Jump to content

The Wiz

Billikens.com Donor
  • Posts

    3,390
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Everything posted by The Wiz

  1. The blue ink cartridge on my printer ran dry
  2. I noticed that ...He played a record 34 mins on Sunday. When I read the report early Sunday he was still ineligible and then sometime during the day before game time he became eligible. I guess when your team is down 4 players, you can become real smart , real fast. Probably a big weekend of studying.
  3. I am sure that UMass was glad to see NJIT cancel considering UMass 's own short handed situation.
  4. The UMass (our next opponent ) game against NJIT tomorrow has been canceled. 2 key players Fernandes (leading scorer....34 min/gm) and Weeks Jr (22 min/ gm) are listed on the injury list as questionable (illness)...both missed the last game. In addition , Walker ( 15 min/gm) is out for the season ...Femur injury and Garcia (18 min /gm) out indefinitely ...academics. Stay tuned...
  5. For those interested in what might have been.... Some other highlights.... Chance to Dance The Bills...57% VCU.........45% Other A-10 teams are below 40% Top players....Yuri #1 ITN in Assts...25th in steals Team FTs FTM/gm....#2 ITN FTM/100 possessions....#1 ITN
  6. Looks like I will put a hold on my Drake spread thread info until I get the all clear...I did notice that Williams and Courtney were on the Injury list with Illness.
  7. I have received a number of questions from posters on the board....I thought I would reprint this one with the the permission of the poster. The poster's message is not only a good summary of questions I have received but brings up a number of issues that have been raised on the main board..... Poster's message.... I really appreciate all your analysis and think you have been spot on with this year's team...that said, what have you seen that gives hope that this season doesn't end like last year? Without JP, this is a pretty average basketball team that has no reliable scoring weapon (Jimerson disappears the second someone guards him, and the bigs aren't enough of a factor offensively to change that). The resume so far is a tough read...OK win @ Boise State, 2 deplorable home losses to UAB and Belmont, and a blown opportunity vs. Auburn. The A-10 is horrid this year, so it seems we'd need 16+ wins with this non-conference performance to be an at large (the other option is winning the A-10 tournament). I personally think right now the Billikens are a Thursday light uniform team in the A-10 (5-8), with a chance at a top 4 seed. I do think we have Richmond's number since we have outphysicaled them for a while now...but the Bonnies are better than SLU, VCU is better than SLU, and one can make the argument that Dayton is as well (yes, they have 3 awful losses, but they also beat KU who would run roughshod over the A-10). It seems like the program has hit a glass ceiling under Travis Ford where they may contend for a spot but won't often get one...losing JP was huge for many reasons (especially in a game he had no business playing in). Yes, I still hold a grudge against Ford for last year's complete waste of 2 4 year starters and a healthy JP because I don't think a leopard can change his spots. Happy Holidays to you and yours, and may the numbers be kind to SLU going forward. My response... Thanks for your note ... I will try to answer your questions from an analytical point of view rather than opinion or observation. Bold statements are from your post.... Without JP, this is a pretty average basketball team that has no reliable scoring weapon. No question , it is hard to replace JP numbers, not to mention the added depth that would have been so valuable ...especially in the closing out of games. He would have added another offensive weapon plus another player to spread out the minutes and allow some players to rest a little. But even without JP we are still one of the better offensive teams ITN. 2 deplorable home losses to UAB and Belmont, and a blown opportunity vs. Auburn.....First those were all painful losses because we could have won them all and they slipped away at the end. But a painful loss is different than a deplorable loss. The computer looks at those 3 games as quality losses...close losses to good teams. It sees UAB, Belmont and Aub and grades them as B+...B+ and A+...It sees 3 potential Dance teams...chance to Dance...53%..51% and 99% and finally it sees us losing by 5 and 5 and 4. A total of 14 pts to 3 potential Tourney teams and thinks we have played them fairly even. We can play with them....and in fact, not only did we not lose ground numbers wise but actually gained a little after the Aub loss. Also we did have a win in there against BC...while not a great team , they are an above average team (B- ) Forgetting about the outcome of those games for a moment....Suppose I told you on Dec 3 (right before the UAB game) that on Dec 19th we would be in about the same place numbers wise for a chance to Dance. And further, that after these 4 games , we would be the best in the A-10. Would you take that ?....Maybe you would or would not. Then I tell you we will lose 3 of the next 4 games. Would you then take it? My guess is that you would....And