Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Bracketology - 2/18/2020

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default Bracketology - 2/18/2020

    Charlie Creme's new Bracketology is out.

    Of interest to the Lady Zag fans, we are still shown on the #4-Seed line but we are now in the Dallas region in the same bracket as Troy (#13), Fresno State (#12) and Indiana (#5).

    In those coveted #1 through #5-seed lines there was not much movement. NC State moved off the #1-seed line to the #3-seed line and Maryland moved up to the #1 seed-line to replace NC State. Oregon State moved to the #4-seed line (as expected) and Arizona moved up to the #3-seed line. LSU dropped down to the #7-seed line and TCU moved up to the #6-seed line.

    Complete bracket can be found here: http://www.espn.com/womens-college-b...l/bracketology

    ZagDad

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default

    From the Spokesman Review:

    Bulldogs climb two spots to No. 13 in AP poll
    Mon., Feb. 17, 2020

    By Jim Allen
    jima@spokesman.com
    (509) 459-5437

    The grind will continue with road games at Loyola Marymount and Pepperdine, but the Zags got the week off to a good start by moving up two spots, to 13th, in the Associated Press media poll. GU (25-2 overall and 14-1 in the WCC) moved ahead of Oregon State and Florida State, both of which lost to unranked foes last week. However, GU is losing ground in the Ratings Percentage Index. Despite winning two games, the Zags fell two more spots to 13th. The Zags are competing with those teams and others to finish among the top 16 according to metrics applied by the NCAA. The top 16 will host first- and second-round NCAA Tournament games.

    Only two Power 5 teams (South Carolina and Baylor) have fewer losses than GU, which is 25-2 overall and 14-1 in the WCC. However, the WCC is ranked only 11th in conference RPI, meaning that any losses by GU would probably put them outside the top 16.

    The consensus of experts is that GU must run the table in those last five games to host NCAA games. However, it’s possible that they could still host with one more loss, provided they get help via losses by other competing teams.
    The entire article can be found here: https://www.spokesman.com/stories/20...13-in-ap-poll/

    ZagDad

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Issaquah, WA
    Posts
    14,165

    Post

    Who are the hardest women's college basketball teams to place on the S-curve?

    Over the last three weeks, South Carolina, Baylor and Oregon have established themselves as the three best teams in the country. Distinguishing among them is nearly impossible, but they have unquestionably separated themselves from the rest of the pack. The Gamecocks, Lady Bears and Ducks have wrapped up No. 1 seeds -- barring something extraordinary and unforeseen. The dominance has been obvious. We know exactly how good they are.

    The same can't be said for some teams at the next level. Even this deep in the season, a few teams remain a mystery. Whether it has to do with imbalance in conference schedules, inconsistent play or injuries to key players, the identity of some teams in the next group -- which consists of about a dozen teams -- still remains somewhat unknown.

    Let's look at how they're impacting the bracket, and what their current seed is in our latest Bracketology projection....


    Gonzaga: No. 4 seed, Dallas Regional

    The Feb. 8 loss to 11-15 Saint Mary's was alarming. That was the Zags' second loss of the season; they had won 21 consecutive games since an overtime loss to Stanford in the third game of the season. The fact that the loss to St. Mary's came just two games after losing senior shooting guard Katie Campbell (knee) for the season is the concern. Gonzaga is second in the country in 3-point percentage, but Campbell (43.1%; team-high 47 3-pointers) was a big part of that.

    Last March the Zags lost point guard Lauren Stockton and wing Jill Townsend to injuries in the WCC tournament semifinals, derailing what could have been a top-16 placement. They were a No. 5 seed instead and lost to Oregon State on the Beavers home floor. Once again, there is no way to evaluate Gonzaga against teams it's competing against for top-16 positioning with the lineup that is currently available.

    The WCC typically has some teams to challenge Gonzaga, which has already clinched at least a tie for its 15th regular season title in 16 years, but this year only one other team in the conference (BYU) has an RPI in the top 100. Even without the Campbell injury to consider, measuring a team that hasn't played NCAA tournament-level competition in six weeks can be difficult.

