Sporting News: Marquette is an under-the-radar Final Four Contender

[TheButlerDidIt]

Just my personal opinion that if we finish 6th or higher, we are in. The committee will probably take the top 7 Big East finishers; just to be sure, I'd hope we could finish higher than 6th. Lot's of work to do.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

To paraphrase Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction, let's not sucking each others dicks just yet.

We could very easily finish up 3-4 or 2-5 the rest of the way. Seton Hall is tough on the road, St. John's is not going to be a pushover, Cincy is a load at home and we've got a very, very tough game on Saturday, not to mention a Louisville team with a lot of history of success at the Bradley Center and an improved Pitt team.

[Eye]

Before I even read the remainder of the article and thread (and I'm sure that it's been commented on already), consistently outperform their seed? Huh? They've beaten one higher-seeded team in his time there. And without looking it up, they lost as a 2 to a 7 in UNLV. At best it's a push. Now on to the rest of the article and thread.

[Benny B]

Benny .. not doubting you, but how does that .0118 jive with this website:

http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Marquette.html

It lists DePaul as MU's biggest RPI drag.  Honestly, I don't fully understand the #s..

I'm not saying that DePaul isn't the biggest "drag" on MU's RPI, all I'm saying is that had MU won at Allstate, their RPI would be about .0118 ratings percentage index points higher, which translates into a 8-10 place jump based on today's RPI rankings (might be more tomorrow, might be less).  Note (to Chicos) -- I didn't say anything about excluding outliers.

The website you linked, I looked at it for the first time just now.  Obviously, it's a forecasting site based on expected W/L's over the remaining schedule, but I haven't yet read how to interpret the numbers.

My point is that MU should be concerned with presenting a solid resume going into Selection Sunday, not dwelling over how horrible the loss at DePaul was.  MU isn't going to be excluded from the conversation in Indy based on RPI (resulting from the loss at DePaul) assuming they end the season strong.  Nor will they be excluded from the tourney simply because they lost to DePaul.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm not saying that DePaul isn't the biggest "drag" on MU's RPI, all I'm saying is that had MU won at Allstate, their RPI would be about .0118 ratings percentage index points higher, which translates into a 8-10 place jump based on today's RPI rankings (might be more tomorrow, might be less).  Note (to Chicos) -- I didn't say anything about excluding outliers.

The website you linked, I looked at it for the first time just now.  Obviously, it's a forecasting site based on expected W/L's over the remaining schedule, but I haven't yet read how to interpret the numbers.

My point is that MU should be concerned with presenting a solid resume going into Selection Sunday, not dwelling over how horrible the loss at DePaul was.  MU isn't going to be excluded from the conversation in Indy based on RPI (resulting from the loss at DePaul) assuming they end the season strong.  Nor will they be excluded from the tourney simply because they lost to DePaul.

I understand and largely agree with you.  My concern is that it comes down to team X and team Y and they try to compare.  Both have similar resumes but one has about as crappy a loss as you can get and the other doesn't.  That could come back to bite us.  I hope we win enough at the end here so it's a moot point. 

[Pakuni]

I understand and largely agree with you.  My concern is that it comes down to team X and team Y and they try to compare.  Both have similar resumes but one has about as crappy a loss as you can get and the other doesn't.  That could come back to bite us.  I hope we win enough at the end here so it's a moot point. 

you may be right.
but when you start looking at "bubble" teams, it's very unlikely that MU is alone with a bad loss. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if most have a bad loss ... thus making them bubble teams.
Look at Lunardis last four in and out today and their bad losses.