that is exactly what has happened. We have lost 3 of 4 and we are in about the same place as we were on Dec 3. The A-10 is horrid this year ...I don't agree with this statement...We are a B league this year. over the years the A-10 has generally been B or B+. I don't have any numbers from last year because the numbers were messed up by Covid. But 2 years ago was the worst season for the A-10 (since the Bills have been in the league ...2005 ). In fact the last few years have been down...2021-22 is shaping up as the best year for the league since 2015-16. The hot years for the league were 2012-13 & 2013- 2014. Again I am talking about league overall quality. There is more parity in the A-10 and Leagues overall in D1. Leagues are not as top heavy anymore which makes them seem watered down. In the A-10 the bottom and middle have come up and the top has come down. the Bonnies are better than SLU, VCU is better than SLU, and one can make the argument that Dayton is as well (yes, they have 3 awful losses, but they also beat KU who would run roughshod over the A-10).... Again the computer disagrees with you....At least as of now , we are the best team in the A-10...That doesn't mean we will go undefeated in the conference....The model is showing 4 losses to.... St. B, Day, Rich and Dav...all away. Also, currently showing a sweep of all the rest of the home games. I think that answers most of your questions... I did try entering....a glass ceiling under Travis Ford.... hold a grudge against Ford ....complete waste of 2 4 year starters ...and it came up as ...did not compute. When I entered don't think a leopard can change his spots. It said ...see Zoo Wishing you a Happy and Healthy Holiday to you and yours. May Santa bring you NCAA tickets to see The Bills play in March. Poster Well done sir...The last paragraph or so was me being honest about my lack of objectivity towards Travis Ford. Knowing how SLU operates, firing Ford would lead to Jim Crews 2.0. I really like your December 3rd analysis... If we are around 50% to Dance, does that also mean 50% to the NIT, or is this also factoring in the disaster scenario of a sub-.500 season in A10 play? My response... I think I know what you are trying to ask here....If the Bills have a 50% chance of making The Dance...then they have a 99% chance of making the NIT. ( the poster said that was what he was asking and that I did answer his question.)
  8. Well, based on the title of this thread , I can't say I was surprised either by the outcome or the spread....BUT...it was still soooo disappointing. Why?... because we had this game within our grasp and let it slip away....13pt lead with 8min 14 sec to go. Got to win these type of games. Like always let's look back at the highlights of the original post (in bold)... This game may be decided on 1 play....a TO ...a reb... a layup, made or missed.. or even a FT or two...Sadly this statement was true. Many will think that 1 play was the FT missed at the end of the game...Please read the next paragraph. First we need to shoot well...48/39/76...mimimum...50/40/80 would be nice... Close ??? Well it depends on how you look at it...How about 50/40/ 65 That is almost a bingo...with 1 small problem...that was the slash for the 2nd half only...Unfortunately, we had to play 2 halves and the 1st half was.... 35/ 0 /75...Yes, the zero is not a typo ...in a normal Bills game we would have had 3 more 3s in the 1st half and 3 more FTM in the 2nd half.......we would have finished with a slash of 47/41/79 . We were missing 12 pts...should have won by 8...BUT...we didn't need 12 more points...if we had sunk 1 more 3 in the 1st half and finished with a 3P% of 14% instead of zero... we win. No mistakes...TOs 11...worst case match them in TOs... We had 17 TOs.... they had 11 TOs so the match wasn't going to work . Results...Aub...15pts on TOs...Bills 11pts...4 pt difference...Hmmm...4 pts...where have I seen this before? Rebs ...match them...And did we ...46-27 for The Bills...This what allowed us to stay in the game...allowed to come back in the 2nd half...allowed us to almost win....2nd chance pts Aub 12...Bills 11 Smith, Johnson and Green...hold them to 32 pts ...39pts...7 too many...we did a good job on Jabari and Johnson ...we let Green slip away. Smith and Kessler ...hold them to 11 rebs. ...13...close enough in light of the fact that we crushed them overall on the boards. Don't shoot into the trees...2 blks or less....We did shoot into the trees...6 blks...probably a few less blks would have made a diff. And last but not least, we need to play a full 40 min of basketball....You could look at this a few ways....Here is how I would look at it...We played 39 min 57.4 sec of good basketball....had we made 2 FTs at the end, we could have still won this game. To expound on this further ...We played the 13th best team ITN even, except for the final 2.6 sec of the game. There is nobody left on our schedule that is anywhere near Aub in terms of difficulty....and yet we just played Aub even. Nobody can beat us the rest of the way....Only we can beat us.
  9. Injury update....Williams who is Auburn's 1st or 2nd player off the bench is dealing with a toe injury....He is expected to play but not be at 100%.
  10. If Mem played Aub at the Fetz....Aub by 5 over Mem
  11. And therein lies the reason that Auburn lost the game...10 extra TOs by UConn, yet only 2 extra points for Aub. Hopefully we won't make the same TO mistake that UConn made. 20+ TOs is almost always a loss. As I mentioned in the original post...11 TOs by the Bills or at least match AUB TOs.
  12. I am not sure MPG is a good indicator of depth. Most of the Aub games have been blowouts ...so you use your bench more in those games. In the only close regulation game against USF ...Aub wins by 6 ...they had 7 players over 20min...nobody else over 10min. Even in Aub double OT loss to UConn they still only had 7 players over 20 min. They had 1 guy with 13 min and the only reason for that was because Smith (their star) fouled out.
  13. First, we will start with... Chance to Dance The Bills...55%...dn St. B..........53%....dn VCU...........44%....unch A-10 teams not listed are below 40% And now on to the game. This will be our toughest game of the year unless we Dance. No matter how you cut it Auburn is good. AP has them at 13th ITN. And in a rare instance , I too, have them at 13th. Needless to say they are rated at A+. We come in at A-. Before we go any further , be it known that this is a winnable game. There are some issues we will need to deal with but they are manageable. First let's take a look at the report card, ....................SLU....................AUB..........................SLU.........................AUB .................................OFF..........................................................DEF............. PPG...............A+..15th ITN......A...........................C+.................................B FG%...............A-......................C.............................C..................................A- 3Pt%.............A........................C+............................B..................................C FT%...............A-......................B-................................................................. Reb...............B.......................A-...............................A-................................B- OFF Rebs = total rebs...DEF Rebs = opp reb UP....Off....PPG...FG%...3P%...FT%.....Def....Reb...3P% Down....Off...Reb...Def....none Team FTs... Top 100 Teams ITN FTM/gm....The Bills...2nd FTA/gm....The Bills....4th FTM / 100 possessions...The Bills...1st FTA / Offensive play...The Bills........7th Top 100 ITN (In The Nation)/ gm SLU Assts...Collins...2nd...up Stls......Collins....42nd....up FG%.....Linssen...83rd....up Aub Assts...Green...65th Stls.....Johnson...35th Blks.....Kessler...10th Injuries Flanigan 10/14/21.. G...Achilles...Flanigan is recovering from Achilles surgery and is expected to return in 2 weeks. So here are the issues for this game....The good news is we are the better team offensively. As I have pointed out a number of times this year, we are one of the best offensive teams ITN. The issue in this game as in others will be to not give up our advantage. There are 2 ways we can give up the advantage...shoot poorly or not rebound. Shooting wise, we just need to have a normal Bills night. On rebounds , I am showing we should be able to match up with them... we should be about even on rebs....We need to convert the should to... need to be even with them on rebs....no 2nd chance shots for Aub. Here are the road blocks ...Smith ...at 6'10 .. he is not only their best player but one of the top players ITN. He shoots as well inside as outside...45/44/84 plus 7 rebs/gm. But this isn't the only Bills problem ...there is the other guy...Kessler..7' 1...he is in there to Reb (7 rebs/gm) and blk ( over 3/gm)...Did I mention? ...they will both be playing at the same time. WWN2D2W... First we need to shoot well...48/39/76...mimimum...50/40/80 would be nice....No mistakes...TOs 11...worst case match them in TOs. Rebs ...match them..Smith, Johnson and green...hold them to 32 pts. ...Smith and Kessler ...hold them to 11 rebs. Don't shoot into the trees...2 blks or less...The numbers in this section are not pie in the sky...they are all doable. Bottom line.... Yes, Aub is 13th ITN but they are beatable. The difference between this game and the others this year is there is no room for error. We don't need to have an extraordinary game ...we just need to do everything well....all things we are capable of...we just need to put it all together. And last but not least, we need to play a full 40 min of basketball. This game may be decided on 1 play....a TO ...a reb... a layup made or missed... Focus... If we cut down the trees , we can leave the Tigers growling.
  14. At the beginning of the season , I had this game, in fact, the next 2 games (Auburn and Drake) as question marks. A question mark at the beginning of the season means even. Again, the formula for this game is simple...play like we did against BC and we win ...play like we did against Belmont and we get blown out.
  15. Auburn is an A team ... we are an A- team playing at home so it should be close. I am waiting for the numbers from the Auburn / N Ala game on Tues night. Whether we are favored or not, it is a very winnable game. How winnable? If we play like we did against BC minus a couple of TOs ...we win.
