I know this has been done to death, but with only four reg season games left is this worth asking again - if we win out the reg season are we in? Are we bubbly even in we don't win a BE tourney game? If we win out and grab at least one at MSG are we pretty safely in? What's our RPI in those scenarios? I just think a 21-11 or 22-11 team with wins over Prov x2 , UW, Butler x2 and a #1 'Nova team (I mean 6 top 50 wins) would be hard not to pass the eyeball test (stupid DePaul loss... - but still could be a top-200 loss) . I wouldn't expect it to happen, but stranger runs have happened.
Although I guess in some ways we could get two bites at the apple. Win out the regular season and we are (close?) to in. Win it all in NY and we're in. I'd say both are about similarly likely?
Or to put in ANOTHER way - can we afford any more regular season losses and still get to the tourney short of winning the BET? Does 3-1 plus a BET finals get us there? (I suppose maybe if one of the 3 is 'Nova)...
No
A win is a win. However, we only beat DePaul by 13 with them playing without Garrett and Rycksbosch. We should not think we are playing well because of that win.
Starting a new thread about our Tourney hopes after every single win always seems to go well here. We have polls asking when our next loss will be and listing up to like 6 games down the line, polls asking what our record will be in the next set of X amount of BE games, threads about what we need to do to get into the Tourney after every game we win, etc. And what inevitably happens every time? We lose our next game, we go 1-X in the next X games in the BE, we lose to a bad team in our next game and everyone wants Wojo gone, etc.
Let's enjoy the fact that we have a young and exciting team and understand that they're too inconsistent to win 4 straight games against quality teams, so wondering what that would do for our resume doesn't really do a whole lot.
Quote from: 1SE on February 22, 2016, 06:38:25 AM
Or to put in ANOTHER way - can we afford any more regular season losses and still get to the tourney short of winning the BET? Does 3-1 plus a BET finals get us there? (I suppose maybe if one of the 3 is 'Nova)...
I am enjoying the conversation you are having with yourself.
I do that often, although sometimes I bring my dog into the conversation because I respect her viewpoint.
Marquette isn't winning it's next 4 games. Probably not winning 3. At this point, breaking even is the goal. Marquette's only chance of making the NCAA tourney is to get hot at MSG. Accept it. Embrace it.
If we win out in the regular season are we in? No. If we win out, our most likely Big East path would be the 4/5 game against Providence, then Villanova, then Xavier in the final. So if we lose to Providence...
21-11 (10-8)
RPI: 82
SOS: 90
Loss to Providence
No team with a sub-70 RPI has made the tournament as an at-large since the 90's. We sure as hell wouldn't be sniffing it with an 82. What if we beat Providence?
22-11 (10-8)
RPI: 70
SOS: 76
Beat Providence, lose to Villanova in the semifinals.
That gives us a slim, slim chance. The RPI would be very low for an at-large, but in an age of weak bubble teams getting in, we'd have a chance. The real strength of our resume would be recency, with a 6-1 record in our last 7, 7-3 in our last 10, and 11-4 in our last 15. Those losses would all be to teams that are top-50 Pomeroy teams with Creighton as the only loss that might not be a tourney team. Now if we beat Villanova and lose to Xavier?
23-11 (10-8)
RPI: 62
SOS: 63
Beat Providence, beat Villanova, lose to Xavier in finals
On paper, it's a much better resume. Personally, I've thought 23 wins was our benchmark for a bid all season long. The only possible problem here is that the Selection Committee often seems to undervalue results in the conference tourneys when it comes to getting a bid. Sure, we'd knock 'Nova down a seed line, but would we move into the field? If we aren't in at 22-11, I'm not sure 23-11 would be viewed any better. If they started putting the field together Saturday, this would make us a lock, but because they'd already have their baseline bracket set by Thursday or Friday, I'd still be nervous come Selection Sunday.
So what about the scenarios with a loss in regular season? I'll assume a loss to Creighton. Why? Because it would actually be less damaging than a loss to Villanova, and frankly, I have severe doubts about our ability to go into Omaha and come away with a win. Anyway...if we lose to Creighton, that likely drops us to the 3/6 game against Seton Hall, followed by Xavier and Villanova. Personally, I'd rather play the Wednesday games if it gave us a chance to avoid Seton Hall. Not sure anyone is a worse matchup for us in the entire league. But I digress...on to scenarios. 3-1 with a loss to Creighton and losing to Seton Hall on Thursday?
20-12 (9-9)
RPI: 95
SOS: 92
Loss to Seton Hall
Not only are we out of the NCAAs with that scenario, but we probably miss the NIT as well. After all the regular season champs get slotted, there probably won't be enough bids to get to the mid-90s, and unlike the NCAAs, the NIT seems to be even more strict in following the RPI. We missed the NIT in 2014 with a better (92) RPI than this. Next scenario, go 3-1, somehow beat SHU, then lose to Xavier?
21-12 (9-9)
RPI: 84
SOS: 80
Beat Seton Hall, Lose to Xavier
The good news, we probably get a NIT berth, but NCAAs? No chance. So how about if we get to the Final?
22-12 (9-9)
RPI: 70
SOS: 67
Beat Seton Hall, Beat Xavier, Lose to Villanova
This puts us squarely in bubble territory, but we probably would be left out. Not only because of the low RPI, but because conference tourney games seem to get less merit than regular season games when it comes to bubble teams.
