Prospects for a Sweet 16 run

[Lennys Tap]

In the last 40 years, we have made it that far how many times?  Five?  Miracle we made it that far in one of them.

True, but in the 4 years before Wojo got here we made it 3 times.

[Cheeks]

True, but in the 4 years before Wojo got here we made it 3 times.

Yup, and on the front pages of the Tribune and all kinds of other things, too.

Just win

[Lennys Tap]

Yup, and on the front pages of the Tribune and all kinds of other things, too.

Just win

Jaimie Huffman (MSU) was dubbed "Shoes" by Al McGuire when he lost one in an NCAA game.

Our very own Jaimie (sic) became "Other Shoes" when he lied about new and damning info that would come out about Marquette's best coach not named Al McGuire.

No more Chico, Cheeks, Hoopaloop, Warrior Dad, etc.. From this day forward you'll be "Other Shoes".

Just LOL, baby.

[79Warrior]

Yup, and on the front pages of the Tribune and all kinds of other things, too.

Just win

No kidding.

[D'Lo Brown]

Seeding counts. Getting a top 4 seed means the committee considers you one of the 16 best teams in Division I. And the higher your seed, the more the matchups are stacked in your favor (at least from a ranking standpoint).

Thank you very much for doing this analysis, it's great food for thought. Yum.

As we all know, being a top 4 seed practically guarantees a matchup in the 1st round with a low/mid major team. These are teams that qualified by beating other teams in a bad conference, and not just on their own merits. Getting a game like that on its own significantly increases the odds of a Sweet 16 run even if the round of 32 game is a coin flip.

Anecdotally, my opinion is that there is a significant drop-off in quality between an 11/12 seed and a 13/14 seed. Gotta be the biggest drop-off in any point in the seeding. IMO, that cliff is a (perhaps the) primary driver of what your analysis found.

[Elonsmusk]

I see a team with depth, good guards, size, shooters.   Not perfect and a lot can go wrong, but there are a lot functional pieces.

Team is performing better than I anticipated going into the season.  Wojo showing some signs of improvement as coach - loved that he didn't yank Cain against K-State early after the two missed shots, one of which was the dunk attempt that flew out of his hands.  Historically that would have led to the bench for Jamal.

Team does play hard across the board, and that a credit to coaching staff as well.

Never would have thought going into the season this could be a Sweet 16 team, yet given the state of college basketball this year, and what we've shown thus far - maybe this is the year we finally win an NCAA tournament game under Wojo.


#progress

[tower912]

Once we Symir reclassified and Wojo landed Jayce, I started thinking this team could be better than last year.   Still a long way to go, though.   Lots can still go wrong.

[4everwarriors]

Lotsa golf left ta bee played yet, aina?

[tower912]

After running it through the translator, I think that is what I said in my last sentence. 

[DoctorV]

Nice data Marcus.

I swear I'm over last season, but this is precisely why blowing all those under 4 min TO leads and losing all those close games last year really crushed MU.

Holding off Nova and splitting the Conf title, or even winning the last game at home, or even beating SH at the garden and then winning conf tourney (I understand no guarantee we win the final) would have likely giving MU a 4 seed because the overall resume was very strong.

With a 4 seed the season would've ended with much less pain imo. There would've been a conference title to hang the hat on (or possibly a conf tourney title) and IMO MU would've lost game 2 or later in the dance rather than the MURRAY St debacle.

I'm not saying getting a 4 seed or better would have avoided all the turmoil w the brothers, but it still would have left the season on a much more positive note and the team wouldn't have the added stress it will have this March to win a game in the NCAA tournament under Wojo/Markus regime.

As for this year, a 4 seed or better would be spectacular. The conference is really strong so it won't be an easy task, 5-8 seed would seem more likely at this point imo. That said, the foundation is there for a top 2/3 BE finish that would earn the top 4 seed

[brewcity77]

Nice data Marcus.

I swear I'm over last season, but this is precisely why blowing all those under 4 min TO leads and losing all those close games last year really crushed MU.

Holding off Nova and splitting the Conf title, or even winning the last game at home, or even beating SH at the garden and then winning conf tourney (I understand no guarantee we win the final) would have likely giving MU a 4 seed because the overall resume was very strong.

With a 4 seed the season would've ended with much less pain imo. There would've been a conference title to hang the hat on (or possibly a conf tourney title) and IMO MU would've lost game 2 or later in the dance rather than the MURRAY St debacle.

I'm not saying getting a 4 seed or better would have avoided all the turmoil w the brothers, but it still would have left the season on a much more positive note and the team wouldn't have the added stress it will have this March to win a game in the NCAA tournament under Wojo/Markus regime.

As for this year, a 4 seed or better would be spectacular. The conference is really strong so it won't be an easy task, 5-8 seed would seem more likely at this point imo. That said, the foundation is there for a top 2/3 BE finish that would earn the top 4 seed
[/quote

The way last year ended was brutal. Holding on in just 1 or 2 of those games would've likely had us a line higher, where 75% of the teams went to the Sweet 16 (as opposed to the 5-line, where 75% lost day one).

[Marcus92]

Anecdotally, my opinion is that there is a significant drop-off in quality between an 11/12 seed and a 13/14 seed. Gotta be the biggest drop-off in any point in the seeding. IMO, that cliff is a (perhaps the) primary driver of what your analysis found.

I don't think this is merely opinion.

Here are the individual and average KenPom rankings for teams at each seed line in the 2019 NCAA tournament:

11 seed
Saint Mary's (31)
Ohio St. (44)
Belmont (49)
Arizona St. (57)
Temple (69)
St. John's (88)
Avg. KenPom rank: 56.4

12 seed
Oregon (28)
Murray St. (51)
New Mexico St. (53)
Liberty (58)
Avg. KenPom rank: 47.5

13 seed
UC Irvine (73)
Vermont (76)
Northeastern (89)
St. Louis (106)
Avg. KenPom rank: 86.0

14 seed
Yale (77)
Northern Kentucky (96)
Old Dominion (113)
Georgia St. (124)
Avg. KenPom rank: 102.5

Even in a year where the 11 seeds were weaker than usual (ideally, their average KenPom ranking should be somewhere around 42), there's a big drop-off in team quality starting at the 13 seed line.

For comparison, the 86th ranked KenPom team was BYU, which didn't win a single Top 50 game and missed the postseason altogether.

The 102nd ranked KenPom team was UCLA, which racked up 16 losses -- including 7 out of 10 during one stretch. That run was punctuated by a home loss to #109 Utah and a 24-point road drubbing by #112 Stanford.

[brewcity77]

The 11-seeds were also skewed by putting all the play in teams on those lines. Still kind of bewildering that teams like Temple, ASU, & St John's, who were all sub-60 going into the tournament, got bids.

[Eldon]

The 11-seeds were also skewed by putting all the play in teams on those lines. Still kind of bewildering that teams like Temple, ASU, & St John's, who were all sub-60 going into the tournament, got bids.

IIRC, the committee said that they valued these teams' SOS.  The Johnnies, for instance, beat #1 Duke that year.  (And maybe had some other marquee win...I'm forgetting at the moment)

[brewcity77]

IIRC, the committee said that they valued these teams' SOS.  The Johnnies, for instance, beat #1 Duke that year.  (And maybe had some other marquee win...I'm forgetting at the moment)

I think the committee valued them being high majors. St John's scheduled horribly (#330 NCSOS per kenpom) & got blown out by Duke.

[BrewCity83]

No one gets to the Sweet 16 without winning some that could go either way

No one?  It seems that when UW-Madison gets to the Sweet 16, it's commonly by getting a decent seed, winning a first round game against an inferior team, then taking advantage in the second round of an even easier matchup caused by a 13-4 or 14-3 upset in the first round.   Uncanny how they get those matchups.

[oldwarrior81]

From 2000 (the Final Four team under Bennett) the Badgers had a streak of beating the lower seeded teams and not doing so well against the better seeds.

against teams seeded 1-8:  they were 1-7
against teams 9-16:  they were 10-3

2010   W-13, L-12
2009   W-5, L4
2008   W-14, W-11, L-10
2007   W-15, L-7
2006   L-8
2005   W-11, W-14, W-10, L-1
2004   W-11, L-3
2003   W-12, W-13, L-1
2002   W-9, L-1
2001   L-11

[WarriorFan]

This team needs to prove two things to make a S16 run:

1.  It's more than Markus.  No problems when Markus goes off for 25 or 30, but there needs to be another 2-3 guys in double figures and playing well at the same time.  When Markus + Sacar + Cain or BB or ??? are "on" this team will be very difficult to stop.

2.  Coaching adjustments.  There have been a few (like the surprise zone) but to make the S16 there need to be adjustments that positively impact the game.  Traps, pressing for more than just shot clock, zone, running an actual offense, etc.  One I'd like to see is BB and Cain as the "bigs" along with Markus +2 of either Sacar/Greg/Koby.  That would create a lot of space.

[Its DJOver]

Just because an adjustment isn't so drastic that everyone notices it (zone, press, dramatically different offensive style) does not mean that it can't be incredibly effective.  There was no major halftime adjustment in the Purdue game, we just had better intensity and execution in the second half.  Throwing something completely different out there may work for a possession or two, but there's a reason that we start out in the system that we do; because it's going to be the most effective in the long term.

[Marcus92]

Since the tournament committee began seeding teams in 1979, Marquette has earned 20 NCAA bids. Here's how MU's seeds break down:

3 seed (1979, 2003, 2012, 2013)
4 seed (1996)
5 seed (2002, 2019)
6 seed (1994, 2008, 2009, 2010)
7 seed (1982, 1997, 2006)
8 seed (2007)
9 seed (1980, 1983)
10 seed (2017)
11 seed (2011)
12 seed (1993)

In the 5 NCAA tournaments where Marquette received a 4 seed or better, they've reached the Sweet 16 4 times (1979, 2003, 2012, 2013). MU's combined record in those games is 11-5, a winning percentage of 68.8%.

In the 15 other NCAA tournaments where Marquette was seeded 5 or lower, they've reached the Sweet 16 just twice (1994 and 2011). MU's combined record in those games is 7-15, a winning percentage of 31.8%.

Seeding matters.

[Coleman]

I feel the same about this team now as I did at the beginning of the season, and how I have felt basically ever since the Hausers left.

We are a probably a 7 or 8 seed.  I think a realistic expectation is one NCAA tournament win. Sure, we could get lucky, pull a 6 seed and get the upset winner of a 14 vs 3 upset, and somehow make it into the Sweet 16, but it is unlikely.

This is not a top 25 team. I do think it is almost certainly an NCAA tournament team. Which means we are probably bound for a typical MU posteason, one and done in the tourney or round of 32.

Somewhat depressing. Not as depressing as missing the tournament. But it is reality.

[Tha Hound]

I feel the same about this team now as I did at the beginning of the season, and how I have felt basically ever since the Hausers left.

We are a probably a 7 or 8 seed.  I think a realistic expectation is one NCAA tournament win. Sure, we could get lucky, pull a 6 seed and get the upset winner of a 14 vs 3 upset, and somehow make it into the Sweet 16, but it is unlikely.

This is not a top 25 team. I do think it is almost certainly an NCAA tournament team. Which means we are probably bound for a typical MU posteason, one and done in the tourney or round of 32.

Somewhat depressing. Not as depressing as missing the tournament. But it is reality.

Or, you can look at it like Kenpom does (#23 team in the nation), or that we've had a succesfull non-conference start to the season, or that we have quite literally the best player in the country, a guy whos capable of putting up 40 on any given night.

It's not all doom and gloom everyone. I believe this team is better than what many of the debbie downers on this board think it is. I know Wojo hasn't had that success yet. But all it takes to change the narrative are a few late season W's.

[Coleman]

Or, you can look at it like Kenpom does (#23 team in the nation), or that we've had a succesfull non-conference start to the season, or that we have quite literally the best player in the country, a guy whos capable of putting up 40 on any given night.

It's not all doom and gloom everyone. I believe this team is better than what many of the debbie downers on this board think it is. I know Wojo hasn't had that success yet. But all it takes to change the narrative are a few late season W's.

I honestly didn't think a 7 seed and a win in the NCAA tournament was "doom and gloom." Historically, that is an average to above average year for Marquette. It just gets old after a while, we all want to be playing on the second weekend more often.

[rocky_warrior]

I believe this team is better than what many of the debbie downers on this board think it is.

I noticed a lot of them have been quiet since a relatively successful Orlando trip, and solid road win over Kansas St.

[Goose]

I guess I fall into the Debbie downer camp and have been quiet based off a long layoff before they play a meaningful game. I stated earlier that they had one real tier one D1 player (play meaningful minutes at top ten program) and believe that more than when first stated.

Very happy to see some guys step up and play a big game, but need to see BB or others do it more than one game. Do not see any real reason to believe this team is better than a 7 or 8, and think that may be reach.

All that said, looking forward to see if Wojo can coach the guys up in BE play. IMO, success or failure will come down to Koby and Johnson and how they play. They remain the two guys that might be difference makers for this team.