Big Bubble Night Discussion | Page 16 | The Boneyard

Big Bubble Night Discussion

We're now in 100% of brackets on BracketMatrix (there are teams a few seedlines better than us that aren't in 100%).

MSU has one more game against Michigan at home that would likely put them in the field.
 
Kansas played UTEP tonight. I thought out of conference games were illegal?
 
Kemba'sYogurt said:
And almost lost. They were down 15 at one point. Imagine if we scheduled UTEP right now and lost? Just stop.
Expand ...
They fell 4 spots in KenPom and the NET despite winning, because they were favored by 15 but only won by 5. They were trailing by 3 with less than 4 minutes left and risked a Q3 loss. They gained a Q3 win for their efforts. And I guess they sold 2500 tickets, too.

They played the game because they had an 11 day layoff between last game and Big 12 tournament, since they had no COVID makeup games.

UConn will have a 5 day layoff.
 
Last edited:
auror said:
We're now in 100% of brackets on BracketMatrix (there are teams a few seedlines better than us that aren't in 100%).

MSU has one more game against Michigan at home that would likely put them in the field.
Expand ...
You think a win there would put them in? They just got absolutely crushed on the road. Down by about 30. Lost by 20. Before that loss their NET was 72. Their KenPom is 61.

At 14-11, I think they need more than a home win against Michigan. The 2019 Ohio State team that had a similar record in conferece (8-12) had much better metrics.

I think in a normal year they wouldn't even be talked about on the bubble after that annihilation last night.
 
.-.
tzznandrew said:
You think a win there would put them in? They just got absolutely crushed on the road. Down by about 30. Lost by 20. Before that loss their NET was 72. Their KenPom is 61.

At 14-11, I think they need more than a home win against Michigan. The 2019 Ohio State team that had a similar record in conferece (8-12) had much better metrics.

I think in a normal year they wouldn't even be talked about on the bubble after that annihilation last night.
Expand ...
Lunardi says they'll need 1 win in the B1G tournament if they LOSE to Michigan on Saturday to get in, which seems crazy. I don't think they should get in with a win, but given the weak bubble and brand name I think they'd be in with the good wins they have
 
Kemba'sYogurt said:
And almost lost. They were down 15 at one point. Imagine if we scheduled UTEP right now and lost? Just stop.
Expand ...

Don’t discourage him. At this point, he’s like Clark Griswold at the Blackjack table in “Vegas Vacation”. It’s a comedic train wreck!

Chevy Chase Reaction GIF
 
tzznandrew said:
You think a win there would put them in? They just got absolutely crushed on the road. Down by about 30. Lost by 20. Before that loss their NET was 72. Their KenPom is 61.

At 14-11, I think they need more than a home win against Michigan. The 2019 Ohio State team that had a similar record in conferece (8-12) had much better metrics.

I think in a normal year they wouldn't even be talked about on the bubble after that annihilation last night.
Expand ...
A loss to a top 5 team on the road isn't something I or the committee will hold against a team. The margin hurts their computer numbers, for sure. And yeah, I would imagine they'd need a win in the conf tourny also, but their metrics will significantly improve with a win against a top 5 team.

They have no bad losses (6-0 in Q3+4) and although they'll only be 5-9 in Q1 (or maybe 6-10 depending on tourny matchups) they'll have beaten Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio State (likely 2 #1s and a #2 seed). In my experience, the committee rewards firepower. 1 elite win doesn't put you in (I feel like there are 3 VTech seasons where they beak Duke and no one else), but 3...?
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
You think fewer games are better. I heard you the first time. Why do teams ever play non-conference games?
Expand ...
Jerry Palm says non-conference SOS is the third most important factor. Much higher than W-L record. So how would have shoehorning a couple of OOC tomato cans into the schedule have helped us? I'm thinking if might have hurt us.

Most important​

  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses

Some value​

  • Average NET win and loss
  • Overall record
  • Non-Conference record, road record

Not nothing, but not very important​

  • NET and other computer rankings
  • Overall home records, non-conference and by quadrant
  • Game scoring margins

Not criteria​

  • Conference records and standings
  • AP Top 25, Coaches Poll
  • Tournament history
 
Last edited:
Waquoit said:
Jerry Palm says non-conference SOS is the third most important factor. Much higher than W-L record. So how would have shoehorning a couple of OOC tomato cans into the schedule have helped us? I'm thinking if might have hurts us.

Most important​

  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses

Some value​

  • Average NET win and loss
  • Overall record
  • Non-Conference record, road record

Not nothing, but not very important​

  • NET and other computer rankings
  • Overall home records, non-conference and by quadrant
  • Game scoring margins

Not criteria​

  • Conference records and standings
  • AP Top 25, Coaches Poll
  • Tournament history
Expand ...
You're being too generous to engage on this. He's right in theory, but he has no evidence that they could have even gotten a game in when in a time when we weren't the pause except in November....when we hadn't practiced enough to really justify the games.

Everyone thinks UConn would be better off if we played more games. Everyone. So the debate is in the specifics of who and when and whether it was possible. I'm trusting the AD that we didn't do it because it wasn't particularly feasible. The onus is on Nelson to actual provide reasonable overlap between UConn and another school or two when neither school is in a stoppage and with enough time between the games. That would be a good faith argument.

But it's easier to live in hypothetical land where he can't be wrong. Because, again, he's right in theory and we can all agree with that.
 
Today's Bubble Games:
  • 12 PM - CBS, Memphis @ Houston. Go Cougars, boo Penny
  • 2 PM - CBS, Drake vs Loyola-Chi. Does Drake get in with a loss in the MVC championship?
  • 4:30 - CBS, Michigan @ Michigan State. So easy to root against State here. Michigan is a fun team too.
 
tzznandrew said:
You're being too generous to engage on this.
Expand ...
I'm not trying to be generous, I'm trying to make a hanging case. He has been killing the team for months about this and I say he was wrong on the merits as well as the results.
 
Waquoit said:
I'm not trying to be generous, I'm trying to make a hanging case. He has been killing the team for months about this and I say he was wrong on the merits as well as the results.
Expand ...
I think he's ultimately correct in theory not just because more wins likely helps generate a better NET, but also because it likely would kept the team fresher. So many of the team's losses came after layoffs that were longer than a normal year.

I'm not sure Nelson is worth the rope you'd hang him on, mojo-wise.
 
.-.
Keeping the Q1 / Q2 metrics in mind:
  • Quadrant 1: Home 1-30, Neutral 1-50, Away 1-75
  • Quadrant 2: Home 31-75, Neutral 51-100, Away 76-135
Opportunities we have for teams to move up:
  • Providence (76)
  • Marquette (87)
  • Georgetown (95)
If Providence can slip under the 75 NET line, we shift the road Q2 loss to Q1, and the home Q3 win to Q2. Marquette and Georgetown play each other in the 8/9 game. We swept them both Home & Away. If that winner beats Villanova, hopefully they would get below 75 NET.

At the end of the day, we just need to take care of business.
 
Waquoit said:
Jerry Palm says non-conference SOS is the third most important factor. Much higher than W-L record. So how would have shoehorning a couple of OOC tomato cans into the schedule have helped us? I'm thinking if might have hurt us.

Most important​

  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses

Some value​

  • Average NET win and loss
  • Overall record
  • Non-Conference record, road record

Not nothing, but not very important​

  • NET and other computer rankings
  • Overall home records, non-conference and by quadrant
  • Game scoring margins

Not criteria​

  • Conference records and standings
  • AP Top 25, Coaches Poll
  • Tournament history
Expand ...

I don't care if it is the third factor. It sucks for us. The SEC teams have a poor OOC record, but they played a lot of games and they have a lot more wins than UConn. We are counting on the committee to ignore TWO big factors, overall record and quality wins, to give us a good seed. One mulligan is possible. Two? That is going to be tough.
 
tzznandrew said:
I think he's ultimately correct in theory not just because more wins likely helps generate a better NET,
Expand ...
Would a couple of wins against cupcakes be worth the dilution of non-conference SOS. That's a "most important". NET and W-L record are only "some value". I'm asking.
 
Waquoit said:
Would a couple of wins against cupcakes be worth the dilution of non-conference SOS. That's a "most important". NET and W-L record are only "some value". I'm asking.
Expand ...
If you can juke your own NET into a higher ranking you also raise the teams you play. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I can't crunch the numbers. But the B10 had the most OOC games and won a good percentage—but mostly not against the best of other teams, so sort of like what Nelson was pitching—and that meant that all their NETs were inflated and they got way more Quad 1 opportunities. It's probably more of a "Big East in general should have played more" than a UConn specific thing. But it does matter.
 
