Jump to content

Texas vs KU, Big XII Tourney Title Game- today at 5pm, ESPN

shadow_operative

By shadow_operative
in Basketball

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 706
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

TexPx
TexPx
Loop 1604
Loop 1604

Would be so on brand for Texas to get the 1 seed and lose to a 16. Some of y’all would prob still be trying to keep RT since “the players love him!!!!!!!”

Pancho
Pancho

Posted Images

HtownHorn

HtownHorn 15231

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ignatius said:

All the talk about us having a superior bench was probably still understated; outscored them 20-3…

and that is with our 6th man starting.

43 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

All the same...rather not see Purdue again...

Why they are much worse this year without Ivey and their backup center that killed us. Not to mention the Euro wing that was a good 3-point shooter.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, HtownHorn said:

and that is with our 6th man starting.

Why they are much worse this year without Ivey and their backup center that killed us. Not to mention the Euro wing that was a good 3-point shooter.

They’re still a good team from deep and have an elite big man. We’ve struggled against both types of teams separately 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19579

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

They’re still a good team from deep and have an elite big man. We’ve struggled against both types of teams separately 

I think the key to him is fronting with a guy ready to step in on the back side as soon as the ball is thrown up in the air to kind of get underneath him, and then conversely crashing down with a little guy with active hands when you don’t front him. 
he puts the ball on the deck a lot. Other than that yeah- good luck and hope he misses. 
he’s on ugly son of a bitch though, I tell you what. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I realize it's a season-long deal, but Kansas was considered the #1 overall seed a week ago, and then lost two games to Texas by a combined 35 points. How is that not enough to move them off that spot. 

17 Q1 wins is insane. 3 more than the next highest. #2 SOS and #19 non-conference SOS. They played a tough out of conference schedule and the Big 12. Won the #1 NET conference regular season

Conference tournaments don’t really move the needle that much for the top seeds 

They are deserving. The end. The resume is still better than Houston (a bad loss, few Q1 wins and terrible SOS), Bama (12 Q1 wins and won the #3 NET conference) and Purdue/UCLA/Texas. 

MAYBE Bama jumps them if they win the SECT, with the #1 SOS and #1 non-conf SOS and a 13th Q1 win against aggy. 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, texastroubadour said:

Should? Uh no

Yes

14 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

Sweet hot take, bruh.

Gtfo

Ok

5 minutes ago, Js1 said:

17 Q1 wins is insane. 3 more than the next highest. #2 SOS and #19 non-conference SOS. They played a tough out of conference schedule and the Big 12. Won the #1 NET conference regular season

Conference tournaments don’t really move the needle that much for the top seeds 

They are deserving. The end. The resume is still better than Houston (a bad loss, few Q1 wins and terrible SOS), Bama (12 Q1 wins and won the #3 NET conference) and Purdue/UCLA/Texas. 

This. It’s like the ding dongs above don’t follow the sport. They were always locked into overall 1 and we were locked into a 2 before this conference tourney started. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

Yes

Ok

This. It’s like the ding dongs above don’t follow the sport. They were always locked into overall 1 and we were locked into a 2 before this conference tourney started. 

NET is supposedly the end all, be all, or just about. 17 Q1 wins on your resume, from the #1 NET conference, is going to get you the top seed, with a top 20 NCSOS to boot.

The NET argument is why we aren’t a 1, with 14 Q1 wins, but our NCSOS was 147th. That’s why. Bama was #1, Purdue 59, KU 19, Houston 21 and UCLA 39.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 53452

Posted
Posted

We played creighton, Gonzaga, Tennessee, and Illinois. Beat 2 of them and should have beaten another. That’s a good top of non-con I’d think. Need to look at bama and Kansas I guess to see how theirs was constructed.  Is the difference more quality opponents, or fewer in the >200 group?  I doubt there’s much difference for a top 10 team in playing the #90 team vs #290 in terms of results but it makes a huge difference in that NCSOS metric. Especially if there’s multiple occurrences on the schedule. 
 

so that brings up the question of does the committee look beyond the number and parse the noncon schedule?  Or just compare numbers and that’s the measurement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Doesn't make sense that NCSOS is talked about more than SOS. Are we comparing full season performance or not? 

Most important

  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses

Some value

  • Average NET win and loss
  • Overall record
  • Non-Conference record, road record

Not nothing, but not very important

  • NET and other computer rankings
  • Overall home records, non-conference and by quadrant
  • Game scoring margins

Not criteria

  • Conference records and standings
  • AP Top 25, Coaches Poll
  • Tournament history
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UTEE97

UTEE97 3931

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

NET is supposedly the end all, be all, or just about. 17 Q1 wins on your resume, from the #1 NET conference, is going to get you the top seed, with a top 20 NCSOS to boot.

The NET argument is why we aren’t a 1, with 14 Q1 wins, but our NCSOS was 147th. That’s why. Bama was #1, Purdue 59, KU 19, Houston 21 and UCLA 39.

They also played without Self and their star defender. The committee is unlikely to punish them for this loss. They might not get the #1 overall seed though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 53452

Posted
Posted (edited)

It seems like this year there may be 6 teams with 1 seed resumes, depending on which metrics you value above others. With ku being the best across the board still, and Texas being one of the outsiders still. 
 

and nobody lost early in their conference tourney to lose position. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3464

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

NET is supposedly the end all, be all, or just about. 17 Q1 wins on your resume, from the #1 NET conference, is going to get you the top seed, with a top 20 NCSOS to boot.

The NET argument is why we aren’t a 1, with 14 Q1 wins, but our NCSOS was 147th. That’s why. Bama was #1, Purdue 59, KU 19, Houston 21 and UCLA 39.

This was my lone critique of Beard while he was here. He played garbage nonconference schedules and had a history of doing so prior to coming here. He literally made up a tournament out of whole cloth (Leon Black) where we didnt play any team rated higher than the mid 200s. When I made this argument before posters made the seemingly reasonable point of there being no difference between teams ranked in the 150s and those in the 250s. My answer to that is if that's the case then why damage your resume for tourney seeding placements by playing teams that wholly destroy said resume. If there's no difference then between them then replace those 250s and 300s with 100s and 150s and get a more favorable seeding as a result. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 15231

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

We played creighton, Gonzaga, Tennessee, and Illinois. Beat 2 of them and should have beaten another. That’s a good top of non-con I’d think. Need to look at bama and Kansas I guess to see how theirs was constructed.  Is the difference more quality opponents, or fewer in the >200 group?  I doubt there’s much difference for a top 10 team in playing the #90 team vs #290 in terms of results but it makes a huge difference in that NCSOS metric. Especially if there’s multiple occurrences on the schedule. 
 

so that brings up the question of does the committee look beyond the number and parse the noncon schedule?  Or just compare numbers and that’s the measurement?

Yeah, if we had beat Illinois and Tech, I think we are a #1. The problem going forward is to stop playing 3-5 games against 300+ Net teams in the OOC, and maybe play at least 1 road OOC game before conference play starts. Beard's scheduling strategy bit us in the ass this year. The biggest difference is we will likely get matched with the strongest #3 seed.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3464

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, HtownHorn said:

Yeah, if we had beat Illinois and Tech, I think we are a #1. The problem going forward is to stop playing 3-5 games against 300+ Net teams in the OOC, and maybe play at least 1 road OOC game before conference play starts. Beard's scheduling strategy bit us in the ass this year. The biggest difference is we will likely get matched with the strongest #3 seed.

Or better yet, play in a preseason holiday tournament. Typically you get 1 or 2 teams in the 75 to 100 range and then a team in the top 40 range and then if you make the finals you typically get a team in the top 15 to top 10 range. Add in 3 or 4more top 75 teams and then even it out with some 150s to 175s and 1 or 2 200s and 300s and voila your noncon will be guaranteed to be in the top 25 easily. 

Edited by Catdaddyhorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Native Horn

Native Horn 3581

Posted
Posted

I guess I didn't realize that there are seeds within the seeds.  We are projected to be a 2 seed, but the #5 overall seed.  Does that mean that we are supposed to be matched up against the worst 15 seed?  Sorry if I don't understand, thanks to anybody who can asplain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hagbard Celine

Hagbard Celine 11216

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Scholz said:

I’d just like to add a big fuck you to the KC crowd that booed us the entire tournament. Hope you’re all pissed off right now. Eat a big dick.

this x1000

posted before and will post again

after corn ralph and tigger left there was zero reason to keep the hoops tournament in kc every year

++

it would be nice if sark could deliver a deep probe on the way out

++

stupidest thing dallas ever did was implode reunion

the year we had both tournaments in downtown dallas at the same time was epic

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

Or better yet, play in a preseason holiday tournament. Typically you get 1 or 2 teams in the 75 to 100 range and then a team in the top 40 range and then if you make the finals you typically get a team in the top 15 to top 10 range. Add in 3 or 4more top 75 teams and then even it out with some 150s to 175s and 1 or 2 200s and 300s and voila your noncon will be guaranteed to be in the top 25 easily. 

This. They’re fun too 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3464

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Native Horn said:

I guess I didn't realize that there are seeds within the seeds.  We are projected to be a 2 seed, but the #5 overall seed.  Does that mean that we are supposed to be matched up against the worst 15 seed?  Sorry if I don't understand, thanks to anybody who can asplain.

Not necessarily the worst 15 seed, but for sure we will be in the overall bracket of the worst #1 seed if we are the best #2 seed. I don't think they worry too much about matching the worst 15 seed with the best 2 seed. Their major concern is location of games and not matching up conferences mates too early within the same bracket.. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 34578

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Most important

  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses

Some value

  • Average NET win and loss
  • Overall record
  • Non-Conference record, road record

Not nothing, but not very important

  • NET and other computer rankings
  • Overall home records, non-conference and by quadrant
  • Game scoring margins

Not criteria

  • Conference records and standings
  • AP Top 25, Coaches Poll
  • Tournament history

I'm not arguing that it's not a major consideration. I'm arguing that it's stupid that it's a major consideration on par with overall strength of schedule. If you are considering NCSOS and SOS equally then you are penalizing teams from tough conferences. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3464

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I'm not arguing that it's not a major consideration. I'm arguing that it's stupid that it's a major consideration on par with overall strength of schedule. If you are considering NCSOS and SOS equally then you are penalizing teams from tough conferences. 

I think it's a relic of the past. This current view of analyzing college sports in a parochial manner where we compare overall conference strengths is relatively new and truly stems from SECization of college sports. Back in the day when college basketball was more prominent the NCAA looked to reward schools that sought a lot of good intersectional matchups and gave the networks great TV inventory.  Now that college sports have devolved down into dick measuring contests between conferences we don't value these noncon matchups as much. 

Edited by Catdaddyhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 53452

Posted
Posted

No kidding. If an overall SOS is similar, why does it matter from where in the schedule the strength comes?

texas v kansas I see how it can be a differentiator- but it should show up in the full sos there. But why should it be a big deal with Texas vs bama or Houston where the conference sos is so much different?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 15231

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

Not necessarily the worst 15 seed, but for sure we will be in the overall bracket of the worst #1 seed if we are the best #2 seed. I don't think they worry too much about matching the worst 15 seed with the best 2 seed. Their major concern is location of games and not matching up conferences mates too early within the same bracket.. 

I think they only consider the S curve for the Top 4 seeds, and then fill in the bracket based on travel. They also try to avoid putting teams from the same conference in the same bracket among the top 4 seeds.

Edited by HtownHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...