So what does all this mean? Pretty much that our only hope of getting an at-large bid is winning out the regular season and at least making the semifinals of the Big East Tournament, and for the NIT we probably need to win 4 more total games.
The reality is our NCAA Tourney started on November 13. There were four defining moments that cost us a tourney bid this season:
November 13: Belmont
We blew an 80-79 lead with under 30 seconds to play. I know, it's a narrow lead, but that was a huge moment. You need to finish that at home.
January 20: DePaul
Duane Wilson should have been the hero when he put us up 56-54 with 8 seconds to play. Instead, Billy Garrett drives the floor, gets a layup and a phantom and-one call to beat us with 1 second left. Huge, huge moment.
February 6: at Xavier
We led most of the way before falling behind at the under-8. Still, the team fought back and Cheatham's free throws made it a 1-point game with 2:15 to play. We couldn't finish off the comeback as XU finished the game with a 12-5 run.
February 13: Creighton
We had a 62-60 lead thanks to Duane Wilson, but James Milliken's three with 1:04 to play followed by a poor final minute led to another home loss.
You could just as easily argue the moments against IUPUI, LSU, ASU, Wisconsin, and Providence (twice) were just as important positives as these four moments were negatives, and you'd be right, but had just one or two of those gone the other way, we'd be talking about the tournament. Hell, if all four of those had gone the other way, we could finish 2-2 and lose our first Big East Tourney game and still likely get in. But it is what it is. We had a very slim margin for error this season, and the errors in those four finishes are the difference between a tourney bid and a trip to the couch to watch the NCAAs on TV.
Quote from: tower912 on February 22, 2016, 08:22:20 AM
Marquette isn't winning it's next 4 games. Probably not winning 3. At this point, breaking even is the goal. Marquette's only chance of making the NCAA tourney is to get hot at MSG. Accept it. Embrace it.
This is the reality. Probably our best chance is for us to get to MSG and hope we can slide through with one big upset. Say we play up to the 7-seed and get DePaul in the first game. Beat them, then upset Xavier and hope that Butler as the 6 can knock off Seton Hall. If we beat Butler and end up with anyone but Villanova in the BET final, we'd have a shot.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 22, 2016, 08:04:25 AM
Starting a new thread about our Tourney hopes after every single win always seems to go well here.
Right. If we can beat DePaul without Billy Garrett, we can beat anybody
Respect da process, hey?
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 08:33:01 AM
If we win out in the regular season are we in? No. If we win out, our most likely Big East path would be the 4/5 game against Providence, then Villanova, then Xavier in the final. So if we lose to Providence...
21-11 (10-8)
RPI: 82
SOS: 90
Loss to Providence
No team with a sub-70 RPI has made the tournament as an at-large since the 90's. We sure as hell wouldn't be sniffing it with an 82. What if we beat Providence?
22-11 (10-8)
RPI: 70
SOS: 76
Beat Providence, lose to Villanova in the semifinals.
That gives us a slim, slim chance. The RPI would be very low for an at-large, but in an age of weak bubble teams getting in, we'd have a chance. The real strength of our resume would be recency, with a 6-1 record in our last 7, 7-3 in our last 10, and 11-4 in our last 15. Those losses would all be to teams that are top-50 Pomeroy teams with Creighton as the only loss that might not be a tourney team. Now if we beat Villanova and lose to Xavier?
23-11 (10-8)
RPI: 62
SOS: 63
Beat Providence, beat Villanova, lose to Xavier in finals
On paper, it's a much better resume. Personally, I've thought 23 wins was our benchmark for a bid all season long. The only possible problem here is that the Selection Committee often seems to undervalue results in the conference tourneys when it comes to getting a bid. Sure, we'd knock 'Nova down a seed line, but would we move into the field? If we aren't in at 22-11, I'm not sure 23-11 would be viewed any better. If they started putting the field together Saturday, this would make us a lock, but because they'd already have their baseline bracket set by Thursday or Friday, I'd still be nervous come Selection Sunday.
So what about the scenarios with a loss in regular season? I'll assume a loss to Creighton. Why? Because it would actually be less damaging than a loss to Villanova, and frankly, I have severe doubts about our ability to go into Omaha and come away with a win. Anyway...if we lose to Creighton, that likely drops us to the 3/6 game against Seton Hall, followed by Xavier and Villanova. Personally, I'd rather play the Wednesday games if it gave us a chance to avoid Seton Hall. Not sure anyone is a worse matchup for us in the entire league. But I digress...on to scenarios. 3-1 with a loss to Creighton and losing to Seton Hall on Thursday?
20-12 (9-9)
RPI: 95
SOS: 92
Loss to Seton Hall
Not only are we out of the NCAAs with that scenario, but we probably miss the NIT as well. After all the regular season champs get slotted, there probably won't be enough bids to get to the mid-90s, and unlike the NCAAs, the NIT seems to be even more strict in following the RPI. We missed the NIT in 2014 with a better (92) RPI than this. Next scenario, go 3-1, somehow beat SHU, then lose to Xavier?
21-12 (9-9)
RPI: 84
SOS: 80
Beat Seton Hall, Lose to Xavier
The good news, we probably get a NIT berth, but NCAAs? No chance. So how about if we get to the Final?