    ESPN Article Link

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sandy Eggo CA
    Posts
    704

    Default

    If I remember correctly, Zag gals played UCLA to a very close finish in a preseason scrimmage in Spokane. Watched the Bruins last night & was impressed. Much better team concept than the one-on-one Beavers. Of couse, GU isn't the same team now w/out Katie, & not sure they'll ever get back to where they were when she was draining all those treys. But, if they can manage to win out (big if) even if they don't win the conference tourney, based on comparing them to UCLA, they deserve to be Dancing in Spokane.

    Haven't touched here on the $$ angle, have we? But why would the NCAA, in their mercenary little hearts, ever forgo capacity crowds (12,000?) at the Arena with the Zags playing vs half that many in the seats if they ship out the team to play somewhere else? They wouldn't. And won't if they aren't forced to. C'mon girls, take the decision out of the bean counter's hands. You can do it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by upan8th View Post
    If I remember correctly, Zag gals played UCLA to a very close finish in a preseason scrimmage in Spokane. Watched the Bruins last night & was impressed. Much better team concept than the one-on-one Beavers. Of couse, GU isn't the same team now w/out Katie, & not sure they'll ever get back to where they were when she was draining all those treys. But, if they can manage to win out (big if) even if they don't win the conference tourney, based on comparing them to UCLA, they deserve to be Dancing in Spokane.

    Haven't touched here on the $$ angle, have we? But why would the NCAA, in their mercenary little hearts, ever forgo capacity crowds (12,000?) at the Arena with the Zags playing vs half that many in the seats if they ship out the team to play somewhere else? They wouldn't. And won't if they aren't forced to. C'mon girls, take the decision out of the bean counter's hands. You can do it.
    Hopefully you only watched the 2nd half of the UCLA game. The first half of the UCLA vs OSU game was terrible on both sides. UCLA could not shoot worth beans and OSU could not hang onto the ball (14 t/os in the first half).

    If the Lady Zags host in Spokane, it will be in the Kennel, not the Arena and they would be hosting the 1st and 2nd rounds. This year, the Spokane Arena is hosting the 1st and 2nd rounds of the Mbb NCAA tournament.

    The next two (2) years (2021 & 2022) Spokane will be hosting the 3rd and 4th rounds of the Wbb NCAA tournament. Thus (not this year), if in the next two (2) years, the Lady Zags were lucky enough to host the 1st and 2nd rounds of the NCAA tournament at the kennel, they would have a very good chance (if they would win rounds 1 and 2) to play rounds 3 and 4 in the Spokane Arena. But that is next year or the following year, this year the Lady Zags only have the opportunity to host in the kennel and if they won both games in the kennel, then they would be shipped to one of the following sites; Greenville, NC, Dallas, TX, Fort Wayne, IN or Portland, OR.

    The lady zags are something like 12th in total home attendance throughout all of college Wbb, regardless of arena size and are 2nd in the nation in capacity of arena filled at over 94%.

    Lots to play for ladies, let's get it done,

    Go Zags,

    ZagDad

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sandy Eggo CA
    Posts
    704

    Default

    Appreciate the corrections regarding venues, ZD. Should have checked more carefully. Nonetheless, 6,000 fannies packed into a wild & crazy Kennel has got to do more for the women's college game than playing in half full campus arena's named after banks. As for last night's UCLA vs OSU game, yeah, lackluster 1st half, kind of like entirety of our last three Zag's games.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default

    Butts in the seats was why the NCAA moved the 1st and 2nd rounds of the tournament to sites of the Top-16 seeds. When the NCAA made sites "bid" on hosting the 1st and 2nd rounds of the Wbb tournament (just like the Mbb), when the local home team did not make the tournament, they had sites without almost any attendance. Bad look in the arena and worse look on TV. Hence, if the Top-16 seeds host the first two (2) rounds, a local team is guaranteed to be present for the first round games and if chalk holds, the home team will be in both the 1st and 2nd round games. Lots for the local teams to play for and almost guaranteed better attendance for the first two round games. Really a big benefit to the Top-16 seeds to get to play the first two rounds at home, but with the disparity that still exists in the Wbb game, the NCAA feels that guaranteed attendance is more important than a level playing field.

