showthebill Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Good write-up on the bills http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7606709/an-early-look-ncaa-tournament-sleeper-teams-ncb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccarthyirish7 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Good write-up on the bills http://insider.espn....eeper-teams-ncb Do you mind pasting article in? I don't have Insider access. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Last week the NCAA was good enough to host me and about 20 other members of the media at its annual mock selection exercise for the Division I men's tournament. Going through the mock selection gave me a greater appreciation for how the real selection committee goes about its work. It turns out when you're comparing dozens of teams to each other and you have a limited amount of time to do so, something as simple as "good wins" really does matter. And "bad losses" sure don't help. But are there teams that are better than they appear under the trusty old good-win/bad-loss test? Absolutely. I've picked five. The ground rules here are simple. These are teams that combine two characteristics: 1) They are not currently ranked in the top 25 in either major poll, and 2) they are really good at basketball. Saint Louis Billikens It's easy to see why the Billikens are off the radar to pollsters, fans -- really, everyone. It's not simply that Rick Majerus' team hasn't beaten "anyone," as the saying goes. SLU's PR issues go deeper than that: It hasn't played anyone, period. Aside from a game in December against SWAC member Alabama State (current RPI No. 308), the Billikens' entire schedule from November to present day has been a remarkably thorough and intensive investigation of Division I's midsection. Their "best" win would probably be their 77-64 victory at home over Washington before Thanksgiving, and that, to say the least, will not exactly wow the committee. But here's the thing: Saint Louis can only play the opponents put in front of it, and it has done so very, very well. This is easily the best defense in the A-10, one that takes care of its defensive glass but also forces opponents to cough up the ball. (Somewhat unusual combination, that.) Joe Lunardi's latest projection pegs SLU as a No. 8 seed. If you're John Calipari or Jim Boeheim right now, you have to be thinking the last thing you need in the round of 32 is to run across a renowned defensive thinker like Majerus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenROAR Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Early look at NCAA tourney sleepers Last week the NCAA was good enough to host me and about 20 other members of the media at its annual mock selection exercise for the Division I men's tournament. Going through the mock selection gave me a greater appreciation for how the real selection committee goes about its work. It turns out when you're comparing dozens of teams to each other and you have a limited amount of time to do so, something as simple as "good wins" really does matter. And "bad losses" sure don't help. But are there teams that are better than they appear under the trusty old good-win/bad-loss test? Absolutely. I've picked five. The ground rules here are simple. These are teams that combine two characteristics: 1) They are not currently ranked in the top 25 in either major poll, and 2) they are really good at basketball. Saint Louis Billikens It's easy to see why the Billikens are off the radar to pollsters, fans -- really, everyone. It's not simply that Rick Majerus' team hasn't beaten "anyone," as the saying goes. SLU's PR issues go deeper than that: It hasn't played anyone, period. Aside from a game in December against SWAC member Alabama State (current RPI No. 308), the Billikens' entire schedule from November to present day has been a remarkably thorough and intensive investigation of Division I's midsection. Their "best" win would probably be their 77-64 victory at home over Washington before Thanksgiving, and that, to say the least, will not exactly wow the committee. But here's the thing: Saint Louis can only play the opponents put in front of it, and it has done so very, very well. This is easily the best defense in the A-10, one that takes care of its defensive glass but also forces opponents to cough up the ball. (Somewhat unusual combination, that.) Joe Lunardi's latest projection pegs SLU as a No. 8 seed. If you're John Calipari or Jim Boeheim right now, you have to be thinking the last thing you need in the round of 32 is to run across a renowned defensive thinker like Majerus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenbill Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Thanks for posting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Thanks for posting it. -yep, thanks!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 If they really look deep enough, the only two bad losses we have are to LMU and UMass. We should never have played LMU. The game was unnecessary especially after 9 days on the road. UMass? I don't know why that went so bad, other than they shot lights out. Maybe the Temple game because it was at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 If they really look deep enough, the only two bad losses we have are to LMU and UMass. We should never have played LMU. The game was unnecessary especially after 9 days on the road. UMass? I don't know why that went so bad, other than they shot lights out. Maybe the Temple game because it was at home. UMass on the road, and Temple? Are you kidding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 If they really look deep enough, the only two bad losses we have are to LMU and UMass. We should never have played LMU. The game was unnecessary especially after 9 days on the road. UMass? I don't know why that went so bad, other than they shot lights out. Maybe the Temple game because it was at home. Hindsight is 20/20... The reality is that we don't have any elite scorers. We don't have Erwin Claggett consistently swishing awkward falling sideways 3s off the dribble, we don't have Larry Hughes breaking down defenders at will. If we're not hitting open shots, and our opposition is hitting the difficult contested ones, we're going to lose. We could make the Elite 8 and we could lose in the first round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 If they really look deep enough, the only two bad losses we have are to LMU and UMass. We should never have played LMU. The game was unnecessary especially after 9 days on the road. UMass? I don't know why that went so bad, other than they shot lights out. Maybe the Temple game because it was at home. -i don't think losing to top 100 rpi teams on the road are bad losses and neither is 14rpi at home Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 -i don't think losing to top 100 rpi teams on the road are bad losses and neither is 14rpi at home BCS bias. Were you expecting something different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 No bad losses for SLU....LMU (road) = C+...UMass (road) = B ....Dayt (road) =B ..Tem (home) = A-...NM (road) = A+ As for the article...I liked what they had to say on the Bills. I agreed with 3 teams they picked. SLU, Cal & Memphis....I disagreed with the other 2...Zags and Drexel....I would have gone with K-St. and Tex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Alright, maybe I over reacted to the losses. But you have to admit that loss to LMU two days after we slip into the rankings was a killer. I really think had we won that one we'd have stood a good chance of still being ranked to this day. The L to UNM at the Pit would not have hurt as bad nor the L at Dayton one game later. But I like the PD's column on Humans v Computers. Big Brother knows all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Agree- like it or not that LMU loss has haunted us all season. The Temple game at home was a game we should have won as the zebras were protecting Temple and controlled the game's outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Agree- like it or not that LMU loss has haunted us all season. The Temple game at home was a game we should have won as the zebras were protecting Temple and controlled the game's outcome. When Temple played X, ESPN said that Temple's "Good wins" were against us and Duke. What say you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 When Temple played X, ESPN said that Temple's "Good wins" were against us and Duke. What say you? Didn't Temple beat Wichita St, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Didn't Temple beat Wichita St, too? Yes, 78-74 at a neutral site (Puerto Rico). Coincidentally, the Temple-X game was the same night the Shockers went into Omaha and laid the wood on Creighton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 It should have been a good "loss" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NextYearBill Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 new bracket out. Duke in 2nd round. http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMDG Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 new bracket out. Duke in 2nd round. http://espn.go.com/m...ll/bracketologyRevenge for 12/11/11. I like it. Duke is VERY beatable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo027 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 As long as we're not in UK's pod in Louisville, which is the absolute worst draw possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMDG Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 this bracket would also give us the opportunity to beat mizzou to be the first 8-seed to make the final four Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperdeckKid Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Duke in Greensboro is not appealing to me at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMDG Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Duke in Greensboro is not appealing to me at allsure there'd be some cameron crazies there, but everyone knows, duke people aren't from NC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kappy96 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Would really like to see us play our way down to a 6 seed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.