As we enter February and move into the stretch run, Cracked Sidewalks looks back at Marquette's non-conference opponents to see where they're at. The good is being just one of 10 teams with a non-conference Q1A home win. The bad is a pair of (highlighted) teams that are right on the razor's edge between quadrants. We have all that, and an updated S-Curve.
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2022/02/non-con-check-in.html
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 01, 2022, 12:01:37 PM
As we enter February and move into the stretch run, Cracked Sidewalks looks back at Marquette's non-conference opponents to see where they're at. The good is being just one of 10 teams with a non-conference Q1A home win. The bad is a pair of (highlighted) teams that are right on the razor's edge between quadrants. We have all that, and an updated S-Curve.
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2022/02/non-con-check-in.html
Remember late December when we were all like "let's just get a high seed in the NIT or be a bubble team"
Quote from: fjm on February 01, 2022, 12:30:06 PM
Remember late December when we were all like "let's just get a high seed in the NIT or be a bubble team"
Exactly! That's why I cannot get very upset about Saturday and refuse to join in the post -mortem blame game. Shaka has really impressed with his coaching ability and the establishment of a system. Now we are wondering what seed we will get in the Big Dance.
While luck has certainly played a part (9-1 in games decided by 6 or fewer points) they are in the mix for a protected seed and won't be a loss that hurts Marquette in March, other than emotionally.
I don't follow this. So, because Madison have won 90% of their close games.....that was certainly due to luck?
Quote from: We R Final Four on February 01, 2022, 02:10:32 PM
While luck has certainly played a part (9-1 in games decided by 6 or fewer points) they are in the mix for a protected seed and won't be a loss that hurts Marquette in March, other than emotionally.
I don't follow this. So, because Madison have won 90% of their close games.....that was certainly due to luck?
Yes. Late game execution matters too, but results in close games typically even out over time.
Quote from: We R Final Four on February 01, 2022, 02:10:32 PM
While luck has certainly played a part (9-1 in games decided by 6 or fewer points) they are in the mix for a protected seed and won't be a loss that hurts Marquette in March, other than emotionally.
I don't follow this. So, because Madison have won 90% of their close games.....that was certainly due to luck?
Torvik calls it FUN instead of luck:
http://adamcwisports.blogspot.com/search/label/FUN
since he thinks there may be some controllable aspects to it:
Quote
And with Maryland, there's actually a pretty obvious hypothesis about what that something might be: an all-American point guard (Melo Trimble) who can get to the line at will, and hits 90% of his free throws. This is something that is particularly useful in close games.
Ole Miss beats #25 LSU at LSU tonight, 76-72
Quote from: THRILLHO on February 01, 2022, 06:12:16 PM
since he thinks there may be some controllable aspects to it:
While I know some scoopers have latched onto the "fact" that PC is only lucky to be 19-2, I think this is more the case.
They control the game well, and put themselves in a position to be "lucky". But instead of luck, once they have a close game on the line, they control that aspect well too. Good coaching, and experienced players can do that.
Should they blow out more teams? Sure, but even scoopers lament the fact that blowouts boost computer numbers too much.
Marquette may be the lucky one (of 2) to have held them under 60 points. Do that, and it's a guaranteed win! :)
Quote from: rocky_warrior on February 01, 2022, 10:48:36 PM
While I know some scoopers have latched onto the "fact" that PC is only lucky to be 19-2, I think this is more the case.
They control the game well, and put themselves in a position to be "lucky". But instead of luck, once they have a close game on the line, they control that aspect well too. Good coaching, and experienced players can do that.
Should they blow out more teams? Sure, but even scoopers lament the fact that blowouts boost computer numbers too much.
Marquette may be the lucky one (of 2) to have held them under 60 points. Do that, and it's a guaranteed win! :)
Agree. I think the constant charge that they are just lucky is sour grapes. Give some credit to Cooley and his experienced players. Maybe they have been a little lucky on occasion but that can be said about most teams in the BE at some point this season.
The good news is that MU no longer needs to worry how WVU or Ole Miss are doing. MU controls its own destiny.
The old saying goes, "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity."
Kudos to Providence for putting themselves in position to win close games and kudos to them for winning them.
But in the long run, that kind of success is not sustainable. That's not sour grapes, that's statistical probability.
The question is, when does Providence's luck run out? It might not be until March.
Quote from: tower912 on February 02, 2022, 08:15:00 AM
The good news is that MU no longer needs to worry how WVU or Ole Miss are doing. MU controls its own destiny.
For a tourney berth. For seeding? Still matters how WVU and Ole Miss are doing.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 02, 2022, 08:51:14 AM
For a tourney berth. For seeding? Still matters how WVU and Ole Miss are doing.
Exactly. Ole Miss last night was huge, not just because they inched closer to Q2 (would've got it had they held their first half lead) but because it also gives LSU a Q3 loss and we're competing with LSU for seeding.