    As you said, having an Arena that is 94+% full looks really good on TV even if there are only 6,000 fans. The same 6,000 fans in an 15,000-18,000 seat arena does not project very well on the TV broadcast.

    ZagDad

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,582

    Default

    we are not the same without Katie's defense.....she, like Elle before, was a defensive dynamo....she didn't need to score high to have a great game.. one sees how disruptive she is....her 3's can be replaced, her defense, no....

    we lost to UCLA by 6 as I recall....

    Truongs MUST show up big....I think they will.....win the next two....have a week off to rest and heal and practice and meld....and then to Portland....then another week to rest and heal and practice and meld....

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sylean View Post
    we are not the same without Katie's defense.....she, like Elle before, was a defensive dynamo....she didn't need to score high to have a great game.. one sees how disruptive she is....her 3's can be replaced, her defense, no.......
    Sylean, Please explain this statement to me.

    We have played four games since the KC injury. In three (3) of the four (4) games we have played, we have held the opponents to fewer points than they scored when KC was present. This would imply that the "overall" scoring defense is, if nothing else, at least comparable to the scoring defense we had when KC was available.

    On the other hand, two (2) of our lowest scoring games (2 of the lowest 3) have occurred in the last two (2) games. The game results would appear to imply that our scoring offense has been more greatly affected by Katie's injury than our scoring defense.

    ZagDad

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    PNWest
    Posts
    3,425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZagDad84 View Post
    Sylean, Please explain this statement to me.

    We have played four games since the KC injury. In three (3) of the four (4) games we have played, we have held the opponents to fewer points than they scored when KC was present. This would imply that the "overall" scoring defense is, if nothing else, at least comparable to the scoring defense we had when KC was available.

    On the other hand, two (2) of our lowest scoring games (2 of the lowest 3) have occurred in the last two (2) games. The game results would appear to imply that our scoring offense has been more greatly affected by Katie's injury than our scoring defense.

    ZagDad
    ZD... I understand exactly what she meant... the style of play on D is less aggressive... Katie was an energizer bunny... ZD you do a lot of good here but at times you are over bearing... the numbers may bear you out but watching and seeing how the D plays does not.... not trying to argue but in reality sylean nor anyone else here has to reply to your cross examination or explain their opinion on this board... there is room for all our opinions whether you consider them right or wrong is irrelevant.... like I said you do many good things here and I appreciate the majority of your input... different doesn't necessarily mean wrong...

    This is just my opinion...

    Go!! Las Zagas!!!
    "Learn from the past, Plan for the future, Live in the Now!"

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default

    Bigblahla,

    Let me give you some insight to my background. In my profession, it is very numbers driven. I need to support my decisions based on the information available. As far as the Lady Zags are concerned, I watch the game and I may even re-watch the game, form my opinions on the game and then look to the stats to support my conclusions. Sometimes the stats tell me that my conclusions are way out of line and I need to revise my conclusions. I try very hard to not allow my personal opinions of the players, coaching staff or opponent impact my review. I try, although I am not always as successful as I would like, to be relatively impartial. I allow others on the board to post the "everything is positive and the world rides on unicorns" type of reviews. Not my style, but plenty of room for both types of reviews.

    IMO, there are two (2) very general components of any BB game, offense and defense; everything else is simply a subset of the two general categories. Furthermore, I will project that most will agree that the primary goal in any BB game, is to score more points than your opposition. IMO, that can happen by increasing your offensive production, upping your defensive intensity and subsequently reducing your opposition's point production or some combination of both. There are many, many ways to achieve these goals. There is no right way or wrong way, but at the end of the day, you want to score more points than your opposition.

