What has changed with Marquette and is it sustainable?

[PaintTouches]

Marquette has played 14 games in 2026 after playing 14 in 2025, this season. In both segments it has gone 5-9. If the record is equally miserable, why do I feel this burst of excitement? This and much more at the link.
LINK HERE

[GoldenWarrior11]

The James/Stevens/Parham group (and I'd even throw Owens in there) has gotten much better and more confident over the course of the season.  It's obviously a great group to build around and add pieces in this portal cycle.  They don't get to where they are without the lumps (and frustrations) with the early season lineups with Jones, Hamilton and Lowery. 

As much growth and development a single transfer would have had (either a true center to push Gold more to the forward position, a shooting guard that could have played off the slashing abilities of Ross more, or a point guard to help facilitate looks within the offense), the staff bet on our guys, and thought they could make jumps that did not pan out.

I don't think they will not make the same mistake twice going into next season. 

[BM1090]

Bubble Team

[WhiteTrash]

What has change? Playing all BE teams.
MU has improved some not still a good team. Even setting the brutal GU game aside, MU has not played all that well if you actually watch the games. The level of play is off significantly from the past four year.

The good news is, I feel, that it is 95% due to talent (I'd say 100% but Shaka still puts Hamilton into the games). IMO Shaka's offense still looks good, he seems more energized and engaged compared to November & December. I'd make MU stock a "BUY". 

[panda]

Bubble Team

Struggling to see how the 58th ranked team is considered a bubble team

[BM1090]

Struggling to see how the 58th ranked team is considered a bubble team

Lots of teams ranked between 45-65 are on the bubble. This is metrically what a bubble team looks like. Game results have lagged behind, obviously. Hopefully they finish strong to carry into next year a bit.

[panda]

Lots of teams ranked between 45-65 are on the bubble. This is metrically what a bubble team looks like. Game results have lagged behind, obviously. Hopefully they finish strong to carry into next year a bit.

We're not first four out.

We're not next four out.

We're not next next four out.

We're not next next next four out.

We land in the next next next next four out.

Never heard next to the fourth power team out discussed as a bubble team.

[BM1090]

I think you're misunderstanding my point. We're obviously not a bubble team.

My point is and has always been, for almost two months now, metrically we've been playing like a bubble team. Nothing more.

[Jables1604]

Bubble Team

Hello? Exactly!

[panda]

I think you're misunderstanding my point. We're obviously not a bubble team.

My point is and has always been, for almost two months now, metrically we've been playing like a bubble team. Nothing more.

Playing much better. But 58 ain't no bubble team

[MuMark]

Playing much better. But 58 ain't no bubble team

Last year San Diego State had a Net ranking of 59.....they were an 11 seed.

Utah State was 61 in the Pomeroy......they were a 10 seed.

Pomeroy as we know is a total efficiency metric.......Net has a large efficiency component as part of its ranking.

They both won over 20 games but again the argument was efficiency.........

[Newsdreams]

Playing much better. But 58 ain't no bubble team

Yes it is, or you don't know how it works.....

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Yes it is, or you don't know how it works.....

It's the latter.

[panda]

Yes it is, or you don't know how it works.....

I know there's 21 spots in between 58 and 37. And those spots are usually occupied by teams with road wins and quad 1 victories.

[1SE]

Fiserv needs a new banner: years (well, partial years) where we "metrically played like a bubble team"

[TheButlerDidIt]

I know there's 21 spots in between 58 and 37. And those spots are usually occupied by teams with road wins and quad 1 victories.

At large bids go to the top 37 teams outside of conference tourney champions. Need to go to top 45ish teams to include best 37 plus top conference teams or assumed conference tourney champions.

[panda]

At large bids go to the top 37 teams outside of conference tourney champions. Need to go to top 45ish teams to include best 37 plus top conference teams or assumed conference tourney champions.

What would have to happen for the 58th ranked team to make the tournament?

[TheButlerDidIt]

Since January 1, MU has the metrics of a bubble team. That is all anyone is saying. Since the start of the season, they do not. Easy peasy.

[panda]

Since January 1, MU has the metrics of a bubble team. That is all anyone is saying. Since the start of the season, they do not. Easy peasy.

What bubble team has zero q1 wins, 1 road win and a losing record?

Playing better no doubt but let's not kid ourselves here.

[TheButlerDidIt]

No one is kidding themselves. No one ever said anything about wins/record breakdown. No one ever disputed that.

[Jay Bee]

Since January 1, MU has the metrics of a bubble team. That is all anyone is saying. Since the start of the season, they do not. Easy peasy.

Well, except a key metric: Wins and Losses. They simply do not. They are 5-9.

I think saying, "they have played better than their record might indicate" is fine... but this bubble team stuff is just grasping for what isn't there.

[Jay Bee]

No one is kidding themselves. No one ever said anything about wins/record breakdown. No one ever disputed that.

Eh, but they are. If you say, 'certain metrics', OK, maybe. But, 'their metrics are that of a bubble team' is crazy town talk.

[BM1090]

Well, except a key metric: Wins and Losses. They simply do not. They are 5-9.

I think saying, "they have played better than their record might indicate" is fine... but this bubble team stuff is just grasping for what isn't there.

I guess I don't consider W/L a metric, but maybe analytically fits better

[TheButlerDidIt]

I will certainly use "certain" next time for certain.

I realize now that I should have qualified my statement by singling out offensive/defensive efficiency metrics.

Result-based metrics like WAB have MU far off the bubble because that metric is directly tied to wins.

My initial post was semantically challenged.

[Scoop Snoop]

I will certainly use "certain" next time for certain.

I realize now that I should have qualified my statement by singling out offensive/defensive efficiency metrics.

Result-based metrics like WAB have MU far off the bubble because that metric is directly tied to wins.

My initial post was semantically challenged.

 Being semantically challenged is certainly a characteristic proudly displayed in many scoop posts.