I am curious about a school like Colgate with a very high NET but other rankings around 65-70. If they don't win their conference, could they get an at-large? They have played 3 teams total so far (that is crazy in itself), and only Army is over .500 at 12-8. I understand that NET is being used to position teams in Q's, but that is still a factor that is strongly in their favor, as is a 6-0 record on the road. If you really delve into the the SOS, their case should fall apart.
 
.-.
huskypantz said:
I am curious about a school like Colgate with a very high NET but other rankings around 65-70. If they don't win their conference, could they get an at-large? They have played 3 teams total so far (that is crazy in itself), and only Army is over .500 at 12-8. I understand that NET is being used to position teams in Q's, but that is still a factor that is strongly in their favor, as is a 6-0 record on the road. If you really delve into the the SOS, their case should fall apart.
Expand ...
Of course not. The selection committee will lose a lot of credibility if they hang everything on NET. This year is sort of a more extreme version of the limits of computer metrics to determine the field. Even in a normal year, NET, RPI, Kenpom etc need to be taken with a grain of salt
 
tzznandrew said:
If you can juke your own NET into a higher ranking you also raise the teams you play. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I can't crunch the numbers. But the B10 had the most OOC games and won a good percentage—but mostly not against the best of other teams, so sort of like what Nelson was pitching—and that meant that all their NETs were inflated and they got way more Quad 1 opportunities. It's probably more of a "Big East in general should have played more" than a UConn specific thing. But it does matter.
Expand ...
Again, it's Non-Conference Strength of Schedule that is most important. Actually winning those games is only of some value. Jerry Palm's bracketology explanation says to me that if we had ginned up a few games against some local scrubs if would have given us little to no value seeding-wise. That OOC USC game would have been severely diluted. A neutral court win versus a top opponent is like gold this year. The fact that we have hit the BET with all systems go shows not playing those games didn't hurt us on court.

Getting back to hanging, this was a drumbeat carried on for months. Constant criticism of the coach and program that ends up being incorrect without some level of atonement is hanging-worthy. And this is only one charge!
 
It is possible that the Big East gets 3 bids. Villanova, Creighton and UConn. How can anyone seriously think Seton Hall deserves anything? Xavier got smoked by Marquette. 6-7 in the league. Their 4 of the 7 non-league wins are Tenn Tech, Bradley, Oakland, Eastern Ky. and the 5th is a Cincinatti team that has struggled. So while they or somebody will probably get the Big East legacy bid, it is pretty slim pickins after the top 3. Maybe you could make a case for the Johnnies, but I don’t see it myself. Do you seriously want to waste a bid on a team that has lost games to Georgetown, DePaul, Butler and Marquette? The Hall? How do you invite a team that I’d dropping like a rock and only 1 game over .500. If I’m Val I’m meeting with the refs to fix things so an underdog wind the tourney to insure 4 slots. Nobody is leaving out the other 3 regardless of performance.
 
Waquoit said:
Again, it's Non-Conference Strength of Schedule that is most important. Actually winning those games is only of some value. Jerry Palm's bracketology explanation says to me that if we had ginned up a few games against some local scrubs if would have given us little to no value seeding-wise. That OOC USC game would have been severely diluted. A neutral court win versus a top opponent is like gold this year. The fact that we have hit the BET with all systems go shows not playing those games didn't hurt us on court.

Getting back to hanging, this was a drumbeat carried on for months. Constant criticism of the coach and program that ends up being incorrect without some level of atonement is hanging-worthy. And this is only one charge!
Expand ...
In the list you gave:

Most important​

  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses
NCSOS isn't the most important. It's in a list of other relevant statistics including games by quadrant, etc.

Win percentage as a raw stat isn't itself that important, but it factors into your NET, which determines the quadrants, which are the first two categories. Win% is also a major determinant SOS.

The B10 got lots of wins against sundry OOC opponents. Their high winning percentage helped them get a load of Q1 games in conference.

Think of it this way. Michigan is absolutely going to get a #1 seed. Their NET is through the roof. Part of that is that they played and won more games. Their OOC schedule wasn't something to write home about:

134 Bowling Green
255 Oakland
170 Ball State
104 UCF
63 Toledo

UConn's is

302 CCSU
167 Hartford
14 USC

If they were able to schedule a couple of games in the Hartford territory, it clearly wouldn't have hurt. And, it looks to me like it would have helped a lot, because you can do this through most of the B10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,193
Messages
4,556,279
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom