collapse

* '23-'24 SOTG Tally


2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

2024 Coaching Carousel by Tyler COLEk
[Today at 08:53:41 PM]


Point guard or big by tower912
[Today at 08:49:15 PM]


[Paint Touches] Shaka reaffirms MU commitment by TSmith34, Inc.
[Today at 07:07:35 PM]


2024 Transfer Portal by TSmith34, Inc.
[Today at 07:02:04 PM]


Big East 2024 Offseason by PGsHeroes32
[Today at 06:38:03 PM]


Banquet by tower912
[Today at 04:01:11 PM]


Going Portaling: Which Portal Prospect do you want and why? by Big Papi
[Today at 03:11:41 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: The long cold summer

Marquette
Marquette

Open Practice

Date/Time: Oct 11, 2024 ???
TV: NA
Schedule for 2023-24
27-10

Author Topic: Creighton  (Read 7718 times)

BallBoy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Creighton
« Reply #25 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.

tower912

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 23650
Re: Creighton
« Reply #26 on: February 29, 2024, 10:53:41 AM »
Time for a Norman conquest. 
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6612
Re: Creighton
« Reply #27 on: February 29, 2024, 11:25:43 AM »
Time for a Norman conquest.

We don't play Oklahoma, plus Porter Moser teaches siege defense well.

PointWarrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1925
Re: Creighton
« Reply #28 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? 

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9039
Re: Creighton
« Reply #29 on: February 29, 2024, 02:31:48 PM »
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
Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

Shooter McGavin

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2700
Re: Creighton
« Reply #30 on: February 29, 2024, 02:38:02 PM »
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!

PointWarrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1925
Re: Creighton
« Reply #31 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?
 

No. It’s a mini Conf concept. Winner Saturday would get the 2 seed

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9039
Re: Creighton
« Reply #32 on: February 29, 2024, 03:32:05 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
Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9039
Re: Creighton
« Reply #33 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
Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

BallBoy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Creighton
« Reply #34 on: February 29, 2024, 05:41:43 PM »
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.

wisblue

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1380
Re: Creighton
« Reply #35 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. .
« Last Edit: February 29, 2024, 10:25:37 PM by wisblue »

Viper

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: Creighton
« Reply #36 on: February 29, 2024, 06:27:48 PM »
As Dung Willie has so eloquently said, McDermott owns Shaka
McDermott, no. Gard? Yes.

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6592
Re: Creighton
« Reply #37 on: February 29, 2024, 07:15:51 PM »
McDermott, no. Gard? Yes.
It’s been a tough couple week for your Badgers.

copious1218

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
Re: Creighton
« Reply #38 on: February 29, 2024, 07:57:02 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.

DoctorV

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
Re: Creighton
« Reply #39 on: February 29, 2024, 09:10:37 PM »
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

BallBoy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Creighton
« Reply #40 on: February 29, 2024, 09:55:02 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.

MuMark

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4320
Re: Creighton
« Reply #41 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.

wisblue

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1380
Re: Creighton
« Reply #42 on: February 29, 2024, 10:18:30 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).
« Last Edit: February 29, 2024, 10:56:39 PM by wisblue »

wisblue

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1380
Re: Creighton
« Reply #43 on: February 29, 2024, 11:10:50 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.

BallBoy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Creighton
« Reply #44 on: March 01, 2024, 12:04:55 AM »
“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.

wisblue

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1380
Re: Creighton
« Reply #45 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.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2024, 05:34:15 AM by wisblue »

BallBoy

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Creighton
« Reply #46 on: March 01, 2024, 07:22:13 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.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26430
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: Creighton
« Reply #47 on: March 01, 2024, 09:16:23 AM »
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.
This space reserved for a 2024 2025 National Championship celebration banner.

wisblue

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1380
Re: Creighton
« Reply #48 on: March 01, 2024, 09:36:16 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.

Juan Anderson's Mixtape

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4334
Re: Creighton
« Reply #49 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.