Being able to leapfrog LSU I think is better for seeding than if Ole Miss creeps up to 96 in the NET or whatever
Quote from: Pepe Sylvia on February 02, 2022, 10:03:13 AM
Being able to leapfrog LSU I think is better for seeding than if Ole Miss creeps up to 96 in the NET or whatever
Sure, but it all matters. Each individual tick may not matter much, but added all together throughout the course of a season and it makes a huge difference. Texas A&M has the same overall record as us and plays in a higher ranked conference than we do. We are generally considered to be a 6 seed or better while TAMU isn't even being mentioned as a bubble team. Who you play and how they perform matters.
Quote from: Pepe Sylvia on February 02, 2022, 10:03:13 AM
Being able to leapfrog LSU I think is better for seeding than if Ole Miss creeps up to 96 in the NET or whatever
Both are beneficial.
There's a dissonance between the comment that all data points matter (and thus individual points don't matter much), and then at the same time one individual data point itself makes a huge difference.
With 9+ games left (including conference tournaments), declaring that we're in competition with any individual team for seed right now, or that any single one of their wins or losses is "huge" isn't reflective of reality.
Neither LSU nor us are currently seeded or even in the tournament yet. If it ended today, we probably would be, but the season isn't ending today. We have 9 games plus the conference tournament left. So does LSU.
We might wind up competing with them for seed after the season is over, but for that to happen dozens if not hundreds of individual data points (out of our 9+ remaining games, LSU's 9+ remaining games, and remaining games from the other 30 opponents for each team) have to align in exactly the right way for both teams to wind up in an "MU or LSU" decision for seed.
And then there's the fact that the committee frequently moves teams up and down for a whole host of other reasons. We could wind up with a better NET score and still wind up with a worse seed if it fits with the goal of keeping teams closer to home, avoiding intra-conference matchups, reflecting the personal biases of the committee members, etc.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 02, 2022, 12:26:41 PM
With 9+ games left (including conference tournaments), declaring that we're in competition with any individual team for seed right now, or that any single one of their wins or losses is "huge" isn't reflective of reality.
I agree and found it crazy that the JS put up an article about WI's chances at a #1 seed with 10 or so games of conference play left.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2022/02/01/wisconsin-mens-basketball-predicted-no-1-seed-ncaa-tournament-march-madness-cbs-sports-jerry-palm/9297054002/ (https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2022/02/01/wisconsin-mens-basketball-predicted-no-1-seed-ncaa-tournament-march-madness-cbs-sports-jerry-palm/9297054002/)
Quote from: Spotcheck Billy on February 02, 2022, 01:03:59 PM
I agree and found it crazy that the JS put up an article about WI's chances at a #1 seed with 10 or so games of conference play left.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2022/02/01/wisconsin-mens-basketball-predicted-no-1-seed-ncaa-tournament-march-madness-cbs-sports-jerry-palm/9297054002/ (https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2022/02/01/wisconsin-mens-basketball-predicted-no-1-seed-ncaa-tournament-march-madness-cbs-sports-jerry-palm/9297054002/)
The only crazy part is using Jerry Palm as the source. He's terrible. Palm is one of 5 brackets of the 108 on Bracket Matrix that have Wisconsin as a 1-seed. Only people that think RPI is still a thing put Wisconsin up that high right now.
In December, it is too early to really talk about competing for seeding. Now that we're in February, we're about 70% of the way through the regular season. Seeding is absolutely a valid discussion at this point.
If they even want to be in the discussion for a 1 seed then tonight's game in Champagne becomes a must win.
That said, they probably won't win tonight or be in the discussion for a 1 seed.
If they somehow got a 1 and had Oklahoma in the second round as listed in Palms bracket they would probably lose to Porter Mosers club, as Illinois did last season.
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on February 02, 2022, 07:40:59 AM
Agree. I think the constant charge that they are just lucky is sour grapes. Give some credit to Cooley and his experienced players. Maybe they have been a little lucky on occasion but that can be said about most teams in the BE at some point this season.
Yeah, probably that "luck" quantity is some combination of actual luck combined with some factors related to close-game success (Torvik's example is having a guy who can draw fouls and shoot a high FT%). How to tease those apart might be tough. A few years ago Pomeroy did an analysis of 3pt% defense where he split the conference season into halves and showed that there was little correlation between those halves, arguing that defenses don't affect 3pt% (while they do obviously affect shot selection). I wonder if the same analysis could be done for luck to tease out the random from the non-random part of it. Might require multiple seasons of data. I vaguely recall him showing that a few teams, like Syracuse, were consistently allowing lower 3pt% across seasons.
Quote from: Spotcheck Billy on February 02, 2022, 01:03:59 PM
I agree and found it crazy that the JS put up an article about WI's chances at a #1 seed with 10 or so games of conference play left.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2022/02/01/wisconsin-mens-basketball-predicted-no-1-seed-ncaa-tournament-march-madness-cbs-sports-jerry-palm/9297054002/ (https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/college/uw/2022/02/01/wisconsin-mens-basketball-predicted-no-1-seed-ncaa-tournament-march-madness-cbs-sports-jerry-palm/9297054002/)
This article had to be posted today or it would be relegated to the trash bin. After UW-Madison loses tonight any talk of a 1 seed would be laughed at and this article is rendered moot.