning. With out "Big 3" rankings and how closely grouped they are, I have to think it would take an abnormal amount of upsets to take out spot away.

TheGonzagaFactor
02-26-2016, 07:43 AM
Don't we share the league title if we both win out? I know they get the number 1 seed though.

Yes, it would be a shared title.

gonzagafan62
02-26-2016, 08:30 AM
Don't we share the league title if we both win out? I know they get the number 1 seed though.

We win Saturday and we have league title with SMC

gonstu
02-26-2016, 09:05 AM
We win Saturday and we have league title with SMC

And SMC plays after us. A "W" at BYU would really put the pressure on. I'm sure Randy won't let his players anywhere near our score/results prior to their game though right?

gonstu
02-26-2016, 09:33 AM
Nice meeting you tonight, Stu. I went back to your section at the half but didn't see you.
soccerdud & CEO were in your section tonight. Nice seeing them too.

Moved 1 section over to sit w/ other family. More available seating than I thought there would be. But it was a week night and USD has had a pretty bad year. thanks for the signs - we got player autographs, every player in the regular rotation I think. Good to meet you too.