Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsTheHCP, Nov 7, 2018.
You say this while FULLY knowing Zion just got hurt...
Washington is consistently winning the games they should win and hasnt lost to a non-tournament team at the time of this writing (Gonzaga, Auburn, Virginia Tech, Minnesota, Arizona State). The Gonzaga and Minnesota game were 2 point losses.
Washington has talent and experience. Their success isnt due to the conference. Metrics can adjust for that and bracketologists take that into account.
If Duke was worthy of the absurd amount of attention they get (no team is), they would've won regardless. Or at least kept the deficit within 15. And it should also be another lesson as to why you shouldnt speak with such certainty. Didnt you say Duke would go undefeated? They have 3 losses and counting.
Everyone has been calling the Pac12 a 1-bid conference this year. You think both UW and ASU get in?
ASU is a tournament team as of this moment.
I see that ASU is currently slated as one of Lunardi's last 4 in (which is silly to me seeing as Utah St is one of his first 4 out, and they have a better record in what seems to be a better conference and beat ASU head-t0-head, but that's not the point).
However, that wasn't what I asked. I asked if you think ASU gets in. That is to say, do you personally think that when selection Sunday rolls around, that ASU (assuming they don't with the conference tourney) will be given an at-large berth?
I kind of think the only team that gets in will be the conference winner. Maybe they get two, but I kind of doubt it. I think Larry Scott has kind of failed the conference. Not that I think it's "fair" to place it all on one guy, but he certainly doesn't seem to have helped much...
I use BracketMatrix.com instead of Lunardi.
And Im not sure. One bad loss and they're on the outside looking in. USC was thought to be a lock and missed it last year (highest rated team based on RPI to ever miss the tournament), so the same sort of thing may happen to Arizona St.
Seems to me like the Pac12's image problem has grown exponentially the past couple years, both in football and basketball. If the blue-bloods aren't garnering headlines, the rest of the conference may as well not even exist.
ASU hosts last-place Cal Sunday, and then are on the road for their final 3 games of the season. Oregon State is the only good team left on their schedule. Considering how often mid-major "locks" lose in their conference tourneys, allowing another team in their conference to get into the dance, I think the Devils will need to win out and reach the conference finals if they want a shot at the tourney.
It does make me wonder, looking at the conference standings--if the Beavs win the rest of their regular season games (yes, I know they'd need to win in Seattle and Pullman to do so), would they have a shot at the tourney?
They probably do, but the bubble isn't as strong as in recent years. Really not impressed with the collection of bubble teams, and there just isn't a ton of depth in regards to major conferences this year. It's likely we see the final four at-large teams play in the First Four as 12 seeds. I think the last time you had an at-large first four team below 11 was 2013 (that year they had an 11 and a 13 matchup, which was weird) so it's been a while.
In regards to Oregon State, I think they have little to no chance. I've been working on a formula that predicts seed lines for teams on all the factors that the selection committee considers, and have tried to use results to optimize it. Here are the teams that'd be out of the tournament as of now. As of now, they have a worse resume than Oregon.
First Four Out
- Indiana (64.1)
- San Francisco
Next Four Out
- Butler (62.0)
- Seton Hall
Another Seven Out
- Arkansas (60.6)
- Oregon (60.0)
- Fresno State
- Oregon State (58.1)
So Oregon State has 14 other teams ahead of them right now, which means they can't rely on the collapse of other teams. They have to boost their resume, but they don't have big enough resume boosting games remaining. They'll have to win their conference tournament to make it into the dance.
For comparison, Washington is a 7 seed at 72.9
I'm not saying they aren't a decent team. I'm saying they are benefiting from NCAA tournament teams regulars like UCLA and Arizona having epic lows. Also teams like Oregon, Stanford and USC who probably should have been better, are up and down Also, they have the single easiest sconference schedule in the Pac-12. So I am not surprised they have a good record. With all that returning talent they should be in March anyway.
Not questioning your formula, since I know nothing about it, but it seems absolutely insane to me that Oregon would be ahead of Oregon State in terms of tournament résumé.
The Win Quality Column was incorrect. Oregon State has a big edge in WQ, but Oregon is favored by NET, BPI, and KenPom. After the correction, Oregon and Oregon State are both relatively even. However, both remain behind a large collection of bubble teams.
That's ridiculous. Any formula that puts the Ducks ahead of a team with a better record and that swept the Ducks this season is wack.
Speaking of Washington, one of my son’s best friends and the son of a childhood friend of mine, just signed with the Huskies. Very proud of him, good kid. Been the starting PG for Jefferson for the past 4 seasons. Marcus Tsohonis. Oregon player of the year his junior season.
So Donovan Mitchell got on his high horse last night after the injury to Zion. Putting the NCAA on blast and Luka just squashed him.
It's an interesting debate. The schools make money, the conferences make money, we get it there's a lot of money. The flip slide is I believe it's 98% of college athletes never turn pro at that sport. Most of them get full-ride scholarships, housing, food, etc, that's more than a job out of HS would pay them, that's more than most kids who are going to school to be doctors, scientists, engineers get, they're definitely receiving something for their services. Like Luka mentioned there are options, China, Europe, G-League is trying to ramp up too, so there are definitely options.
Very few are pro NCAA and heck I'm not either, but I always feel bad when a player gets hurt, amateur, or pro, I don't know if the situation these guys get put in, is as bad as they like to let on. Fact is if they demand so much that it's not feasible for the colleges and NCAA to do it financially they won't have that option at all eventually. Basketball and CFB are the sports that really make the money and support many other sports and athletes being able to go to school.
I think it's a more complex topic than players like to make it, their main point seems to be, well the NCAA makes money when we play, so we should make money too. You go to college on an athletic scholarship, and you're being given goods in exchange for your services, if you want straight cash then why don't you choose another option? Obviously, the reason why most of the 1 and done and most of the 1-2%ers don't choose that option is in fact because they are getting something out of it too. If it was just the NCAA getting something out of it the players wouldn't do it.
Not to mention the fact that the exposure Zion and other players receive from the platform provided by the NCAA is worth a ton, and the players certainly aren't quantifying that. Would the amount of hype currently surrounding Zion exist to its present degree if he were playing in the G-League (which he could have done)? Not likely. Even if he's not receiving a check, he's garnering a benefit that shouldn't be ignored.
Seems like there was plenty of hype about LeBron coming straight out of high school. Great players get noticed. For lesser talents, or later-blooming talents, your point is well taken.
Separate names with a comma.