http://marquettenation.com/2016/01/19/is-marquette-an-ncaa-tournament-team/ (http://marquettenation.com/2016/01/19/is-marquette-an-ncaa-tournament-team/)
Discuss.
This has been discussed ad nauseam in other threads, but I'll bite.
Today? Nah.
In early March? I hope so. 11-7 is a lock, but that requires 9-3 in the final 12. 10-8 probably requires a win in the BET. 9-9 and a visit to the BE finals would be necessary to even sneak into the perhaps the last four in. Anything less and MU would need to win the BET. Some here would say this isn't the case, but there is ZERO chance an 11-7 BE team isn't a lock, and 10-8 is probably a lock too.
These next three conferences games are critical. If they can take all three and be sitting at 5-4 at the midway point, things will be looking much better.
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on January 19, 2016, 02:32:39 PM
This has been discussed ad nauseam in other threads, but I'll bite.
Today? Nah.
In early March? I hope so. 11-7 is a lock, but that requires 9-3 in the final 12. 10-8 probably requires a win in the BET. 9-9 and a visit to the BE finals would be necessary to even sneak into the perhaps the last four in. Anything less and MU would need to win the BET. Some here would say this isn't the case, but there is ZERO chance an 11-7 BE team isn't a lock, and 10-8 is probably a lock too.
These next three conferences games are critical. If they can take all three and be sitting at 5-4 at the midway point, things will be looking much better.
Yep. Revisit in a couple of weeks. We'll know more.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
This is the most clueless comment i've seen on here in a while, and that is saying something.
This will probably be a top 20 team preseason next year if Ellenson returns, and probably a team that will be in the top 15 most of the season.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
Gotta think they're in next year with Henry back.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/Bi6FcO7UoutWM/giphy.gif)
This should go over well
No.
The obvious logical answer is NO.
But what fun is that for a fan?...its not like its a fool's hope. It can be imagined in the realm of possibility.
* Beat DePaul at home
* and STJ away (yes difficult)
* then Butler at home (conceivable).
>>>> BE: 5-4 at the half. Along the way dispatch Stetson.
Second half. Wins:
* DePaul away
* Creighton home
* Georgetown home
* 2 of these (@Seton Hall, @Creighton, @Butler, Prov home) (tough I know).
Losses:
* Nova at home and @Xavier
>>>> BE: 10-8 (BE Top 5?)
BET 1-1 - finish 22-11 (RPI around 65)
or if we drop one during BE play perhaps BET 2-1 (again Tough)
or if all else fails win the BET!
Quote from: jsheim on January 19, 2016, 02:47:54 PM
The obvious logical answer is NO.
But what fun is that for a fan?...its not like its a fool's hope. It can be imagined in the realm of possibility.
* Beat DePaul at home
* and STJ away (yes difficult)
* then Butler at home (conceivable).
>>>> BE: 5-4 at the half. Along the way dispatch Stetson.
Second half. Wins:
* DePaul away
* Creighton home
* Georgetown home
* 2 of these (@Seton Hall, @Creighton, @Butler) (tough I know).
Losses:
* Nova at home and @Xavier
>>>> BE: 10-8 (BE Top 5?)
BET 1-1 - finish 22-11 (RPI around 65)
or if we drop one during BE play perhaps BET 2-1 (again Tough)
or if all else fails win the BET!
Boy, looking at the above an NCAA bid seems like a very tall order, especially 2 out of 3 of @Seton Hall, @Creighton, @Butler.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 19, 2016, 03:01:46 PM
Boy, looking at the above an NCAA bid seems like a very tall order, especially 2 out of 3 of @Seton Hall, @Creighton, @Butler.
sorry corrected it:
2 out of 4 of @Seton Hall, @Creighton, @Butler, Prov home
still tough I know.
When I read threads like this, one reaction I have is that few scoopers must have watched a Creighton game. Most posts on this board consistently underrate Creighton's improvement from last year. They will be a very tough out.
Quote from: Crean to Ann Arbor on January 19, 2016, 03:34:43 PM
When I read threads like this, one reaction I have is that few scoopers must have watched a Creighton game. Most posts on this board consistently underrate Creighton's improvement from last year. They will be a very tough out.
Which would be disappointing since almost every Big East game is on FS1, FS2, CBSSN and FSN
The sooner people get the idea of MU as a tournament team out of their heads, the better. They're not that good. Just enjoy the surprise wins and leave it at that. It makes their 8 minute chuckfests a little easier to deal with.
Keep in mind that MU:
a) Is a 6-loss team right now (7 teams in top 50 RPI have at least six losses; 10 more have 5 losses)
b) Has one quality and one good road win
c) Has one quality and one good neutral-site win
d) Has no losses to >150RPI teams
e) Has only two losses against 100-150RPI teams, at least one of which (GU) will be in the top 100 by end of season, the other of which (Belmont) may end up in the tourney any way.
f) Three of six losses are against top 10 RPI teams.
g) Has an RPI that has climbed about 15 places over the past week despite two losses in that time.
'F' is interesting... top 10 losses are easily overlooked by the committee, so take those three games (IA, Nova, X) away for a moment and look at MU's remaining resume objectively. Granted, RPI and SOS still suck, but 2-2 in Big East, 10-1 non-con, and 12-3 overall seems pretty solid.
