8 Warning Signs: Your Team Is Going Home

[another shocker]

You mean we are going to lose? (A blood curdling scream fills the room). I hadn't considered that possibility. :(

well, you said that, not me. :)

[Cdizzle]

Baker's bank shot should have been an and-1. He hit the backboard cause he got fouled, not cause he sucks at shooting. Not that I'm extremely bitter about it or anything.

[ShockAzs]

Baker's bank shot should have been an and-1. He hit the backboard cause he got fouled, not cause he sucks at shooting. Not that I'm extremely bitter about it or anything.

I am flat out extremely bitter about it. No sarcasm necessary. That Kentucky team never played so well again, which I'm also bitter about. If they played like that the entire tournament, they curb stomp everybody all the way to a Natty. Which REALLY pisses me off.

[WSUwatcher]

Kentucky was lucky in a number of ways: the banked Wildcat three and no-call on Baker's shot mentioned above; but also Early's failed dunk off a lob; 2-6 FTs from Wessel and Wiggins (why in the world was Wiggins not a better foul shooter?) and just 4-9 by the team in the second half; a collision between FVV's head and the floor that he later acknowledged left him a little foggy for most of the second half.

Give them credit for playing up to the level of their competition against WSU (no sarcasm intended; WSU was that good, and UK responded) -- but they were damn lucky.

Edit: And, by the way, go NKU (see sign #7).

[WuShock16]

I am flat out extremely bitter about it. No sarcasm necessary. That Kentucky team never played so well again, which I'm also bitter about. If they played like that the entire tournament, they curb stomp everybody all the way to a Natty. Which REALLY pisses me off.

If they played like that all season, they wouldn't have been an 8 seed.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

still..'difficult to see a real veteran team (like dayton) lose three games in a row.

the shockers got screwed again. there's no two ways about it.

Looking at the last 5 years, KenPom ranks 2017 Dayton 17th out of 20 amongst all 7 seeds. Ken wouldn't have flinched if Dayton was given a 10 seed this year.

If you are going to whine, pick a better topic.

[SB Shock]

Looking at the last 5 years, KenPom ranks 2017 Dayton 17th out of 20 amongst all 7 seeds. Ken wouldn't have flinched if Dayton was given a 10 seed this year.

If you are going to whine, pick a better topic.

So basically this really is the correct matchup, just somehow the NCAA mixed up the seeds. WSU is the 7, Dayton is the 10.

[SHOCKvalue]

So basically this really is the correct matchup, just somehow the NCAA mixed up the seeds. WSU is the 7, Dayton is the 10.

WSU is better than a 7, actually.

Dayton is probably not a 7, but they're better than a 10.

[SB Shock]

WSU is better than a 7, actually.

Dayton is probably not a 7, but they're better than a 10.

So which 6th seed do you replace with WSU and why?

[ShockingButTrue]

So basically this really is the correct matchup, just somehow the NCAA mixed up the seeds. WSU is the 7, Dayton is the 10.

Although Dayton is much closer to Indianapolis than either WSU, or Kentucky... Nice reward for losing their last 2 games. :barbershop_quartet_

[shock]

So which 6th seed do you replace with WSU and why?

I want to see a bracket where teams are ranked by kenpom

[SHOCKvalue]

So which 6th seed do you replace with WSU and why?

Have you actually looked at all four 6 seeds? The answer is there for you, and it is patently obvious.

To say nothing of the fact that only a single 6 seed betters WSU in Massey's advanced metric composite, and according to kenpom's tournament projections, again just one 6 seed has better odds through the elite 8, at which point not a single 6 seed has better odds moving forward.

Good 'nuff?

EDIT: And for the record, the single 6 seed mentioned above is SMU, roundly considered to also be criminally underseeded. Ironic?

[SB Shock]

Have you actually looked at all four 6 seeds? The answer is there for you, and it is patently obvious.

To say nothing of the fact that only a single 6 seed betters WSU in Massey's advanced metric composite, and according to kenpom's tournament projections, again just one 6 seed has better odds through the elite 8, at which point not a single 6 seed has better odds moving forward.

Good 'nuff?

Yes I have. And WSU body of work is not better than any of them.

You can cite all the advance analytics you want, but the fact is NCAA said they didn't use them and won't use them until they are ordered to. So you are stuck evaluating using what the NCAA says is their standard (which RPI centric team sheets). The real problem with WSU resume is two fold:

1. They didn't win in November and December when they had a chance to pick up quality wins. Had won 1 or 2 of those games then their resume starts looking more like their analytics says they are.

2. They MVC sucked so bad they didn't give them enough opportunities to offset the the lack of quality wins in November and December.

Now WSU has a chance to be of the driver of change, but this requires them to beat Dayton and Kentucky and show that the analytics is correct and the RPI teams sheets are not accurate portrayal of what this team is capable of.

[Cdizzle]

Yes I have. And WSU body of work is not better than any of them.

You can cite all the advance analytics you want, but the fact is NCAA said they didn't use them and won't use them until they are ordered to. So you are stuck evaluating using what the NCAA says is their standard (which RPI centric team sheets). The real problem with WSU resume is two fold:

1. They didn't win in November and December when they had a chance to pick up quality wins. Had won 1 or 2 of those games then their resume starts looking more like their analytics says they are.

2. They MVC sucked so bad they didn't give them enough opportunities to offset the the lack of quality wins in November and December.

Now WSU has a chance to be of the driver of change, but this requires them to beat Dayton and Kentucky and show that the analytics is correct and the RPI teams sheets are not accurate portrayal of what this team is capable of.

For the record, the analytics say Kentucky is one of 7 teams that would be favored over WSU. So expecting WSU to win that game to "prove the analytics correct" is a false narrative.

[SHOCKvalue]

Yes I have. And WSU body of work is not better than any of them.

You can cite all the advance analytics you want, but the fact is NCAA said they didn't use them and won't use them until they are ordered to. So you are stuck evaluating using what the NCAA says is their standard (which RPI centric team sheets). The real problem with WSU resume is two fold:

1. They didn't win in November and December when they had a chance to pick up quality wins. Had won 1 or 2 of those games then their resume starts looking more like their analytics says they are.

2. They MVC sucked so bad they didn't give them enough opportunities to offset the the lack of quality wins in November and December.

Now WSU has a chance to be of the driver of change, but this requires them to beat Dayton and Kentucky and show that the analytics is correct and the RPI teams sheets are not accurate portrayal of what this team is capable of.

So really, what you want me to do is to adjust my expectations and units of measure to match your own, which are patterned directly after those of the NCAA Selection Committee, which themselves have been roundly mocked by the national media for their seeding treatment of WSU?

Got it, even though I don't.