PDA

View Full Version : The 2018-19 Season “definition of success”



tyra
09-24-2018, 04:38 PM
I ask this question every year. What is your definition of success for the upcoming season? Realistically. Barring injuries. With everything we know now.

katman50
09-24-2018, 05:15 PM
At the minimum, the Elite 8.

DixieZag
09-24-2018, 05:33 PM
At the minimum, the Elite 8.

Yep, and an instant classic type game for the FF if they lose.

bartruff1
09-24-2018, 05:53 PM
Win the conference ….get to the dance....play well....a one and done tourney is a krap shoot as Virginia proved once again last year...

Zagdawg
09-24-2018, 06:19 PM
Agree with Bart.

cggonzaga
09-24-2018, 06:39 PM
Final Four. Tournament is not a crapshoot. Generally the best teams win. This team control its own destiny.

TexasZagFan
09-24-2018, 07:39 PM
Those who focus on the destination have difficulty enjoying the journey. I'm looking forward to a heckuva ride, with the opportunity to add to my photobucket!

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/IMG_1794_zpswcd1mgen.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/IMG_1794_zpswcd1mgen.jpg.html)

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/IMG_1716_zps63khe5np.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/IMG_1716_zps63khe5np.jpg.html)

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/E2C6CB56-9066-4CBF-A0C2-5D9FC21892F5_zpshonbkdci.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/E2C6CB56-9066-4CBF-A0C2-5D9FC21892F5_zpshonbkdci.jpg.html)

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/8CD21E59-B222-4E2B-B988-045AE450FB3E_zpshxlxr2ao.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/8CD21E59-B222-4E2B-B988-045AE450FB3E_zpshxlxr2ao.jpg.html)

thespywhozaggedme
09-24-2018, 07:44 PM
Final Four. With the talent on this team, barring an injury and Geno not joining the team, anything less would be disappointing.

thespywhozaggedme
09-24-2018, 07:46 PM
Win the conference ….get to the dance....play well....a one and done tourney is a krap shoot as Virginia proved once again last year...

You didn't make any attempt whatsoever to answer the actual question in the thread title. Unless you think that this team, as currently constructed would be considered having had a successful season by simply making MM.

thespywhozaggedme
09-24-2018, 07:47 PM
Final Four. Tournament is not a crapshoot. Generally the best teams win. This team control its own destiny.

Agree 100%

:agreed:

GoZags
09-24-2018, 07:58 PM
Those who focus on the destination have difficulty enjoying the journey. I'm looking forward to a heckuva ride, with the opportunity to add to my photobucket!

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/IMG_1794_zpswcd1mgen.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/IMG_1794_zpswcd1mgen.jpg.html)

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/IMG_1716_zps63khe5np.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/IMG_1716_zps63khe5np.jpg.html)

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/E2C6CB56-9066-4CBF-A0C2-5D9FC21892F5_zpshonbkdci.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/E2C6CB56-9066-4CBF-A0C2-5D9FC21892F5_zpshonbkdci.jpg.html)

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q417/richkinley/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/8CD21E59-B222-4E2B-B988-045AE450FB3E_zpshxlxr2ao.jpg (http://s350.photobucket.com/user/richkinley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2016-12/8CD21E59-B222-4E2B-B988-045AE450FB3E_zpshxlxr2ao.jpg.html)

I'll add continue to be known as the school/program that does things the right way ... that's my definition of success

Reborn
09-24-2018, 08:19 PM
To have the best record in GU history. Also to be the best 3 pt shooting team that Gonzaga ever had.

Go Zags!!!

Malastein
09-24-2018, 08:59 PM
I believe that this team can compete for a national championship, and it’d be very sweet to see them reach that level of ultimate success. However, I’d be happy if they reached the elite 8. I just hope that the star power of this squad can shine as the games become more intense.

stevet75
09-25-2018, 06:11 AM
I would be, at least, mildly disappointed if the Zags didn't make the final four. Of course I would be mildly disappointed if they lost any game, including the championship.
Final Four is my expectation.

caldwellzag
09-25-2018, 06:17 AM
Elite 8 would be the floor, but mostlikely Final Four or bust year. This is hands down our best shot at the NC.

Markburn1
09-25-2018, 08:14 AM
“Love her, love her, love her! If she favours you, love her. If she wounds you, love her. If she tears your heart to pieces – and as it gets older and stronger, it will tear deeper – love her, love her, love her!”
― Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

If the Zags don't meet your expectations, it doesn't mean they haven't been successful.

23dpg
09-25-2018, 08:20 AM
I'll add continue to be known as the school/program that does things the right way ... that's my definition of success

Honestly this would be my answer too.
If they won the NC but it was later found that they committed violations, it would be a failure in my eyes.
I love love love cheering for a team that has continual success doing it the right way especially when so many other schools simply don’t.

Zaga
09-25-2018, 10:29 AM
To see our walk on players get a whole bunch of minutes this year!

Go Zags! #runthetable

LongIslandZagFan
09-25-2018, 10:41 AM
Injury-free first then with that... E8... anything after that is a crapshoot of matchups.

Norwester
09-25-2018, 11:15 AM
Final Four. Tournament is not a crapshoot.

Some beg to differ:

"Are you kidding me? The tournament is a crapshoot. It shouldn't be everything. It's such a shallow thing to pin everything on." Mark Few

"The NCAA Tournament is a crapshoot. It’s a single-elimination event of 40-minute games. Literally anything can happen in that thing. ..." Gary Parris, CBS

"In a way, Duke has become the symbol, a microcosm, of what the tournament is: a complete crapshoot. You need the right matchups, good health, consistent coaching and plenty of luck." Matt Norlander, CBS Sports

"The NCAA Tournament is a crapshoot. Judge Maryland on its regular season instead." Ryan Conners

"As anyone who even remotely follows college basketball understands, no one knows anything about what will happen in this year’s NCAA tournament. Total crapshoot even for a tournament that’s intended to be a crapshoot." Steven Markley, Chicago Tribune

"The NCAA Tournament is generally a crapshoot that requires an equal amount of luck as it does skill." Chris Schutte, Mid Major Madness

"In an eccentric sport whose teams spend four quiet months straining and grinding to construct merit, whereupon everyone agrees to spend three loud weeks in a 68-team semi-crapshoot to mint legacies, to determine which coaches get plummer jobs and to ascertain who gets the joy, the Associated Press coach of the year award went to Tony Bennett of Virginia here Thursday." Chuck Culpepper and Gene Wang, Washington Post

"The ultimate crapshoot on an annual basis comes in college basketball." justbet.com

"As college basketball ushers in another NCAA Tournament, we are reminded anew how the playoffs are akin to walking a tightrope, playing Russian roulette or participating in a crapshoot." Mark ######nt, NABC.com (National Association of Basketball Coaches)

Still, turning to basketball, determining who might be cutting down the nets at the end of any given season is more of a crapshoot....Gonzaga, a Jesuit school of 7,300 students in Washington state, quit playing football during World War II. Hoops, that’s another story. Gonzaga battled North Carolina to the wire in the 2017 NCAA tournament championship game. And it was no fluke." Mike Strange, Knox News

"...the NCAA Tournament is a total crapshoot." Grey Papke, Larry Brown Sports

"Like it or not, a single elimination crapshoot of a tournament defines college basketball. You can go 34-0, have a bad game, and be done in 40 minutes. You can also barely sneak into the tournament, catch fire behind Kemba Walker, and win a damn national title." Travis Miller, Hammer and Nails, SBA Nation

"Now we're here for the greatest crapshoot in sports. A 68-team brawl that will produce one champion in San Antonio next month." Myron Medcalf, ESPN

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 11:43 AM
Playing in April in Minneapolis

https://s17-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fstmedia.stimg.co%2Fows_1 47344263565009.jpg%3Fh%3D630%26amp;w%3D1200%26amp; fit%3Dcrop%26amp;bg%3D999%26amp;crop%3Dfaces&sp=86d461e0c9d653ee118151b65ead899e

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 11:44 AM
Some beg to differ:

That’s fine. Go back 20 years or even further back and tell me one of the top 3 best teams in any given year didn’t win the NC. 2014 UConn team being the exception. The crapshoot portion is most of the field because at least 64-65 teams aren’t among the best in the country. If a team is truly the best they’ll shine through in March. Just my opinion.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 11:51 AM
What do these Championship match ups have in common?