Since scoring margin only matters when the committee is giving a team the benefit of doubt in a close loss, the bottom line is that other than RPI (90) and SOS (108) - which can and will, respectively, be improved over the next 7 weeks - there aren't any black marks on MU's resume, and in a year with a lot of mediocre teams in the 8-13 seed pool, that could be quite advantageous to MU.
MU still has a lot of work to do just to get onto the bubble... but if they can find their way there, I'd feel pretty good about their prospects for sneaking an at-large bid.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 19, 2016, 04:30:46 PM
The sooner people get the idea of MU as a tournament team out of their heads, the better. They're not that good. Just enjoy the surprise wins and leave it at that. It makes their 8 minute chuckfests a little easier to deal with.
MUfan12 - can't figure out the "12"...was that the last year you were a "fan".
I'm curious, when did you stop hoping MU would get in the tournament this year? before season started? after Belmont? after SH?
I guess there comes a time when we give up hope...last year around GT#2, I threw in the towel...but still .. before the BET Nova game...maybe?
Anyway the point is.....its just to easy to play the intellectual CYA game ... MU is gonna lose this and that and not get in the tournament.
When MU got down by 8 to providence was there anything in your soul that hoped they would come back...or were things going as planned?
http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2016/01/19/2016-ncaa-tournament-bubble-watch-acc-sec-pac-12
Quote from: jsheim on January 19, 2016, 05:18:19 PM
MUfan12 - can't figure out the "12"...was that the last year you were a "fan".
I'm curious, when did you stop hoping MU would get in the tournament this year? before season started? after Belmont? after SH?
I've been going to MU games since 88-89. Lived and died with the team from a young age. Haven't missed a home game in 13 years. But by all means, question my fandom because I don't think this is a tournament team.
There was no "moment." I thought they'd have a decent shot at a tourney bid before the season, but I didn't think the BE would be as strong as it is. Creighton and Hall are way better than I thought they'd be. With the cupcake parade dragging down the RPI, winning 10-11 in the league is a little too much for this group, given their youthful mistakes and struggles with physicality.
I'd love to be wrong about that.
Quote from: MuMark on January 19, 2016, 05:24:23 PM
http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2016/01/19/2016-ncaa-tournament-bubble-watch-acc-sec-pac-12
"Marquette, DePaul and St. John's won't come anywhere near the field without a dramatic, highly unexpected turn of events. That leaves five teams, divided into two tiers."
I'm still hoping on a "dramatic, highly unexpected turn of events." too early to give up.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
Not this year. Yes, next year. Buzz isn't the coach, so most players will develop and show marked improvement year over year.
We're going undefeated from here on out. We're going to win the next 50 straight.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
Agree about this year.
Not sure why you'd say that about next year. Makes no sense, a whole year in advance, to write off a good young team with everybody returning a couple solid additions coming in.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on January 19, 2016, 02:38:06 PM
This is the most clueless comment i've seen on here in a while, and that is saying something.
This will probably be a top 20 team preseason next year if Ellenson returns, and probably a team that will be in the top 15 most of the season.
We will see how clueless this ends up being. Of course, if Wojo can bring in another contributor in the spring class, I reserve the right to change my prediction. However, right now with what they have my prediction is that they will not make the tournament next year.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
Lol.
Quote from: chapman on January 19, 2016, 06:07:12 PM
Not this year. Yes, next year. Buzz isn't the coach, so most players will develop and show marked improvement year over year.
I suppose one could argue that Duane and JJJ are not showing the development that Coach Wojo should bring. Maybe Sandy.
It's not just about the coach.
One of the reasons why I do not think this will be an NCAA tournament team next year is that I have come to realize as the Big East season goes on that we are not as athletic as I thought we were when we were playing cupcakes. Xavier and St. John's are much quicker than us and are better jumpers. I suspect tomorrow that we will see that DePaul is also more athletic than us.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 10:05:43 PM
One of the reasons why I do not think this will be an NCAA tournament team next year is that I have come to realize as the Big East season goes on that we are not as athletic as I thought we were when we were playing cupcakes. Xavier and St. John's are much quicker than us and are better jumpers. I suspect tomorrow that we will see that DePaul is also more athletic than us.
Dude, youngest team in the BEast. Give them time to grow.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2016, 02:35:37 PM
They are not an NCAA tournament team this year or next year, even if Ellenson comes back
This year, no. Next year, I would wager yes.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 19, 2016, 11:24:11 PM
Dude, youngest team in the BEast. Give them time to grow.
I think St. John's is actually younger and much more athletic than us. St. John's will be better than us next year. We barely beat them without their shot blocker.
Quote from: bilsu on January 20, 2016, 07:26:38 AM
I think St. John's is actually younger and much more athletic than us. St. John's will be better than us next year. We barely beat them without their shot blocker.
Actually they're not. Their two graduate transfers tip the scales in their favor. We are way ahead of st. John's and will be next year. We lost to two top 5 teams. That's no reason to start predicting doom and gloom for next season
Quote from: bilsu on January 20, 2016, 07:26:38 AM
I think St. John's is actually younger and much more athletic than us. St. John's will be better than us next year. We barely beat them without their shot blocker.
