Several thoughts
-
@DCHawker The polls aren’t seeding the tournament teams. They are meaningless in the big scope of things. To “merit” moving up in the poll, you simply win when the games, while the teams ahead of you lose. That’s the rule they use, even though there are several team’s resumes that might look better. It would be funny if we just kept winning ugly game after game, imo. Butt ugly w after w- it would drive people up a wall…lol.
-
@KUSTEVE That’s the 2011-12 season you just described. KU didn’t win pretty and heavily relied on bad ball to keep guys out of foul trouble.
-
-
@BeddieKU23 said:
I love Vick, he’s been really good for most of the year. Lately he hasn’t been as great but today he had some great hustle plays as you pointed out. I think he struggles offensively to figure out when he should drive or shoot. He’s still getting comfortable with this team. Defense is still a big work in progress as we saw yet again today. He’s only going to get better
If Vick and Bragg can consistently play better I think this is a FF team. Now, can they be a little less loss on D before the NCAAT? Time will tell but getting minutes should help.
-
Nothing personal but you are the stereotype of the expression…the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
You complain about not playing anybody but if you look at all the other teams’ schedules you will find the same pattern. There is only a limited number of elite teams and they don’t normally play each other in pre-season except for a limited number of tournaments. The best way to determine the toughness of schedule is to look at the record against top 50 teams and the strength of schedule. According to Sagarin who lists both, here are a few…
- Kentucky, 3-2, 31
- Duke, 3-4, 42
- Villanova, 5-1, 14
- Baylor, 7-1, 6
- UCLA, 3-1, 78
- West Virginia, 4-1, 145
- Gonzaga, 4-0, 95
- Kansas, 6-1, 26
Keep in mind that after Gonzaga win over Saint Mary’s its SOS went up from the mid 200s to 95; likewise, had Indiana not lost 6 games, KU’s SOS would be in the single digits. Keep in mind that all of KU’s wins in conference are against top 50 teams…actually top 30s.
Obviously when taken in isolation, numbers do not look as good; however, when taken in context and compared to other top teams that you say are better, KU’s numbers look pretty damn good, wouldn’t you agree.
-
@JayHawkFanToo It’s not green grass, brown grass or chartreuse grass… I think we’re talking past one another. You are clearly inferring criticism in my comments. I’m not being critical re the schedule. We typically have one of the toughest non-conf schedules year in and year out - and play 2-3 top teams. Just hasn’t played out that way this year.
You can slice and dice it any number of ways. If you want to use the Sagarin ratings, I would note that we’ve played the (tied for) fewest top 25 of any of those teams - just 2. Louisville, not listed above, has played 8 such games; Villanova 5. If you look at RPI, we’ve only have 4 top 50 wins - Duke at 15, TCU is next highest and then Nebraska (of all things). This year, so far, we simply don’t have as many high quality wins as other teams (or that we typically do at this time). Our overall SOS is mostly a product of the fact that we haven’t played any really bad teams - only 2 in the 200s.
And, it is simply a statement of fact that we haven’t played ISU, WVU or Baylor yet - either at home or on the road.
Our overall schedule strength - and opportunity for high quality Ws - will obviously change in the next two weeks.
Again, we’ve beaten every team we’ve played since the first game - that’s all we can do; can’t control how other teams play. My point and only point is that IMO, there are at least 3 others teams that have better overall resumes at this point than we do - and that if we are #1 this week, which seems likely, it will be more a product of the fact that we were the last to lose, rather than relative merits of each team’s resume…
-
Again, I used the top 50 because it is more consistent than the top 25 which is way too inconsistent; when KU played Indiana it was a top 5 team and now it is not even in the top 25; the top 50 change places but don’t change that much.
If you look at the resumes I posted, you could say that Baylor and maybe Villanova have better resumes but Baylor has a bad loss at WVU and by that I mean a 21 point pasting while KU’s loss was a 4 point OT loss to the team that went on to be #1… If you want to look at joke schedules, look at Gonzaga. while they have played rankled team Iowa State (2 point win) and Arizona, the rest of the team have been dogs perhaps for the last game against overrated Saint Mary’s and its strength of schedule went from the mid 200’s to its current 95.
My question is…with which team would you have traded schedules? Like I indicated, had Indiana not gone into the crapper, KU’s SOS is in single digits and we are not even having this conversation…and it would have had nothing to do with KU doing anything different, right My point is that team’s records do not depend uniquely on what they do but also on what the team they have played do and so on. All things considered I am as happy as I can be with KU’s record and I know the team is not even close to having peaked and will only get better. That’s all.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Again, we seem to be talking past one another. I wasn’t and am not suggesting we trade schedules with anyone. And, I’m not complaining about KU’s schedule or our record.