1982 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Georgetown
1993 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Michigan
1999 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Connecticut beat Duke
2005 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Illinois
2007 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Florida beat Ohio State
2008 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Kansas beat Memphis
2015 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Duke beat Wisconsin
2017 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Gonzaga

LouisianaZag
09-25-2018, 11:52 AM
Yep, and an instant classic type game for the FF if they lose.

Your exactly right. The key of course is staying injury free
.

Norwester
09-25-2018, 12:08 PM
That’s fine. Go back 20 years or even further back and tell me one of the top 3 best teams in any given year didn’t win the NC. 2014 UConn team being the exception. The crapshoot portion is most of the field because at least 64-65 teams aren’t among the best in the country. If a team is truly the best they’ll shine through in March. Just my opinion.

'83: North Carolina State (a 3 seed. There were at least 5 better teams in the tournament including Houston, Virginia and Louisville. Pepperdine had them beaten in the first round game, but gagged a substantial lead and Dane Suttle , an 83% FT shooter, missed two FT's that would have iced the game. NCSU caught lightning in a bottle)
'85: Villanova (an 8 seed. Not even in the top 3 in the big east. But, played a perfect game against a vastly more talented team in the championship game)
'88: Kansas (a 6 seed. Arguably not even a top 20 team).
'97: Arizona (a 4 seed. Kansas, Duke, North Carolina and Kentucky were better teams).
and...both of UConn's recent championships.

The World Series is not a crapshoot. The College World Series is not a crapshoot. The Stanley Cup is not a crapshoot. The NBA championship is not a crapshoot. The World Cup is mostly not a crapshoot. The Super Bowl and the NCAA MBB tournament ARE crapshoots, IMHO.

Zagdawg
09-25-2018, 12:16 PM
One injury to a key player or hot shooting team/player can change the outcome quickly.

bartruff1
09-25-2018, 12:18 PM
That is why they call it March Madness...the chock is usually busted the first day and with hundreds of millions of brackets.....the experts are never right because of the upsets of the better teams....who control their own destiny.....not...

mgadfly
09-25-2018, 12:19 PM
What do these Championship match ups have in common?



1982 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Georgetown
1993 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Michigan
1999 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Connecticut beat Duke
2005 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Illinois
2007 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Florida beat Ohio State
2008 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Kansas beat Memphis
2015 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – Duke beat Wisconsin
2017 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championsh ip_Game) – North Carolina beat Gonzaga


The only times in history that the best teams (defined in this thread as top 3) could have possibly matched up against each other as both teams in the championship game were 1 seeds. The rest of history certainly had one or more teams in the championship not in the top 3.

maynard g krebs
09-25-2018, 12:30 PM
Some beg to differ:

"Are you kidding me? The tournament is a crapshoot. It shouldn't be everything. It's such a shallow thing to pin everything on." Mark Few

"The NCAA Tournament is a crapshoot. It’s a single-elimination event of 40-minute games. Literally anything can happen in that thing. ..." Gary Parris, CBS

"In a way, Duke has become the symbol, a microcosm, of what the tournament is: a complete crapshoot. You need the right matchups, good health, consistent coaching and plenty of luck." Matt Norlander, CBS Sports

"The NCAA Tournament is a crapshoot. Judge Maryland on its regular season instead." Ryan Conners

"As anyone who even remotely follows college basketball understands, no one knows anything about what will happen in this year’s NCAA tournament. Total crapshoot even for a tournament that’s intended to be a crapshoot." Steven Markley, Chicago Tribune

"The NCAA Tournament is generally a crapshoot that requires an equal amount of luck as it does skill." Chris Schutte, Mid Major Madness

"In an eccentric sport whose teams spend four quiet months straining and grinding to construct merit, whereupon everyone agrees to spend three loud weeks in a 68-team semi-crapshoot to mint legacies, to determine which coaches get plummer jobs and to ascertain who gets the joy, the Associated Press coach of the year award went to Tony Bennett of Virginia here Thursday." Chuck Culpepper and Gene Wang, Washington Post

"The ultimate crapshoot on an annual basis comes in college basketball." justbet.com

"As college basketball ushers in another NCAA Tournament, we are reminded anew how the playoffs are akin to walking a tightrope, playing Russian roulette or participating in a crapshoot." Mark ######nt, NABC.com (National Association of Basketball Coaches)

Still, turning to basketball, determining who might be cutting down the nets at the end of any given season is more of a crapshoot....Gonzaga, a Jesuit school of 7,300 students in Washington state, quit playing football during World War II. Hoops, that’s another story. Gonzaga battled North Carolina to the wire in the 2017 NCAA tournament championship game. And it was no fluke." Mike Strange, Knox News

"...the NCAA Tournament is a total crapshoot." Grey Papke, Larry Brown Sports

"Like it or not, a single elimination crapshoot of a tournament defines college basketball. You can go 34-0, have a bad game, and be done in 40 minutes. You can also barely sneak into the tournament, catch fire behind Kemba Walker, and win a damn national title." Travis Miller, Hammer and Nails, SBA Nation

"Now we're here for the greatest crapshoot in sports. A 68-team brawl that will produce one champion in San Antonio next month." Myron Medcalf, ESPN

Nice job. Thanks.

My expectations are to see a high scoring team that plays really hard and moves the ball great. I just want to see entertaining, high quality basketball.

Great teams get beat in the second round (and sometimes the first) all the time. When you get to the round of 32 and beyond, almost everybody's good and can beat anyone else on a given day. Wichita was a poor shooting team when they hit all those 3's. The 3 pointer is the great equalizer; it's too easy a shot for high D1 players and is makes the tourney much more of a crapshoot than 35 years ago.

I hope for an elite 8 or final 4 and the chances are very good that'll happen. But it's more rational to base expectations on the season. My hope is for not more than 3-4 losses and to see a team that peaks in March, and that's it.

maynard g krebs
09-25-2018, 12:42 PM
That’s fine. Go back 20 years or even further back and tell me one of the top 3 best teams in any given year didn’t win the NC. 2014 UConn team being the exception. The crapshoot portion is most of the field because at least 64-65 teams aren’t among the best in the country. If a team is truly the best they’ll shine through in March. Just my opinion.

OK, so one of the top 3 usually wins the national championship. And as often as not, one of the 1 seeds gets knocked out in the round of 32, and usually at least one is gone by the sweet 16. And the experts can seldom unanimously say which that will be. Hence, crapshoot.

It's not like the days when UCLA had Walton or Kareem.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 12:44 PM
The only times in history that the best teams (defined in this thread as top 3) could have possibly matched up against each other as both teams in the championship game were 1 seeds. The rest of history certainly had one or more teams in the championship not in the top 3.

You’re basing that off rankings. The best teams aren’t always correctly ranked.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 12:45 PM
'83: North Carolina State (a 3 seed. There were at least 5 better teams in the tournament including Houston, Virginia and Louisville. Pepperdine had them beaten in the first round game, but gagged a substantial lead and Dane Suttle , an 83% FT shooter, missed two FT's that would have iced the game. NCSU caught lightning in a bottle)
'85: Villanova (an 8 seed. Not even in the top 3 in the big east. But, played a perfect game against a vastly more talented team in the championship game)
'88: Kansas (a 6 seed. Arguably not even a top 20 team).
'97: Arizona (a 4 seed. Kansas, Duke, North Carolina and Kentucky were better teams).
and...both of UConn's recent championships.

The World Series is not a crapshoot. The College World Series is not a crapshoot. The Stanley Cup is not a crapshoot. The NBA championship is not a crapshoot. The World Cup is mostly not a crapshoot. The Super Bowl and the NCAA MBB tournament ARE crapshoots, IMHO.

So 6 times in the past 35 years? Isn’t that proving my point?

mgadfly
09-25-2018, 12:54 PM
You’re basing that off rankings. The best teams aren’t always correctly ranked.

Yes, it’s way easier to wait until the games are all played. That way the top two teams have always met in the championship game.

That’s the way I like to play roulette too, wager after the spin is completed.

tinfoilzag
09-25-2018, 01:28 PM
Winning record against Top 50 teams, Elite 8.

That would be playing to level of expectations for GU IMO.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 01:36 PM
Show me 1 coach that says its not a crapshoot

:lmao:

Norwester
09-25-2018, 01:52 PM
So 6 times in the past 35 years? Isn’t that proving my point?

Not by any stretch.

6 in 35 is a 17% chance.