Xavier needed a technical foul after a bad foul call against St. John's to win their game against St. John's. Does that mean Xavier's not as good as St. John's?
Logic tends to go out the window around here when Marquette loses a couple in a row (even if it's to 2 top 5 teams).
Quote from: jsglow on January 19, 2016, 02:36:40 PM
Yep. Revisit in a couple of weeks. We'll know more.
Agreed. "Is Marquette an NCAA Tournament team?" is a question we can discuss but not yet answer with a good amount of confidence (obviously).
Quote from: mubbnation on January 20, 2016, 10:33:30 AM
Agreed. "Is Marquette an NCAA Tournament team?" is a question we can discuss but not yet answer with a good amount of confidence (obviously).
I feel pretty confident. Right now we're the 8th best team in a 10 team conference. So, no. The discussion should be whether we can improve enough by the end of the year to become an NIT team. I hope so.
Quote from: MuMark on January 19, 2016, 05:24:23 PM
http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2016/01/19/2016-ncaa-tournament-bubble-watch-acc-sec-pac-12
I don't disagree with their general order...but I'd place MU closer to the GTown/Creighton group than the DePaul/St. John's group.
To the original question: If the season ended today, we'd be out. If we continue to do as we have done, we'd be out. To be in, we would have to surprise more teams. The good news is that we still have five games left vs Nova, X, Butler and Providence, so the opportunity is there.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 08:56:36 AM
Xavier needed a technical foul after a bad foul call against St. John's to win their game against St. John's. Does that mean Xavier's not as good as St. John's?
Logic tends to go out the window around here when Marquette loses a couple in a row (even if it's to 2 top 5 teams).
Yep yep.
Hate to be a downer but...No, Marquette is not a Tourney team this season. I really want them to be, but it's highly unlikely that they'll get there.
MU projects to 17-14 (pre-BET) with an RPI of around 130. Even if they're able to steal the 45/55 games against Prov and Creighton, with all other games going as projected, that gets this team to 19-12 (8-10) with an RPI of ~96. Throw in upsets of Nova and at Xavier and RPI still only projects to 71 (21-10, 10-8). Sure, it's not all about RPI and they'd have a pair of "signature wins," but would that even be enough? Not likely.
Only if we win the BET...and then we would be one and done.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 20, 2016, 10:50:20 AM
I feel pretty confident. Right now we're the 8th best team in a 10 team conference. So, no. The discussion should be whether we can improve enough by the end of the year to become an NIT team. I hope so.
By that logic, you're describing Butler too.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on January 20, 2016, 12:15:42 PM
By that logic, you're describing Butler too.
Exactly. That's what I continue to not understand.
The highest profile bracket "guru" has us in his Next Four out. Given that, I think you have to acknowledge we have a chance.
That being said, I worry most about our Home & Home with Creighton. The NCAA dreamers are counting on a sweep and I think that will be a tough task.
The middle is where we need to feast and right now we're 0-2 in the Middle (@GT, SHU).
Quote from: rocky_warrior on January 20, 2016, 12:15:42 PM
By that logic, you're describing Butler too.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 12:19:48 PM
Exactly. That's what I continue to not understand.
You guys are confusing 8th
best with 8th
place.
How many teams in the Big East can you confidently say that MU is better than? DePaul, St. John's...maybe Creighton?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 20, 2016, 12:25:39 PM
You guys are confusing 8th best with 8th place.
How many teams in the Big East can you confidently say that MU is better than? DePaul, St. John's...maybe Creighton?
How many can you confidently say that Butler is better than? DePaul, St. John's...maybe Creighton?
I'm not even saying we have a good chance to be a Tourney team. Only...
1) MU's resume is *currently* better than their conference record.
2) There's a chance, and it wouldn't surprise me much either way (make it or not)
3) It all depends if the team develops more consistency in the coming weeks. Consistent inconsistency won't do it (but that also wouldn't surprise me)
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 12:26:55 PM
How many can you confidently say that Butler is better than? DePaul, St. John's...maybe Creighton?
You forgot to add Marquette ;)
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 12:26:55 PM
How many can you confidently say that Butler is better than?
DePaul
St. John's
Marquette
Seton Hall
Creighton
Quote from: rocky_warrior on January 20, 2016, 12:15:42 PM
By that logic, you're describing Butler too.
I'm not saying we're the 8th best team because we're currently in 8th place. I'm saying that our entire season's performance says we're better than 2 teams (St Johns and DePaul) and worse than the other 7. Butler is better than us. Only team we might be on a par with (from that group of 7) is Creighton.
I always set making the tournament as my hope for our team. I hate to say it, but I just don't see it this year (and in the eternal optimist). It's not that we aren't good enough, but that this league is really good. We'd need minimum 11 league wins and our losses against Seton Hall and Georgetown will likely come back to bite us. I hope I'm wrong, but just can't see it.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 20, 2016, 12:54:21 PM
I always set making the tournament as my hope for our team. I hate to say it, but I just don't see it this year (and in the eternal optimist). It's not that we aren't good enough, but that this league is really good. We'd need minimum 11 league wins and our losses against Seton Hall and Georgetown will likely come back to bite us. I hope I'm wrong, but just can't see it.