22-12 (9-9)
RPI: 70
SOS: 67
Beat Seton Hall, Beat Xavier, Lose to Villanova
This puts us squarely in bubble territory, but we probably would be left out. Not only because of the low RPI, but because conference tourney games seem to get less merit than regular season games when it comes to bubble teams.
So what does all this mean? Pretty much that our only hope of getting an at-large bid is winning out the regular season and at least making the semifinals of the Big East Tournament, and for the NIT we probably need to win 4 more total games.
The reality is our NCAA Tourney started on November 13. There were four defining moments that cost us a tourney bid this season:
November 13: Belmont
We blew an 80-79 lead with under 30 seconds to play. I know, it's a narrow lead, but that was a huge moment. You need to finish that at home.
January 20: DePaul
Duane Wilson should have been the hero when he put us up 56-54 with 8 seconds to play. Instead, Billy Garrett drives the floor, gets a layup and a phantom and-one call to beat us with 1 second left. Huge, huge moment.
February 6: at Xavier
We led most of the way before falling behind at the under-8. Still, the team fought back and Cheatham's free throws made it a 1-point game with 2:15 to play. We couldn't finish off the comeback as XU finished the game with a 12-5 run.
February 13: Creighton
We had a 62-60 lead thanks to Duane Wilson, but James Milliken's three with 1:04 to play followed by a poor final minute led to another home loss.
You could just as easily argue the moments against IUPUI, LSU, ASU, Wisconsin, and Providence (twice) were just as important positives as these four moments were negatives, and you'd be right, but had just one or two of those gone the other way, we'd be talking about the tournament. Hell, if all four of those had gone the other way, we could finish 2-2 and lose our first Big East Tourney game and still likely get in. But it is what it is. We had a very slim margin for error this season, and the errors in those four finishes are the difference between a tourney bid and a trip to the couch to watch the NCAAs on TV.
Hokey smokes, brew, this is thorough! Thanks.
I just want us to finish strong for the sake of finishing strong. Otherwise, where the chips fall is so "out there" that it does me no good to think about it.
If we win two this week, THEN I'll start to contemplate the possibilities.
We are playing for an NIT berth, full stop. The only way we get an NCAA berth at this point is if we don't lose until at least the BET finals(so 5-0 in regular season and 2-1 in BET).
Like was said on the podcast, I think we are playing for the 6th seed right now. Avoid having to play a crappy game(we'd most likely win) that did nothing but tire the team out, plus the 6th seed will avoid Villanova until the finals. If we can get 6th then we'd face Seton Hall or Creighton most likely...if we could win that then we'd be looking at Xavier who I feel most confident against weirdly of the top 4 teams....then it would likely be Nova......
We're playing for an NIT berth.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 08:33:01 AM
If we win out in the regular season are we in? No. If we win out, our most likely Big East path would be the 4/5 game against Providence, then Villanova, then Xavier in the final. So if we lose to Providence...
21-11 (10-8)
RPI: 82
SOS: 90
Loss to Providence
No team with a sub-70 RPI has made the tournament as an at-large since the 90's. We sure as hell wouldn't be sniffing it with an 82. What if we beat Providence?
22-11 (10-8)
RPI: 70
SOS: 76
Beat Providence, lose to Villanova in the semifinals.
That gives us a slim, slim chance. The RPI would be very low for an at-large, but in an age of weak bubble teams getting in, we'd have a chance. The real strength of our resume would be recency, with a 6-1 record in our last 7, 7-3 in our last 10, and 11-4 in our last 15. Those losses would all be to teams that are top-50 Pomeroy teams with Creighton as the only loss that might not be a tourney team. Now if we beat Villanova and lose to Xavier?
23-11 (10-8)
RPI: 62
SOS: 63
Beat Providence, beat Villanova, lose to Xavier in finals
On paper, it's a much better resume. Personally, I've thought 23 wins was our benchmark for a bid all season long. The only possible problem here is that the Selection Committee often seems to undervalue results in the conference tourneys when it comes to getting a bid. Sure, we'd knock 'Nova down a seed line, but would we move into the field? If we aren't in at 22-11, I'm not sure 23-11 would be viewed any better. If they started putting the field together Saturday, this would make us a lock, but because they'd already have their baseline bracket set by Thursday or Friday, I'd still be nervous come Selection Sunday.
So what about the scenarios with a loss in regular season? I'll assume a loss to Creighton. Why? Because it would actually be less damaging than a loss to Villanova, and frankly, I have severe doubts about our ability to go into Omaha and come away with a win. Anyway...if we lose to Creighton, that likely drops us to the 3/6 game against Seton Hall, followed by Xavier and Villanova. Personally, I'd rather play the Wednesday games if it gave us a chance to avoid Seton Hall. Not sure anyone is a worse matchup for us in the entire league. But I digress...on to scenarios. 3-1 with a loss to Creighton and losing to Seton Hall on Thursday?
20-12 (9-9)
RPI: 95
SOS: 92
Loss to Seton Hall
Not only are we out of the NCAAs with that scenario, but we probably miss the NIT as well. After all the regular season champs get slotted, there probably won't be enough bids to get to the mid-90s, and unlike the NCAAs, the NIT seems to be even more strict in following the RPI. We missed the NIT in 2014 with a better (92) RPI than this. Next scenario, go 3-1, somehow beat SHU, then lose to Xavier?