Again, my only point is that while we likely will be #1 tomorrow, that is more a product of being the team that has gone the longest without a loss (excepting Gonzaga), rather than on the overall resume AT THIS POINT.
I’m not at all suggesting that Baylor is better than us, but they unequivocally have more quality Ws at this point - Louisville, Oregon, Xavier and ISU and MSU. So does Villanova - Purdue (away), Notre Dame, Creighton and Xavier. I didn’t mention Gonzaga - you did - but in addition to the win against a perhaps overrated St. Mary’s, they’ve also beaten Arizona, Florida, and ISU. The other team in the conversation is UCLA. They’ve played a weak schedule overall, and have only one quality W, but it is arguably the single best win of the year - UK at Rupp (which, of course, we can and will match…).
As to losses, you characterize Baylor’s as a bad one because of the margin, but they lost to a really good team on the road - and, we know from direct experience that double digit losses in Morgantown can be expected. I don’t think that is a worse loss than a neutral court loss to an IU team that has turned out to be mediocre. Villanova’s only loss was to a very good Butler team on the road. UCLA’s only loss was by 2 to a full strength Oregon. Gonzaga of course doesn’t have a blemish, but despite more quality wins, because they play so many teams with rankings in the 200s ad 300s, I don’t think they rate.
Now, 2 weeks from now, when we’ve beaten UK, WVU, Baylor and ISU, we will unequivocally have the best resume in the country. We simply do not now…
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 very true, our non conference SOS will improve after we go to Lexington, UK has the same trouble with the SEC looking like a bigger joke than the B12. I would still bet we end up in KC if we win the big 12.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 Great post. I do think we chase a moving target. Indiana was a top 10-12 team when we played them, Duke was top 3, and we have KY coming up. So if the critique about SOS is scheduling, I dont know if we can fault Self, other than that silly beat-up preseason ritual of blowing ESU, PittSt, or FHSU’s ships clean out of the harbor, and replace them with more legitimate D1 foes. I think Self tries to balance the “confidence builder-cupcakes” vs some “name” foes in the nonconf.
I think what you said is spot on, but we see that the rankings truly is a sort of moving target. Take Baylor: some were shocked they got to be ranked #1, but then there is those 5 x top35 Ws, so the polls seemed to reflect that in their ranking.
The biggest question of all for Bill Self teams are if we are peaking by early March, have we addressed some weaknesses by then? Are we a better product for the Tourney seeding, which is where all these rankings rollercoasters really start to matter…
-
@DCHawker said:
@JayHawkFanToo … And, I’m not complaining about KU’s schedule or our record.
This is what you wrote:
Who have we beaten? Duke, but without their bigs and they’ve now lost 4 games. No one else. No of the other top teams in the B12.
It sure sounds like complaining to me…never mind, we have reached an impasse and we should just leave it at that.
-
@JayHawkFanToo It’s not a complaint - it’s a factual observation…
-
Yep. I don’t think one can really say KU has beet a S16 caliber team. This team will be harshly tested over the next two weeks.
-
@DCHawker you are right. The Indiana loss is not looking good right now. I dont think our expectations are misplaced. We have three starters and two main reserves from an elite eight team that was playing at a championship level. We have just as much, if not more, talent than everyone in our conference. Yes its hard to win on the road, but K state, Tech, and Iowa State do not have any distinct advantage over us. Tommorow night would be a great time for our guys to start playing like we know they are capable of.
-
I agree with all the pessimism. The loss to Okla St was simply unacceptable. Woe is us.
-
KU is dealing with a short bench, a post position that has no depth and production beyond Lucas, and has struggled to beat the teams sitting 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 10th in the league.
Basically KU has struggled to put away the bottom half of the league and now gets the top half of the league along with Kentucky thrown in there.
Combine the way KU is playing right now, the schedule KU has coming up over the next 7 games (3-4 is a legitimate possibility with the way KU is playing right now), the Big 12 being down (the Big 12 will be a 4-5 bid league this year), and KU’s nonconference schedule rating tumbling as Indiana and Duke keep cratering and you get the possibility of KU not getting to go though Tulsa/KC looks like a real possibility right now.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 but I just get the feeling that any game now things are going to start looking better. The short bench doesnt help, but that isnt causing the issues at hand. To me, it looks like our guys are saving their energy to play offense. I don’t think any of them are that slow and incapable of putting together consecutive stops.
There was a discussion earlier about Nova and Duke and their depth. Basically, those teams had one more sub than us. But in crunch time who played? That’s right, the starters. Is one more man really that significant though? I doubt it. If anything, the shorter practice times and other things Self said they were doing will counteract guys playing an extra two or three minutes per game. So I don’t think the short bench is too much to worry about because we need as much cohesion as possible just like the 2012 team. The real issue is bench production.
-
Why do you think the Big 12 is down? The conference is as strong as it has ever been…
According to Pomeroy:
3 teams in the top 10, 4 in the top 25 including WVU at #2
8 teams or 80% of the Conference teams ranked in the top 35
According to Sagarin:
3 teams in the top 11, 4 in the top 25 including WVU at #1
8 teams or 80% of the Conference teams ranked in the top 34
According to Keneth Massey, the Big 12 is still ranked the #1 Confernced followed by the ACC.
The most recent Bracketology has the conference with 6 teams and does not even include KSU which is currently ranked #25. Other sites have the conference with 7 teams.
No other conference has the top to bottom numbers the Big 12 has.
-
@HawkChamp The short bench is causing issues because Mason is playing 35 mpg and Graham is playing 34 mpg. Those numbers are only going to increase which means those 2 can’t rest and conserve energy to play defense.
We’ve already seen Graham’s shooting suffer this year and his tired legs won’t go away this year. Mason’s shooting won’t continue either playing 35+ mpg either.
KU’s offense will not keep up with this pace unless Self starts forcing Lightfoot and Coleby into the line up more in a traditional 3 out 2 in line up to give Mason and Graham more rest to keep their legs fresher.
-
@JayHawkFanToo The Big 12 does not get 7 teams in. Not even close. The selection committee still values RPI above all else (there is no disputing this one). The Big 12 ends up with 4-5 at large caliber teams. Baylor (1), Kansas (5), West Virginia (23), TCU (25), ISU (47), OSU (52), and KSU (53) are the only teams in at large range. OSU isn’t getting in and unless ISU picks up their play, they won’t get in either. KSU is also down low enough that an at large isn’t guaranteed for them either.
The Big 12 has 3 good teams, 4-5 average teams, and 2-3 bad teams. The Big 12 is down from years past.
I don’t care what Sagarin says, the ACC is better top to bottom. The Big 12 might be the second best league (Big 12 and Big East are neck and neck to me), but that isn’t saying much because the B10 is way down this year and the PAC 12 and SEC have no depth beyond the top 3-4 teams in each league.
This is going to be a year with a lot of mid majors making the tournament.
-
The NCAA has indicated it uses the RPI as one of many tools to determine the tournament field; it is also on record as saying it also uses two computerized methods…Sagaring and Pomeroy. The NCAA just announced it will be reviewing the RPI and plans to implement the changes for the 2017-2018 season; it has invited two individuals to make presentations and propose changes to the RPI…do you wantv to make a guess who they invited? Jeff Sagarin and Ken Pomeroy.
The RPI was never intended to be used the way it is; in its present form, it can lower the RPI of a team for beating a team with a low RPI and increase the RPI of a team that loses to a team with high RPI. In other words, KU’s RPI can go up by losing to WVU or Baylor and go down by beating Texas or Oklahoma in conference play…it does not make any sense and this is why the other systems are much better since this condition is not allowed.
I still think the conference gets in at least 6 and possibly 7 teams. Since you think it only gets 4-5, how about a little friendly wager? Let’s call 5 a push, less than 5, you win, more than 5, I win…what say you?
-
@JayHawkFanToo The NCAA can say whatever BS they want to. They weight the RPI far heavier than anything else. It’s the only reason why 8 and 9 loss KU teams entering the tournament got 2 seeds when we lost to Stanford and a 7th seeded WSU team that was rated top 15-20 in the polls and computer rankings most of that year. Those were KU teams that should’ve been 3-4 seeds at best.
If you want to bet, don’t try and stack the odds in your favor that much and expect anyone to bite.
-
The numbers area based on what each of us predicted you said 4-5, I said 6-7 and I though it would be fair to have a push/tie number. Let’s eliminate the tie and call it 5.5; 5 or less you win, 6 or more I win.
Considering no conference has ever sent more than 70% of its teams, in our case 7 teams, realistically I only have 2 numbers, 6 and 7; you, on the other hand, have 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, and each of those numbers has a higher probability than my numbers…fair enough?
-
I don’t think any team in the country has a tougher stretch coming up then KU does. @ West Virginia, @ Kentucky and home vs Baylor in a 8 day stretch. Imagine if KU wins all three games, there would be no denying that KU is the #1 team in the country then.
The Next 10 games will shape this team for better or worse. We will truly see how good these guys are. 6 road games, hostile environments, emotionally charged up opponents and fans. We will see how much Heart Frank, Devonte, Josh, Landen, Svi, Carlton, Legerald have. This is what College Basketball is all about right here.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 6 teams at least. The Big 3, along with Texas Tech, the Grape Apes, and the Clones.