Not even a week ago you said this in the other Tournament thread:
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 14, 2016, 05:34:27 PMWe have to beat DePaul twice and St. John's. We also need to win at home, probably need to get 4 out of Xavier, Providence, Villanova, Creighton, Butler, and Georgetown. That gives us 9 wins.
That would leave us needing to get 2 wins on the road against Seton Hall, Xavier, Creighton, and Butler. And likely need to win our first at MSG to be a lock. I think that's doable
I wonder if Dukescoop is so down after 3 straight losses
Quote from: WarriorPride68 on January 20, 2016, 01:05:02 PM
Not even a week ago you said this in the other Tournament thread:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/jwwdc1qExL3GM/giphy.gif)
Quote from: Waldo Jeffers on January 20, 2016, 01:45:33 PM
I wonder if Dukescoop is so down after 3 straight losses
Headline in yesterday's Charlotte Observer:
Dark days for Duke: Syracuse hands Blue Devils 3rd consecutive loss
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 20, 2016, 12:54:21 PM
I always set making the tournament as my hope for our team. I hate to say it, but I just don't see it this year (and in the eternal optimist). It's not that we aren't good enough, but that this league is really good. We'd need minimum 11 league wins and our losses against Seton Hall and Georgetown will likely come back to bite us. I hope I'm wrong, but just can't see it.
If you mean 11 league wins between the regular season and the conference tournaments, we are on the same page.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 20, 2016, 12:47:57 PM
I'm not saying we're the 8th best team because we're currently in 8th place. I'm saying that our entire season's performance says we're better than 2 teams (St Johns and DePaul) and worse than the other 7. Butler is better than us. Only team we might be on a par with (from that group of 7) is Creighton.
Resume-wise, what have Georgetown and Seton Hall done to show that they're better than us? What wins do they have to prove it? Yeah, they beat us, but our best wins are probably better than theirs (until Georgetown beat Xavier) and we definitely don't have the bad losses that Georgetown does, and Seton Hall's worst loss (LBSU, RPI 129) is worse than ours (Belmont, RPI 97).
I could make a legitimate argument that our resume is better than any team outside of the 4 ranked teams in our conference. Our body of work is certainly not a definitive 8th.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 20, 2016, 12:47:57 PM
I'm not saying we're the 8th best team because we're currently in 8th place. I'm saying that our entire season's performance says we're better than 2 teams (St Johns and DePaul) and worse than the other 7. Butler is better than us. Only team we might be on a par with (from that group of 7) is Creighton.
I don't understand how you can already conclude that Butler is better than us. They might be. But they are 0-2 against Providence, a team we beat on the road, and their only 2 conference wins are against St. John's and DePaul, the 2 teams you say we're better than. Their best wins (at Cinci, vs. Purdue, vs. Tennessee, vs. Temple) are no better than our best wins (at Providence, ASU neutral court, LSU neutral court, at Wisconsin). Nothing that has happened so far this season says they are any better than we are, and they are 2-4 (beat St. John's and IUPUI, lost twice to Providence and once to Xavier and Nova) against mutual opponents while we are 3-2 (beat IUPUI, St. John's, Providence, lost to Nova and Xavier).
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on January 20, 2016, 02:01:13 PM
Resume-wise, what have Georgetown and Seton Hall done to show that they're better than us? What wins do they have to prove it? Yeah, they beat us, but our best wins are probably better than theirs (until Georgetown beat Xavier) and we definitely don't have the bad losses that Georgetown does, and Seton Hall's worst loss (LBSU, RPI 129) is worse than ours (Belmont, RPI 97).
I could make a legitimate argument that our resume is better than any team outside of the 4 ranked teams in our conference. Our body of work is certainly not a definitive 8th.
Until we get a rematch with those 2, they can only be considered better than us.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 20, 2016, 12:47:57 PM
I'm not saying we're the 8th best team because we're currently in 8th place. I'm saying that our entire season's performance says we're better than 2 teams (St Johns and DePaul) and worse than the other 7. Butler is better than us. Only team we might be on a par with (from that group of 7) is Creighton.
The only fact that really matters proves we're better than Providence, right?
Quote from: jsheim on January 19, 2016, 02:47:54 PM
or if all else fails win the BET!
I like having a Plan B.
Quote from: MU82 on January 20, 2016, 02:13:55 PM
The only fact that really matters proves we're better than Providence, right?
Doesn't that "fact" also prove that Wisconsin is better than Michigan State? And that OK State is better than Kansas? And that Va Tech is better than Virginia?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 20, 2016, 02:24:52 PM
Doesn't that "fact" also prove that Wisconsin is better than Michigan State? And that OK State is better than Kansas? And that Va Tech is better than Virginia?
I was just being hilarious.
In the words of the immortal Sgt. Hulka: Lighten up, Francis!
Quote from: MU82 on January 20, 2016, 02:26:03 PM
I was just being hilarious.
In the words of the immortal Sgt. Hulka: Lighten up, Francis!
Don't get mad at me because your joke didn't land ;D
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 02:02:13 PM
Until we get a rematch with those 2, they can only be considered better than us.
He said "entire season's performance", which I took to mean as body of work. Their bodies of work are no better than ours at this point.
By that logic, we're better than Providence.
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on January 20, 2016, 03:13:06 PM
He said "entire season's performance", which I took to mean as body of work. Their bodies of work are no better than ours at this point.
Their 5-2 and 4-2 conference records are significantly better than our 2-4 conference record, to go with their head to head wins over us. If the committee were looking at these 3 teams' resumes today, Seton Hall and Georgetown would at least be considered, while Marquette would not.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 01:55:47 PM
If you mean 11 league wins between the regular season and the conference tournaments, we are on the same page.
11 combined gets us on the bubble. 12 gets us in. 10 or less and we need to 4 at MSG.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 03:14:21 PM
Their 5-2 and 4-2 conference records are significantly better than our 2-4 conference record, to go with their head to head wins over us. If the committee were looking at these 3 teams' resumes today, Seton Hall and Georgetown would at least be considered, while Marquette would not.
Bracket Matrix disagrees with you. Compilation of brackets has Seton Hall ahead of us, but Marquette is listed as 12th out and Georgetown isn't even listed.
Georgetown lost to Radford, Asheville and Monmouth.....we have zero bad losses. Georgetown has 3 top 100 wins (Xavier, Wisconsin, Syracuse). We have four top 100 wins. More good wins, less bad losses. The only thing we have going against us right now is that we played so many 280+ RPI teams in non conference. Our good wins/bad losses are better than almost every other bubble team.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 20, 2016, 03:19:32 PM
11 combined gets us on the bubble. 12 gets us in. 10 or less and we need to 4 at MSG.
Meh.
11-7 with a loss in the BET opener and MU is still safely in.
10-8 with a win in the BET and MU is closer to the bubble, but I bet they still are safe from the play-in games.
Now, getting to 11 wins is alot easier said than done. But if they do, they'll be fine.
That said, our non-con scheduling has done us absolutely no favors. 10-8 or even 9-9 probably would have been enough if we didn't have 5 games against the 300+ RPI teams. But that's been discussed ad nauseam and is what it is now.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 02:02:13 PM
Until we get a rematch with those 2, they can only be considered better than us.
Yeah, but a resume takes into account your season, not just one game as a snapshot. By that logic, we could run the table to the national title and Belmont would be better than us because they didn't get a rematch.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 20, 2016, 02:37:56 PM
Don't get mad at me because your joke didn't land ;D
I'm not mad at all. Just saying, "You better hit those bunks my little babies, or Sergeant Hulka with the big toe is gonna see how far he can stick it up your ass."
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 20, 2016, 04:04:09 PM
Yeah, but a resume takes into account your season, not just one game as a snapshot. By that logic, we could run the table to the national title and Belmont would be better than us because they didn't get a rematch.
The difference here is that Belmont doesn't play in our conference and isn't 1.5 and 2.5 full games up on us in the standings. So no, by that logic that's not how it would go.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on January 20, 2016, 03:33:11 PM
Meh.
11-7 with a loss in the BET opener and MU is still safely in.
10-8 with a win in the BET and MU is closer to the bubble, but I bet they still are safe from the play-in games.
That's your opinion, with no rationalization. Maybe you're right, but I've repeatedly shown the numbers as to why I think 22 total wins puts us on the bubble and 23 is needed to be a lock.
11-7 in league and first round BET loss means a sub-60 RPI, which more often than not means missing the tournament. That's bubble territory, at best.
Bracket Matrix
We are in 3 brackets out of 53
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 20, 2016, 06:22:43 PM
Bracket Matrix
We are in 3 brackets out of 53
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
How many is DePaul in?
Losing at home to DePaul...that's a resounding No
This team kinda sucks guys. I've been staying positive all year but this one might be it for me. There was 0 contact on that and one but it shouldn't have come to it.
Quote from: muhoops1 on January 20, 2016, 08:59:30 PM
Losing at home to DePaul...that's a resounding No
Agreed, we're just not that good.
No.
No f ING way
this question should be re-phrased to is marquette a NIT team. i'm not sure we even make that tourney right now. incredibly disappointed
LOL tonight was pathetic.
No way we play in March
Quote from: Blueprint on January 20, 2016, 09:10:11 PM
No way we play in March
Well, we have to play in the Big East tourney.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 20, 2016, 09:03:56 PM
LOL tonight was pathetic.
The thing is, DePaul missed layups and wide opens 3s left and right. They didn't play very well and we still lost at home to them. That was just awful. We need a PG and another PF in the worst way.
When was the last time MU did not go to any postseason tournament for 3 straight years? If MU doesn't turn things around soon they are in danger of missing even the NIT again.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 20, 2016, 02:01:28 PM
I don't understand how you can already conclude that Butler is better than us. They might be. But they are 0-2 against Providence, a team we beat on the road, and their only 2 conference wins are against St. John's and DePaul, the 2 teams you say we're better than. Their best wins (at Cinci, vs. Purdue, vs. Tennessee, vs. Temple) are no better than our best wins (at Providence, ASU neutral court, LSU neutral court, at Wisconsin). Nothing that has happened so far this season says they are any better than we are, and they are 2-4 (beat St. John's and IUPUI, lost twice to Providence and once to Xavier and Nova) against mutual opponents while we are 3-2 (beat IUPUI, St. John's, Providence, lost to Nova and Xavier).
Never mind tonight, but Purdue is way better than Providence. Butler is/ was way better than Marquette.
Quote from: jsheim on January 19, 2016, 05:18:19 PM
MUfan12 - can't figure out the "12"...was that the last year you were a "fan".
I'm curious, when did you stop hoping MU would get in the tournament this year? before season started? after Belmont? after SH?
I guess there comes a time when we give up hope...last year around GT#2, I threw in the towel...but still .. before the BET Nova game...maybe?
Anyway the point is.....its just to easy to play the intellectual CYA game ... MU is gonna lose this and that and not get in the tournament.
When MU got down by 8 to providence was there anything in your soul that hoped they would come back...or were things going as planned?
You were saying?
Folks I really do not want to hear how DePaul and St. John's should not be in the Big East, that they bring the conference down. Time we face the fact we are again a bottom feeder. Great kids, great coach, just can not win basketball games.
No, No, No, No, AND NO!!!
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 20, 2016, 09:12:21 PM
The thing is, DePaul missed layups and wide opens 3s left and right. They didn't play very well and we still lost at home to them. That was just awful. We need a PG and another PF in the worst way.
I said as much on Twitter. DePaul didn't even play well. Just a poor display at home.
Quote from: Norm on January 20, 2016, 09:16:41 PM
When was the last time MU did not go to any postseason tournament for 3 straight years? If MU doesn't turn things around soon they are in danger of missing even the NIT again.
OK, looked it up in the archives. The last time MU went 3 straight years without a postseason appearance was '63-'64, '64-'65 and '65-'66, the last year of Ed Hickey and the first two years of McGuire.
NO WAY
Head to head isn't everything. Even though we lost to the hapless Blue Demons I think we're a smidge better than them. For now anyway. We're #8, we're #8!
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 20, 2016, 10:39:55 PM
Head to head isn't everything. Even though we lost to the hapless Blue Demons I think we're a smidge better than them. For now anyway. We're #8, we're #8!
We are headed to finish last two years in a row.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on January 19, 2016, 02:38:06 PM
This is the most clueless comment i've seen on here in a while, and that is saying something.
This will probably be a top 20 team preseason next year if Ellenson returns, and probably a team that will be in the top 15 most of the season.
Very few teams go from 6-12 in the BE to Top 20 in one season. If they play a tougher schedule next year they go 14-15, tops.
Quote from: Norm on January 20, 2016, 10:22:28 PM
OK, looked it up in the archives. The last time MU went 3 straight years without a postseason appearance was '63-'64, '64-'65 and '65-'66, the last year of Ed Hickey and the first two years of McGuire.
I hate stats. Hopefully we make *some* postseason tourney this year.
Quote from: ecompt on January 20, 2016, 11:19:39 PM
Very few teams go from 6-12 in the BE to Top 20 in one season. If they play a tougher schedule next year they go 14-15, tops.
They do when half of their team is freshmen. This season will be rough but next season will be very good.
Quote from: Norm on January 20, 2016, 10:22:28 PM
OK, looked it up in the archives. The last time MU went 3 straight years without a postseason appearance was '63-'64, '64-'65 and '65-'66, the last year of Ed Hickey and the first two years of McGuire.
Well, if history repeats itself, then we're in good shape for the next decade or so.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 20, 2016, 09:27:00 PM
You were saying?
What I said still stands:
"I guess there comes a time when we give up hope..."
you gave up too early.
AS of today I will give a break to someone who says its hopeless. DePaul loss was a killer. Did you know there's another thread started trolling for Wojo's head on a platter? I don't like the three "chucking" like anyone else...but that's too much!
as for me...@STJ win, <STET win>, BUT win, 2 of (@SH,@X,@CR,@BUT), PV win, CR win, @DP win, V loss, GT win = 10-8 BET=1-1 = Tourney :)
and if that breaks down like it did with DP, there's always another formulation :)
Quote from: jsheim on January 21, 2016, 11:38:41 AM
as for me...@STJ win, <STET win>, BUT win, 2 of (@SH,@X,@CR,@BUT), PV win, CR win, @DP win, V loss, GT win = 10-8 BET=1-1 = Tourney :)
and if that breaks down like it did with DP, there's always another formulation :)
Yeah, we're more likely to go 4-14 than 10-8 in the BE. If I had to guess our BE record now, I'd guess something like 6-12. Fortunately, I'm not a great long-term prognosticator.
Quote from: tower912 on January 20, 2016, 09:10:59 PM
Well, we have to play in the Big East tourney.
Props to tower for simply responding "No" to the thread title prior to DePaul, and for stating somewhere that he's through counting on freshmen have a big impact in the Big East.
You're getting to be an oracle, dude!
Thanks. Let me give you a couple of thoughts to ponder. Since the Amigos, how many freshmen regularly started games for MU before this season? When buzz was here and wouldn't play freshmen (remember the screaming on this board about that?), when he stated that they didn't play defense to his standards, didn't understand the offense, and/or weren't tough enough, was that just an excuse or did he have a point? If you were told that ANY other team (besides Kentucky) was going to have half of their roster be freshmen and were going to need all of them to contribute for the team to be successful, what would your expectations be for said generic team?