  16. And Yuri would have been on that 20+ record list had BC not gone to its Yuri "prevent the record" defense" at the end of the game. Btw, the previous Bills record was held by Jim Roder who recorded his 18 assists at the 1987 NIT against S. Miss.
  17. What a great game....Good to know that I was closer than all the experts and the only one to pick The Bills by double digits to win...kind of like a Price is Right moment ...closest to the actual score without going over. Btw, for those that can't wait for the next report card...Yuri is 2nd ITN in assists. What a night he had. For those who like quadrants, the double digit win should also help our NET ranking. If that doesn't make sense to you, check out the NET ranking post above. So let's see what happened this game..... Bold posting is from the original post in this thread. The team that shoots the best from the arc and rebounds best (no 2nd chances ) will probably win the game.... We matched them on rebounds ...32/31 ...2nd chance points 6 for each team...so no damage... and we crushed them on 3s...40.7% to 17.6%....this was the ball game. keep them under 65 pts... Close enough ....they scored some cheap points after the game was decided as we tried to seal up the the Yuri assist record. 47/38/75...with an emphasis on the 38%... This was a hit... 53 / 41 / 83... 41 was a hit because 1 less 3 and we would have fallen below 38...we made 1 extra FT and 3 extra 2s...extra 7 pts which we needed to balance some extra TOs TO 11 ... This was a miss ... 15 TOs...this resulted in 15 pts for BC ....Fortunately we were able to score 12 pts on only 10 TOs by BC...another concern was 10 stls ...way too high ...no matter for this game but we can't do that against Auburn. We need to bounce back on shooting ....We did Bottom line.... we shoot terrible against Belmont and we lose...we shoot great against BC and we win...I think the strategy is pretty clear going forward...... We shoot good ...we win...we shoot bad we lose. Since we are a good shooting team overall, the future looks bright.
  18. I have included a great article on Net Ranking....I think it is good for the novice as well as the seasoned fan who follows basketball carefully. You are technically correct ...the NCAA did get rid of the margin of victory in May of 2020. In the section below titled How Are Net Rankings Calculated?... I have bolded a line which refers margin of victory no longer being included. On the surface not a bad idea. BUT like everything else the NCAA does , they make things worse when they fix things especially non basketball things like tech data models. The reason I mentioned you were technically correct is because they didn't really delete margin of victory...they moved it and hid it AND made it worse. Now look a little farther down in the article to the section titled...Adjusted Net Efficiency...last line...again bolded by me. This section explains not only why margin of victory isn't gone (nor limited) but why it is now one of the key factors in the ranking. It is why dumb things happen....On Wed. before their loss to Arizona, Wyoming was 12th in the NET rankings. What a joke... a team that I didn't even have close to the top 100... was 12th in the NET rankings. Wed night they played a good team, Ariz who beat them....but the NCAA said no, they didn't beat WY ...they whupped them by 29 pts...emphasis on the 29pts. What happened next was very predictable ...after taking down the WY powerhouse... AZ becomes number 1 in the rankings. So for those that like to fool around with quadrants....better not forget the margin of victory...And for those posters who think the Bills season is over because of a couple of close losses...a couple of blowouts against LaSalle and Fordham and the NCAA says you might be Dancing. PS...The most important part of the article is at the end of the section which is titled...NET Rankings Explained...last few lines....again bolded... Translation of those lines...Want to see the NCAA pull a quarter out of your ear? What Are NET Rankings? Understanding College Basketball’s New Ranking System 0 Comments Estimated Read Time: 6 minutes See All Guides Published March 23, 2021 Even the most dedicated college basketball fans have probably wondered how college basketball teams are ranked. NCAA Division I men’s and women’s basketball each have their own 10-member selection committee responsible for selecting, seeding, and bracketing teams for the championship tournament. There is a lot of debate and voting involved. To assist in making these decisions, the NCAA created the NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET ranking system) in 2018, replacing the outdated Rating Percentage Index (RPI) system with a more sophisticated metric. What exactly are NET rankings? Read on for a complete overview of the NCAA Evaluation Tool, including its role in seeding March Madness. Plus, learn how you can use it to compare teams when betting on college basketball. NET Rankings Explained The NCAA