Marquette ... Depaul (RPI 153)
Notre Dame ... Loyola-Marymout (209)
South Florida ... Central Michigan (181)
Okie State ... Tulsa (62 ... not a bad loss, but their worst)
Dayton ... St. Joe's (176)
Cincy ... St. John's (91) ... not really a bad loss yet, but could become one if the Johnnies falter
Old Dominion ... George Mason (130)
Louisville ... Western Carolina (93) .. with their remaining sked (5 games with opponents RPI 217 or worse), this will be a bad loss in a month

So, really, six of eight have a "bad" loss and the seventh could by the end of the season.
The DePaul loss could cost MU in the sense it's another loss (and not a win), but I don't think in and of itself will be a determining factor.

p.s. As you can see above, there certainly are losses crappier than DePaul.

[NersEllenson]

What's really sad is that so much emphasis is placed on RPI, when it is a flawed system.  Just go look at Dayton's results/body of work compared to ours, and tell me they deserve to be in the tourney more than we do?  MU gets killed due to having played 6 teams with RPI's ranging from 200-330, with 3 of those 6 being in the 300-330 range - Presbyterian, MD Eastern Shore and Grambling.  Lastly, if Providence can win a few games, we will at least show more 2 more wins in the 50-100 category.  Thankfully, our remaining games are all against Top 100 RPI;s, though only Pitt and Lville are in the Top 50.

I still say 4-3 the rest of the way and a 19-9 finish will get us in the tourney.  Our record in our last 10 games would be 7-3, therefore playing well going into the tourney.  This is where our close losses may "help" our cause...hard not to look at MU notice/credit on some level MU losing to Villy and WVU 3 games by a combined 5 points.

[Tom Crean's Tanning Bed]

Note too both ND's and USF worst losses were at home as well.  Doesn't really make the DePaul loss more justifyable on our end, but I would think the committee would have to view a home loss to a sub-150 team worse than a road loss to a sub-150 team.

I don't like ND's chances much.  Sure, they are 6-5 in conference play, but they are absolutely brutal away from the Joyce Center (only 2 road/neutral wins were by 1 over USF and over SLU in Chicago). And they still have to go to Seton Hall (solid at home), Louisville, Georgetown (on a Saturday, and GTown is 4-0 on Saturdays), and Marquette (on Senior Day).  Even if they win out their home slate, they still have to steal a road game at some point, and none of those are going to be easy to steal.  

If Marquette can get Saturday's game and get to 7-5, we will firmly control our tourney destiny.  

[4everwarriors]

Under the radar FF contender? Huh? Without any big men we're more like completely known by other teams. No surprises here. If anyone here seriously thinks we're still dribbling in Indy in late March, they should beg, borrow, steal, and 2nd mortgage the house, take the proceeds directly to Vegas and lay it on MU.

[Benny B]

What's really sad is that so much emphasis is placed on RPI, when it is a flawed system.  Just go look at Dayton's results/body of work compared to ours, and tell me they deserve to be in the tourney more than we do?  MU gets killed due to having played 6 teams with RPI's ranging from 200-330, with 3 of those 6 being in the 300-330 range - Presbyterian, MD Eastern Shore and Grambling.  Lastly, if Providence can win a few games, we will at least show more 2 more wins in the 50-100 category.  Thankfully, our remaining games are all against Top 100 RPI;s, though only Pitt and Lville are in the Top 50.

I still say 4-3 the rest of the way and a 19-9 finish will get us in the tourney.  Our record in our last 10 games would be 7-3, therefore playing well going into the tourney.  This is where our close losses may "help" our cause...hard not to look at MU notice/credit on some level MU losing to Villy and WVU 3 games by a combined 5 points.

I think the whole RPI thing is blown out of proportion.  As humans, we want a simple answer to every question, and simplest way to rank 347 basketball teams is the RPI.  But you're right, no matter how good the calculation is, it is still flawed.

Fortunately, the committee realizes this and wholeheartedly agrees that RPI is not the end-all-be-all.  Otherwise, how do you explain them excluding teams with a top-30 RPI over the past decade?

The media over-hypes RPI because they live in a 30-second world.  Even a two-hour Sportscenter dedicated to Men's Hoops wouldn't have time to scrutinize schedules and compare bodies of work.  However, the committee does have the time, and that's what matters.