WSU is a very balanced team

[pie n eye]

1. I don't believe there are ANY "elite" teams this year
2. I like our back court, team defense and depth
3. UNI's Koch exposed our biggest weakness which is post defense
4. I think there are 4-5 teams that stand a little above the next twenty but are beatable
5. You can throw a blanket over the teams ranked 6-20 with ANY capable of putting together a run
6. Personally, I thing we belong somewhere in the 15-20 range right now
7. Hopefully, in March we will reach our long range shooting potential at the right time
8. If MM and CF get hot we will be dangerous for anyone

Koch had 14 points on 3-9 shooting. He pulled (;)) 3 rebounds. He fouled out after playing 22 minutes. Sure, he was 8-9 from the free throw line but how did that performance "expose" our big men? Especially when you consider what they did against better players/teams like Poetl, Zimmerman, and Mock.

[another shocker]

marshall is painting a masterpiece this year.. still in progress.. nuff said

[boltforge]

3. UNI's Koch exposed our biggest weakness which is post defense

I liked that we had four guys to give fouls.

If the refs decide they want the game to be: "Centers are not allowed to touch each other" then we can keep rotating and running in our four 5's in until their guy fouls out. If they let the front court play, we rotate two of our best centers until their guy's legs fall off.

This seems to be the strategy so far.

[asiseeit]

Our centers have performed admirably in a few key games but I am looking over all and
relative to other ranked teams. Our two centers together only average 6.3 rebounds per
game and one blocked shot. They get most of their fouls standing flat footed with their
hands straight up. Personally, if they are going to get fouls on them I would like to see
them intimidating a shooter trying to block shots. Just me, I guess. They are probably
being coached to play D as they do and it's hard to argue with GM's success.

[pie n eye]

One of the big problems with that is our seed. We will likely not get a favorable matchup at all with our current seed line. If we can get into the 5-6 line and avoid playing a 1-2 seed until at least the Sweet 16, we have a decent shot (and there's the possibilty that a 1-2 seed loses the first weekend).

Most high seeds are more likely to lose in the first round than go to the Final Four. There are much fewer variables. We are no exception.

I don't think we are "elite" this year. I also don't think any team is truly "elite" this year. It's that wide open. And I think I've read the KenPom blog on this, but that would take some digging haha.

If there aren't any "elite" teams this year why should we be afraid to play a 1 or a 2 seed? I'm not talking about the historical odds of the NCAA tournament. I'm talking about THIS WSU team vs. THIS year's field.

The "we can't get far in the tournament without a good seed" seems like defeatist logic. Like we're saying that we think WSU can do well in the tournament but only if all the other good teams get beat first. What?

There are very few slouches in the field. Sure, the top 1-2 (3?) seeds basically get a first round bye but after that you're playing dangerous teams the rest of the way. If the goal was just to make it to the Sweet 16 as some kind of moral victory then, yeah, let's hope for a 5-6 so we can get to the second weekend (not guaranteed) by avoiding the 1 or 2. (and I'm not saying I would be disappointed with another Sweet 16)

But if the goal is to win a Final Four/National Championship (which I imagine it is for the team and most fans) then we're likely going to have to beat at least a couple 1 or 2 seeds. In fact we've had pretty good luck with them in the last few years (Zags, Ohio State, KU) but not so much with the lower seeds (VCU, Kentucky). Sure, I get that's a small sample size.

I know that someone can throw a million stats into my face to prove why I'm wrong but I'm not looking at this from a bettors perspective. Obviously the odds always favor the field over any one team. But in reality they're going to roll the balls out and one team is going to win six games. I think the Shockers, regardless of their seed, are good enough to compete with any team in the country. Once the ball is tipped there's not a spreadsheet in the world that can predict, with 100% accuracy, the outcome of a game.

[pie n eye]

Our centers have performed admirably in a few key games but I am looking over all and
relative to other ranked teams. Our two centers together only average 6.3 rebounds per
game and one blocked shot. They get most of their fouls standing flat footed with their
hands straight up. Personally, if they are going to get fouls on them I would like to see
them intimidating a shooter trying to block shots. Just me, I guess. They are probably
being coached to play D as they do and it's hard to argue with GM's success.

How many rebounds do our guards average? Who boxes out the other team's post players so our guards can grab those rebounds?

We might not block a ton of shots but could that be due to our defense allowing less drives to the lane thus less necessity for shot blocking?

[Kel Varnsen]

If there aren't any "elite" teams this year why should we be afraid to play a 1 or a 2 seed? I'm not talking about the historical odds of the NCAA tournament. I'm talking about THIS WSU team vs. THIS year's field.

The "we can't get far in the tournament without a good seed" seems like defeatist logic. Like we're saying that we think WSU can do well in the tournament but only if all the other good teams get beat first. What?