I love MU hoops. It is a true passion. I always have, I always will. But to assume that MU is going to be immune to growing pains........ well, look around.
Quote from: tower912 on January 21, 2016, 12:06:49 PM
Thanks. Let me give you a couple of thoughts to ponder. Since the Amigos, how many freshmen regularly started games for MU before this season? When buzz was here and wouldn't play freshmen (remember the screaming on this board about that?), when he stated that they didn't play defense to his standards, didn't understand the offense, and/or weren't tough enough, was that just an excuse or did he have a point? If you were told that ANY other team (besides Kentucky) was going to have half of their roster be freshmen and were going to need all of them to contribute for the team to be successful, what would your expectations be for said generic team?
I love MU hoops. It is a true passion. I always have, I always will. But to assume that MU is going to be immune to growing pains........ well, look around.
Great call.
This young team is awful defensively, gets lost on offense for long stretches and lacks overall toughness. Maybe that bald guy
does know something about basketball after all.
It sounds good for fans to talk about patience and "the process" and "bare cupboards" and "building a program" and so on, but it's an entirely different beast to actually go through it.
Think of it like cleaning out your garage. When you start, you have these grandiose plans of how everything is going to look when it's completed and how everything will be organized and in its perfect place...but an hour into the process, you're sweating and swearing and things doesn't fit how you planned and your stuff is scattered across the driveway. You're eventually going to get to some version of that grandiose plan but there's going to be a big, frustrating mess on the way.
Respecting the process is great, understanding that freshmen don't usually lead to wins is fine, but why then did we sign a One and Done? If this year is a rebuilding year, what is the point of HE?
I have no problem with Wally, I think he's a great role player and will be a fine senior like David Diggs, etc but if we're in the midst of building something here, what's the point of bringing in a One and Done?
Quote from: The Lens on January 21, 2016, 12:17:13 PM
Respecting the process is great, understanding that freshmen don't usually lead to wins is fine, but why then did we sign a One and Done? If this year is a rebuilding year, what is the point of HE?
1. Because freshmen bring risk and uncertainty, but not certain failure. There was always a chance that we could catch lightning in a bottle.
2. Because at the time he first committed, it wasn't certain how likely HE was to being one and done. It seems pretty likely now, but you never know when the kid is still in HS.
Quote from: The Lens on January 21, 2016, 12:17:13 PM
Respecting the process is great, understanding that freshmen don't usually lead to wins is fine, but why then did we sign a One and Done? If this year is a rebuilding year, what is the point of HE?
I have no problem with Wally, I think he's a great role player and will be a fine senior like David Diggs, etc but if we're in the midst of building something here, what's the point of bringing in a One and Done?
Because he's an incredibly gifted player.
Because not every "one and done" coming in, ends up being an actual "one and done."
Because having such a player brings national attention to Marquette's program.
Because, rebuild or not, the program is still trying to win.
Is that enough? Do you need more reasons?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 21, 2016, 12:09:32 PM
Great call.
This young team is awful defensively, gets lost on offense for long stretches and lacks overall toughness. Maybe that bald guy does know something about basketball after all.
It sounds good for fans to talk about patience and "the process" and "bare cupboards" and "building a program" and so on, but it's an entirely different beast to actually go through it.
I'm not sure that I agree that this team is
awful defensively. aren't their defensive numbers top 80 or so? They do have a lot of long stretches of poor offense. They seem to be doing the right things on offense, sharing the ball well and leading the big East in assists, so hopefully improvement is just a matter of time.
Buzz would have had a tough time last year, as well. He would have had a leg up this year with four or five freshmen becoming sophomores, though.
It'd be a lot easier to like Buzz if he hadn't had disparaging remarks to make on his way out the door. Another thing that Buzz knows is contracts which is why he'll be at Virginia Tech as long as he wants to be.
Quote from: The Lens on January 21, 2016, 12:17:13 PM
Respecting the process is great, understanding that freshmen don't usually lead to wins is fine, but why then did we sign a One and Done? If this year is a rebuilding year, what is the point of HE?
I have no problem with Wally, I think he's a great role player and will be a fine senior like David Diggs, etc but if we're in the midst of building something here, what's the point of bringing in a One and Done?
You ask that question like he burdened MU with a giant, one-year free agent contract. There are loads of reasons, as well listed by MerritsMustache above.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 21, 2016, 12:24:50 PM
Because he's an incredibly gifted player.
Because not every "one and done" coming in, ends up being an actual "one and done."
Because having such a player brings national attention to Marquette's program.
Because, rebuild or not, the program is still trying to win.
Is that enough? Do you need more reasons?
All this and more.
I mean, why did LSU bring in Simmons? What a bunch of dopes.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on January 21, 2016, 12:23:24 PM
1. Because freshmen bring risk and uncertainty, but not certain failure. There was always a chance that we could catch lightning in a bottle.
2. Because at the time he first committed, it wasn't certain how likely HE was to being one and done. It seems pretty likely now, but you never know when the kid is still in HS.
He was the 4th player in his class (per ESPN). Trust me, Wojo & Co knew what they were getting. Wojo's been recruiting kids like Henry for 15+ years. He knows what they want, the NBA and asap.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 21, 2016, 12:24:50 PM
Because he's an incredibly gifted player.