21-12 (9-9)
RPI: 84
SOS: 80
Beat Seton Hall, Lose to Xavier
The good news, we probably get a NIT berth, but NCAAs? No chance. So how about if we get to the Final?
22-12 (9-9)
RPI: 70
SOS: 67
Beat Seton Hall, Beat Xavier, Lose to Villanova
This puts us squarely in bubble territory, but we probably would be left out. Not only because of the low RPI, but because conference tourney games seem to get less merit than regular season games when it comes to bubble teams.
So what does all this mean? Pretty much that our only hope of getting an at-large bid is winning out the regular season and at least making the semifinals of the Big East Tournament, and for the NIT we probably need to win 4 more total games.
The reality is our NCAA Tourney started on November 13. There were four defining moments that cost us a tourney bid this season:
November 13: Belmont
We blew an 80-79 lead with under 30 seconds to play. I know, it's a narrow lead, but that was a huge moment. You need to finish that at home.
January 20: DePaul
Duane Wilson should have been the hero when he put us up 56-54 with 8 seconds to play. Instead, Billy Garrett drives the floor, gets a layup and a phantom and-one call to beat us with 1 second left. Huge, huge moment.
February 6: at Xavier
We led most of the way before falling behind at the under-8. Still, the team fought back and Cheatham's free throws made it a 1-point game with 2:15 to play. We couldn't finish off the comeback as XU finished the game with a 12-5 run.
February 13: Creighton
We had a 62-60 lead thanks to Duane Wilson, but James Milliken's three with 1:04 to play followed by a poor final minute led to another home loss.
You could just as easily argue the moments against IUPUI, LSU, ASU, Wisconsin, and Providence (twice) were just as important positives as these four moments were negatives, and you'd be right, but had just one or two of those gone the other way, we'd be talking about the tournament. Hell, if all four of those had gone the other way, we could finish 2-2 and lose our first Big East Tourney game and still likely get in. But it is what it is. We had a very slim margin for error this season, and the errors in those four finishes are the difference between a tourney bid and a trip to the couch to watch the NCAAs on TV.
Ha - I appreciate it Brew - I realize the RPI is the killer but when you look at a team like Alamaba
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/333/alabama-crimson-tide
who are on the bubble on all the analyst services tt seems like our resume isn't that far off theirs. Makes those cupcakes so much more frustrating.
I would be amazed if we go 4-0 but I mean we have realistic shots at Creighton, Gtown and Butler. Villanova is a tough W but hey - someone gets super hot and it could happen. HE's showcase game! The trick though is to play at our potential for four (5) straight games.
If Alabama splits their last 4 and loses the 7/10 game to Arkansas in the SEC Tourney, they're still looking at a 65 RPI and 39 SOS. I'll be the first to say that RPI is a massively flawed metric, but the only way we beat those numbers is to go undefeated until the Big East Tourney final.
That's why our cupcakes were so disappointing. When you look at our body of work, we've only got one really bad loss (DePaul at home), have quite a few decent wins (LSU, ASU, Wisconsin, Providence x2, Butler), and if we finished even 3-1, you'd have to think a 9-9 league record wouldn't be too damning. Everything about our resume has the look of a solid bubble team that should have a shot if we finish strong, but we're trying to swim with 6 massive anchors tied to our legs.
If we can get to an RPI in the 65-75 range, we might have a shot because we'd be hot late. But anything below that, it'd just be asking the committee to ignore a ton of our resume.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 09:51:36 AM
If Alabama splits their last 4 and loses the 7/10 game to Arkansas in the SEC Tourney, they're still looking at a 65 RPI and 39 SOS. I'll be the first to say that RPI is a massively flawed metric, but the only way we beat those numbers is to go undefeated until the Big East Tourney final.
That's why our cupcakes were so disappointing. When you look at our body of work, we've only got one really bad loss (DePaul at home), have quite a few decent wins (LSU, ASU, Wisconsin, Providence x2, Butler), and if we finished even 3-1, you'd have to think a 9-9 league record wouldn't be too damning. Everything about our resume has the look of a solid bubble team that should have a shot if we finish strong, but we're trying to swim with 6 massive anchors tied to our legs.
If we can get to an RPI in the 65-75 range, we might have a shot because we'd be hot late. But anything below that, it'd just be asking the committee to ignore a ton of our resume.
Hopefully will be a wake-up call for next year's scheduling. What was the average RPI of those cupcakes - about 320? Any way to figure out what our RPI goes to if we say those cupcakes average out at 220?
Quote from: 1SE on February 22, 2016, 09:59:29 AM
Hopefully will be a wake-up call for next year's scheduling. What was the average RPI of those cupcakes - about 320? Any way to figure out what our RPI goes to if we say those cupcakes average out at 220?
Schedule is the killer, no doubt.
0-5 record vs top 25 RPI teams
9-0 record vs 200+ RPI teams
Non conference SOS is 314 right now (out of 351 teams)
Quote from: 1SE on February 22, 2016, 09:59:29 AM
Hopefully will be a wake-up call for next year's scheduling. What was the average RPI of those cupcakes - about 320? Any way to figure out what our RPI goes to if we say those cupcakes average out at 220?