There are very few slouches in the field. Sure, the top 1-2 (3?) seeds basically get a first round bye but after that you're playing dangerous teams the rest of the way. If the goal was just to make it to the Sweet 16 as some kind of moral victory then, yeah, let's hope for a 5-6 so we can get to the second weekend (not guaranteed) by avoiding the 1 or 2. (and I'm not saying I would be disappointed with another Sweet 16)

But if the goal is to win a Final Four/National Championship (which I imagine it is for the team and most fans) then we're likely going to have to beat at least a couple 1 or 2 seeds. In fact we've had pretty good luck with them in the last few years (Zags, Ohio State, KU) but not so much with the lower seeds (VCU, Kentucky). Sure, I get that's a small sample size.

I know that someone can throw a million stats into my face to prove why I'm wrong but I'm not looking at this from a bettors perspective. Obviously the odds always favor the field over any one team. But in reality they're going to roll the balls out and one team is going to win six games. I think the Shockers, regardless of their seed, are good enough to compete with any team in the country. Once the ball is tipped there's not a spreadsheet in the world that can predict, with 100% accuracy, the outcome of a game.

I didn't say we couldn't get far in the tournament without a good seed. But our odds do go up if we don't have to play a 1 or 2 seed (and they have a chance at getting eliminated). And I'm pretty sure you can't get to the Final Four without getting to the second weekend. I'm not on the team or staff so I can say things like "I wouldn't want to play Team X".

And I think we can play with just about anyone. But if we were to play someone like North Carolina who has athletes all over the place, we may have matchup problems. Not that we can't win, but good teams will always present those.

[Dan]

We have a team full of newbies and young players with a couple grizzled vets leading the way. We are better now than we were in November/December and we'll be better in March than we are now. I like our chances no matter where we get seeded.

[Cdizzle]

I didn't say we couldn't get far in the tournament without a good seed. But our odds do go up if we don't have to play a 1 or 2 seed (and they have a chance at getting eliminated). And I'm pretty sure you can't get to the Final Four without getting to the second weekend. I'm not on the team or staff so I can say things like "I wouldn't want to play Team X".

And I think we can play with just about anyone. But if we were to play someone like North Carolina who has athletes all over the place, we may have matchup problems. Not that we can't win, but good teams will always present those.

Those athletes were so bad they couldn't out-athlete UNI to a win. Marcus Paige is really, really good. But UNI is not. UNC doesn't play defense. That can have a tendency to kill you when you play a team that can control tempo and lock you up.

Having said that, I would not be opposed to UNC being on the opposite side of the bracket.

[ShockdaWorld]

We have a team full of newbies and young players with a couple grizzled vets leading the way. We are better now than we were in November/December and we'll be better in March than we are now. I like our chances no matter where we get seeded.

I agree 100%. Although I find it difficult to think of 22-23 year old guys as grizzled vets. :)

[MadaboutWu]

Quick question: do the Kenpom rankings adjust for the injuries? And if so how much? If they don't, our numbers look great. Also they probably don't adjust for CF's early-game absence?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Those athletes were so bad they couldn't out-athlete UNI to a win. Marcus Paige is really, really good. But UNI is not. UNC doesn't play defense. That can have a tendency to kill you when you play a team that can control tempo and lock you up.

Having said that, I would not be opposed to UNC being on the opposite side of the bracket.

When discussing games played away from home in November, I think Shocker fans know very well what can happen when your stud senior guard is injured.

Just sayin'... I don't put much stock into those outcomes.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Quick question: do the Kenpom rankings adjust for the injuries? And if so how much? If they don't, our numbers look great. Also they probably don't adjust for CF's early-game absence?

I'm 99% sure that they do not adjust for injuries or for Connor.

[Cdizzle]

When discussing games played away from home in November, I think Shocker fans know very well what can happen when your stud senior guard is injured.

Just sayin'... I don't put much stock into those outcomes.

Agreed. But their defensive numbers haven't really improved either.

I think I found the article I was referencing earlier, though it is not by Pomeroy.

http://www.charged.fm/blog/post/5200/decoding-march-madness-past-champions

[shockmonster]

My negativity about WSU's chances in March is not a negativity about WSU's efficiency the past 2 months. I agree that WSU has been consistently dominant against mediocre competition. My main theory is that WSU has weaknesses that MVC teams just don't have the personnel to expose very often.

I think WSU is performing about on par with how many of the elite teams around the country would perform if inserted into the MVC. However, I feel that this is deceptive to how WSU will perform against better competition, specifically, better competition with strong interior players.

Just my opinion. I'll admit it is more of an eye test and matchup concern than something I can point to via statistics.

I'm glad you admit that there isn't a metric that clearly identifies these "elite" teams and that you are identifying them by the eye test. However, you have never identified any of the elite teams. Would you please let us in on your evaluation of the elite teams you are talking about?