Evaluation Tool is a ranking system for men’s and women’s college basketball teams, developed in partnership with the NCAA and Google Cloud. The NET uses a highly sophisticated algorithm the NCAA doesn’t share. However, NET rankings are adjusted daily during the college basketball season and displayed publicly on NCAA.com and NCAA.org. The NET is one of the sorting tools used by the selection committees to determine which teams receive at-large bids for March Madness. We wish we could say that NET rankings alone determined tournament seeding, but it’s not that simple. The NET is not designed to select and seed teams for the committee. Remember, teams that win their conference tournaments automatically qualify for the NCAA tournament. The remaining tournament bids are given to teams who the selection committee considers the best in the country. Many of them will have high NET rankings, but that isn’t a perfect predictor of a team making the tournament, nor is it necessarily an indication of how teams will be seeded. There will be teams left out with good NET rankings and others that squeak in with relatively poor rankings. NET Rankings vs. RPI Prior to adopting the NET ranking system, the NCAA had utilized the Rating Percentage Index, or RPI, since 1981. Widely criticized for not accounting for a teams’ margin of victory, the RPI was calculated based on winning percentage, strength of schedule, and opponents’ strength of schedule. In theory, RPI punished teams for playing weaker opponents, which isn’t entirely in the realm of control for teams in weaker conferences. As an attempt to overcome the shortfalls of the RPI, the NET considers multiple other factors. We’ll share as much info as we can about each of these in the next sections. How Are NET Rankings Calculated? The NCAA does not publicly share the exact formula it uses to calculate NET rankings. In fact, there is almost no part of the NET that can be calculated or reverse engineered. The proprietary algorithm is a tightly kept secret, but here’s what we do know: the NET has two main components – adjusted net efficiency and the team value index. The NCAA dropped three other components of the original NET formula before the 2020-2021 college basketball season. The new NET algorithm no longer uses winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage, and scoring margin. The NCAA confirmed it does not anticipate any further adjustments in the formula for several years. Let’s explore the remaining factors in as much detail as possible with the limited information provided. Adjusted Net Efficiency In basketball, net efficiency is a team’s offensive efficiency (points per possession) minus its defensive efficiency (opponent points per possession). Here’s the basic formula: To find adjusted net efficiency, the NCAA tweaks the above calculation to account for strength of opponent and game location – home, away, or neutral– across all games played. Exactly how the algorithm calculates this adjustment is somewhat of a mystery. The important thing to remember is that a given net efficiency value – say, 8.2 points per 100 possessions – rates higher against stronger competition than the same efficiency against weaker opponents. Equally, having a certain efficiency when playing on the road rates higher than accomplishing that same efficiency at home. Adjusted net efficiency is now the most heavily weighted part of the NET formula, so running up the score can have a significant effect on NET rankings. Team Value Index The Team Value Index (TVI) is the other “results-oriented” element of the NET. It’s designed to reward teams for beating other good teams. The Team Value Index only considers games against Division I opponents and is based on results. The algorithm factors in the opponent, location, and winner to produce a TVI score. Again, little information is shared about how TVI is actually calculated. Interestingly, strength of schedule is in some way part of both adjusted net efficiency and the Team Value Index, but its exact impact on each component is – you guessed it – a secret. What About the Quadrant System? Hoops diehards are probably wondering if the so-called Quadrant System is still in play with NET rankings. The NCAA still utilizes the Quadrant System for March Madness tournament selections and seeding. Essentially, at the end of the season, the NET sorts games into tiers, from Quadrant 1 at the top through Quadrant 4. The men’s and women’s Quadrant Systems differ slightly in that the men’s uses a weighted system to account for home, neutral site, and road games. The women’s system doesn’t differentiate based on where games are played and simply sorts teams into four quadrants based on NET ranking: Quad 1 (NET 1-25), Quad 2 (NET 26-50), Quad 3 (NET 51-100), and Quad 4 (NET 101+). Here’s a quick overview of the Division I men’s basketball Quadrant System, with the corresponding NET rankings for each quadrant displayed by location: Tier Home Game Neutral Site Game Road Game Quadrant 