The problem is actually the combined record of the six bad cupcakes, which currently stands at 25-99 (and that's with some overachieving). I know I calculated the difference somewhere by substituting the teams we played for other, better cupcakes that were available to play on the same days we did.
Here it is: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=50537.msg803881#msg803881
I posted that before the loss at home to Creighton, but gives a decent idea of how the RPI and SOS would change had we just scheduled 4 different cupcakes. It also factors in what the RPI would be if we had gone 3-1 in those 4 games.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 10:22:11 AM
Here it is: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=50537.msg803881#msg803881
I posted that before the loss at home to Creighton, but gives a decent idea of how the RPI and SOS would change had we just scheduled 4 different cupcakes. It also factors in what the RPI would be if we had gone 3-1 in those 4 games.
Great stuff - so winning out the regular season would be
21-10 (10-8)
Actual Schedule -- RPI: 74 / SOS: 92
New Schedule -- RPI: 45 / SOS: 39
3-1 Schedule -- RPI: 63 / SOS: 39 **20-11 (10-8)**
That looks like a tourney team. Even 3-1 over these last four would be on the bubble. Painful.
Quote from: WarriorPride68 on February 22, 2016, 09:02:04 AM
Right. If we can beat DePaul without Billy Garrett, we can beat anybody
Not only that, but our mammoth win over wisc demonstrates even further our dragon slayer awesomeness. Those two wins alone should make us a lock for the dance.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 22, 2016, 10:57:50 AM
Not only that, but our mammoth win over wisc demonstrates even further our dragon slayer awesomeness. Those two wins alone should make us a lock for the dance.
Don't know how I end up the MUoptimist here, but come on, we're 4-2 over the last 6 with quality wins against Butler and Providence. We hung close @Xavier right until the end and were a du-will trey away from OT with Creighton. I don't think 4-0 is going to happen but we've been playing solid ball over the last 6 games and the only real stretch in this next 4 is 'Nova and, hey, maybe HE decides he wants top 3 money and goes for 30 and 20 on them! :-)
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 08:33:01 AM
If we win out in the regular season are we in? No. If we win out, our most likely Big East path would be the 4/5 game against Providence, then Villanova, then Xavier in the final. So if we lose to Providence...
21-11 (10-8)
RPI: 82
SOS: 90
Loss to Providence
No team with a sub-70 RPI has made the tournament as an at-large since the 90's. We sure as hell wouldn't be sniffing it with an 82. What if we beat Providence?
22-11 (10-8)
RPI: 70
SOS: 76
Beat Providence, lose to Villanova in the semifinals.
That gives us a slim, slim chance. The RPI would be very low for an at-large, but in an age of weak bubble teams getting in, we'd have a chance. The real strength of our resume would be recency, with a 6-1 record in our last 7, 7-3 in our last 10, and 11-4 in our last 15. Those losses would all be to teams that are top-50 Pomeroy teams with Creighton as the only loss that might not be a tourney team. Now if we beat Villanova and lose to Xavier?
23-11 (10-8)
RPI: 62
SOS: 63
Beat Providence, beat Villanova, lose to Xavier in finals
On paper, it's a much better resume. Personally, I've thought 23 wins was our benchmark for a bid all season long. The only possible problem here is that the Selection Committee often seems to undervalue results in the conference tourneys when it comes to getting a bid. Sure, we'd knock 'Nova down a seed line, but would we move into the field? If we aren't in at 22-11, I'm not sure 23-11 would be viewed any better. If they started putting the field together Saturday, this would make us a lock, but because they'd already have their baseline bracket set by Thursday or Friday, I'd still be nervous come Selection Sunday.
So what about the scenarios with a loss in regular season? I'll assume a loss to Creighton. Why? Because it would actually be less damaging than a loss to Villanova, and frankly, I have severe doubts about our ability to go into Omaha and come away with a win. Anyway...if we lose to Creighton, that likely drops us to the 3/6 game against Seton Hall, followed by Xavier and Villanova. Personally, I'd rather play the Wednesday games if it gave us a chance to avoid Seton Hall. Not sure anyone is a worse matchup for us in the entire league. But I digress...on to scenarios. 3-1 with a loss to Creighton and losing to Seton Hall on Thursday?
20-12 (9-9)
RPI: 95
SOS: 92
Loss to Seton Hall
Not only are we out of the NCAAs with that scenario, but we probably miss the NIT as well. After all the regular season champs get slotted, there probably won't be enough bids to get to the mid-90s, and unlike the NCAAs, the NIT seems to be even more strict in following the RPI. We missed the NIT in 2014 with a better (92) RPI than this. Next scenario, go 3-1, somehow beat SHU, then lose to Xavier?
21-12 (9-9)
RPI: 84
SOS: 80
Beat Seton Hall, Lose to Xavier
The good news, we probably get a NIT berth, but NCAAs? No chance. So how about if we get to the Final?
22-12 (9-9)
RPI: 70
SOS: 67
Beat Seton Hall, Beat Xavier, Lose to Villanova
This puts us squarely in bubble territory, but we probably would be left out. Not only because of the low RPI, but because conference tourney games seem to get less merit than regular season games when it comes to bubble teams.