Because not every "one and done" coming in, ends up being an actual "one and done."
Because having such a player brings national attention to Marquette's program.
Because, rebuild or not, the program is still trying to win.
Is that enough? Do you need more reasons?
I think Wojo brought Henry in bc he saw him as the best way to get to the NCAAs THIS season. I think those were Wojo's expectations. Say this about Wojo, he didn't drop any TC excuses all fall. He's done more complaining about guys not getting it than he has offering up the youth excuse.
Quote from: The Lens on January 21, 2016, 01:01:09 PM
He was the 4th player in his class (per ESPN). Trust me, Wojo & Co knew what they were getting. Wojo's been recruiting kids like Henry for 15+ years. He knows what they want, the NBA and asap.
Andrew and Aaron Harrison went to UK as the #5 and #6 players nationally. They both stayed two years.
You just never know.
Quote from: The Lens on January 21, 2016, 01:04:07 PM
I think Wojo brought Henry in bc he saw him as the best way to get to the NCAAs THIS season. I think those were Wojo's expectations. Say this about Wojo, he didn't drop any TC excuses all fall. He's done more complaining about guys not getting it than he has offering up the youth excuse.
Agree 100%. Wojo was adamant that we would be very good this year. Think he's more than a bit befuddled that we're not.
Quote from: The Lens on January 21, 2016, 01:04:07 PM
I t Say this about Wojo, he didn't drop any TC excuses all fall. He's done more complaining about guys not getting it than he has offering up the youth excuse.
In fact, his public pronouncements have done the opposite. He is more interested in getting the guys to do their thing, adopt the offense and play an occasional minute of defense.
Wojo has completely backed away from the youth excuse, to his everlasting credit.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 21, 2016, 01:13:08 PM
Agree 100%. Wojo was adamant that we would be very good this year. Think he's more than a bit befuddled that we're not.
I wonder if he really felt adamant, or he is just used to winning at Duke, and presumed that the Big East would be easier than the ACC. And, maybe he's more attuned to having freshmen who can consistently contribute, as Duke gets higher level players.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 21, 2016, 01:13:08 PM
Agree 100%. Wojo was adamant that we would be very good this year. Think he's more than a bit befuddled that we're not.
Boy, we didn't schedule like we thought we were going to be very good this year.
Marquette is better. Much better. The Big East is better still.
Quote from: Crean to Ann Arbor on January 21, 2016, 12:25:02 PM
I'm not sure that I agree that this team is awful defensively. aren't their defensive numbers top 80 or so? They do have a lot of long stretches of poor offense. They seem to be doing the right things on offense, sharing the ball well and leading the big East in assists, so hopefully improvement is just a matter of time.
This. We are a very good defensive team. Force more TOs than any other team in the BEast. Dont have the numbers but believe we have held all of our conference opponents to below their season average in eFG%. Unfortunately, it turns out the good defense and poor offense is frustrating to watch. Fans prefer offense to defense
Our otherwise solid defense breaks down when we fail to corral a rebound. Like last night.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 21, 2016, 02:48:20 PM
This. We are a very good defensive team. Force more TOs than any other team in the BEast. Dont have the numbers but believe we have held all of our conference opponents to below their season average in eFG%. Unfortunately, it turns out the good defense and poor offense is frustrating to watch. Fans prefer offense to defense
In BE play, MU is...
1st in Steals
6th in FG% D
6th in 3pt% D
6th in Blocks
8th in scoring D
9th in DReb
9th in DReb %
9th in fouls committed
10th in FG att allowed
Saying MU is awful defensively was an overstatement on my part. They force more TOs than any other BE team, but they are also prone to repeated defensive breakdowns. Aside from steals, this team's defensive stats are not very good.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 21, 2016, 03:11:46 PM
In BE play, MU is...
1st in Steals
6th in FG% D
6th in 3pt% D
6th in Blocks
8th in scoring D
9th in DReb
9th in DReb %
9th in fouls committed
10th in FG att allowed
Saying MU is awful defensively was an overstatement on my part. They force more TOs than any other BE team, but they are also prone to repeated defensive breakdowns. Aside from steals, this team's defensive stats are not very good.
Oh yeah, Kenpom has MU at #48 nationally on defense. Sadly, #215 on offense
Quote from: WarriorPride68 on January 21, 2016, 03:37:35 PM
Oh yeah, Kenpom has MU at #48 nationally on defense. Sadly, #215 on offense
How are in points off of turnovers? We seem to miss more fastbreaks created from steals than any other team I have ever seen.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on January 21, 2016, 01:08:47 PM
Andrew and Aaron Harrison went to UK as the #5 and #6 players nationally. They both stayed two years.
You just never know.
This is an outstanding point, and a few others here (me included) have said similar things about others who stayed a second year, such as Griffin, Barnes and Smart. Kyle Singler was a higher-ranked recruit than Hank and he stayed FOUR years at Duke.
I don't expect Hank to stay four years and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he left after this one. But you are so right in saying "You just never know." Young folks make all kinds of decisions for all kinds of reasons.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on January 21, 2016, 01:08:47 PM
Andrew and Aaron Harrison went to UK as the #5 and #6 players nationally. They both stayed two years.
You just never know.
and one was a second round draft choice and the other did not get drafted.