1 NET 1-30 NET 1-50 NET 1-75 Quadrant 2 NET 31-75 NET 51-100 NET 76-135 Quadrant 3 NET 76-160 NET 101-200 NET 136-240 Quadrant 4 NET 161+ NET 201+ NET 241+ Quad 1 wins make the biggest headlines, as they come against the highest caliber opponents. On the other end of the spectrum, Quad 4 games are the easiest on the schedule. A loss here could have devasting consequences for a team’s tournament aspirations. When looking at NCAA rankings, each team’s record will display its overall record, home record, away record, and neutral record, as well as its record in each of the four quadrants. Note that game results can shift between quadrants throughout the season depending on fluctuations of an opponent’s NET ranking. How to Use NET Rankings to Compare Teams There are 350 schools in Division I men’s college basketball and 354 in Division I women’s basketball. Part of what makes March Madness so chaotic is most teams must face opponents from outside of their conferences. There is simply no perfect way to compare two teams that may not have played each other before or even shared any common opponents in a given season. That said, NET rankings can provide some valuable insights for basketball bettors. Because the NET system rewards teams for beating quality opponents and considers adjusted net efficiency, NET rankings should give you some sense of how a team performs against other top competition. When comparing teams, we recommend looking at the number of Quadrant 1 wins and Quadrant 3 and 4 losses. A team with a good NET ranking but several Quad 3 and 4 losses may be prone to playing down to their opponent. Conversely, a team with a mediocre or even low NET ranking but a few Quad 1 wins may not be the most consistent but could have an upset in them. Sometimes, a team will have a much lower seeding than their NET ranking would imply, as was the case for both Loyola Chicago and Colgate in the 2021 NCAA men’s tournament and Oregon in the women’s tournament. The NCAA doesn’t provide any explanations for this, but an educated guess would be that such teams either played too many Quad 4 games or not enough Quad 1 games, or struggled in their recent performances. A Word of Warning Bracketology is complicated, as much an art as a science. Exactly how the NCAA utilizes its own evaluation tools and team sheets is convoluted and vague, perhaps even intentionally so. The NET is a complex analytical model, but it’s still just one part of the picture. Tournament seedings are not solely decided based on NET ranking. Interestingly, in 2021, the top four teams in the NET rankings (Gonzaga, Baylor, Illinois, and Michigan) all received a #1 seed from the men’s basketball committee. On the women’s side, only three of the top four squads in the NET rankings received a #1 seed – Stanford, UConn, and South Carolina. The Baylor Lady Bears were relegated to a #2 seed, with NC State receiving the final top seed. While the NET is a useful predictive metric, we must remind bettors that no single metric can perfectly foresee every outcome – that’s why we have to play the games. Similarly, despite spending millions on developing algorithms, the March Madness selection committee is ultimately still a human committee, and thus a flawed one. For all its high talk of “amateurism” when discussing its athletes, the NCAA is still run like a business. March Madness brings in over a billion dollars of revenue every year, and one has to wonder what impact that has on tournament selection. Your Source for College Basketball Betting Information Even with sophisticated ranking systems in play, college basketball can still be unpredictable. That’s all part of the fun. Be sure to check out our “How to Bet on Sports” section for more NCAA basketball betting advice. We provide all the information you need to make confident wagers and fill out your March Madness brackets. Have fun and enjoy the action out there!
  19. We need the 10 pt spread to max out our net rankings...
  20. They are combined %s...at large and auto bid. It is a sliding scale...as our chances to win the conference go up our at large chances go up too....as our chances for the auto bid drop then what you are seeing is mainly the at large bid. I did it this way because in the end , I want to know as well as most fans what are our chances to get into the Tourney. I really don't care whether it is an at large or an auto... just get in. Right now , as it did in the preseason forecast, it looks like a 2 bid conference with a chance that one of those 40% teams could come in and grab a 3rd bid. Based on the percentages ...SLU 60% and St. B 59% ...it looks like the conference title is a tossup right now. Please note there is no Davidson at this time... to low to be listed. I think the NCAA embarrasses itself buy putting out data too early that confuses its fans. If they don't have enough data to put out a realistic forecast then they should just wait till they do. Bottom line....We are still in the running for a Dance bid.