So what does all this mean? Pretty much that our only hope of getting an at-large bid is winning out the regular season and at least making the semifinals of the Big East Tournament, and for the NIT we probably need to win 4 more total games.
Thanks for this post Brew. Its definitely a tall task, but I enjoy following along. To me, making the NCAAs is the difference between a good year and bad, even though there have been enormous strides this year versus last. The future is bright, but the goal should always be to dance every year.
It's a long shot, but there is still a chance. Starts on Wednesday.
After the last two years, I'd consider the NIT, Vegas, or even CBI to be a step in the right direction. Anything that has us playing beyond Selection Sunday would be a win in my book.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 01:47:37 PM
After the last two years, I'd consider the NIT, Vegas, or even CBI to be a step in the right direction. Anything that has us playing beyond Selection Sunday would be a win in my book.
Step in the right direction, yes.
Success? Absolutely not. At least in my book.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2016, 10:22:11 AM
Here it is: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=50537.msg803881#msg803881
I posted that before the loss at home to Creighton, but gives a decent idea of how the RPI and SOS would change had we just scheduled 4 different cupcakes. It also factors in what the RPI would be if we had gone 3-1 in those 4 games.
So would the bad scheduling of cream puffs be a Wojo problem or a Broeker problem?
To have that kind of schedule, no matter what the makeup was of our team, is a huge disappointment. It made it darn near impossible to be even in consideration of the NCAA from the get go with that type of schedule. Just adds to the frustration level.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 22, 2016, 02:17:34 PM
Step in the right direction, yes.
Success? Absolutely not. At least in my book.
When was the last time MU missed out on any postseason tourney 3 years running? And this in a day and age when there are more teams going to post season tourneys then ever before.
Quote from: mufanatic on February 22, 2016, 04:52:41 PM
When was the last time MU missed out on any postseason tourney 3 years running? And this in a day and age when there are more teams going to post season tourneys then ever before.
Last 2 years with Deane & first 2 years with Crean I believe for missing the NCAA atleast
People are really complaining about the schedule right now?
Sorry, but 8-10 in the BE even with a top 25 SOS wasn't getting us into the NCAAs unless we won the BET. So, we're in the same spot we would've been if we played a tougher schedule.
Give me the wins and build on it going into next year. The non-conference schedule achieved what it was meant to achieve. Successful scheduling job.
The *hope* should be an NIT berth. Absent an amazing BET run or going 4-0 to close out the regular season, we're in a rough spot.
Quote from: 1SE on February 22, 2016, 09:59:29 AM
Hopefully will be a wake-up call for next year's scheduling. What was the average RPI of those cupcakes - about 320? Any way to figure out what our RPI goes to if we say those cupcakes average out at 220?
No. That scenario doesn't provide the information needed. Your RPI is not based on your opponents' RPI.
A team with a much "better" RPI can be worse on your RPI to play (assuming same location).
already started
Quote from: wadesworld on February 22, 2016, 06:51:23 PM
People are really complaining about the schedule right now?
Sorry, but 8-10 in the BE even with a top 25 RPI wasn't getting us into the NCAAs unless we won the BET. So, we're in the same spot we would've been if we played a tougher schedule.
Give me the wins and build on it going into next year. The non-conference schedule achieved what it was meant to achieve. Successful scheduling job.
[/b]
Totally agree, and kill me if this has been refuted but isn't the major flaw in the "if our schedule had a higher strength our RPI would higher!" argument that we would have the same W-L as we do today? If our SOS was 100 points higher we'd have, guessing, 2 more losses and our RPI would suffer.
The complaining would be at the same volume but directed at the performance not the competition.
*note: i've not done the myriad of RPI/Sagrin scenarios of our W-L vs different levels of opposition.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 22, 2016, 11:31:42 AM
To me, making the NCAAs is the difference between a good year and bad
There's no in-between?
To me, the NCAAs rank No. 1. But after that, it depends on a lot of factors before I make a declaration.
Did we improve? Where were we starting from? Did the team's performance give hope for the future or suggest little hope for the future? Was the team mostly enjoyable to watch?
Based on all of those factors, I would say this was not a "good" season but also was not a "bad" season.
If 2014-15 was "bad" (or even "awful") and 2012-13 was "good" (or even "great"), I would rate this season as "OK."
I enjoyed watching the games again, I got some great "up" moments thanks to wins over Wisconsin, Providence and Butler as well as wins in the 2 games I attended in Brooklyn, and I think the program is on the right trajectory.
That can't be "bad" in my book.
Quote from: MU82 on February 22, 2016, 08:26:05 PM
There's no in-between?
To me, the NCAAs rank No. 1. But after that, it depends on a lot of factors before I make a declaration.
Did we improve? Where were we starting from? Did the team's performance give hope for the future or suggest little hope for the future? Was the team mostly enjoyable to watch?
Based on all of those factors, I would say this was not a "good" season but also was not a "bad" season.
If 2014-15 was "bad" (or even "awful") and 2012-13 was "good" (or even "great"), I would rate this season as "OK."
I enjoyed watching the games again, I got some great "up" moments thanks to wins over Wisconsin, Providence and Butler as well as wins in the 2 games I attended in Brooklyn, and I think the program is on the right trajectory.
That can't be "bad" in my book.
