MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 07:15:15 AM

Title: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 07:15:15 AM
Do you want Stevie on Scheierman or Alexander?   
Omaha is a b!tch to play at.
TKo health is a wild card.  With him healthy, I see a way for MU to eke out a win.  Without him, double digit loss.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: HutchwasClutch on February 29, 2024, 07:18:37 AM
Quote from: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 07:15:15 AM
Do you want Stevie on Scheierman or Alexander?   
Omaha is a b!tch to play at.
TKo health is a wild card.  With him healthy, I see a way for MU to eke out a win.  Without him, double digit loss.

I bet he's a no go.  If it's still bothering him significantly, which seems likely with this injury, let him rest and see about next week hopefully. 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Goose on February 29, 2024, 07:28:15 AM
Omaha is a tough place to win and they have waited a year to get revenge. That said, I think they get the win, with or without TK. I had little confidence going into UConn, but they are playing at a very high level right now. They know what is on the line and I believe they are ready to rumble.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on February 29, 2024, 07:38:28 AM
Omaha Stakes!

Kolek's health is going to be a key factor.  Plus, Creighton has been red hot at home.  Maybe the Jays are due to cool off?

Marquette rebounded from the debacle at UConn to play a near perfect home stand.  Channel that energy for the next 5 weeks and it will be a fun ride.

Now the fun begins.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 07:44:51 AM
Quote from: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on February 29, 2024, 07:38:28 AM
Omaha Stakes!

Kolek's health is going to be a key factor.  Plus, Creighton has been red hot at home.  Maybe the Jays are due to cool off?

Marquette rebounded from the debacle at UConn to play a near perfect home stand.  Channel that energy for the next 5 weeks and it will be a fun ride.

Now the fun begins.
Bravo on the pun.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Uncle Rico on February 29, 2024, 08:16:07 AM
As Dung Willie has so eloquently said, McDermott owns Shaka
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: We R Final Four on February 29, 2024, 08:21:33 AM
Load management.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on February 29, 2024, 09:15:51 AM
Quote from: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 07:15:15 AM
Do you want Stevie on Scheierman or Alexander?   
I think Stevie has proven that he can probably cover both simultaneously.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 09:22:54 AM
Quote from: TSmith34, Inc. on February 29, 2024, 09:15:51 AM
I think Stevie has proven that he can probably cover both simultaneously.
Well, there was that one time last season when he guarded the entire Butler team, but I am not sure that works against Creighton.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: rgoode57 on February 29, 2024, 09:27:49 AM
Yes, Omaha is a tough place to play, an Creighton has a very good team I expect that UConn, Creighton, and Marquette will sit at the top of the BE for several years.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Scoop Snoop on February 29, 2024, 09:39:57 AM
Quote from: Goose on February 29, 2024, 07:28:15 AM
Omaha is a tough place to win and they have waited a year to get revenge. That said, I think they get the win, with or without TK. I had little confidence going into UConn, but they are playing at a very high level right now. They know what is on the line and I believe they are ready to rumble.

Always love your enthusiasm Goose, but please explain how "they"/we win if Kolek is watching from the bench.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 29, 2024, 09:43:06 AM
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on February 29, 2024, 09:39:57 AM
Always love your enthusiasm Goose, but please explain how "they"/we win if Kolek is watching from the bench.

We score more points than them?
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUfan12 on February 29, 2024, 09:47:24 AM
Creighton has really bounced back offensively this month. I think if you can keep Ashworth in check you have a chance. When he gets going they're really hard to guard.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Scoop Snoop on February 29, 2024, 10:03:56 AM
Quote from: Galway Eagle on February 29, 2024, 09:43:06 AM
We score more points than them?

Now there's an idea!
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Nukem2 on February 29, 2024, 10:07:54 AM
Quote from: MUfan12 on February 29, 2024, 09:47:24 AM
Creighton has really bounced back offensively this month. I think if you can keep Ashworth in check you have a chance. When he gets going they're really hard to guard.
Thats where MU will miss Sean. He gave Ashworth fits at Fiserv.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Galway Eagle on February 29, 2024, 10:13:11 AM
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on February 29, 2024, 10:03:56 AM
Now there's an idea!

It's been my golf strategy for years.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: fjm on February 29, 2024, 10:13:16 AM
TKo "will be limited, might be out for a while" is what I'm hearing.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: The Lens on February 29, 2024, 10:15:30 AM
Quote from: fjm on February 29, 2024, 10:13:16 AM
TKo "will be limited, might be out for a while" is what I'm hearing.

Demetrius Bowels would say you're not listening to the right people.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUfan12 on February 29, 2024, 10:15:35 AM
Quote from: fjm on February 29, 2024, 10:13:16 AM
TKo "will be limited, might be out for a while" is what I'm hearing.

Respectfully, I don't know if they would know that this soon. You could be right but it seems really early for anything to be known.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on February 29, 2024, 10:20:27 AM
I'm expecting to hear something like "How long Tyler will be out will depend on how he responds to treatment".

Words that sound vague but are in fact meaningless.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MuggsyB on February 29, 2024, 10:21:22 AM
Obviously Tyko's health is paramount, but I think Oso has to have a big game Saturday.  We haven't needed his scoring the last few games but I believe he and Ben have to outplay Kalky for starters and that means scoring the ball.

Ashworth is a guy who can really hurt you if you're not paying attention.  Who Stevie guards will be interesting.  I'm more inclined to have him check Alexander because he has the ball in his hands the most.  All I know is MU's best beats Creighton's best.  I hope we see a complete performance on the road. 

Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: fjm on February 29, 2024, 10:22:02 AM
Quote from: The Lens on February 29, 2024, 10:15:30 AM
Demetrius Bowels would say you're not listening to the right people.

Hoping Unc Demetrius is right. Just reporting what I've been told.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MuggsyB on February 29, 2024, 10:26:44 AM
Quote from: Nukem2 on February 29, 2024, 10:07:54 AM
Thats where MU will miss Sean. He gave Ashworth fits at Fiserv.

JTY's absence is a big loss.  We have done great without him but he gave us very important minutes.  Versus certain match-ups his persiferousness was a major feather in our caps.  It's very unfortunate he got injured.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BallBoy on February 29, 2024, 10:37:41 AM
The next two games are key to Marquette seeding in the Tournament.  If they lose both, I could see us slipping to a 3 seed.  Win both and I think we are a lock for a 2 regardless of what happens in the BET. 

MU has a very narrow path to a share of the Big East Regular Season and Top seed in the BET.  For any shot, we need:
1. Win out
2. UConn loses to us and a plus one.  Either Seton Hall or Providence will work.

This would give us a share of the BERST.

If MU beats Creighton and they finish third, the tie breaker between MU and UConn for seeding will be head-to-head against Creighton.  MU would be 2-0 while UConn would be 1-1 giving us the 1 seed. 

If Creighton finishes 4th, then the most likely candidate for 3rd would be Seton Hall.  If UConn wins against them but loses to Providence then the head to head would be Seton Hall/MU 1-1 and UConn/Seton Hall 1-1.  Meaning Creighton becomes the deciding H2H.  If UConn loses to SH then MU would own both likely 3,4 team tie breakers at 2-0 vs 1-1 and 1-1 vs 0-2.  It SH and Creighton are tied in the standing, MU would have the winning % in that group.

If MU losses to Creighton then UConn would need to lose the last 3 games.  Highly unlikely, but in that scenario, assuming MU beats UConn and Xavier.  Tie breaker would go Creighton H2H tied, Seton Hall MU wins.

Morale of the story, if you win at Creighton you put yourself in the best possible position while needing one other team to beat UConn but if it happens you control your own destiny. 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BrewCity83 on February 29, 2024, 10:43:49 AM
BERST or Bust?
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BallBoy on February 29, 2024, 10:52:44 AM
There is one more scenario,

Providence wins out beating Nova, Georgetown and UConn putting them at 12-8.  UConn loses to us and Providence but beats Seton Hall.  Creighton loses to both us and Nova putting them at 12-8 as well.  Seton Hall loses to UConn and Nova putting them at 12-8 (Depaul is the win).   In this scenario, we would come out of this group ahead of UConn in win %.  MU 4-2 and UConn 3-3. 

Nova would just miss the 12-8 record due to a loss to Providence but assuming same scenario but Providence loses to Nova it would be a similar outcome but MU 5-1 and UConn 4-2.

There is a path but we need to win out and get some help.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 10:53:41 AM
Time for a Norman conquest. 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 29, 2024, 11:25:43 AM
Quote from: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 10:53:41 AM
Time for a Norman conquest.

We don't play Oklahoma, plus Porter Moser teaches siege defense well.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: PointWarrior on February 29, 2024, 11:39:35 AM
What's the tie breaker look like if MU, Creighton, and SH all finish tied for second at 14-6 or 13 - 7?     Assume Creighton gets #2 since they beat SH twice? 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Jay Bee on February 29, 2024, 02:31:48 PM
Quote from: PointWarrior on February 29, 2024, 11:39:35 AM
What's the tie breaker look like if MU, Creighton, and SH all finish tied for second at 14-6 or 13 - 7?     Assume Creighton gets #2 since they beat SH twice?

No. It's a mini Conf concept. Winner Saturday would get the 2 seed
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Shooter McGavin on February 29, 2024, 02:38:02 PM
Quote from: Goose on February 29, 2024, 07:28:15 AM
Omaha is a tough place to win and they have waited a year to get revenge. That said, I think they get the win, with or without TK. I had little confidence going into UConn, but they are playing at a very high level right now. They know what is on the line and I believe they are ready to rumble.

My gut says they get a win no matter what as well.  My brain is with Tower without Kolek though.  I hope my gut wins out!
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: PointWarrior on February 29, 2024, 02:57:05 PM
thanks, lets say Creighton wins Sat (cause TyKo had his oblique amputated and can't play).   Who has the tiebreaker between MU and SH?
 

Quote from: Jay Bee on February 29, 2024, 02:31:48 PM
No. It's a mini Conf concept. Winner Saturday would get the 2 seed
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Jay Bee on February 29, 2024, 03:32:05 PM
Quote from: PointWarrior on February 29, 2024, 02:57:05 PM
thanks, lets say Creighton wins Sat (cause TyKo had his oblique amputated and can't play).   Who has the tiebreaker between MU and SH?


If it's a 3 way tie, goes CU then us then SH bc we'd be 2-2 in mini Conf, sh 1-3
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Jay Bee on February 29, 2024, 03:33:53 PM
But, if only two team tie... if we lose to UCONN, SH is ahead of us in tiebreaker. If we best UCoNn, we win tiebreaker due to SH 0-2 v CU
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BallBoy on February 29, 2024, 05:41:43 PM
Quote from: PointWarrior on February 29, 2024, 11:39:35 AM
What's the tie breaker look like if MU, Creighton, and SH all finish tied for second at 14-6 or 13 - 7?     Assume Creighton gets #2 since they beat SH twice?

Regardless of what the record ends up being 14-6 or 13-7 it will be the same because it will go to the mini-conference of which the results would be below: 
The Mini-conference would be
MU with 2-2
Creighton 3-1
SH 1-3

The above only applies if MU loses to Creighton.  If not then there is no way MU, Creighton, and SH could end up tied.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on February 29, 2024, 06:11:24 PM
A 3 way tie at 13-7 is highly unlikely because it would require Seton Hall to win at UConn on Saturday. I really don't see that happening. The fact that SH won the first game between the two makes it that much less likely

I expect a beat down similar to what MU gave Providence last night.

ETA: should have said a tie at 14-6 is highly unlikely because it would require SH to win at UConn. .
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Viper on February 29, 2024, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Uncle Rico on February 29, 2024, 08:16:07 AM
As Dung Willie has so eloquently said, McDermott owns Shaka
McDermott, no. Gard? Yes.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: We R Final Four on February 29, 2024, 07:15:51 PM
Quote from: Viper on February 29, 2024, 06:27:48 PM
McDermott, no. Gard? Yes.
It's been a tough couple week for your Badgers.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: copious1218 on February 29, 2024, 07:57:02 PM
Quote from: wisblue on February 29, 2024, 06:11:24 PM
A 3 way tie at 13-7 is highly unlikely because it would require Seton Hall to win at UConn on Saturday.

No, SH can lose to UConn and win their last 2 to get to 13-7. They're currently 11-6.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: DoctorV on February 29, 2024, 09:10:37 PM
Quote from: BallBoy on February 29, 2024, 10:52:44 AM
There is one more scenario,

Providence wins out beating Nova, Georgetown and UConn putting them at 12-8.  UConn loses to us and Providence but beats Seton Hall.  Creighton loses to both us and Nova putting them at 12-8 as well.  Seton Hall loses to UConn and Nova putting them at 12-8 (Depaul is the win).   In this scenario, we would come out of this group ahead of UConn in win %.  MU 4-2 and UConn 3-3. 

Nova would just miss the 12-8 record due to a loss to Providence but assuming same scenario but Providence loses to Nova it would be a similar outcome but MU 5-1 and UConn 4-2.

There is a path but we need to win out and get some help.

I mean this in the nicest way possible,  but you lost me in the first 10 scenarios.

Honestly, who cares this season?

I used to fret about the BET seed and opponent draw in the wojo years when Marquette was always bubble-icious but does it really matter this season?

I don't want to be 'that guy' but this years BET, if you set aside how cool it would be to be B2B champs, likely doesn't mean much. Many would, and do, argue that it's better to lose and get ready for the big one the following week.

Although I don't particularly subscribe to that, since I always want wins, I'm definitely not going to worry about who Marquette plays.
Perhaps if I was traveling to NYC I would care more about opponent but I just don't this year.

I'm confident in the team, and not terrible concerned if they don't prevail.
The way this season has shaped up March madness is indeed king.

Let's whoop Creighton on Saturday and UConn on Wednesday though
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BallBoy on February 29, 2024, 09:55:02 PM
Quote from: DoctorV on February 29, 2024, 09:10:37 PM
I mean this in the nicest way possible,  but you lost me in the first 10 scenarios.

Honestly, who cares this season?

I used to fret about the BET seed and opponent draw in the wojo years when Marquette was always bubble-icious but does it really matter this season?

I don't want to be 'that guy' but this years BET, if you set aside how cool it would be to be B2B champs, likely doesn't mean much. Many would, and do, argue that it's better to lose and get ready for the big one the following week.

Although I don't particularly subscribe to that, since I always want wins, I'm definitely not going to worry about who Marquette plays.
Perhaps if I was traveling to NYC I would care more about opponent but I just don't this year.

I'm confident in the team, and not terrible concerned if they don't prevail.
The way this season has shaped up March madness is indeed king.

Let's whoop Creighton on Saturday and UConn on Wednesday though

If you don't care move on.

Here is why it matters.  76% of NCAA tournament winners are in 1 and 2 seed line but 1 seeds have won it 63% of the time. Two seeds won 13%.  Most 1 and 2 seeds either won their conference tournament or made it to the championship game.  Unless you had an overwhelmingly dominant season, it is more unlikely you make those two lines if you lose early in your tourney.  It is more likely you lose a seed line.  3 seeds won it 11% and 4 won 5% so pretty big drop off. 

Our best odds of winning or getting to the championship game in the BET when we don't play every top seed along the way.  If MU gets the one seed they avoid UConn or Creighton in the semis and wouldn't need to play them both. 

Losing in the BET early is for teams that see the sweet sixteen as their ceiling.  Also you don't want to go in with a mindset that losing is ok if not desirable because that carries over.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MuMark on February 29, 2024, 10:11:53 PM
"Losing in the BET early is for teams that see the sweet sixteen as their ceiling.  Also you don't want to go in with a mindset that losing is ok if not desirable because that carries over."

Fans can have any mindset will have no impact on how far MU goes in the Big East tournament or the NCAA tournament.

Players and coaches all want to win ......every game.......if they don't win the BET it won't because they had the wring mindset......and they can still make a deep,run.......kind of like UCONN last season.

1 and 2 seeds don't have the best chance to win it all because they have a 1 or 2 next to,their name.....it's because they are the best teams.

So,if Kolek is out and we somehow drop,to,a 3 seed and then get him back healthy for the dance our odds to win it all won't be materially different......you still get a more easily winnable first game and then go,from there.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on February 29, 2024, 10:18:30 PM
Quote from: copious1218 on February 29, 2024, 07:57:02 PM
No, SH can lose to UConn and win their last 2 to get to 13-7. They're currently 11-6.

My mistake.

I meant to say that a 3 way tie at 14-6 is unlikely because it would require Seton Hall to win at UConn.

A 3 way tie at 13-7 is pretty unlikely too because it would require (1) MU to lose out, (2) Creighton to lose to Villanova, and (3) Seton Hall to go 1-1 against UConn and Villanova (I assume they will beat DePaul).
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on February 29, 2024, 11:10:50 PM
Quote from: MuMark on February 29, 2024, 10:11:53 PM
"Losing in the BET early is for teams that see the sweet sixteen as their ceiling.  Also you don't want to go in with a mindset that losing is ok if not desirable because that carries over."

Fans can have any mindset will have no impact on how far MU goes in the Big East tournament or the NCAA tournament.

Players and coaches all want to win ......every game.......if they don't win the BET it won't because they had the wring mindset......and they can still make a deep,run.......kind of like UCONN last season.

1 and 2 seeds don't have the best chance to win it all because they have a 1 or 2 next to,their name.....it's because they are the best teams.

So,if Kolek is out and we somehow drop,to,a 3 seed and then get him back healthy for the dance our odds to win it all won't be materially different......you still get a more easily winnable first game and then go,from there.

I second this.

I also think that those often cited numbers about how certain seeds have performed in past tournaments are losing some of their significance as there has been more parity in recent years.

IMHO, once a team gets past the first round, matchups become a lot more significant than seeding.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BallBoy on March 01, 2024, 12:04:55 AM
Quote from: MuMark on February 29, 2024, 10:11:53 PM
"Losing in the BET early is for teams that see the sweet sixteen as their ceiling.  Also you don't want to go in with a mindset that losing is ok if not desirable because that carries over."

Fans can have any mindset will have no impact on how far MU goes in the Big East tournament or the NCAA tournament.

Players and coaches all want to win ......every game.......if they don't win the BET it won't because they had the wring mindset......and they can still make a deep,run.......kind of like UCONN last season.

1 and 2 seeds don't have the best chance to win it all because they have a 1 or 2 next to,their name.....it's because they are the best teams.

So,if Kolek is out and we somehow drop,to,a 3 seed and then get him back healthy for the dance our odds to win it all won't be materially different......you still get a more easily winnable first game and then go,from there.

They are the best teams or at least perceived to be the best because they won and because they regularly win their tournament or go deeper.   When you look at the exceptions their regular season record stands out which doesn't happen as much as you move further from the top.

Because they earned it through their play they also have easier path in the tournament.  Historically it is why the best win % in first rounds follow the seed lines. The first round win % drops between 6-8% for every seed line increase.  3 seeds have lost 22 times vs once for 1 seeds. Seems like a significant jump.  These aren't all-time stats either.

If everything played out from a seed line perspective, a one seed wouldn't play a top 10 team until the elite 8 while a 3 seed plays them in the sweet sixteen. If the 3 seed wins they have to play another top ten team and then 2 more.  That's 4 top ten teams vs 3 top ten teams along the way. 

That's on paper. I get it and anything can happen but the other reason there is a big drop off between a 1 and 3 in terms of championships is the road for the 3 is harder leaving less chance for error.

The better the team the more likely they create matchup problem because they have more weapons. When you are a one or two dimensional team matchups become more of an issue.

The last 3 seed to win the NCAA tournament was in 2011 and the last four seed was 1997 so talk parity all you want but 1 and 2 seeds have dominated the last decade of champions and in the modern era. 

There are always exceptions but UConn didn't win the NCAA tournament because they lost earlier. They lost in the semifinals in what was arguably the game for the championship. UConn also has something MU doesn't...5 championships in 25 years so people are willing to look the other way. If MU doesn't win, those same people use it as a reason to knock them down a line increasing toughness of the tournament.

There are a lot of caveats/assumptions in your statement about Kolek. He comes back healthy, the team continues to fire on all cylinders and don't get thrown out of their flow upon his return, and he doesn't have any effects of a layoff.  We are three weeks from the first round and you assume not playing for that period of time will have zero impact when in reality is the most likely reason we would lose early outside of a under-seeded opponent. Yeah in reality it would be materially harder. Lower seed and your star player is just getting back into a game flow.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 01, 2024, 05:26:51 AM
The last 4 seed to win the NCAA was in 2023, not 1997.

You also said that only one 1 seed has lost in the first round, when in fact it's 2.

Looks like you are using data that doesn't include last year's torurnament, which is the greatest example of how parity has increased in recent years.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: BallBoy on March 01, 2024, 07:22:13 AM
Quote from: wisblue on March 01, 2024, 05:26:51 AM
The last 4 seed to win the NCAA was in 2023, not 1997.

You also said that only one 1 seed has lost in the first round, when in fact it's 2.

Looks like you are using data that doesn't include last year's torurnament, which is the greatest example of how parity has increased in recent years.

You are correct the numbers I cited did not include last years by accident but one year doesn't make parity a trend.   The numbers don't materially change.


What is likely a culprit for that is COVID where players got an extra year. That isn't carrying forward so the average players are naturally going to return to less experience which will likely bring the results back to historical norms.  I believe that is next year.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: brewcity77 on March 01, 2024, 09:16:23 AM
Quote from: Jay Bee on February 29, 2024, 02:31:48 PM
No. It's a mini Conf concept. Winner Saturday would get the 2 seed

If Marquette wins Saturday, MU will have 14 wins, Creighton will have 7 losses, and they cannot be tied.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 01, 2024, 09:36:16 AM
Quote from: BallBoy on March 01, 2024, 07:22:13 AM
You are correct the numbers I cited did not include last years by accident but one year doesn't make parity a trend.   The numbers don't materially change.


What is likely a culprit for that is COVID where players got an extra year. That isn't carrying forward so the average players are naturally going to return to less experience which will likely bring the results back to historical norms.  I believe that is next year.

This is more than just a 1 year trend. Fewer 1 seeds and more teams with seeds of 6 or higher have been making the Final Four over the last 10 years or so than in the first 30 years of the 64 team fields.

I don't think there is any way to measure precisely how much of the success of a team in the tournament is due to the quality of the team and how much is because of an "easier path". But I think that almost all of it is the quality of the team.

One of the obvious problems with lumping every team on a seed line together (especially the one seeds) is that you're lumping 4 teams on the seed line together.

Using this year as the example, and looking at teams 1-8, everyone seems to agree that Houston, Purdue, and UConn are the best 3 teams and deserve number 1 seeds. There is a significant drop off from there to teams 4-8, the group that includes Arizona, UNC, Tennessee, and MU. I don't think the team in that group that gets the fourth number 1 seed suddenly has improved its prospects for winning the championship over the team that is number 5 on the seed list and gets a number 2 seed.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on March 01, 2024, 09:41:42 AM
The only difference is that the fourth 1 seed will likely get an easier bracket than most of the 2 seeds.  Not having to play UConn, Purdue, or Houston before the Final Four would be an advantage.

Of course, upsets could happen and make it all moot.  But on paper, the West bracket should be the most wide open.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Hards Alumni on March 01, 2024, 09:46:38 AM
Quote from: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on March 01, 2024, 09:41:42 AM
The only difference is that the fourth 1 seed will likely get an easier bracket than most of the 2 seeds.  Not having to play UConn, Purdue, or Houston before the Final Four would be an advantage.

Of course, upsets could happen and make it all moot.  But on paper, the West bracket should be the most wide open.

IMO, we are all missing the forest for the trees here.

Any team can run into another team that is able to exploit their weakness perfectly.  And with the growing parity amongst division 1 teams it is becoming more evident every year.

I think the most important thing when getting a bid is what your regional looks like.  If there are teams you match up well with then your seed line isn't as important.  Sure, its great to play as a 2 or a 1, but ultimately, you're getting a pretty good team in round 2 no matter what.  Now what matters is what the profile of that second team is.

I'm not sure I'm explaining this well.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 01, 2024, 09:54:58 AM
Quote from: wisblue on March 01, 2024, 09:36:16 AM
I don't think the team in that group that gets the fourth number 1 seed suddenly has improved its prospects for winning the championship over the team that is number 5 on the seed list and gets a number 2 seed.

You can think that but you are wrong. An easier path matters.  It's not the only thing that matters and it can be debated how much it matters but it absolutely matters.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on March 01, 2024, 10:12:24 AM
Quote from: tower912 on February 29, 2024, 07:15:15 AM
Do you want Stevie on Scheierman or Alexander?   
Omaha is a b!tch to play at.
TKo health is a wild card.  With him healthy, I see a way for MU to eke out a win.  Without him, double digit loss.
If Ross starts, put him on Scheierman and Stevie on Alexander.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 01, 2024, 11:55:16 AM
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 01, 2024, 09:54:58 AM
You can think that but you are wrong. An easier path matters.  It's not the only thing that matters and it can be debated how much it matters but it absolutely matters.

That first sentence is something of a conclusive argument.

You seem to be assuming that team 4 on the seed list has an easier path than team 5 on the seed list.

As Hards Alumni explained above, there's a lot more to the path than the seed position given the importance of matchups. Then there's the fact that the actual path a team has to follow might end up being significantly different than the path it would have followed if the higher seeds win every game. You also can't assume that the teams are placed on the NCAA seed list in the exact order of their inherent strength at the time the tournament comes around. Some teams may be rising and some may be fading (see Marquette as a 5 seed in 2018 and North Carolina in 2022 as an 8 seed)

I will agree that it can be debated how much of a difference one spot on the seed list matters, and it's my opinion that the difference is insignificant.

I looked at something earlier this year that reinforced my opinion. Using Ken Pom ratings and win probabilities I looked at Houston's win probability against a variety of future conference opponents who conveniently covered several potential seed lines. I don't remember from when I jotted these down if they were all home or all away games, but I made sure they were all the same.

At the time I did this Houston was rated number 1 by Ken Pom, so a presumed 1 seed. The win probabilities were:

BYU (5) 2 seed- 63%
Kansas (10) 3 seed- 70%
Baylor (14) 4 seed- 71%
Iowa State (17)- 5 seed- 71%
Oklahoma (18)- 5 seed- 71%
TCU (32)-8 seed-83%
Texas (33)- 9 seed- 82%
Cincinnati (37) 10 seed- 83%
Texas Tech (42) 11 seed- 85%

IMHO this illustrates that the inherent advantage of playing a team one seed line lower is minimal at best.

I did the same thing for BYU and its win probabilities were consistently 10-12% lower than Houston's against the same teams. That reflects the fact that Houston is a stronger team than BYU.

If I remember correctly, MU was a 3 point favorite against MSU in the second round last year. If those teams had played on a neutral court in a non tournament game, and MSU had won, it wouldn't be considered an upset. But people often put a lot more significance on that seed number than they should.



Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: PointWarrior on March 01, 2024, 12:48:53 PM
I just pray we don't get Vermont in the first round this year...



Quote from: Hards Alumni on March 01, 2024, 09:46:38 AM
IMO, we are all missing the forest for the trees here.

Any team can run into another team that is able to exploit their weakness perfectly.  And with the growing parity amongst division 1 teams it is becoming more evident every year.

I think the most important thing when getting a bid is what your regional looks like.  If there are teams you match up well with then your seed line isn't as important.  Sure, its great to play as a 2 or a 1, but ultimately, you're getting a pretty good team in round 2 no matter what.  Now what matters is what the profile of that second team is.

I'm not sure I'm explaining this well.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MU82 on March 01, 2024, 02:47:11 PM
Quote from: BallBoy on March 01, 2024, 07:22:13 AM
You are correct the numbers I cited did not include last years by accident but one year doesn't make parity a trend.

What is likely a culprit for that is COVID where players got an extra year. That isn't carrying forward so the average players are naturally going to return to less experience which will likely bring the results back to historical norms.  I believe that is next year.

This is also COVID year, with numerous teams fielding older, more experienced players. And next year will be one, too.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Spaniel with a Short Tail on March 01, 2024, 03:39:39 PM
ESPN preview.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/page/CBBblockbuster030124/mens-college-basketball-weekend-picks-alabama-tennessee-marquette-creighton

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/c7f15a34b93577bc9f9bf68931070577/tenor.gif?itemid=18593508)
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MuMark on March 01, 2024, 04:08:34 PM
I'm seeing Creighton up 5.5 now
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: StillAWarrior on March 01, 2024, 04:17:31 PM
Quote from: MuMark on March 01, 2024, 04:08:34 PM
I'm seeing Creighton up 5.5 now

Might have something to do with ESPN releasing their preview.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: brewcity77 on March 01, 2024, 05:56:42 PM
It'll be all the sweeter when we beat them without Kolek.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MurphysTillClose on March 01, 2024, 07:15:33 PM
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 01, 2024, 05:56:42 PM
It'll be all the sweeter when we beat them without Kolek.

This is where my head is at. Hope the line keeps moving
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: brewcity77 on March 01, 2024, 09:58:51 PM
Quote from: MurphysTillClose on March 01, 2024, 07:15:33 PM
This is where my head is at. Hope the line keeps moving

The Shaka as an underdog narrative is real.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Newsdreams on March 01, 2024, 10:30:12 PM
Quote from: Galway Eagle on February 29, 2024, 09:43:06 AM
We score more points than them?
Sorry but Shaka 3 Thursdays ago said it isn't as simple as scoring more points, in Shaka I trust.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 01, 2024, 11:47:03 PM
Quote from: wisblue on March 01, 2024, 11:55:16 AM
That first sentence is something of a conclusive argument.

You seem to be assuming that team 4 on the seed list has an easier path than team 5 on the seed list.

As Hards Alumni explained above, there's a lot more to the path than the seed position given the importance of matchups. Then there's the fact that the actual path a team has to follow might end up being significantly different than the path it would have followed if the higher seeds win every game. You also can't assume that the teams are placed on the NCAA seed list in the exact order of their inherent strength at the time the tournament comes around. Some teams may be rising and some may be fading (see Marquette as a 5 seed in 2018 and North Carolina in 2022 as an 8 seed)

I will agree that it can be debated how much of a difference one spot on the seed list matters, and it's my opinion that the difference is insignificant.

I looked at something earlier this year that reinforced my opinion. Using Ken Pom ratings and win probabilities I looked at Houston's win probability against a variety of future conference opponents who conveniently covered several potential seed lines. I don't remember from when I jotted these down if they were all home or all away games, but I made sure they were all the same.

At the time I did this Houston was rated number 1 by Ken Pom, so a presumed 1 seed. The win probabilities were:

BYU (5) 2 seed- 63%
Kansas (10) 3 seed- 70%
Baylor (14) 4 seed- 71%
Iowa State (17)- 5 seed- 71%
Oklahoma (18)- 5 seed- 71%
TCU (32)-8 seed-83%
Texas (33)- 9 seed- 82%
Cincinnati (37) 10 seed- 83%
Texas Tech (42) 11 seed- 85%

IMHO this illustrates that the inherent advantage of playing a team one seed line lower is minimal at best.

I did the same thing for BYU and its win probabilities were consistently 10-12% lower than Houston's against the same teams. That reflects the fact that Houston is a stronger team than BYU.

If I remember correctly, MU was a 3 point favorite against MSU in the second round last year. If those teams had played on a neutral court in a non tournament game, and MSU had won, it wouldn't be considered an upset. But people often put a lot more significance on that seed number than they should.

This was a lot words amounting to nothing.

A 1 seed gets a 16 seed in the first round and is guarenteed to not a see a seed higher than 4 until the elite 8. That is an easier path than any other seed line.

This is not a controversial take.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MountainCreekHouse on March 02, 2024, 03:00:28 AM
For what its worth, I was impressed with the way the team played against Providence when Kolek left the game. If anything, a good sign for the future.

Unrelated Creighton-game question for the group: Do you think we have been playing better or worse since the loss of Sean Jones?
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Judge Smails on March 02, 2024, 04:06:04 AM
I think we've been playing better since the Sean Jones injury.  But that isn't an indictment of Sean Jones, but instead simply the result of a team maturing and gelling as the season progresses. If Sean were still available, I think we'd be even better now than we already are. Hope his recovery is going well.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 02, 2024, 05:58:55 AM
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 01, 2024, 11:47:03 PM
This was a lot words amounting to nothing.

A 1 seed gets a 16 seed in the first round and is guarenteed to not a see a seed higher than 4 until the elite 8. That is an easier path than any other seed line.

This is not a controversial take.

At least I tried to explain the basis for my opinion instead of being simplistic and dismissive.

If you assume that every team on one seed line is inherently stronger than every team on the next seed line, and that the highest seed wins every game throughout the tournament, the 1 seeds have an easier path than the 2 seeds.

But the seeding is not that precise and the tournament does not play out  that way.

Over the years, in the only round in which teams in consecutive seed lines are guaranteed to face each other, the 9 seeds have won just over half of the games against 8 seeds. That suggests to me that the difference in strength between teams on consecutive seed lines is not that great, if it exists at all.

The top 1 seeds do have an advantage in the first round because they get to face the very weakest teams in the tournament. But after that matchups and how the tournament plays out take over.

In terms of percentages how much easier do you think the path of the overall 4 seed is than the overall 5 seed. Is it as much better as the path for the overall 1 seed as compared to the  overall 8 seed?



Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Galway Eagle on March 02, 2024, 08:41:24 AM
Quote from: Newsdreams on March 01, 2024, 10:30:12 PM
Sorry but Shaka 3 Thursdays ago said it isn't as simple as scoring more points, in Shaka I trust.


It was a different game back in the old days
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: cheebs09 on March 02, 2024, 08:44:21 AM
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 01, 2024, 09:58:51 PM
The Shaka as an underdog narrative is real.

I also don't think Shaka is too fond of the Creighton faithful. Not that I blame him. I'm guessing he will be fired up for this one.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: We R Final Four on March 02, 2024, 08:48:31 AM
Quote from: cheebs09 on March 02, 2024, 08:44:21 AM
I also don't think Shaka is too fond of the Creighton faithful. Not that I blame him. I'm guessing he will be fired up for this one.
Agreed.....I was thinking last night about which teams/coaches/fans in the Big East really seem to bother Shaka. I think Creighton is on the top of that list.....and it seems to be a short list to me.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: bradforster on March 02, 2024, 08:51:06 AM
Kolek is out today.  The line has now moved to Creighton -6.5.  Let's put on a show without our star guard.  Next man up in Omaha.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Lennys Tap on March 02, 2024, 08:54:24 AM
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 01, 2024, 11:47:03 PM
This was a lot words amounting to nothing.

A 1 seed gets a 16 seed in the first round and is guarenteed to not a see a seed higher than 4 until the elite 8. That is an easier path than any other seed line.

This is not a controversial take.

Theoretically. And usually. Not always. UCONN was the best team in the tournament last year and it wasn't really close - 6 games, all easy, double digit wins. They were a #4 seed. The other FF teams were seeded 5, 8 and 9. No #1 made it past the S16 because they were knocked off by those 4, 5 8 and 9 seeds.

All that said, last year was an anomaly. Sometimes the rare exception helps prove the rule.

Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on March 02, 2024, 08:55:38 AM
Quote from: cheebs09 on March 02, 2024, 08:44:21 AM
I also don't think Shaka is too fond of the Creighton faithful. Not that I blame him. I'm guessing he will be fired up for this one.
Hurley isn't too fond of the Creighton faithful, either.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 08:56:21 AM
Jays by a bunch today. Was gonna be tough with Tyler, but you have to essentially reimagine the offense in two days. The PNR is gonna dry up significantly without a true PG running things. Who else can get separation off the bounce to force help, or kick out to shooters? Would love to be wrong, but I can see this one getting very ugly.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on March 02, 2024, 08:58:51 AM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 08:56:21 AM
Jays by a bunch today. Was gonna be tough with Tyler, but you have to essentially reimagine the offense in two days. The PNR is gonna dry up significantly without a true PG running things. Who else can get separation off the bounce to kick out to shooters? Would love to be wrong, but I can see this one getting very ugly.
As long as the defense travels, we should be able to compete. Offense will probably be a challenge for sure.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: fjm on March 02, 2024, 09:00:11 AM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 08:56:21 AM
Jays by a bunch today. Was gonna be tough with Tyler, but you have to essentially reimagine the offense in two days. The PNR is gonna dry up significantly without a true PG running things. Who else can get separation off the bounce to force help, or kick out to shooters? Would love to be wrong, but I can see this one getting very ugly.


While I can appreciate your feelings... it's time for this kid to show why he was top 100:


PROJECTION
Power-6 Starter
COMPARISON
Marcus Smart
BOSTON CELTICS
Norman is a tough and athletic off guard who plays with tremendous energy and physicality. He is at his best when he is getting downhill and is a strong finisher when attacking the basket. He does a nice job of pulling up and hitting the mid range jumper when driving lanes are cut off but has room to improve as a three-point shooter. Defensively, he has the potential to be one of the top on ball defenders in the class.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: mugrad_89 on March 02, 2024, 09:02:57 AM
All Creighton games come down to how well they shoot - if they're on, they're as tough as anyone.  If not, you have games like they did against St. John's.  I would like to see us ramp up the defensive pressure on them.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Scoop Snoop on March 02, 2024, 09:05:03 AM
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on March 02, 2024, 08:58:51 AM
As long as the defense travels, we should be able to compete. Offense will probably be a challenge for sure.

It's time we use the Brad Davison game plan. Just don't get caught by the refs.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: real chili 83 on March 02, 2024, 09:05:50 AM
We win....by 27.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: HutchwasClutch on March 02, 2024, 09:09:11 AM
Quote from: fjm on March 02, 2024, 09:00:11 AM

While I can appreciate your feelings... it's time for this kid to show why he was top 100:


PROJECTION
Power-6 Starter
COMPARISON
Marcus Smart
BOSTON CELTICS
Norman is a tough and athletic off guard who plays with tremendous energy and physicality. He is at his best when he is getting downhill and is a strong finisher when attacking the basket. He does a nice job of pulling up and hitting the mid range jumper when driving lanes are cut off but has room to improve as a three-point shooter. Defensively, he has the potential to be one of the top on ball defenders in the class.

The next time he does this will be the first MU nation has seen this skill from him.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Vander Blue Man Group on March 02, 2024, 09:09:31 AM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 08:56:21 AM
Jays by a bunch today. Was gonna be tough with Tyler, but you have to essentially reimagine the offense in two days. The PNR is gonna dry up significantly without a true PG running things. Who else can get separation off the bounce to force help, or kick out to shooters? Would love to be wrong, but I can see this one getting very ugly.

Essentially reimagine the offense? 

The offense will be the same. The execution and effectiveness will be the potential issues. I expect to see more point Oso.

And as someone else said, it likely comes down to how well Creighton is shooting from 3.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Vander Blue Man Group on March 02, 2024, 09:11:49 AM
Quote from: HutchwasClutch on March 02, 2024, 09:09:11 AM
The next time he does this will be the first MU nation has seen this skill from him.

Considering the pull up midrange jumper is not a part of the MU offense this shouldn't be a surprise to MU nation.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: cheebs09 on March 02, 2024, 09:12:02 AM
I'm here for a Chase Ross breakout game.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on March 02, 2024, 09:13:45 AM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 08:56:21 AM
Jays by a bunch today. Was gonna be tough with Tyler, but you have to essentially reimagine the offense in two days. The PNR is gonna dry up significantly without a true PG running things. Who else can get separation off the bounce to force help, or kick out to shooters? Would love to be wrong, but I can see this one getting very ugly.

On the reverse side, Creighton didn't have time to adjust defensively. Who starts? The obvious answer is Chase (with Kam at PG) but Ross tends to get into early foul trouble and is heads down on offense. Maybe Tre with Stevie running PG? Ben with Jop and Oso? Creighton prepared for Tyler but not the alternatives. 

Maybe this is one MU steals? Certainly Vegas and the rest of us see blow out but this one will be up to MU's balanced class depth. Next man up.

I remember too well the past with Diener out, Dom out or Markus out...here Shaka has Tyler AND Sean out and his balanced class philosophy still has MU within range. That transfer portal fix drug doesn't look as appealing with your two best PGs out now, hey?
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 09:15:03 AM
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on March 02, 2024, 09:09:31 AM
Essentially reimagine the offense? 

The offense will be the same. The execution and effectiveness will be the potential issues. I expect to see more point Oso.

If they don't adjust anything it's gonna be a mess. It'll have to be more set actions since the on-court chemistry is gonna be a lot different. Where are Kam and Jop gonna get catch and shoot looks? Creighton can play them straight up without Tyler's ability to create.

Like I said, I hope to be very wrong and catch hell for this after the game. But TK is so central to everything MU does offensively that I think this one is a little too soon for them to be able to overcome him not playing.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Uncle Rico on March 02, 2024, 09:15:38 AM
Unleash Al
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 09:15:51 AM
MUfan12, COLE Hall of Fame.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: HutchwasClutch on March 02, 2024, 09:17:36 AM
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on March 02, 2024, 09:11:49 AM
Considering the pull up midrange jumper is not a part of the MU offense this shouldn't be a surprise to MU nation.

Many of Oso's shots and baskets have been of this variety.  It's not always off the pick and roll for him.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on March 02, 2024, 09:19:28 AM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 09:15:03 AM
If they don't adjust anything it's gonna be a mess. It'll have to be more set actions since the on-court chemistry is gonna be a lot different. Where are Kam and Jop gonna get catch and shoot looks? Creighton can play them straight up without Tyler's ability to create.

Like I said, I hope to be very wrong and catch hell for this after the game. But TK is so central to everything MU does offensively that I think this one is a little too soon for them to be able to overcome him not playing.
Space the floor (lots of minutes for Brick) and create mismatches that can be exploited by aggressive drives to the basket. Kick out for open 3's if/when help comes. We have the athleticism advantage. Need to aggressively use it.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: HutchwasClutch on March 02, 2024, 09:19:43 AM
Quote from: cheebs09 on March 02, 2024, 09:12:02 AM
I'm here for a Chase Ross breakout game.

This is much more realistic than hoping on a prayer Norman becomes a major force suddenly.

Chase has played very solid since his injury.  Would be great if he can take it to next level now.  Talent is there to do so.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Scoop Snoop on March 02, 2024, 09:21:18 AM
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on March 02, 2024, 09:13:45 AM
Creighton prepared for Tyler but not the alternative

This is where I am. Shaka knows what to expect from Creighton and, if Kolek was playing, McDermott would know what to expect from Marquette. Although I am still nervous about this game, the surprise factor clearly belongs to Marquette. It just might result in a W.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on March 02, 2024, 09:22:32 AM
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on March 02, 2024, 09:21:18 AM
This is where I am. Shaka knows what to expect from Creighton and, if Kolek was playing, McDermott would know what to expect from Marquette. Although I am still nervous about this game, the surprise factor clearly belongs to Marquette. It just might result in a W.

House money, hey?
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Vander Blue Man Group on March 02, 2024, 09:27:06 AM
Quote from: HutchwasClutch on March 02, 2024, 09:17:36 AM
Many of Oso's shots and baskets have been of this variety.  It's not always off the pick and roll for him.

No, they aren't. Oso's push shots in the lane are not midrange shots.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: mug644 on March 02, 2024, 09:48:34 AM
Quote from: cheebs09 on March 02, 2024, 08:44:21 AM
I also don't think Shaka is too fond of the Creighton faithful. Not that I blame him. I'm guessing he will be fired up for this one.

Maybe that's because Nebraska borders Kansas, and we all saw how Shaka feels about Bill Self.

Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on March 02, 2024, 09:13:45 AM
...
I remember too well the past with Diener out, Dom out or Markus out...here Shaka has Tyler AND Sean out and his balanced class philosophy still has MU within range. That transfer portal fix drug doesn't look as appealing with your two best PGs out now, hey?

This current team is better placed to cope with the loss of TWO point guards than either of those teams were to lose ONE point guard.

It's a challenge to be sure, but one that can be overcome.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Goose on March 02, 2024, 09:54:54 AM
I think MU wins today. This is a statement game for the season and proving they can win without TK would be a statement. Have felt all season that experience and depth was the strength of the team and I think they show it today.

Will add, this is not a homer post. Shaka has built a culture and it will be tested without TK, but the culture is firmly established.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Shooter McGavin on March 02, 2024, 09:59:01 AM
Quote from: Goose on March 02, 2024, 09:54:54 AM
I think MU wins today. This is a statement game for the season and proving they can win without TK would be a statement. Have felt all season that experience and depth was the strength of the team and I think they show it today.

Will add, this is not a homer post. Shaka has built a culture and it will be tested without TK, but the culture is firmly established.

I like it Goose.  And I hope you are right.  Agree that the culture has been established and it is the right time of year to test that theory.  The freshman have had months of practice under their belts and the sophomores have made an obvious leap from last year.  Let's get it done boys!   Go MU!
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: dgies9156 on March 02, 2024, 09:59:21 AM
Quote from: Goose on March 02, 2024, 09:54:54 AM
I think MU wins today. This is a statement game for the season and proving they can win without TK would be a statement. Have felt all season that experience and depth was the strength of the team and I think they show it today.

Will add, this is not a homer post. Shaka has built a culture and it will be tested without TK, but the culture is firmly established.


First person up talking sense!

Injuries are part of the game. But we are a damn Top 5 team. We will act like it.


Get well Tyler and next man up!!!'
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: JakeBarnes on March 02, 2024, 10:00:47 AM
Quote from: Goose on March 02, 2024, 09:54:54 AM
I think MU wins today. This is a statement game for the season and proving they can win without TK would be a statement. Have felt all season that experience and depth was the strength of the team and I think they show it today.

Will add, this is not a homer post. Shaka has built a culture and it will be tested without TK, but the culture is firmly established.

I am with you on this feeling, Goose. Time to grind and shine.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 02, 2024, 10:04:22 AM
I think it's very likely that the offense will struggle today without Kolek.

There are going to be several players who are going to have to play more minutes and/or take on different roles.

MU has not had much time to practice an offense that does not include Kolek's ability to drive to the basket and either finish or dish off. I think the relatively open shots around the basket and wide open catch and shoot threes are going to be harder to come by.

Fortunately Creighton doesn't have the kind of athletes that can suffocate the offense like UConn did to MU. But I think MU's ability to keep this game close is going to depend on defense and CU not going off on threes like they do on occasion.

Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 02, 2024, 10:06:22 AM
We shouldn't forget that today is Creighton's Senior Day so that should be worth about 10 extra points for the Jays.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on March 02, 2024, 10:34:39 AM
From Bart Torvik:
QuoteHi -- it is based on descriptions in the play by play data. So "layups" "tips" "dunks" (etc) are counted as rim attempts, and all other twos are counted as mid-range. Obviously this is far from an exact science, as it relies on scorekeeper descriptions and play-by-play fidelity ... but it's the best I can do, which is good enough for me.

Now mobility and biometric data would be better metrics but not a lot of mid and low major teams have that technology. So that description still relies on the scorekeeper. Is Oso's push shot a layup in the paint or a mid-range? Scorekeepers have said 41% of his two point shots have been "mid-range". 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: We R Final Four on March 02, 2024, 10:41:05 AM
Quote from: Goose on March 02, 2024, 09:54:54 AM
I think MU wins today. This is a statement game for the season and proving they can win without TK would be a statement. Have felt all season that experience and depth was the strength of the team and I think they show it today.

Will add, this is not a homer post. Shaka has built a culture and it will be tested without TK, but the culture is firmly established.
Man, I hope you are right Goose. Would love to see Shaka turn and give a victory yell at CU fans when the clock hits zero.
However, isn't this the actual definition of a homer post?
Potentially, replacing our AA PG with a sparingly used 3rd string freshman?
Vegas....CBB.....Creighton fans.....hell most scoopers think today favors CU.
I think the moneyline is up to +170.....you could win some $ today.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Goose on March 02, 2024, 11:07:57 AM
We R FF

I think TK is replaced by the culture, not one guy. Teams with true character can overcome amazing things. That said, my feeling is in regards to this game in particular. The odds are stacked against them and I think they rally. No predictions on TK-less team beyond today.

Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: WellsstreetWanderer on March 02, 2024, 11:11:05 AM
I believe we have the guys who can step up to this challenge and will
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 02, 2024, 11:13:28 AM
Quote from: Goose on March 02, 2024, 09:54:54 AM
I think MU wins today. This is a statement game for the season and proving they can win without TK would be a statement. Have felt all season that experience and depth was the strength of the team and I think they show it today.

Will add, this is not a homer post. Shaka has built a culture and it will be tested without TK, but the culture is firmly established.

My gut is telling me the same, probably because it feels like we own Creighton on the court for some reason.
Ring-out-ahoya!
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 11:20:49 AM
I'm hopeful the defense clicked into another level these past few games. We've seen significant improvement all season long, but MU was downright imposing on Wednesday. Kolek's absence can be overcome if they pour into defense and hold Creighton under 75.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on March 02, 2024, 11:24:49 AM
It is a top 15 opponent in their gym without MU's all American.  I would not be surprised to see a reprise of @UConn.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 11:28:03 AM
Quote from: tower912 on March 02, 2024, 11:24:49 AM
It is a top 15 opponent in their gym without MU's all American.  I would not be surprised to see a reprise of @UConn.

It's a gut feeling, but I would be surprised if the result slipped away beyond a 10-15 point loss that balloons in the final 10 minutes. Marquette doesn't have much to lose today.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUEng92 on March 02, 2024, 11:39:39 AM
When it comes to playing Creighton, the everlasting PTSD of attending the first Creighton-MU Big East game in person in Omaha makes me full COLE.  I always expect CU to have five different players shoot 80% from three point range
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: nyg on March 02, 2024, 11:43:46 AM
Quote from: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 11:28:03 AM
It's a gut feeling, but I would be surprised if the result slipped away beyond a 10-15 point loss that balloons in the final 10 minutes. Marquette doesn't have much to lose today.

Two hours ago, you posted that Mu12fan should be in the "Cole" Hall of Fame......for basically saying the same thing.

Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 11:46:02 AM
Quote from: nyg on March 02, 2024, 11:43:46 AM
Two hours ago, you posted that Mu12fan should be in the "Cole" Hall of Fame......for basically saying the same thing.

I've repeatedly said that I expect Marquette to compete and even like their chances to win without Kolek. Of course there is a downside possibility today. My point is that I don't think the downside scenario is as extreme as some expect.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on March 02, 2024, 11:49:36 AM
I've been wrong before.   I can just as easily envision a scenario where Tre and Zaide bust out, combining for 40 minutes and 15 points.
  Creighton is top15,  at home, where they curbstomped UConn.   
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Goose on March 02, 2024, 11:49:46 AM
tower

I thought the UConn game could get it ugly and it did. There were a lot reasons why I thought UConn could put the hammer down, but today I think it is MU showing that they are an all around good, tough team.

To be honest, if they were going to X today I would be less confident. I know that sounds strange, but playing up to competition might be exactly what is needed for the boys today.

At the very least, I am expecting a fair good performance today. Winning on the road has a tough and Omaha is extra tough. That said, some times very good teams rise to the occasion and that is what I am expecting.

I think MU holds Creighton under 70 today and the defense will be the stud of the game.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: ATWizJr on March 02, 2024, 11:51:57 AM
Quote from: nyg on March 02, 2024, 11:43:46 AM
Two hours ago, you posted that Mu12fan should be in the "Cole" Hall of Fame......for basically saying the same thing.
What is the  "COLE" that you and others reference?  Thanks.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: We R Final Four on March 02, 2024, 11:53:26 AM
Quote from: tower912 on March 02, 2024, 11:24:49 AM
It is a top 15 opponent in their gym without MU's all American.  I would not be surprised to see a reprise of @UConn.
Didn't you say a day or so ago that MU will win with or without TK?
or am I mistaking you for another scooper?
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUEng92 on March 02, 2024, 11:53:40 AM
Cult of Low Expectations.  At least I hope that's what it is because that's the context I used it
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: tower912 on March 02, 2024, 11:56:26 AM
Quote from: Goose on March 02, 2024, 11:49:46 AM
tower

I thought the UConn game could get it ugly and it did. There were a lot reasons why I thought UConn could put the hammer down, but today I think it is MU showing that they are an all around good, tough team.

To be honest, if they were going to X today I would be less confident. I know that sounds strange, but playing up to competition might be exactly what is needed for the boys today.

At the very least, I am expecting a fair good performance today. Winning on the road has a tough and Omaha is extra tough. That said, some times very good teams rise to the occasion and that is what I am expecting.

I think MU holds Creighton under 70 today and the defense will be the stud of the game.
MU was tied at 18 at UConn.   It was a good game for 8 minutes.   As I also said, I can envision a scenario like the one you describe.  Ross on Scheierman and Stevie on Alexander could be extremely disruptive. That is where my heart is, but not where my money would go.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 02, 2024, 11:56:43 AM
Quote from: wisblue on March 02, 2024, 05:58:55 AM
At least I tried to explain the basis for my opinion instead of being simplistic and dismissive.

If you assume that every team on one seed line is inherently stronger than every team on the next seed line, and that the highest seed wins every game throughout the tournament, the 1 seeds have an easier path than the 2 seeds.

But the seeding is not that precise and the tournament does not play out  that way.

Over the years, in the only round in which teams in consecutive seed lines are guaranteed to face each other, the 9 seeds have won just over half of the games against 8 seeds. That suggests to me that the difference in strength between teams on consecutive seed lines is not that great, if it exists at all.

The top 1 seeds do have an advantage in the first round because they get to face the very weakest teams in the tournament. But after that matchups and how the tournament plays out take over.

In terms of percentages how much easier do you think the path of the overall 4 seed is than the overall 5 seed. Is it as much better as the path for the overall 1 seed as compared to the  overall 8 seed?

I did explain. The reason it is "simplistic" is because it is simple.  1 seeds have an advantage in the first round, are more likely to face a lower seed in the second round,  and are guarenteed to not face anything higher than a 4 seed until the elite 8. All of these are facts. You can debate how much of an easier path it is or how meanigful it is, but it is an easier path. I'm not debating you on degree or whether other things matter more,  just that a 1 seed has an easier path than a 2 seed. If you pool 362 D1 coaches 362 of them would say a 1 seed is better than a 2 seed.

Again this is not a controversial take.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: nyg on March 02, 2024, 12:01:49 PM
Quote from: MUEng92 on March 02, 2024, 11:53:40 AM
Cult of Low Expectations.  At least I hope that's what it is because that's the context I used it

Yes, another scoopism.  Used consistently over the years for posters who state anything bad about a game or player.

Least not as bad as "Dung", which has risen from two posters from being funny, then comedians to class clowns. 

Lets hope Oso or other starters don't get in foul trouble early today, otherwise it will get extremely ugly.  Enjoy the game. 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 12:37:08 PM
Quote from: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 11:46:02 AM
I've repeatedly said that I expect Marquette to compete and even like their chances to win without Kolek. Of course there is a downside possibility today. My point is that I don't think the downside scenario is as extreme as some expect.

Can't say this applies without Oso and Kolek both. Though I hope to see this team fight like hell defensively.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 12:41:59 PM
Quote from: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 12:37:08 PM
Can't say this applies without Oso and Kolek both. Though I hope to see this team fight like hell defensively.

Cole HOF!
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: mugrad_89 on March 02, 2024, 12:44:28 PM
Quote from: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 12:37:08 PM
Can't say this applies without Oso and Kolek both. Though I hope to see this team fight like hell defensively.

That's there oniy chance - Creighton isn't deep so hound them like crazy.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Vander Blue Man Group on March 02, 2024, 12:49:17 PM
The chances of a win are now remote but this is a big opportunity for some of the guys for their confidence and continued development. 
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: wisblue on March 02, 2024, 12:55:04 PM
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 02, 2024, 11:56:43 AM
I did explain. The reason it is "simplistic" is because it is simple.  1 seeds have an advantage in the first round, are more likely to face a lower seed in the second round,  and are guarenteed to not face anything higher than a 4 seed until the elite 8. All of these are facts. You can debate how much of an easier path it is or how meanigful it is, but it is an easier path. I'm not debating you on degree or whether other things matter more,  just that a 1 seed has an easier path than a 2 seed. If you pool 362 D1 coaches 362 of them would say a 1 seed is better than a 2 seed.

Again this is not a controversial take.

Except I was discussing the difference between the overall 4 seed and the overall 5 seed not all 1 seeds. If you frame the question as covering all 1 seeds and all 2 seeds as if they are all equal that is something different.

If you aren't interested in discussing how much of an advantage that one spot on the seed list provides, that's fine. But, I would bet that if you tracked the results of the number 1 overall seed versus against the results of the number 4 overall seed, the overall 1 would do significantly better.

You have already dismissed my attempt to quantify my opinion that the probability of a good team beating a 4 seed is not any different than the same team beating a 3 seed. The specific matchup is a much bigger factor than the number of the seed.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 12:56:52 PM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 12:41:59 PM
Cole HOF!
That would be voted upon by the scoop media, not present inductees.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 12:56:52 PM
That would be voted upon by the scoop media, not present inductees.

Veterans committee, homie. Congrats.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: Tyler COLEk on March 02, 2024, 01:07:56 PM
Quote from: MUfan12 on March 02, 2024, 01:06:30 PM
Veterans committee, homie. Congrats.
Please, I've barely been retired two seasons.
Title: Re: Creighton
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on March 02, 2024, 01:42:59 PM
Quote from: wisblue on March 02, 2024, 12:55:04 PM
Except I was discussing the difference between the overall 4 seed and the overall 5 seed not all 1 seeds. If you frame the question as covering all 1 seeds and all 2 seeds as if they are all equal that is something different.

If you aren't interested in discussing how much of an advantage that one spot on the seed list provides, that's fine. But, I would bet that if you tracked the results of the number 1 overall seed versus against the results of the number 4 overall seed, the overall 1 would do significantly better.

You have already dismissed my attempt to quantify my opinion that the probability of a good team beating a 4 seed is not any different than the same team beating a 3 seed. The specific matchup is a much bigger factor than the number of the seed.

Because it doesnt matter if we're talking the 4th 1seed or the top 1 seed. Both of them get the same advantage over a 2 seed. At the start of the tournament a 1 seed always has the easier path over a 2 seed.
EhPortal 1.39.9 © 2025, WebDev