March 17 Non-UConn games thread

[Plebe]

That must be what I'm thinking about. Yeah, she'll make the 10-member and some level of AP. Based on the regular season, right?

I haven't heard that it's only based on the regular season.

I've had the impression that the first couple weekends of the NCAA tournament do come into play. But I don't know this officially.

 

[Shades]

I haven't heard that it's only based on the regular season.

I've had the impression that the first couple weekends of the NCAA tournament do come into play. But I don't know this officially.

Okay, how's this for logic even if they consider NCAA tournament play (which I'm doubting)....
It's an individual award, not a team award, so unless the individual is responsible for the team losing, it shouldn't be a factor in losing the award.

Gustafson scored 29 pts (12-16) and 17 reb. I think she did her part.
She scored 40 pts in a game in the Big Ten tournament and her team still lost.
I contend she's still a worthy player.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

(U)SC's post-game presser is a hoot. Dawn's opening statement is the hoot part. She is in our bracket and her mood has shifted into wry fatalism.

 

[Plebe]

Okay, how's this for logic even if they consider NCAA tournament play (which I'm doubting)....
It's an individual award, not a team award, so unless the individual is responsible for the team losing, it shouldn't be a factor in losing the award.

Gustafson scored 29 pts (12-16) and 17 reb. I think she did her part.
She scored 40 pts in a game in the Big Ten tournament and her team still lost.
I contend she's still a worthy player.

I agree she's very worthy. But it's been rare that a team that has lost in the first round of the NCAAs has placed someone on the AA teams.

A couple years ago Banham made AA even though her team missed the tournament entirely. That's *extremely* rare.

 

[EasyEd]

This is what happens when an SEC team draws an officiating crew that adheres to the rules regarding freedom of movement. Missouri was exposed as the fraud they've been all year.

I wouldn't like to see that crew officiate a UConn game. When you call a game that close, it's easy for anyone to foul out.

 

[ocoandasoc]

I'm a Mizzou fan, but -- as Geno says -- you have to adjust to the way the refs are calling the game. Missouri didn't.

It was the tightest game I've seen called all year (65 free throws!), and it played right into FGCU's excellent game plan. They spread Missouri out then drove in on a single defender who -- the way this game was called -- fouled them. (In a typical rough and tumble SEC game there might have been 25 fouls called instead of the 56 that these refs whistled. But you have to say that they were consistent for the entire game.

FGCU had Missouri well-scouted. That let Cunningham have her 35 points, but held the other Mizzou players in check. They were too athletic for Missouri's bench players who had to play a lot of minutes because of foul trouble for the starters. (Three of Mizzou's starters played less than 18 minutes!)

No question that Missouri swooned late (or peaked too early, LOL!) this season. Porter had a bad flu and never got back to full strength. (FGCU let her take all the shots she wanted from beyond the foul line -- she made none of them.) And a few of the three point shooters went cold which resulted in them passing when they should have shot. Often in their last few games the Mizzou offense would pass up two or three decent shots and then wound up taking desperation heaves or very tough shots to beat the shot clock buzzer. I also think that Missouri got a bit too predictable with their offense -- a few more new wrinkles over the last quarter of the season might have helped. Plus, when they missed their goal of getting a $4 seed and playing a couple of games at home for the first time ever fell through, I think it took the edge off.

I cringed when I saw that FGCU was Mizzou's first round opponent. I have admired their program for years. They always acquit themselves well in the Tourney and always have to battle a much higher seed. I don't care what conference you're in, you don't win thirty games in a season unless you have a talented and disciplined team. They also improved quite a bit over the course of the season -- their only loss in their last 21 games was by two points, and a lot of their wins were blowouts.

Does FGCU have a chance against Stanford? Maybe. I'll be rooting for them. I actually thought that Missouri would match up better against Stanford than they would against FGCU. I guarantee you, though, that Coach Vanderveer and her assistants are watching film tonight.

 

[toadfoot]

I'm a Mizzou fan, but -- as Geno says -- you have to adjust to the way the refs are calling the game. Missouri didn't.

It was the tightest game I've seen called all year (65 free throws!), and it played right into FGCU's excellent game plan. They spread Missouri out then drove in on a single defender who -- the way this game was called -- fouled them. (In a typical rough and tumble SEC game there might have been 25 fouls called instead of the 56 that these refs whistled. But you have to say that they were consistent for the entire game.

FGCU had Missouri well-scouted. That let Cunningham have her 35 points, but held the other Mizzou players in check. They were too athletic for Missouri's bench players who had to play a lot of minutes because of foul trouble for the starters. (Three of Mizzou's starters played less than 18 minutes!)

No question that Missouri swooned late (or peaked too early, LOL!) this season. Porter had a bad flu and never got back to full strength. (FGCU let her take all the shots she wanted from beyond the foul line -- she made none of them.) And a few of the three point shooters went cold which resulted in them passing when they should have shot. Often in their last few games the Mizzou offense would pass up two or three decent shots and then wound up taking desperation heaves or very tough shots to beat the shot clock buzzer. I also think that Missouri got a bit too predictable with their offense -- a few more new wrinkles over the last quarter of the season might have helped. Plus, when they missed their goal of getting a $4 seed and playing a couple of games at home for the first time ever fell through, I think it took the edge off.

I cringed when I saw that FGCU was Mizzou's first round opponent. I have admired their program for years. They always acquit themselves well in the Tourney and always have to battle a much higher seed. I don't care what conference you're in, you don't win thirty games in a season unless you have a talented and disciplined team. They also improved quite a bit over the course of the season -- their only loss in their last 21 games was by two points, and a lot of their wins were blowouts.

Does FGCU have a chance against Stanford? Maybe. I'll be rooting for them. I actually thought that Missouri would match up better against Stanford than they would against FGCU. I guarantee you, though, that Coach Vanderveer and her assistants are watching film tonight.

Pretty much agree with everything you said, although there were several obvious fouls late in the game by both teams that weren’t called. The one that quickly comes to mind was when Cunningham had the ball out at the 3 point line and then lunged and drove her shoulder into the defender knocking her backward to the floor. Doubt I’ve ever seen a more obvious foul that wasn’t called. Maybe the officials were just tired of blowing their whistles.

Maybe it’s just me, but I detest the SEC style of play. It’s way too physical, rewards teams that can’t play good team defense without fouling and flies in the face of the NCAA’s point of emphasis from a couple of years ago that impeding freedom of movement would be called.

 

[IWearShoes]

RPI is not a power rating.

I have no idea what “1 pt lower in Sagarin” means in any statistical sense.

“Seeding is never accurate in middle seed games. “.
Not true at all.
I don’t have the stats in front of me but in the women’s draw, the higher seeded team wins overwhelmingly.

The Sagarin rating is one of the main metrics Vegas uses in setting odds on games. One point lower means on a neutral court LSU would typically be favored by 1. They were on a neutral court and LSU was without their starting center. That says tossup to me.

 

[IWearShoes]

In 6 vs 11 games, #6 has won 66 and lost 26 (72%).

I should have stated it more clearly. I meant it's not uncommon for seeding to not accurately reflect the disparity in two teams or even who the better team is in middle seed games. I'm talking games between seeds in the 6 to 11 range. These games often match teams that are pretty close in strength, but the pundits will act like an 11 win over a 6 is a big upset. Not really and certainly not in the case of CMU who was 27-4 entering the game and a seeding victim of a relatively weak schedule. Still 2-1 vs Top 50 and now 3-1. I am using Sagarin ratings, which I consider to be most accurate in terms of comparing teams.