Norwester
09-25-2018, 01:54 PM
Show me 1 coach that says its not a crapshoot

:lmao:


So, the Google sayeth:


Your search - "ncca tournament is not a crapshoot" - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 02:03 PM
So, the Google sayeth:

coaches have convinced the masses

:lmao:

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 02:06 PM
It’s all good. I think it’s a cop out excuse when you don’t win. Play and coach to the best of your abilities and the rest will take care of itself. Never suggested it happens 100% of the time but it generally holds true.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 02:11 PM
It’s all good. I think it’s a cop out excuse when you don’t win. Play and coach to the best of your abilities and the rest will take care of itself. Never suggested it happens 100% of the time but it generally holds true.

its one BIG defense mechanism coaches and fans use IMO

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 02:39 PM
its one BIG defense mechanism coaches and fans use IMO

Certainly one fans use. I can personally say Few is the only coach I’ve heard say it. I’m sure others have. Has Wright or coach K or Williams or Bill Self or Boeheim ever said it?

Has a coach ever won the big one and said “we got lucky and won that crapshoot”?

Zagdawg
09-25-2018, 03:38 PM
You just made the point that the majority of us understand---- The coaches you listed have the top talent available in college basketball and its not a given that they will win it every year.

mgadfly
09-25-2018, 03:55 PM
Certainly one fans use. I can personally say Few is the only coach I’ve heard say it. I’m sure others have. Has Wright or coach K or Williams or Bill Self or Boeheim ever said it?

Has a coach ever won the big one and said “we got lucky and won that crapshoot”?

This is almost literally what I hear EVERY YEAR in the post-game interview from the winning coach. Something like, "You have to get lucky." "The ball has to bounce your way." "There are a lot of really talented teams that worked really hard, but our shots went in." "We've been in the other locker room where one call or one unlucky bounce ends your tournament ..." "Our team deserves this, these guys worked really hard, but ... [insert something about avoiding injury, shots dropping, luck going their way]."

And citing Bill Self is kind of funny. Isn't he the guy everyone wants to run out of town when he fizzles in the tournament early? googling Bill Self and luck in the NCAA tournament gets you this article (https://kjhk.org/web/2017/03/06/critics-of-bill-selfs-performance-in-march-are-overreacting/) which says:


While it may seem like a cop out to blame parity or luck for an early out in March, the fact of the matter is that the best team rarely wins the national title.

Since Bill Self’s first season at Kansas, three out of the thirteen number one overall seeds have gone on to win the whole thing. For all the mathematically challenged people at home, that is 23%. Putting into consideration the nature of the beast that is the tournament, it is irrational and unhealthy to expect deep runs in March every single year for your beloved schools.

Now, if you are one to discount all the factors I just mentioned above and still want to run with the “Bill Self chokes in March” narrative, lets take a closer look at what Kansas has done in the tournament in the Self era compared to the other most successful programs in the sport.

I don't think it is a cop-out at all. If they were seven game series fine. In one game you can be a very good #1 seed, have your best perimeter defender go down with an injury right before half, and then give up the lead and lose to some mid major team half the country hasn't heard of. Or your stretch 5 can injure his hip/back right before playing a team with a bunch of lengthy shot blockers. Crapshoot.

IowaSERE
09-25-2018, 03:57 PM
Beat Duke or UNC. WCC regular season and tourny champs. 1 or 2 seed. Once again, our seed will be within 1 of our total losses.

E8 minimum, close game to go to the F4.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 04:16 PM
It’s all good. I think it’s a cop out excuse when you don’t win. Play and coach to the best of your abilities and the rest will take care of itself. Never suggested it happens 100% of the time but it generally holds true.

your premise is fine... when applied to a single game. however, you are diving head first into the same logical fallacy that leads spy to predict that we will go undefeated for major portions of basically every season-- i.e. treating a *potential* series of probable victories naively, as though being unable to name a single game we'll probably lose proves that we probably won't lose any at all.

but even if you give us an 80% chance of victory in each game (which is incredibly generous, at least after the opening round), our odds of making the final 4 would only be ~40%, and our odds of winning the NC would only be ~25%. yes, the better team has a significantly better chance of winning a given game, but it doesn't follow that a great team has a better-than-even chance of winning every game in a series against good teams... and once you're below the odds of a coin flip, it seems like "crapshoot" is a fair descriptor to me.

or, if you don't love that argument, see this: kenpom 2018 ncaa tournament odds (https://kenpom.com/blog/). the gold standard of predictive cbb metrics gave NO teams last year even a 50/50 shot at making the final 4, only 3 teams a better than 50/50 shot of making the elite 8, and the 3 best teams COMBINED had < 50% chance of taking home the championship, with no other team having better than ~1/4 chance of making the final four or ~1/15 chance of winning it all. in other words, for the very best teams it's a crapshoot-- and for the other ~65 teams participating, it's somewhere between a longshot and a prayer.

a final four or national championship is certainly within the realm of possibility, but the numbers say that people expecting that outcome are more likely to be disappointed than not.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 04:38 PM
schools should use the crapshoot theory when negotiating $7 mil contracts with coaches.

LongIslandZagFan
09-25-2018, 04:48 PM
It is a crapshoot because
a) you can run into a player making an epic run at greatness (Curry with Davidson)
b) injuries that occur in the tourney like Killian or GBJ
c) Skill matchups sometimes put a better team at a disadvantage to a lesser team overall
d) which refs you have and how they decide to call the game
e) Loyola Chicago, UMBC, various others who get hot at just the right time... etc.
f) location of the game (elevation of venue can have a HUGE impact on a game) especially in the first couple of rounds.

Right there are just 7 things that could impact a tourney game that allows for huge upsets. The best teams don't always make it as far as they should.

Coaching gets the team there. But to say that best teams are always there at the end is a reach.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 04:48 PM
schools should use the crapshoot theory when negotiating $7 mil contracts with coaches.

odds are interesting. everyone is just trying to give themselves the best chance. that goes from hiring/paying coaches, to scheduling, recruiting, and on. there are no certainties. such is life.

we've all seen firsthand the value to a school, a community, and a program of hiring the right coach, even without an NCAA championship.

just like in business, nothing in basketball is guaranteed. but i'm sure glad we've got few and this team. they have a chance to win it all and i'll be disappointed as hell if/when they bow out... but that's not justification for considering the season to be a failure because they roll snakeyes in a big game, nor for heaping mathematically illiterate expectations on the team. at least imo.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 04:55 PM
your premise is fine... when applied to a single game. however, you are diving head first into the same logical fallacy that leads spy to predict that we will go undefeated for major portions of basically every season-- i.e. treating a *potential* series of probable victories naively, as though being unable to name a single game we'll probably lose proves that we probably won't lose any at all.

but even if you give us an 80% chance of victory in each game (which is incredibly generous, at least after the opening round), our odds of making the final 4 would only be ~40%, and our odds of winning the NC would only be ~25%. yes, the better team has a significantly better chance of winning a given game, but it doesn't follow that a great team has a better-than-even chance of winning every game in a series against good teams... and once you're below the odds of a coin flip, it seems like "crapshoot" is a fair descriptor to me.

or, if you don't love that argument, see this: kenpom 2018 ncaa tournament odds (https://kenpom.com/blog/). the gold standard of predictive cbb metrics gave NO teams last year even a 50/50 shot at making the final 4, only 3 teams a better than 50/50 shot of making the elite 8, and the 3 best teams COMBINED had < 50% chance of taking home the championship, with no other team having better than ~1/4 chance of making the final four or ~1/15 chance of winning it all. in other words, for the very best teams it's a crapshoot-- and for the other ~65 teams participating, it's somewhere between a longshot and a prayer.

a final four or national championship is certainly within the realm of possibility, but the numbers say that people expecting that outcome are more likely to be disappointed than not.

I’m disappointed every year we lose in the tournament. Doesn’t mean I haven’t enjoyed the season and all the wins. I understand the premise of the crapshoot, I just don’t fully buy into it. I know it was one season but Villanova was the best team in college basketball last year and they won the nc. That wasn’t a fluke. They stayed healthy and rose to every challenge. That’s what championship teams do.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 05:00 PM
Right there are just 7 things that could impact a tourney game that allows for huge upsets. The best teams don't always make it as far as they should.

It was pretty much shown by norwester in this thread that at least 83% of the time in the past 35 years, the best teams are there in the end. Teams get upset, no doubt. However the numbers overwhelmingly show the best teams are generally there in the end. I don’t get how this can be disputed.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 05:04 PM
I’m disappointed every year we lose in the tournament. Doesn’t mean I haven’t enjoyed the season and all the wins. I understand the premise of the crapshoot, I just don’t fully buy into it. I know it was one season but Villanova was the best team in college basketball last year and they won the nc. That wasn’t a fluke. They stayed healthy and rose to every challenge. That’s what championship teams do.

yep. you have one champion a year, every year. sometimes that'll be the team that comes in with the best team/ best odds (probably more often than any other team), but most years you'll have 3-4 teams who can legitimately win it... and every year only one of them gets it. which means 2-3 don't. sure, if your position is: "we could reasonably be the best team, and therefore we could have the best chance to win the whole thing", then i'm with you all the way. but that probably isn't how it's going to work out, and the math is not vague or wishy-washy on that.

kitzbuel
09-25-2018, 05:06 PM
OK, so one of the top 3 usually wins the national championship. And as often as not, one of the 1 seeds gets knocked out in the round of 32, and usually at least one is gone by the sweet 16. And the experts can seldom unanimously say which that will be. Hence, crapshoot.

It's not like the days when UCLA had Walton or Kareem.60% of NCAA championships have been won by 1 seeds.

That isn't a crapshoot. Coach Few knows that as well. That is why he is constantly trying to improve the seeding. The better the seed the better the chances.

https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

bdmiller7
09-25-2018, 05:11 PM
63% of NCAA championships have been won by 1 seeds.

That isn't a crapshoot. Coach Few knows that as well. That is why he is constantly trying to improve the seeding. The better the seed the better the chances.

https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

At least 75% of 1 seeds lose in the tourney every year.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 05:13 PM
63% of NCAA championships have been won by 1 seeds.

That isn't a crapshoot. Coach Few knows that as well. That is why he is constantly trying to improve the seeding. The better the seed the better the chances.

https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

which means that the chance of a given #1 seeded team winning the whole thing is ~ (1 / (4 / .63)) = or ~15%. from a TEAM perspective, even at the high end, it's absolutely a crapshoot. now, if you're taking an entire seed-line (not germane to a conversation about expectation for zags this season), then maybe you have a point.

bdmiller7
09-25-2018, 05:13 PM
60% of NCAA championships have been won by 1 seeds.

That isn't a crapshoot. Coach Few knows that as well. That is why he is constantly trying to improve the seeding. The better the seed the better the chances.

https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

37% of the time 100% of the 1 seeds lose in the tourney.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 05:15 PM
but most years you'll have 3-4 teams who can legitimately win it... and every year only one of them gets it. which means 2-3 don't.

I thought I made clear this premise from the get go.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 05:17 PM
I thought I made clear this premise from the get go.

ok, so if 1 of the top 3-4 teams wins it (not how it goes ~1/3 of the time, but we'll ignore that), then each of those individual teams has, at best, a 25%-33% chance to win the whole thing. how is this NOT a crapshoot? because after the fact we can look back and say "that team played the best so they earned it"? i'm not buying that logic and don't see any other way for you to defend the point.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 05:21 PM
37% of the time 100% of the 1 seeds lose in the tourney.

Since 1979, 41% of 1 seeds have made the final four. Assuming one of the 3-4 best teams in the country are somewhere in the top 4 seeds, 80% of all final fours included seeds 1-4.

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 05:26 PM
ok, so if 1 of the top 3-4 teams wins it (not how it goes ~1/3 of the time, but we'll ignore that), then each of those individual teams has, at best, a 25%-33% chance to win the whole thing. how is this NOT a crapshoot? because after the fact we can look back and say "that team played the best so they earned it"? i'm not buying that logic and don't see any other way for you to defend the point.

I’m disregarding most of your argument here because I never said that. I’m curious how you can say one of the top 3-4 teams only win a third of the time? Seems completely false to me when a number 1 seed wins the nc at least 60% of the time.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 05:28 PM
its competitive and tough but not gonna give it crapshoot

get a number 1 seed and chances are better than a crapshoot to make FF for Zags @ 50%

cggonzaga
09-25-2018, 05:29 PM
I’ve enjoyed the debate but I’ll bow out now. Enjoy your evenings everybody.

MickMick
09-25-2018, 05:39 PM
1) It is a crapshoot
2) The 1 seed gets the easiest path

Everyone is right��

cjm720
09-25-2018, 05:46 PM
I just want to keep the streak alive. Everything else is gravy.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 05:46 PM
I’m disregarding most of your argument here because I never said that. I’m curious how you can say one of the top 3-4 teams only win a third of the time? Seems completely false to me when a number 1 seed wins the nc at least 60% of the time.

sorry, wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. was trying to prompt you to defend your assertion in a way that i could follow better, and the quoted text was my attempt to state my understanding of your logic -- leaning heavily on your villanova example. i figured that my formulation was weak and hoped that you'd correct it.

i guess we need to disambiguate here? in the spirit of the thread, i thought we were talking about expectations for gonzaga this year. gonzaga appears to be a clear top-5 team. i was bringing up numbers that show that even top-seeded teams have < 50% chance to make the final four (by kenpom predictions) and ~15% chance of winning the whole tournament historically. so, i am defending the idea that the tournament is a crapshoot in terms of outcome for any given team-- including gonzaga.

you and kitz are either talking about something else or moving the goalposts by speaking about GROUPS of teams ("one of top 3-4" or #1 seeds), which does not seem germane to the conversation to me. yes, one of the best teams will probably win the whole thing. but the chances of it being YOUR team (whichever specific one that might be) are still really low. again, this is just basic odds stuff.


its competitive and tough but not gonna give it crapshoot

get a number 1 seed and chances are better than a crapshoot to make FF for Zags @ 50%

that seems to be optimistic as NO team had a 50% chance to make the FF last year according to kenpom... and given the teams that kansas, nevada, duke, and kentucky will be throwing out, i doubt that we'll be more clearly ahead of the rest of the pack than villanova was last season.

getting a 1 seed upgrades your chances all the way from a prayer to a crapshoot, basically... unless you're the UConn women's team.

Zagceo
09-25-2018, 06:22 PM
that seems to be optimistic as NO team had a 50% chance to make the FF last year according to kenpom... and given the teams that kansas, nevada, duke, and kentucky will be throwing out, i doubt that we'll be more clearly ahead of the rest of the pack than villanova was last season.

Zags are 1 for 2 as a No.1 seed making it to FF

Hooray4Daye&Gray
09-25-2018, 06:28 PM
Super Bowl Homeboy.

soccerdud
09-25-2018, 06:33 PM
Zags are 1 for 2 as a No.1 seed making it to FF

same for not even making the sweet 16. don't think either are reflective of their odds this year. such is life when your sample size is 2.

Markburn1
09-25-2018, 07:58 PM
same for not even making the sweet 16. don't think either are reflective of their odds this year. such is life when your sample size is 2.

Enjoying your math and logic.

maynard g krebs
09-25-2018, 09:07 PM
I think the point that some are missing is that using the metric of elite 8 or final 4 as the standard of satisfied expectations places all the weight on the results in the last 10 or 12 percent of the season.

Take the final 4 team. For the most of the latter part of the season, the statistical models predicted a final record of 1 loss. And that loss finally came, at home, to a mediocre BYU team. A pretty random occurrence.

Now, that loss could have come instead, just as easily, a few games later against a somewhat better Northwestern team, given a couple of different bounces or calls. If that had happened, I'd call it a great year with a disappointing ending.

And if Wichita hadn't gotten freakishly hot, Olynyk's team could have been the one to make the final 4.

And if Matthews' shot doesn't rattle in (not a clean make; an inch or 2 longer or more off line and it misses- not to mention it came off a tipped pass) no final 4.

Saying it's a crapshoot doesn't demean the accomplishment of winning in the least, nor is it an excuse for losers. As soccerdud explains so eloquently, it's simply an acknowledgement of things like math and logic.

Sure, the best teams have the best chance of winning - duh - but there's usually a ton of luck involved. A clearly superior team like Nova last year has been a rarity since Wooden retired.

Zags11
09-25-2018, 11:09 PM
Final 4 with the team we have. Hope for title gm.

Zagceo
09-26-2018, 03:28 AM
same for not even making the sweet 16. don't think either are reflective of their odds this year. such is life when your sample size is 2.

UNC has 15 No.1 seeds and 20 Final Four appearences

kitzbuel
09-26-2018, 04:15 AM
I will admit that in my understanding of the definition of a crapshoot, every team has the same chance of winning it all as another. That is not the case. In keeping with the dice game parlance, the higher seeded the team, the more the dice are loading up their favor.

If a smart gambler hedges and bets on all the one seeds according to their odds, that gambler will win more often than lose.

My point is that Mark Few (and his statistically inclined former basketball operations director Jerry Krause) knows this and steadily works to improve GUs odds of success.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

bartruff1
09-26-2018, 06:34 AM
I don't find that definition of a crapshoot in any dictionary …… urbane or otherwise…..

ZagzKrak
09-26-2018, 06:52 AM
I don't find that definition of a crapshoot in any dictionary …… urbane or otherwise…..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crapshoot


There ya go LOL

MontanaCoyote
09-26-2018, 07:07 AM
Win the WCC conference and tourney, #1 seed @ The Dance, Final Four.

Hoping for no serious injuries. Although we have good depth it would be a shame if a serious injury or two threw a monkey wrench into such a promising season.

caldwellzag
09-26-2018, 07:22 AM
The word crapshot is what everyone is getting hung up on here. It is simple mathematics (or maybe a little complexed) that will show you why the NCAA tourny works out the way it does each and every year. Everyone says last years upset of UVA was the biggest upset of all time as a 16 seed beat a 1 seed. Statistically speaking it was, but when you look at the total number of 1 vs 16 games that have been played over the years it was bound to happen. Mathematics and statistics behind sports and life in general are pretty accurate. If all the number 1 seeds have less than a 50% chance of making the Final Four each, then at most the probability of having all four of the 1 seeds in the final four is less than a 7% chance. That's not a crapshot, that's mathematically significant.

There are a million factors into each game that sway the mathematics of it and there is reason we see so many upsets in March Madness. A number 5 seed verse a number 12 seed upset happens almost every year it feels like, when you look at the statistics behind those match ups you will see why one happens almost every year. They are evenly matched teams, but from different sized conferences. Advanced statistics will show you that March Madness is not a crapshot, although we see upsets and the best teams do not always make it to the final four.

FWIW I have my BS in Mathematics and did my senior project on advanced statistics in sports, it's something I am passionate about and something I work with frequently. In this post the numbers I used were very basic and a lot more goes into it than saying a 1 seed has less than a 50% chance of making the Final Four, but for the sake of time and typing a paragraph, not an essay I left it at that.

Zagceo
09-26-2018, 07:36 AM
The word crapshot is what everyone is getting hung up on here. It is simple mathematics (or maybe a little complexed) that will show you why the NCAA tourny works out the way it does each and every year. Everyone says last years upset of UVA was the biggest upset of all time as a 16 seed beat a 1 seed. Statistically speaking it was, but when you look at the total number of 1 vs 16 games that have been played over the years it was bound to happen. Mathematics and statistics behind sports and life in general are pretty accurate. If all the number 1 seeds have less than a 50% chance of making the Final Four each, then at most the probability of having all four of the 1 seeds in the final four is less than a 7% chance. That's not a crapshot, that's mathematically significant.

There are a million factors into each game that sway the mathematics of it and there is reason we see so many upsets in March Madness. A number 5 seed verse a number 12 seed upset happens almost every year it feels like, when you look at the statistics behind those match ups you will see why one happens almost every year. They are evenly matched teams, but from different sized conferences. Advanced statistics will show you that March Madness is not a crapshot, although we see upsets and the best teams do not always make it to the final four.

FWIW I have my BS in Mathematics and did my senior project on advanced statistics in sports, it's something I am passionate about and something I work with frequently. In this post the numbers I used were very basic and a lot more goes into it than saying a 1 seed has less than a 50% chance of making the Final Four, but for the sake of time and typing a paragraph, not an essay I left it at that.

thank you

:allhail:





:lmao:

bartruff1
09-26-2018, 07:59 AM
It all depends on what your definition of " crapshoot " is….there is probably 100% chance that the 4 #16 seeds will not make the final four....that is near certain and therefore the tournament is not a crapshoot....that is nonsense.....

It is the element of uncertainty in every definition of crapshoot that makes the dice game a excellent analogy for the tourney where the probabilities of any number showing up in the dice game or any team winning a basketball game is more or less probable but uncertain...

MDABE80
09-26-2018, 09:37 AM
Crap shoot means nothing. A distraction. Plain and simple it's another visit to the FF and no major injuries.

Pleasant Peninsula
09-26-2018, 10:04 AM
NATTY OR BUST! #1 KenPom ranking. I want Gonzaga to be the objectively best team AND to win the tournament.

That is all.

Zagdawg
09-26-2018, 10:49 AM
People are hung up on the word "crapshoot" --- lets say there are no absolutes which is basically what people mean --i.e. anything can happen and it does.

Someone should provide a mathematical formula on chance of an injury occurring (Tillie last year), or refs going whistle crazy (Collins the year prior).


There are a million factors into each game that sway the mathematics of it and there is reason we see so many upsets in March Madness. - this says it all -- anything can happen to sway the game and it does.

If it were that easy to predict mathematically there would be a bunch of rich statisticians who have placed accurate bets on the dance.......but there are not.

caldwellzag
09-26-2018, 10:58 AM
People are hung up on the word "crapshoot" --- lets say there are no absolutes which is basically what people mean --i.e. anything can happen and it does.

Someone should provide a mathematical formula on chance of an injury occurring (Tillie last year), or refs going whistle crazy (Collins the year prior).

- this says it all -- anything can happen to sway the game and it does.

If it were that easy to predict mathematically there would be a bunch of rich statisticians who have placed accurate bets on the dance.......but there are not.

If you look at people that use advanced statistics to bet on sports they normally hit about 56% of their bets because you are not simply betting if team A or team B would win, you bet the spread (unless you like giving Vegas your money). Human elements are a part of every game, whether it is football, basketball, or baseball, my point is that with advanced statistics and mathematics you can understand why things happen the way they happen. Everyone freaks out over an upset during March Madness, but I would say this statistically that upset was supposed to happen. Maybe not that exact upset, but a 12 will beat a 5, a 15 will beat a 2 from time to time, you can see that in the math.

I know the whistle happy ref hurt us with Collins and may of changed the outcome of the game, but prior to the game we were underdogs from Vegas which means that Vegas was confident enough to say Gonzaga will not beat UNC (Vegas math is a little different as they have to balance books and predict how much money will come in on each side, but it's still math and they are experts).

GlacierZag
09-26-2018, 11:03 AM
All this dry, uninteresting talk about a crapshoot has me jonesing for some tacos. But as long as I'm here, I'd like to see at least the 2nd weekend of the tournament and am hopeful of seeing the Zags play in April.

Zagceo
09-26-2018, 11:16 AM
#1 seeds win the Championship more often than any other, especially considering seven championship games have featured two number one teams. No team seeded higher than 8th has reached the title game as of yet

seeds/championships totals

#1-20
#2-5
#3-4
#4-1
#5-0
#6-1
#7-1
#8-1


Projected 2019 Final Four: Duke, Kansas, Gonzaga, Kentucky

https://www.betfirm.com/odds-to-win-the-ncaa-tournament/

MDABE80
09-26-2018, 12:03 PM
That's an amazing group predicted for the FF. That REALLY amazing. Big stage, rarest of teams. History in the making.
Let's go get this thing!

maynard g krebs
09-26-2018, 12:37 PM
Merriam Webster's first definition of crapshoot is "something that has an unpredictable outcome".

Therefore, if the tourney is not a crapshoot, the outcome would have to be, by definition, predictable.


Predictable: "able to be foretold or declared in advance".

IMO that should settle it.

Zagceo
09-26-2018, 12:48 PM
Merriam Webster's first definition of crapshoot is "something that has an unpredictable outcome".

Therefore, if the tourney is not a crapshoot, the outcome would have to be, by definition, predictable.


Predictable: "able to be foretold or declared in advance".

IMO that should settle it.

one of these seeds is more predicable than the others to win Championship

#1-20
#2-5
#3-4
#4-1
#5-0
#6-1
#7-1
#8-1

caldwellzag
09-26-2018, 12:54 PM
Merriam Webster's first definition of crapshoot is "something that has an unpredictable outcome".

Therefore, if the tourney is not a crapshoot, the outcome would have to be, by definition, predictable.


Predictable: "able to be foretold or declared in advance".

IMO that should settle it.

I can predict that a 1-4 seed will win the National Title this year, and I can do that with 95% confidence rating on it. That's statistically significant. AKA predictable.

ZagzKrak
09-26-2018, 02:01 PM
#1 seeds win the Championship more often than any other, especially considering seven championship games have featured two number one teams. No team seeded higher than 8th has reached the title game as of yet

seeds/championships totals

#1-20
#2-5
#3-4
#4-1
#5-0
#6-1
#7-1
#8-1



https://www.betfirm.com/odds-to-win-the-ncaa-tournament/

In that same time frame 99 1 seeds lost in the tournament. Edit...actually a few more then that but I'm to lazy to figure out the exact number.

cggonzaga
09-26-2018, 03:20 PM
In that same time frame 99 1 seeds lost in the tournament. Edit...actually a few more then that but I'm to lazy to figure out the exact number.

Or for another perspective, they’ve lost fewer games than any other seed (despite playing hundreds of games more)

http://mcubed.net/ncaab/seeds.shtml

ZagzKrak
09-26-2018, 03:38 PM
If you look at the tournament at a whole then yes, a 1 seed is the most likely to win the whole thing. Now if you choose to talk about just 1 team..the Zags for example, then the word crapshoot describes the whole process well.

GonzagasaurusFlex
09-26-2018, 05:37 PM
My definition of success this season:
- Perkins is healthy
- Norvell, Tillie, Rui, and Kispert all improve on last year’s performances
- Brandon Clarke proves to be a formidable, high level D1 post player on both ends.
- Geno Crandall, Jacob Larsen and Joel Ayayi become dependable rotation players as needed before March Madness begins.

GU69
09-26-2018, 07:03 PM
Win the conference ….get to the dance....play well....

Leaving out the crap issue, I agree with this as a successful season and I think we'll get it. I'm looking forward to a fun year.

thespywhozaggedme
09-26-2018, 07:39 PM
My definition of success this season:
- Perkins is healthy
- Norvell, Tillie, Rui, and Kispert all improve on last year’s performances
- Brandon Clarke proves to be a formidable, high level D1 post player on both ends.
- Geno Crandall, Jacob Larsen and Joel Ayayi become dependable rotation players as needed before March Madness begins.

A consensus top-five team by virtually every single pundit out there and that is your definition of success? Setting the bar a little low, aren't you? Man, you're easy to please.

Markburn1
09-26-2018, 07:52 PM
Gee Spy. Flex is looking for individual success for nine different Zags. Seems like a legit definition of success to me.

By the way, should all of that individual success happen, team success is sure to follow.

bballbeachbum
09-26-2018, 08:23 PM
successful season equals my happiness in all of this. Zags have delivered for almost 20 years on that one for me and my vicarious interests

But to be in tune with the spirit of what I think is the thread's true premise: I love watching the Zags belief in their greatness grow as they've battled and earned it.

So success, specifically for the Zags bball team and program, imo, would be to extend that greatness and indulge themselves in marking their own greatness, whatever it is, in every opportunity before them.

And I expect they will

thespywhozaggedme
09-26-2018, 08:24 PM
Gee Spy. Flex is looking for individual success for nine different Zags. Seems like a legit definition of success to me.

By the way, should all of that individual success happen, team success is sure to follow.

Pretty sure the op was talking about the team itself, granted it was implicit, not explicit, but I figured everyone knew that. I mean, yeah on the macro level, everyone waking up tomorrow alive is a "success". lol

GonzagasaurusFlex
09-27-2018, 03:34 AM
A consensus top-five team by virtually every single pundit out there and that is your definition of success? Setting the bar a little low, aren't you? Man, you're easy to please.

If my “definition of success” post happens, the results will take care of themselves. I don’t measure the team’s success on a Final Four or bust perspective; rather, each component part does his part and the collective whole gels then whatever happens will be icing on the cake.

NotoriousZ
09-27-2018, 04:55 AM
I can predict that a 1-4 seed will win the National Title this year, and I can do that with 95% confidence rating on it. That's statistically significant. AKA predictable.

Even if a 1-4 seed won the championship 100% of the time, at best only 25% of those teams will even make it to the Final Four. AKA crapshoot.

Many good people here have made the crapshoot argument well so l will bring up just one more painful example from Gonzaga’s history: the Nevada game. Ronny got reffed out and Nevada had one of their best shooting performances ever. That Zag team was poised to make a deep run in the tournament but the better team doesn’t always win.

caldwellzag
09-27-2018, 06:03 AM
Even if a 1-4 seed won the championship 100% of the time, at best only 25% of those teams will even make it to the Final Four. AKA crapshoot.

Many good people here have made the crapshoot argument well so l will bring up just one more painful example from Gonzaga’s history: the Nevada game. Ronny got reffed out and Nevada had one of their best shooting performances ever. That Zag team was poised to make a deep run in the tournament but the better team doesn’t always win.

I am done making my point about the statistics behind the tourny, from a mathematical side it is not a crapshot it is very predictable in terms of final outcome. Those that argue that it is a crapshot have to small of a lense and do not understand mathematics. Time to move on!

Robzagnut
09-27-2018, 07:17 AM
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. - Coach 'Conan' Few

Zaga
09-27-2018, 07:38 AM
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. - Coach 'Conan' Few

Good one Zagnut!

maynard g krebs
09-27-2018, 09:37 AM
I can predict that a 1-4 seed will win the National Title this year, and I can do that with 95% confidence rating on it. That's statistically significant. AKA predictable.

That's not the point about the term crapshoot. It's about individual games. About being hot or cold on a given day. About getting a good bounce or call here or there.

15 of those 1-4 seeds are gonna lose. And you can't predict which.

Loyola won one of those games last year on a buzzer beater, mid range jumper from the right elbow, that was off line to the left, caught the inside edge of the rim and spun around so that it bounced squarely off the middle of the backboard and dropped in. That's an example of the crapshoot factor.

Statistical generalities have nothing to do with the concept. No one is saying that better teams don't win more often. What you're saying is moot.

And the underlying point is that it's unfair to define a team or a season by one day's result; hence, when someone in this discussion says elite 8 or final 4 is the definition of meeting expectations, it's exaggerating the value of one day over the value of what happens over 5 months.

Markburn1
09-27-2018, 10:41 AM
I am done making my point about the statistics behind the tourny, from a mathematical side it is not a crapshot it is very predictable in terms of final outcome. Those that argue that it is a crapshot have to small of a lense and do not understand mathematics. Time to move on!

Before you move on, please tell me who will win the championship. If you can't do that, please tell me who will make the final four. If you can't do that, please tell me the teams that will participate in the Sweet Sixteen.

I will head to Vegas as soon as you reveal the entirely predictable information that you possess.

caldwellzag
09-27-2018, 11:08 AM
Before you move on, please tell me who will win the championship. If you can't do that, please tell me who will make the final four. If you can't do that, please tell me the teams that will participate in the Sweet Sixteen.

I will head to Vegas as soon as you reveal the entirely predictable information that you possess.

Not sure if you have heard, but the season has not even started yet. Advanced statistics compile STATISTICS from games that are actually played. You guys have the right to think what you want and say what you want. I am saying that the tourny as a whole is predictable based on statistics. I have never once said I know the exact teams that will win each and every game, never said that, never will. I have only stated that with advanced statistics the tourny is predictable in nature. You cannot look at the few outliers as reasons to prove YOUR points (the Nevada game, UVA lose last year, the NC with a whistle happy ref). Heck from a statistical side the National Championship with us and UNC is just more proof that the tourny is predictable as a whole (heck UNC and GU were number 1/3 at the end of the year in the kenpom ratings which uses advanced statistics! Heck Oregon was ranked 10 and the outlier than year was still top 24 in South Carolina). People that claim it is otherwise or people like you Markburn who make a joke of this do so because they don't understand the statistics of sports and how statistics are used to make predictions in this world.

Also, the crap like your post here shows a very narrow point of view and have no clue how to back up your point of view with anything except for making fun of those who disagree with you. Grow up and learn to respect others who disagree with you.

Here is the link to kenpom from 2017 in case you don't believe me.

https://kenpom.com/index.php?y=2017

Markburn1
09-27-2018, 11:44 AM
Not sure if you have heard, but the season has not even started yet. Advanced statistics compile STATISTICS from games that are actually played. You guys have the right to think what you want and say what you want. I am saying that the tourny as a whole is predictable based on statistics. I have never once said I know the exact teams that will win each and every game, never said that, never will. I have only stated that with advanced statistics the tourny is predictable in nature. You cannot look at the few outliers as reasons to prove YOUR points (the Nevada game, UVA lose last year, the NC with a whistle happy ref). Heck from a statistical side the National Championship with us and UNC is just more proof that the tourny is predictable as a whole (heck UNC and GU were number 1/3 at the end of the year in the kenpom ratings which uses advanced statistics! Heck Oregon was ranked 10 and the outlier than year was still top 24 in South Carolina). People that claim it is otherwise or people like you Markburn who make a joke of this do so because they don't understand the statistics of sports and how statistics are used to make predictions in this world.

Also, the crap like your post here shows a very narrow point of view and have no clue how to back up your point of view with anything except for making fun of those who disagree with you. Grow up and learn to respect others who disagree with you.

Here is the link to kenpom from 2017 in case you don't believe me.

https://kenpom.com/index.php?y=2017

Cool. Let's wait till the end of the regular season and then you can give me your predictions. Then I'll go to Vegas.

cggonzaga
09-27-2018, 11:45 AM
There are upsets in sports period. The word upset is used because one team was more favored to win. In the history of any and all sporting events, what do you think the percentage of the better team or favored team winning is? The tournament is no different. Are there upsets? Absolutely. Which team wins over 80% of the time (considering seeding in this case)? The favorite or better team. This is why I don’t consider the tournament a crapshoot, the favorites generally win at a very high rate. The term crapshoot to some people here seems to mean the favorite doesn’t always win. With this line of thinking, every sporting event/game would be considered a crapshoot.

Zagceo
09-27-2018, 11:48 AM
Before you move on, please tell me who will win the championship. If you can't do that, please tell me who will make the final four. If you can't do that, please tell me the teams that will participate in the Sweet Sixteen.

I will head to Vegas as soon as you reveal the entirely predictable information that you possess.

when seeds come out in March check back

:lmao:

caldwellzag
09-27-2018, 11:50 AM
There are upsets in sports period. The word upset is used because one team was more favored to win. In the history of any and all sporting events, what do you think the percentage of the better team or favored team winning is? The tournament is no different. Are there upsets? Absolutely. Which team wins over 80% of the time (considering seeding in this case)? The favorite or better team. This is why I don’t consider the tournament a crapshoot, the favorites generally win at a very high rate. The term crapshoot to some people here seems to mean the favorite doesn’t always win. With this line of thinking, every sporting event/game would be considered a crapshoot.

Spot on. Life would be a crapshot with that logic.

caldwellzag
09-27-2018, 11:58 AM
when seeds come out in March check back

:lmao:

Want an early prediction here you go. Tennessee, Gonzaga, Kansas, Virginia. I think these teams could make as well run Nevada, Duke, and Kansas State. Run to Vegas with that and if you put a future bet on each of them to win the NCAA tourny right now I bet you come out ahead.

Markburn1
09-27-2018, 12:01 PM
There are upsets in sports period. The word upset is used because one team was more favored to win. In the history of any and all sporting events, what do you think the percentage of the better team or favored team winning is? The tournament is no different. Are there upsets? Absolutely. Which team wins over 80% of the time (considering seeding in this case)? The favorite or better team. This is why I don’t consider the tournament a crapshoot, the favorites generally win at a very high rate. The term crapshoot to some people here seems to mean the favorite doesn’t always win. With this line of thinking, every sporting event/game would be considered a crapshoot.

The difference is we aren't talking about an isolated event. We are talking about the ultimate winner having to win six consecutive games against very good competition. No matter what the odds of winning the whole shebang, it becomes a crapshoot to win all six contests.

cggonzaga
09-27-2018, 12:08 PM
The difference is we aren't talking about an isolated event. We are talking about the ultimate winner having to win six consecutive games against very good competition. No matter what the odds of winning the whole shebang, it becomes a crapshoot to win all six contests.

So how is any tournament/playoff different? Somebody suggested in this thread that only the basketball tournament and Super Bowl is a crapshoot. Why only those?

Zagceo
09-27-2018, 12:11 PM
#1 seeds win the Championship more often than any other, especially considering seven championship games have featured two number one teams. No team seeded higher than 8th has reached the title game as of yet

seeds/championships totals

#1-20
#2-5
#3-4
#4-1
#5-0
#6-1
#7-1
#8-1



https://www.betfirm.com/odds-to-win-the-ncaa-tournament/


The difference is we aren't talking about an isolated event. We are talking about the ultimate winner having to win six consecutive games against very good competition. No matter what the odds of winning the whole shebang, it becomes a crapshoot to win all six contests.

not such a "crapshoot" for No.1 seeds

Markburn1
09-27-2018, 12:11 PM
So how is any tournament/playoff different? Somebody suggested in this thread that only the basketball tournament and Super Bowl is a crapshoot. Why only those?

You would have to ask that person. I'm confining my remarks to the tournament.

Markburn1
09-27-2018, 12:17 PM
not such a "crapshoot" for No.1 seeds

You are combining four separate teams to predict one outcome. Hedging your bets. If you want to put separate bets on all four teams, of course you will have more of a chance for success than putting all your marbles on one team. In any event, if you did so, you would still have a potential success rate of one in four. You would have failure in three separate instances.

Markburn1
09-27-2018, 12:19 PM
Want an early prediction here you go. Tennessee, Gonzaga, Kansas, Virginia. I think these teams could make as well run Nevada, Duke, and Kansas State. Run to Vegas with that and if you put a future bet on each of them to win the NCAA tourny right now I bet you come out ahead.

Nope. One of those seven may win it but picking the one that will is a crapshoot.

WallaWallaZag
09-27-2018, 12:32 PM
Spot on. Life would be a crapshot with that logic.

i actually believe life is more or less a crapshoot...at least many aspects of it. you can't control the situation you are born into and realistically not everyone starts life on an even playing field.

caldwellzag
09-27-2018, 12:34 PM
i actually believe life is more or less a crapshoot...at least many aspects of it. you can't control the situation you are born into and realistically not everyone starts life on an even playing field.

That part is true you can't control your environment you are born into, but you can work your way out of it and with a good solid education you can make your life what you want from it.

WallaWallaZag
09-27-2018, 12:43 PM
I am saying that the tourny as a whole is predictable based on statistics. I have never once said I know the exact teams that will win each and every game, never said that, never will. I have only stated that with advanced statistics the tourny is predictable in nature.

...but how predictable does something have to be before you can authoritatively say it isn't a "crapshoot"?

soccerdud
09-27-2018, 12:56 PM
The word crapshot is what everyone is getting hung up on here. It is simple mathematics (or maybe a little complexed) that will show you why the NCAA tourny works out the way it does each and every year. Everyone says last years upset of UVA was the biggest upset of all time as a 16 seed beat a 1 seed. Statistically speaking it was, but when you look at the total number of 1 vs 16 games that have been played over the years it was bound to happen. Mathematics and statistics behind sports and life in general are pretty accurate. If all the number 1 seeds have less than a 50% chance of making the Final Four each, then at most the probability of having all four of the 1 seeds in the final four is less than a 7% chance. That's not a crapshot, that's mathematically significant.

There are a million factors into each game that sway the mathematics of it and there is reason we see so many upsets in March Madness. A number 5 seed verse a number 12 seed upset happens almost every year it feels like, when you look at the statistics behind those match ups you will see why one happens almost every year. They are evenly matched teams, but from different sized conferences. Advanced statistics will show you that March Madness is not a crapshot, although we see upsets and the best teams do not always make it to the final four.

FWIW I have my BS in Mathematics and did my senior project on advanced statistics in sports, it's something I am passionate about and something I work with frequently. In this post the numbers I used were very basic and a lot more goes into it than saying a 1 seed has less than a 50% chance of making the Final Four, but for the sake of time and typing a paragraph, not an essay I left it at that.

this misses the point so hard that it veers off a cliff.

ok, lets start at the beginning:

we're talking about expectations for the ZAGS' season with strong emphasis on the team's NCAA tournament results. we're doing that based on our expected roster and a rough rotation-- and perhaps for the hardcore among us, the expected rosters and rotations for the other top 5-10 teams.

now, since it's before the season and we have none of the additional information that allow the gamblers and advanced stats to get cumulatively better, more accurate, and more specific as the season progresses, i have been using round numbers and examples (real odds, predictions, records, and results) from previous years to give us ballpark expectations of the odds for top teams to reach various rounds of the NCAA tournament. these numbers are obviously not specific to gonzaga this season (because we don't have the data required), but they can be useful for estimating the odds, assuming that team quality is anywhere near the usual distribution (which is a more reasonable assumption than the inverse).

whether we're talking history (https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/) (~15% of #1 seeds go on to win the whole thing), the best predictive advanced stats (https://kenpom.com/blog/2018-ncaa-tournament-probabilities/): (odds for top 4 teams to make final 4 last season: 44%, 41%, 37%, and 22%), and even the gamblers (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-basketball/odds/futures/) (15/2 odds for GU this season), the data clearly indicates that even the supposed "best" teams (who have also been given the easiest paths, by design) have less than a coinflip chance of making the final 4, and generally worse than a 1/6 chance of winning the whole tournament. so if we all grant that gonzaga is almost certain to be one of the game's elite teams this season, those become reasonable stand-ins for us to use for our odds to achieve those goals.

and, yes, i think "crapshoot" is a reasonable descriptor when talking about a specific team's tournament results... that's because "crapshoot", to me, is basically the colloquial metaphor of choice when the chance of an outcome doesn't quite rise to a "coin-flip". take issue with that usage if you like, but understand that when i (and, going out on a limb here, most others on this side of the argument) say that, the intended meaning is just that.

the point we're trying to make is simply this: even if we're all correct that gonzaga is one of the elite teams this season, the best information we have tells us that translates to, generously: ~50% chance of making the elite 8, ~40% chance to make the final four and ~15% chance of winning it all. and it seems both naive and a little unreasonable to state expectations that, even for elite teams, are most likely not going to happen. sure, you can go ahead and do it anyway-- but that's the point that's being made here.

people have taken issues with that in all sorts of ways that are somewhere between a strawman and a distraction. these objections speak neither to the definition of "crapshoot" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crapshoot), nor the claims we're actually making:
-- every outcome is not equally likely (well, duh)
-- there are "mathematically significant" factors that effect the actual odds that we didn't (can't) take into account at this time -- including actual seedings (also duh-- but both sides are in the same position here)
-- in the end, there are real on-the-court reasons that things happen (clearly...)
-- the better team is more likely to win (do i have to keep doing this?)
-- the better seedline is more likely to advance farther (...)
-- the eventual winner (and most of the final four) will almost certainly come from among the best teams (credit to caldwell and his/her math degree for this shocking observation)
-- ...

none of these are contested, useful, or germane... but if you're one of those who felt like they just needed to be said -- they are all obviously true. /highfive.

and now i'm done.

eta: shoutout to markburn-- thanks for the kind words earlier. hope i didn't make you regret them :)

GrizZAG
09-27-2018, 05:28 PM
"I can't begin to describe the amount of crap I've taken for being a lousy free-throw shooter."
Dennis Rodman

So much for the OP intent.

maynard g krebs
09-27-2018, 10:43 PM
this misses the point so hard that it veers off a cliff.

ok, lets start at the beginning:

we're talking about expectations for the ZAGS' season with strong emphasis on the team's NCAA tournament results. we're doing that based on our expected roster and a rough rotation-- and perhaps for the hardcore among us, the expected rosters and rotations for the other top 5-10 teams.

now, since it's before the season and we have none of the additional information that allow the gamblers and advanced stats to get cumulatively better, more accurate, and more specific as the season progresses, i have been using round numbers and examples (real odds, predictions, records, and results) from previous years to give us ballpark expectations of the odds for top teams to reach various rounds of the NCAA tournament. these numbers are obviously not specific to gonzaga this season (because we don't have the data required), but they can be useful for estimating the odds, assuming that team quality is anywhere near the usual distribution (which is a more reasonable assumption than the inverse).

whether we're talking history (https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/) (~15% of #1 seeds go on to win the whole thing), the best predictive advanced stats (https://kenpom.com/blog/2018-ncaa-tournament-probabilities/): (odds for top 4 teams to make final 4 last season: 44%, 41%, 37%, and 22%), and even the gamblers (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-basketball/odds/futures/) (15/2 odds for GU this season), the data clearly indicates that even the supposed "best" teams (who have also been given the easiest paths, by design) have less than a coinflip chance of making the final 4, and generally worse than a 1/6 chance of winning the whole tournament. so if we all grant that gonzaga is almost certain to be one of the game's elite teams this season, those become reasonable stand-ins for us to use for our odds to achieve those goals.

and, yes, i think "crapshoot" is a reasonable descriptor when talking about a specific team's tournament results... that's because "crapshoot", to me, is basically the colloquial metaphor of choice when the chance of an outcome doesn't quite rise to a "coin-flip". take issue with that usage if you like, but understand that when i (and, going out on a limb here, most others on this side of the argument) say that, the intended meaning is just that.

the point we're trying to make is simply this: even if we're all correct that gonzaga is one of the elite teams this season, the best information we have tells us that translates to, generously: ~50% chance of making the elite 8, ~40% chance to make the final four and ~15% chance of winning it all. and it seems both naive and a little unreasonable to state expectations that, even for elite teams, are most likely not going to happen. sure, you can go ahead and do it anyway-- but that's the point that's being made here.

people have taken issues with that in all sorts of ways that are somewhere between a strawman and a distraction. these objections speak neither to the definition of "crapshoot" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crapshoot), nor the claims we're actually making:
-- every outcome is not equally likely (well, duh)
-- there are "mathematically significant" factors that effect the actual odds that we didn't (can't) take into account at this time -- including actual seedings (also duh-- but both sides are in the same position here)
-- in the end, there are real on-the-court reasons that things happen (clearly...)
-- the better team is more likely to win (do i have to keep doing this?)
-- the better seedline is more likely to advance farther (...)
-- the eventual winner (and most of the final four) will almost certainly come from among the best teams (credit to caldwell and his/her math degree for this shocking observation)
-- ...

none of these are contested, useful, or germane... but if you're one of those who felt like they just needed to be said -- they are all obviously true. /highfive.

and now i'm done.

eta: shoutout to markburn-- thanks for the kind words earlier. hope i didn't make you regret them :)

Wow. Wish I had your eloquence.

TexasZagFan
09-28-2018, 04:34 AM
I doubt you'll see many Barbies wearing Zag gear...

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b4/ca/a1/b4caa15aed00066220110776a113ed29.jpg

...unless they're taking dozens of selfies in the Kennel Club.

Zagceo
09-28-2018, 09:08 AM
-- every outcome is not equally likely (well, duh)


Wow. Wish I had your eloquence.

:clap:

maynard g krebs
09-28-2018, 09:55 AM
:clap:

Out of context. Nice.

Robzagnut
09-28-2018, 10:11 AM
Nope. One of those seven may win it but picking the one that will is a crapshoot.


You’re both correct to a certain extent, but predicting who of those 7 will win is much easier after the conference tournaments. Last year I won my bracket pool with Villanova over Michigan. I won it before the championship game, because although many had Villanova, no one else had Michigan.

I’ve predicted who will win the last 3 years in a row. I lost the other two years because my other choices for the Final Four and championship game lost early. Granted, last year Michigan was helped by a last second shot at the buzzer to win it, so in that regard it was a crapshoot.

I almost always choose teams that win their conference tournaments, especially if they dominate them. They’ve played those teams 3 times and they know each other well, so if they dominate they are not only hot, but talented and confident. Michigan crushed it in their conference tournament and it wasn’t even close. Virginia lost their 6th man in their tournament, so them losing early wasn’t a surprise. I didn’t have them making it to the Elite 8.

Watching the major’s conference tournaments is the key to predicting the winner. Picking 7 teams now is a total crapshoot.

caldwellzag
09-28-2018, 10:14 AM
You’re both correct to a certain extent, but predicting who of those 7 will win is much easier after the conference tournaments. Last year I won my bracket pool with Villanova over Michigan. I won it before the championship game, because although many had Villanova, no one else had Michigan.

I’ve predicted who will win the last 3 years in a row. I lost the other two years because my other choices for the Final Four and championship game lost early. Granted, last year Michigan was helped by a last second shot at the buzzer to win it, so in that regard it was a crapshoot.

I almost always choose teams that win their conference tournaments, especially if they dominate them. They’ve played those teams 3 times and they know each other well, so if they dominate they are not only hot, but talented and confident. Michigan crushed it in their conference tournament and it wasn’t even close. Virginia lost their 6th man in their tournament, so them losing early wasn’t a surprise. I didn’t have them making it to the Elite 8.

Watching the major’s conference tournaments is the key to predicting the winner. Picking 7 teams now is a total crapshoot.

I agree with everything your saying and I only threw out the 7 teams becasue Markburn1 was mouthing off. Of those 7 teams I would consider putting a future bet on them if I got the appropriate odds, but I would personally wait until more stats are available for the 2018-2019 basketball season.