    Generally, since the injury to KC, and specifically the last two games, we have had two of our lowest scoring output results (offense) of the season and conversely we have had two of our best efforts on limiting our opponents point production (defense). There could be many, many reasons for this starting with the teams we played, where the games were played, senior night, and so on even before getting into individual players, player capabilities or stats. Lots of room for discussion.

    The above being said, let me address your post. I apologize in advance for quoting lines in your post, but since you covered a lot of topics in a single paragraph, it is the best method to avoid any confusion.

    I understand exactly what she meant... the style of play on D is less aggressive... Katie was an energizer bunny...
    I don't disagree, but I certainly was not going to "assume" what she meant, that was why I asked?

    ZD you do a lot of good here but at times you are over bearing..
    Sorry you feel that way.

    .. the numbers may bear you out but watching and seeing how the D plays does not...
    Eye test verses metrics, there is plenty of room for both opinions. There is not necessarily any right or wrong. By nature I am a metrics type of person, but plenty of room for the eye test people.

    ....not trying to argue but in reality sylean nor anyone else here has to reply to your cross examination or explain their opinion on this board... there is room for all our opinions whether you consider them right or wrong is irrelevant..
    Boy, that sentence is a mouthful. You are absolutely right, nobody has to respond to my questions or polls, or anything else I post and by far and away, most people do not reply or post at all. Nothing new here. That is why this board has 10% of the posts of the Mbb. You get what you put in and the most viewers of the Wbb board don't want or desire to post for what ever reason. That is their choice, but at some time, the few viewers who do frequently post are going to get tired of continuing to try and get this board moving and it really will become a "dead" board.

    This is a "discussion" board, that is why it is here. If you don't want to "discuss" lady zag Wbb or Wbb in general or post articles concerning lady zag Wbb or Wbb in general, at all why are you here? Really?

    I certainly hope their are differing opinions from mine, otherwise there would not be much discussion on this board. Like my question to Sylean above, I made it not to be argumentative, but as sincere desire to understand her position, Yet you come here and accuse me "cross examining" a simple opinion made by a fellow poster. Kind of harsh, particularly from someone who did not even make the initial post. As I stated above, I just want to understand her position and not make an assumption, yet here you come immediately assuming that I am going to disagree with her position. Maybe, before assuming what I might say, maybe you should wait before "ASSuming" what I might say in response. Once again hard to have a "discussion" board if you don't want to "discuss" any issues.

    there is room for all our opinions whether you consider them right or wrong is irrelevant..... different doesn't necessarily mean wrong...
    First why are you concerned with what my opinion might be? My opinion carries no more weight than anybody else's. Opinions are not right or wrong, they simply are. I have never said that somebody else's opinion was wrong whether I agree with it or not. There is plenty of room for all.

    As is my nature, I put most of my supporting information in my posts to show how I came to my position. Does not mean my position is any "righter" or 'wronger" than anybody elses, just that I am willing to put my reasons out there for others to comment on while others make a "fly-by" post and never come back to discuss. Does not help the "discussion" aspect of the discussion board.

    When I make my opinion known on this board, I am more than willing to admit when I am wrong and have done so on many occasions.

    ZagDad

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    10,177

    Default

    I've never seen any message board make a bigger deal of pre season scrimmages than GU, both the men's and women's fans. I really don't think much can be taken from those games, but GU fans sure do like to reference them.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    3,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seacatfan View Post
    I've never seen any message board make a bigger deal of pre season scrimmages than GU, both the men's and women's fans. I really don't think much can be taken from those games, but GU fans sure do like to reference them.
    Got to have something to talk about in late October and early November.

    ZagDad

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,582

    Default

    "I've never seen any message board make a bigger deal of pre season scrimmages than GU, both the men's and women's fans. I really don't think much can be taken from those games, but GU fans sure do like to reference them. "

    they play them for a reason.....probably MORE important than our usual exhibition game vs the "Little Sisters"......

    that, and we have no lives......lol.....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •