2020-21 Games of Interest

[NCAABound]

No Loyola is not comparable to our program. But we have to put ourselves in their shoes like we were a few years ago. Who is gonna go into Chicago and play them? We act like we are Duke nowadays....but these midmajors struggle to "prove" themselves.

[Stickboy46]

The Best win between Loyola and Drake... Not counting beating each other is.... Loyolas home game vs North Texas... That's it.

[lostshocker]

He must have produced the fastest, most humble, most impassioned mea culpa in the history of fast, humble, impassioned mea culpas.

Dude can score, but the few games I've watched, he's a ball hog, poor choice shooting machine that is only so-so defensively. I'd take him long before I'd take The Process, though. I really don't think the kid would have meshed in FHCGM's system.

Weird herald said he was only suspended for the minnesota game and he'd be back for the wisconsin game.

[Kel Varnsen]

I think comparing Loyola’s program to ours is laughable. They have not sustained it like we did after our final four. Never mind the fact that they play in a high school gym and are an afterthought in the Chicago market.

They didn’t look so hot today, putting up 50 points in 45 minutes. Who have they beaten that proves they’re worth a damn? Drake? lol

The Drake win is comparable to our best win, at Ole Miss (road game against a Top 50-60 team). Their second best win is a home win against #76 North Texas, compared to our away game at #101 UCF. Pretty comparable.

I don’t think their program as a whole compares to ours, but their team this season compares pretty well and is likely better at this point in the season.

[ShockTalk]

The Drake win is comparable to our best win, at Ole Miss (road game against a Top 50-60 team). Their second best win is a home win against #76 North Texas, compared to our away game at #101 UCF. Pretty comparable.

I don’t think their program as a whole compares to ours, but their team this season compares pretty well and is likely better at this point in the season.

First, the argument is: What has Drake and Loyola done outside of playing each other? You brought up North Texas. Who are the best they've beaten (on the + side) and who are the worst they've lost to (on the - side). Yes, they lost to several good teams. Maybe losing only by 6 to Miss St? On the negative, they lost to UTSA.

Whose Drake beaten (besides Loyola)? I know they lost to Valpo (with Hemphill playing 35 minutes).

I'm not saying we deserve more as much as I'm saying they deserve less.

I'm also more PO'd about a 12th ranked or worse conference showing 4 teams in by Joe with the 7th ranked AAC not even smelling a second team in.

[Shockm]

I'm also more PO'd about a 12th ranked or worse conference showing 4 teams in by Joe with the 7th ranked AAC not even smelling a second team in.

This makes no sense at all.

A few of the people making these arguments have also made past arguments on why P5 teams deserve so many tourney invitations. They seem to try to have it both ways or they seem to be biased away from the AAC.

[Kel Varnsen]

First, the argument is: What has Drake and Loyola done outside of playing each other? You brought up North Texas. Who are the best they've beaten (on the + side) and who are the worst they've lost to (on the - side). Yes, they lost to several good teams. Maybe losing only by 6 to Miss St? On the negative, they lost to UTSA.

Whose Drake beaten (besides Loyola)? I know they lost to Valpo (with Hemphill playing 35 minutes).

I'm not saying we deserve more as much as I'm saying they deserve less.

I'm also more PO'd about a 12th ranked or worse conference showing 4 teams in by Joe with the 7th ranked AAC not even smelling a second team in.

We can't go down the rabbit hole you are wanting to in terms of who have the teams you've beaten, beaten. We could do that all day and it would only make everything murkier. North Texas is 76 in KenPom and 69 (nice) in Torvik. That's at least comparable to winning at UCF.

Wins Above Bubble can be useful here, as it adjusts for each team's schedule, telling you how many wins each team has relative to a bubble team against their schedule. Torvik has this on his site and a guy named Seth Burn does this as well. At Torvik, we are at 0.9 WAB and an 11 seed (meaning we are positive and should be in based on the metric), Loyola is at 1.2 WAB and a 10 seed, and Drake is at 2.0 WAB and a 7 seed. While this may not seem fair, it does give credit to teams who rack up wins without punishing them for losses that are aberrations, like Drake's loss at Valpo. Utilizing a metric like this would have had our 2015, 2016, and 2017 teams seeded fairly.

https://medium.com/top-level-sports/wins-above-bubble-and-the-at-large-case-for-stephen-f-austin-d6ebea0cd904

[WstateU]

You know what really "grinds my gears"? We weren't able to play any games in South Dakota (had the coach Marshall issue and all the preseason Covid issues eliminating preseason practice) which would have given our young team some great experience (win or lose). We come home and immediately play Missouri and Oklahoma State with a 'rag tag' roster... heck, half the team was quarantined when we played them. It's our house and we don't lose in our house. Not that we're hitting on all cylinders now, but I would love another chance to play both of them AT HOME with a full roster. I'm tellin' ya', it ain't fair. I know, life ain't fair. Tell me I'm crazy!

[Shockm]

We can't go down the rabbit hole you are wanting to in terms of who have the teams you've beaten, beaten. We could do that all day and it would only make everything murkier. North Texas is 76 in KenPom and 69 (nice) in Torvik. That's at least comparable to winning at UCF.

Wins Above Bubble can be useful here, as it adjusts for each team's schedule, telling you how many wins each team has relative to a bubble team against their schedule. Torvik has this on his site and a guy named Seth Burn does this as well. At Torvik, we are at 0.9 WAB and an 11 seed (meaning we are positive and should be in based on the metric), Loyola is at 1.2 WAB and a 10 seed, and Drake is at 2.0 WAB and a 7 seed. While this may not seem fair, it does give credit to teams who rack up wins without punishing them for losses that are aberrations, like Drake's loss at Valpo. Utilizing a metric like this would have had our 2015, 2016, and 2017 teams seeded fairly.

https://medium.com/top-level-sports/...n-d6ebea0cd904

But teams should have a downside for BAD LOSSES. We have ZERO bad losses to go with our ZERO big wins against OSU and Missouri.

Weve lost to Teams we should and defeated teams we should.

[Stickboy46]

But teams should have a downside for BAD LOSSES. We have ZERO bad losses to go with our ZERO big wins against OSU and Missouri.

@Ole Miss is a win that a couple Top 25 teams couldn't pull off.... It's a light years better win than home vs N Texas

[Shockm]

@Ole Miss is a win that a couple Top 25 teams couldn't pull off.... It's a light years better win than home vs N Texas

No because Kel says the numbers don’t say that even though no one knows how the NCAA arrives at their NET.

[Stickboy46]

No because Kel says the numbers don’t say that even though no one knows how the NCAA arrives at their NET.

The Number say that too

@55 Ole Miss > home vs 72 North Texas

[pie n eye]

No because Kel says the numbers don’t say that even though no one knows how the NCAA arrives at their NET.

It is a big win, Q1, but it’s just one game and it’s not the reason our rank isn’t better. Right or wrong (mostly wrong in my opinion, although I understand the thought reason behind it) it really just comes down to not having finished out our games against “weaker” opponents.

What’s funny is that in most of them we had sizable leads that would probably have improved our NET had we maintained them. For one reason or another we didn’t and so here we are.

It’s nothing to worry or get upset about. Like others have said, the opportunities for wins that will get us in the tournament are on the schedule. We just have to take care of business. NET ranking will sort itself out.

[Shockm]

It is a big win, Q1, but it’s just one game and it’s not the reason our rank isn’t better. Right or wrong (mostly wrong in my opinion, although I understand the thought reason behind it) it really just comes down to not having finished out our games against “weaker” opponents.

What’s funny is that in most of them we had sizable leads that would probably have improved our NET had we maintained them. For one reason or another we didn’t and so here we are.

It’s nothing to worry or get upset about. Like others have said, the opportunities for wins that will get us in the tournament are on the schedule. We just have to take care of business. NET ranking will sort itself out.

Weaker ranked opponents than us, but still good opponents. The bad opponents we’ve played are ORU in our first game. We haven’t had opportunities against bad opponents like Valpo. Tulane is a good 150 opponent. ECU beat Houston. Temple is a Top 160 team.

[Kel Varnsen]

No because Kel says the numbers don’t say that even though no one knows how the NCAA arrives at their NET.

Where did I say the NET is good? It’s awful. WAB is a metric not utilized by the NCAA.