However, Jdawg43 gets the final say and he says only 4 A10 teams are getting in. Book it.xlgman wrote:Dancecard has 6 A10 teams comfortably in right now. The opportunities for teams to "steal" bids is rapidly diminishing.
Polls/Bracketology
Looks like Lunardi finally updated the brackets....
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Us at 8 vs Colorado in Buffalo
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Us at 8 vs Colorado in Buffalo
Agree - the average ranking of non-con and conf opponents is around 192 out of 351 teams, so slightly below average. 3 games against top 50, 5 games against bottom 50. 8 against top 100. 13 against bottom 100.NilesGold wrote:Did you reference something for this, or are you just going off your gut instinct? I haven't seen any stat that would lead me to believe UMass' opponents are any worse than average 3pt shooting teams. If you think about it, it makes sense that UMass is good at defending the 3pt line. It starts with the fact that DK seems to want the players to crowd opposing players at the perimeter, even to a fault, case in point the last play vs STL. Gordon is an excellent defender and DK seems to like having him guard the other team's best shooter. Putney is also very good at defending jump shooters, not so much at defending when they drive to the hoop.xlgman wrote:We've played very few good 3PT shooting teams this year and a lot of terrible 3PT shooting teams.
Not arguing we aren't good at defending the arc (offset by giving up a lot of penetration), but I think our numbers are inflated by the fact that we haven't faced that many great shooting teams this year. Good defensive teams should make average offensive teams look bad - it doesn't mean we're great at it.
It's a very difficult stat to get solid, fair data on. So it sucks.
Do you think we are doing a good job defending the three when you watch the games? That's what counts.
I don't think it's a particular strength or a particular weakness. I think in general, we probably play too close on the perimeter - limiting the three but allowing fairly easy penetration. Chaz in particular gets blown by all the time.
Do you think we are doing a good job defending the three when you watch the games? That's what counts.
I don't think it's a particular strength or a particular weakness. I think in general, we probably play too close on the perimeter - limiting the three but allowing fairly easy penetration. Chaz in particular gets blown by all the time.
It's about the body of work. And the teams I referenced can't compete with our resume. The games we played in November and December count.gui98 wrote:Chris, I think its pretty basic why Lunardi has us where he does. 8-6 since Jan 18, and haven't looked great doing it. He watched the URI game last night and thought, these guys look like an 8 seed.
Chris, you seem to follow the braketology stuff really closely, what's your thought on Dayton vs SJU, in terms of which team with a loss today would be in the best position to still make the tourney? I thought it was SJU, but they've already lost two straight, while Dayton has won 10 of their last 11. The more A10 teams in the tourney the better as far as I'm concerned, screw all of our bubble OOC opponents.
Totally with you on that, I just think with Lunardi its more political in terms of his analysis. If we dominated URI, I think he would have had us as a 7, which is where I think we are at wether we win or lose tonight.Chris20 wrote:It's about the body of work. And the teams I referenced can't compete with our resume. The games we played in November and December count.gui98 wrote:Chris, I think its pretty basic why Lunardi has us where he does. 8-6 since Jan 18, and haven't looked great doing it. He watched the URI game last night and thought, these guys look like an 8 seed.
In any event, I will also use this opportunity to thank you for all the great analysis and insight you gave the board this season, I hope to be able to buy you a beer sometime as gratitude.
"I guess your right, a hangover is better than a madhouse".
- Henry "Hank" Chinaski
- Henry "Hank" Chinaski
Lunardi can take his seed list and shove it. Most people in the know have us as a 7, and I've seen we're a 6 in USA TODAY. If they have us as a 6 and Lunardi as an 8, I think we're a solid 7 right now.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... y/6228743/
And I'm telling you, this guy Patrick Stevens is money. He has us as a 6 playing the Minnesota/SMU winner in Raleigh. Only downside is we'd play Duke if we won.
http://www.syracuse.com/patrick-stevens ... tanfo.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... y/6228743/
And I'm telling you, this guy Patrick Stevens is money. He has us as a 6 playing the Minnesota/SMU winner in Raleigh. Only downside is we'd play Duke if we won.
http://www.syracuse.com/patrick-stevens ... tanfo.html
-
Camby4Life
- Senior
- Posts: 1707
- Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:00 am
- Location: South Boston
I still think this is the year that 8/9 isn't the end of the world. There are really only 2 dominant 1 seeds right now, Florida and Arizona, I still think Wichita st is legit, but I'm in the minority. The 4th 1 seed will be a glorified 2 seed, the way they are playing right now Louisville might now have the inside track or Virginia or even Wisconsin. So it would suck to fall back to an 8/9, but let's see what the bracket looks like before we decide it's a bad draw.69MG wrote:^ Almost anything is better than an 8 or 9. The winner of that game plays a #1. I would rather be a 7 or 10 than an 8 or 9. 6 would be great.