  21. Cold shooting last night was a game killer. If you want to find meaning in last night's game check out my post game analysis in the Bel spread thread. As promised in the Bel thread, I am going to list our chances to get a bid in the NCAA playoffs each thread as long as we have at least a 40% chance to make it. I am going to lead with that in this thread, in light of last night's loss and the " end of the world " scenario being painted by some posters. The reality is our overall chances were little affected by last night's loss. One of the things that is being lost in the discussions is the overall parity that is taking place in college basketball at least up until this point. While there will always be rankings and NET trackers, the difference in the actually numbers are much closer ...a 60th ranked team is much closer to a 40th ranked team than a 60 and 40 from the past few years....Let's see our chances.... Chance to Dance The Bills....60% St. B...........59% Day.............46% VCU............44% Rich.............41% To paraphrase Mark Twain...Reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated. ...Our numbers have gone done since the last thread from 61% to 60%. My calendar say December. Long way to go... Turning to the report card ... as expected, our offense numbers have declined but are still very good. Defensive numbers improved a little. And rebounding was much better. Maybe the team was reading our board. Let's see what the grades look like.... ....................SLU....................BC..........................SLU...........................BC .................................OFF...........................................................DEF............. PPG...............A.......................D............................C+................................A- FG%...............B+....................C+..........................C..................................C+ 3Pt%.............A-.......................A-..........................C+................................C FT%...............B+......................C-................................................................. Reb...............B+.......................C+...............................B+...........................A- OFF Rebs = total rebs...DEF Rebs = opp reb UP....Off....Rebs.......Def....PPG...3P% Down....Off...PPG...FG%...3P%...FT%......Def....none Team FTs... Top 100 Teams ITN FTM/gm....The Bills...1st FTA/gm....The Bills....4th FTM / 100 possessions...The Bills...1st FTA / Offensive play...The Bills........6th Top 100 ITN (In The Nation)/ gm SLU Assts...Collins...7th...dn Stls......Collins....46th....unch FG%.....Linssen...96th....dn BC None BC is an above average team (B- ) but a step down from the teams we have been playing. We remain at A-... This game will be a low scoring game featuring 3Pt shooting . The team that shoots the best from the arc and rebounds best (no 2nd chances ) will probably win the game. WWN2D2W... 47/38/75...with an emphasis on the 38%....Hold them to 33% from 3....Rebounds +4 for the Bills.....TO 11 ...This is important because they don't turn it over...There is no star we have to look out for... evenly spread scoring ...keep them under 65 pts. Bottom line...We need to bounce back on shooting ..don't need a great night of shooting just a normal Bills night. Rebound like we did against Bel...and keep TOs down. If we clip the 3pt wings of the Eagles, we will rebound to victory.
  22. Another tough loss because this was a very winnable game. Let's start with the projected slash which is the average of all Bills games leading up to tonight.....48/39/77...to make that slash we would have needed 3 more 2s...2 more 3s and 3 more FTs. That is a total of 15 pts we left on the table. What this means is ...had we had an average night we win by 10...had we had an off night we win by 5 . But instead we have a bad night and lose by 5. 3 more FTs and a couple of layups and we win the game We missed 13 layups....that's a lot of misses... ( 8-21) Are we a bad team?...No....Is the season over?....No...Do we have no chance to win the A-10?....No....Is the Dance bid gone? ...again NO. We had a bad night shooting...that cost us the game...it happens to all teams. We shot 60% from the FT line tonight ...about the same as the last few years when we were the worst FT shooting team ITN. Are posters here going to say we have reverted back and that we are now a bad shooting FT team?... That there has been no FT progress this year based on this one game? No one on this board believes that. And our regular shooting is still good too. The good news is the rebounding was good and even with terrible shooting we came within seconds of a win because of that. We also made some mistakes in the final minutes of this game as well as the last game... TOs , bad shot selection ...essentially closing the game out mistakes. The good news is , like the rebounds , this too can be fixed. Bottom line...Things could be worse...You could be the #20 AP poll ranked Florida Gators and lose to Tex Sou. a team that was 0-7 (a grade D team). In the history of college basketball a Southwestern conf (worst league) team has never beaten a ranked SEC team. The record until yesterday was 51-0...by the way, they whupped them 69-54 ...so it wasn't even close. The ultimate college basketball humiliation. I predict that U of F will get a Dance bid at the end of the season. They will get that bid because they will fix what went wrong. The Bills can do the same...the potential is there. It is up to Ford to meld and bring that potential out. You can't teach potential ...you either have it or you don't. The Bills have it...shooting ability, athleticism, balance and depth. It just has to gel. Just do it.
  23. I see all the nonsense going on with the Net Tracker...More craziness from the NCAA. Who hear believes that Davidson is the best team in the A-10?.... the team that will finish on top of the A-10....Does anyone other than the NCAA believe that? No ..The NCAA doesn't believe that...they say " the numbers aren't meaningful at this point because it is still early". Then why put them out.. I am writing this post in this thread because starting today and for the rest of the season, I will post the probability of the Bills making it to the Dance in every spread thread as long as the Bills have at least a 40% chance to make it to the Dance. You will not have to take a class in Quantum Physics or Advanced Calculus to figure it out. Chance 2 Dance The Bills....61% St. B..........57% Day............46% VCU............45% Rich............42 % Dav.............41% So right now I would say we are a 2 bid league. I listed the other A-10 teams that are above 40%. I was just going to list The Bills but if you want to see the other teams in future threads, let me know.
