2022-2023 B1G Basketball Thread

[FearlessF]

These commentators keep talking about how we couldn't stay with them on defense, I don't see our D as the problem gave up 63 points on 39% shooting.  No reason we don't score a minimum of 75 on these guys, our problem was just bricking wide open 3s all night long.

Edey should have scored 50

no plan and no patience

[medinabuckeye1]

I mean, it kind of is. Purdue has Edey, who is a great college player and maybe a second round NBA draft pick. And other than that, not a whole lot.

Are you actually arguing that Fairlane Dickinson (sp?) Is more talented than Purdue?

[bayareabadger]

FDU didn't even win their conference. They added a bunch of division 2 schools just to maintain. And half their conference was ineligible, because you have to be division 1 for like 4 years to be eligible. I think they finished in 4th, and then lost in their conference championship?

This is a loss that literally cannot ever be matched in the NCAA tournament. FDU has to be the worst team to ever make it

I think you have to call them the worst team to ever win a game. They might not even be the worst team in this tournament.

Texas Southern finished up eighth in the SWAC, six games below .500, and was in the field this year

[ELA]

I think you have to call them the worst team to ever win a game. They might not even be the worst team in this tournament.

Texas Southern finished up eighth in the SWAC, six games below .500, and was in the field this year

I believe, prior to this win FDU was still ranked behind them in KenPom.  The NEC is essentially a D2 conference, and FDU didn't even win it.  Even if not, it was close.

EDIT; Looked it up, going into the tournament Texas Southern was #285, FDU was #312.  I'd be curious if any team was ranked as low as #312 in KenPom and got a bid

[bayareabadger]

I believe, prior to this win FDU was still ranked behind them in KenPom.  The NEC is essentially a D2 conference, and FDU didn't even win it.  Even if not, it was close.

EDIT; Looked it up, going into the tournament Texas Southern was #285, FDU was #312.  I'd be curious if any team was ranked as low as #312 in KenPom and got a bid

Man, that's impressive as hell. 

Honestly more impressive that a team that went 7-11 in the SWAC and was at 285. 

[ELA]

Man, that's impressive as hell.

Honestly more impressive that a team that went 7-11 in the SWAC and was at 285.

Texas Southern usually schedules their ass off, so I'm guessing that held their ranking off.  IIRC there was one year they started 2-9, after playing 9 P5 road games

[bayareabadger]

This has also convinced me the NETs blind spot is bad teams who get good numbers while doing poorly in a good conference.  Neither WVU or ISU looked like a tournament team

I'd be interested if there was some math on this. I usually feel like taking many patterns from the tournament is just chasing one's tail. (Also, are you talking the NET rankings themselves, or the way we rank NET )

ISU is interesting because they were a half-team that ran into another half-team. And their good defense did well capping Pitt's good offense, but their bad offense play like hot smoldering trash. WVU-Maryland was a tossup by the numbers and ended up playing out as such. Maryland is interesting because it's a good stats, so-so resume team. 

[ELA]

Texas Southern usually schedules their ass off, so I'm guessing that held their ranking off.  IIRC there was one year they started 2-9, after playing 9 P5 road games

This year they had the #4 non-con SOS

They played Houston, Kansas, Auburn, Texas Tech, Wichita State and San Francisco on the road, plus Arizona State and Oral Roberts on neutral courts.  So that will hold your rating up.

I'm also now interested in looking at the 3 harder non-conference schedules, because, I'm guessing it's a situation where there other couple games were so easy it REALLY dragged them down

[ELA]

I'd be interested if there was some math on this. I usually feel like taking many patterns from the tournament is just chasing one's tail. (Also, are you talking the NET rankings themselves, or the way we rank NET )

Yeah, taking NCAA tournament sample size is useless.  It's probably mostly anecdotal, but it certainly seems like the NET is too heavily reliant on predictive metrics, because once you get into conference play in the Big Ten or Big XII the past couple years, so long as you don't get blown out, your spot is fairly safe.

Granted my larger problem is how they use NET as a sorting tool for determining quality wins/losses, into defined buckets.  A team rises one spot, suddenly its a Quad 1 win, they fall one spot, its now a Quad 3 loss.  I do that mock bracket that is 2/3 SOR, 1/3 KenPom, and I think it does a hell of a better job, and doesn't boost or drop teams, based on these harshly defined buckets.  I hate that we tried to get more advanced, and then still decided to hyper analyze specific results.  Those results are baked in.  OK, you have a Quad 4 loss.  I don't think you should be killed for that anymore than it already hurts your SOR/KenPom ratings

[MarqHusker]

Kent St. with a cute little haircut bond.   

[ELA]

Kent St. with a cute little haircut bond. 

I initially had Kent State here, but once Michigan beat the best team in the MAC (Toledo), I figured Indiana was solid.

TJD always looks surprised that he's so good

[Kris60]

Who does SunDevilFroggy cheer for in this ASU-TCU game?

[MrNubbz]

The way trains are derailing he prolly hasn't given it much thought

[ELA]

The way trains are derailing he prolly hasn't given it much thought

Is that an unintended Purdue dig?