No in between for me. I watch every game and enjoy doing so, but short of making the NCAA the year is a failure in my book.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 22, 2016, 06:51:23 PM
People are really complaining about the schedule right now?
Sorry, but 8-10 in the BE even with a top 25 RPI wasn't getting us into the NCAAs unless we won the BET. So, we're in the same spot we would've been if we played a tougher schedule.
Give me the wins and build on it going into next year. The non-conference schedule achieved what it was meant to achieve. Successful scheduling job.
Couldn't disagree with this and the subsequent reply to post more.
Quote from: Jay Bee on February 22, 2016, 07:01:39 PM
The *hope* should be an NIT berth. Absent an amazing BET run or going 4-0 to close out the regular season, we're in a rough spot.
This I agree with. We have work to do to get an NIT bid - would be a real disappointment if we don't get one.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 23, 2016, 06:56:49 AM
No in between for me. I watch every game and enjoy doing so, but short of making the NCAA the year is a failure in my book.
OK. That's fair. You're only speaking to your own opinion and not projecting it onto others.
Lots to address...
Quote from: mufanatic on February 22, 2016, 04:50:08 PMSo would the bad scheduling of cream puffs be a Wojo problem or a Broeker problem?
Neither and both? The athletic department wanted to get wins on the schedule. These guys, along with Scholl, I'm sure, all had a hand in crafting the schedule. I don't think you can point at any one individual.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 22, 2016, 06:51:23 PM
People are really complaining about the schedule right now?
Sorry, but 8-10 in the BE even with a top 25 RPI wasn't getting us into the NCAAs unless we won the BET. So, we're in the same spot we would've been if we played a tougher schedule.
Give me the wins and build on it going into next year. The non-conference schedule achieved what it was meant to achieve. Successful scheduling job.
In order...I'm not complaining about the schedule. The question was raised as to what difference improved opposition would make. I was simply addressing that. I'm not happy with the schedule, but at this point, it's spilled milk and I'm not crying.
8-10 in the Big East with a top-25 RPI? Hmm...let's see how close I can get to that with the Wizard using teams that played the same nights we played..
DROP: Grambling, Maine, Chicago State, Presbyterian
ADD: at Vanderbilt, at Louisville, at West Virginia, at Maryland (all wins, needed to get to 24 RPI)
In addition, let's say we also won the Belmont and Iowa games. Here's where we'd be at, assuming wins in our final two home games ('Nova and GT) and losses in our final two road games (Creighton and Butler) as well as a first-round BET loss to Seton Hall:
21-11 (8-10)
RPI: 24
SOS: 17
Record v top-25: 5-3
Record v top-50: 8-6
Record v top-100: 14-10
Record v 101-200: 2-1
Record v 200+: 5-0
That wouldn't just get us in, that would probably get us a 6-seed. Undefeated non-con with four top-20 wins, three of those on the road? We'd be a lock. Granted, it would be near impossible to accomplish, but your scenario of 8-10 in league with a top-25 RPI wouldn't just have us dancing, it'd have us in ballet slippers.
But what's done is done. Hopefully the wins get us consideration for some form of postseason play. If we can't sneak into the NIT, I'd love to play in the new Vegas tournament. Anything to prolong the season, and that one would probably be fun.
Quote from: naginiF on February 22, 2016, 08:02:15 PM
[/b]
Totally agree, and kill me if this has been refuted but isn't the major flaw in the "if our schedule had a higher strength our RPI would higher!" argument that we would have the same W-L as we do today? If our SOS was 100 points higher we'd have, guessing, 2 more losses and our RPI would suffer.
The complaining would be at the same volume but directed at the performance not the competition.
*note: i've not done the myriad of RPI/Sagrin scenarios of our W-L vs different levels of opposition.
I'll point again to this: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=50537.msg803881#msg803881
The only changes I made to our schedule were four cupcakes. Replacing Grambling, Maine, Chicago State, and Presbyterian with Vermont, Kent State, New Hampshire, and Fairfield. I included in that scenarios for going 3-1 in those four new games. All of those teams played games the same nights we did, so all would have been technically available for us to schedule. Had we gone 3-1 (losing to Kent State), we would still be in much better shape than today, with an average RPI improvement of about 17.8 spots.
Right now, I agree with Jay Bee. NIT should be the goal, and it's at least somewhat realistic. Still a lot to do to get there.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 23, 2016, 08:31:58 AM
Lots to address...
Neither and both? The athletic department wanted to get wins on the schedule. These guys, along with Scholl, I'm sure, all had a hand in crafting the schedule. I don't think you can point at any one individual.
In order...I'm not complaining about the schedule. The question was raised as to what difference improved opposition would make. I was simply addressing that. I'm not happy with the schedule, but at this point, it's spilled milk and I'm not crying.
8-10 in the Big East with a top-25 RPI? Hmm...let's see how close I can get to that with the Wizard using teams that played the same nights we played..