  24. Tough loss to UAB...If you need to know the why , then check my post game post on the spread thread. The good news is the loss has caused only minor damage as we remain at A-.. This is the 3rd game in a row where one of the key differences in the game is that our offense is better than the opponents even though the opponents numbers look good. I pointed out in the last 2 games, we gave up our edge by losing the rebound advantage...the results ...one close win in OT and one close loss on games we could have won by 7-9 pts. I will repeat that we are a very good team offensively but we can lose that edge if we lose the rebound war...We can't give lesser offensive teams extra chances to make shots. Of course, rebounds aren't the only reason we can lose a game or make it closer than it needs to be, but I think it is a major factor in the last 2 games and this one coming up. If you look at the report card below the offense is still doing well. The big change from last time is a serious drop in rebounds ...We had been at A and now have dropped to B & B+...While our offense was little affected, we had a drop in all the defensive categories...I attribute that in part to the weakening rebound numbers. Well now is a good time to get healthy in rebounding because Belmont is not a good rebounding team. If we lose this battle of the boards then it will be a bad indicator for future games. I am confident though it can be fixed because we have shown we can rebound in past games. Time to look at the report card. You will notice we no longer have straight A's...yes, because of rebounding...are you getting tired of hearing about this...I do it because rebounding is important. ..........................SLU...........................Bel..........................SLU..........................Bel .......................................OFF..............................................................DEF............. PPG..............A+.. 7th ITN...................B+............................C................................D+ FG%...............A-..................................B+............................C................................D+ 3Pt%.............A....................................B-.............................C.................................C- FT%...............A-........ .........................B+............................................. Reb...............B....................................D...............................B+..............................D OFF Rebs = total rebs...DEF Rebs = opp reb UP....Off....3P%.......Def....none Down....Off...Reb......Def....PPG...FG%...3P%...Reb Team FTs... Top 100 Teams ITN FTM....The Bills...1st FTA....The Bills....1st FTM / 100 possessions...The Bills...1st FTA / Offensive play...The Bills........1st Top 100 ITN (In The Nation)/ gm SLU Assts...Collins...5th...up Stls......Collins....46th....down FG%.....Linssen...91st...new 3P%...Hargrove....68th...new Bel Stls...Murphy...1st Assts...Murphy...42nd PPG...Muszynski...95th Blks....Muszynski...64th Murphy is not their top scorer but he is their most important player. He is similar to Yuri in that he leads in assists and steals. This game is going to be different than UAB where we faced a bunch of stealers and a barrage of TOs. Belmont doesn't standout in opp TOs or steals...just Murphy...Who ever Murphy guards will need glue on his hands and be able to make razor sharp passes. Muszynski is their other key player ..a 6 11 center who can score and block. He can do damage if not contained ...he can also grab rebounds if we leave him alone but he is not a rebound machine. WWN2D2W... With all this talk about rebounds and steals...let us not forget to play basketball ...here is the target slash....48/ 39/ 77.....Keep TOs to 11 ...we did that against one of the top opp TO teams ITN...UAB...We can do it again. Of course the elephant in the room is Rebs...win that battle by 4. Of course, their top scorer is Muszynski....but when he is busy, they will pass the ball to Sheppard and Richard. Hold their top 3 scorers to 34 pts....did I mention rebounding? Bottom line...Don't let Murphy take the ball away from you and get some boards. If we do what we are supposed to do against the Bruins, we won't have to bear another loss.
  25. Tough loss. We did pretty much what we needed to do to win...Pretty much but not all. From the original post in this thread ...WWN2D2W Our TO target is 11....We made 11...check 48 / 39 / 77.....49/42/ 73 ...we were off by 1 FT....check we are one of the better 3P shooting teams ...they are one of the worst defending the 3...we need that 38% from the arc ....That should have read 39% from the projected slash...no matter... we made 42%...check Looks pretty good so far..so what went wrong? Out rebound them ...This was an issue in the last game with BSU ...we are clearly the better offensive team. But if we let them out rebound us , they get 2nd and 3rd chances and we lose our offensive edge. Out rebound them by 4+...And this was it...a fail that cost us the game...They out rebounded us and like I said in this phrase ...we lost our offensive advantage. We shot a 49% FG %...They shot 48.4% FG% ...They made 7 extra shots on 15 extra FGA...many of those were on 2nd chance shots as a result of snagging extra rebounds. Bottom line....We were leading the with 6:07 left in the game. 2 1/2 mins later we were down 9. We played winning basketball for 37 1/2 mins. The problem was it was a 40 min game. I stand by my original statement... we are the better team...but we gave them a 2nd chance (rebound) to win.
×
×
  • Create New...