DROP: Grambling, Maine, Chicago State, Presbyterian
ADD: at Vanderbilt, at Louisville, at West Virginia, at Maryland
In addition, let's say we won the Belmont and Iowa games too. Here's where we'd be at, assuming wins in our final two home games ('Nova and GT) and losses in our final two road games (Creighton and Butler) as well as a first-round BET loss to Seton Hall:
21-11 (8-10)
RPI: 24
SOS: 17
Record v top-25: 5-3
Record v top-50: 8-6
Record v top-100: 14-10
Record v 101-200: 2-1
Record v 200+: 5-0
That wouldn't just get us in, that would probably get us a 6-seed. Undefeated non-con with four top-20 wins, three of those on the road? We'd be a lock. Granted, it would be near impossible to accomplish, but your scenario of 8-10 in league with a top-25 RPI wouldn't just have us dancing, it'd have us in ballet slippers.
But what's done is done. Hopefully the wins get us consideration for some form of postseason play. If we can't sneak into the NIT, I'd love to play in the new Vegas tournament. Anything to prolong the season, and that one would probably be fun.
I'll point again to this: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=50537.msg803881#msg803881
The only changes I made to our schedule were four cupcakes. Replacing Grambling, Maine, Chicago State, and Presbyterian with Vermont, Kent State, New Hampshire, and Fairfield. I included in that scenarios for going 3-1 in those four new games. All of those teams played games the same nights we did, so all would have been technically available for us to schedule. Had we gone 3-1 (losing to Kent State), we would still be in much better shape than today, with an average RPI improvement of about 17.8 spots.
Right now, I agree with Jay Bee. NIT should be the goal, and it's at least somewhat realistic. Still a lot to do to get there.
I meant SOS, not RPI. If we were to go 8-10 (which at this point is pretty optimistic) in the BE but we changed our non-conference to be much more difficult and finished with a top 25 SOS, our RPI would not be in the top 25. We are what we are. A young, inexperienced team who isn't consistent enough to build a resume that warrants an NCAA Tourney at large birth, regardless of whether we played a very difficult schedule or not.
AKA everything about this team stays the same but we played a different early season schedule, we're still not anything close to an at large NCAA Tournament team. Now if we could keep the experience we have through this point of the season but wipe everything out, start 0-0 today, and play a top 25 SOS schedule then we'd have a shot. But the reality is the schedule was (smartly) set up to get the young team some wins and build a winning culture. Going forward this was the best way to set up our schedule, as our team was not ready to compete with top or even mid level teams early in the season (see us losing to a pretty meh Belmont team at home, going to overtime with a horrible IUPUI team, getting completely smoked by a really good Iowa team, getting more or less smoked by a pretty meh Georgetown team for 80% of the game, getting smoked by a pretty solid SH team, etc.). We simply weren't ready for a tough schedule. Now we would be, but that's not how things work.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 23, 2016, 08:35:00 AM
I meant SOS, not RPI. If we were to go 8-10 (which at this point is pretty optimistic) in the BE but we changed our non-conference to be much more difficult and finished with a top 25 SOS, our RPI would not be in the top 25. We are what we are. A young, inexperienced team who isn't consistent enough to build a resume that warrants an NCAA Tourney at large birth, regardless of whether we played a very difficult schedule or not.
AKA everything about this team stays the same but we played a different early season schedule, we're still not anything close to an at large NCAA Tournament team. Now if we could keep the experience we have through this point of the season but wipe everything out, start 0-0 today, and play a top 25 SOS schedule then we'd have a shot. But the reality is the schedule was (smartly) set up to get the young team some wins and build a winning culture. Going forward this was the best way to set up our schedule, as our team was not ready to compete with top or even mid level teams early in the season (see us losing to a pretty meh Belmont team at home, going to overtime with a horrible IUPUI team, getting completely smoked by a really good Iowa team, getting more or less smoked by a pretty meh Georgetown team for 80% of the game, getting smoked by a pretty solid SH team, etc.). We simply weren't ready for a tough schedule. Now we would be, but that's not how things work.
Okay, that I would agree with. Odds of us sweeping Maryland, West Virginia, Louisville, and Vandy on the road to get to a 17 SOS would be pretty slim ;D
I would have liked to see a slightly tougher schedule (as listed in the linked post above) because I think it would give us a good shot at the NIT, and I think this team could gain a lot from playing in that tournament. I know, it's not the NCAAs that some of us always want, but right now, I'd take that as significant progress. And right now, even in this thread about our NCAA hopes, the reality is we're a NIT bubble team that is currently on the wrong side of that bubble.
I'll point again to this: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=50537.msg803881#msg803881
[/quote]
Gracias! I didn't mean to turn you into the lazy Scooper's search engine.
Good original analysis.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 23, 2016, 06:56:49 AM
No in between for me. I watch every game and enjoy doing so, but short of making the NCAA the year is a failure in my book.
In my book a Good year is when Improvement/Development/Record is better than the previous year. This has been a Good year!
MU needs to play like it is the NCAA tourney.
Quote from: Loose Cannon on February 23, 2016, 04:03:35 PM
In my book a Good year is when Improvement/Development/Record is better than the previous year. This has been a Good year!
+1
The past few years have definitely been a case of adjusted expectations. Buzz left the cupboard bare, but there are plenty of indicators we're heading in the right direction. It's not all seashells and balloons, but I think years three and four should continue to show improvement. And honestly, I haven't given up on this year yet. Maybe winning the BET is a bit far fetched, but I'd be very happy even with a NIT or Vegas trip. I just want some form of basketball past Selection Sunday at this point. The past two years have been pretty depressing come mid-March.