Jump to content

ajb5856

Recruiting DB
  • Content count

    2,503
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

ajb5856 last won the day on December 19 2017

ajb5856 had the most liked content!

About ajb5856

  • Rank
    All-American

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,118 profile views
  1. Selection Committee Games of Interest

    I know that was the last update up there but during the Syracuse-UNC broadcast they threw up a graphic with the last four in and first four out and we were no longer in the first four out. He had (at the time) UCLA, USC, Penn State, Washington. Of course that was before PSU went down but I was thrown off that he had switched things up without an official update of his bracket on espn.
  2. Selection Committee Games of Interest

    The other night I think I was watching Oregon play and Bill Walton said that 9 PAC-12 teams deserved a bid. I know he's way out there but he was serious and he actually said those words.
  3. One thing I really didn't like about listening to Rasmussen talk about the quadrants is he kept talking about wins away from home. And then he would tout that a certain team had most of their road wins being tier 1. Doesn't make sense because some of those are probably tier 1 because of the fact that they were on the road. It's like he was saying signature win like a 1-25 but then was adding to it that it was also on the road. No. They were probably top 75 and those are already accounted for within the tier system. No need to give double credit.
  4. https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2017-12-05/ncaa-selection-committee-adjusts-team-sheets-emphasizing
  5. I dont disagree. RPI isn't the best tool there is. What I don't know is if these quadrants are being used formally or just kind of to sort teams and glance at wins in a different manner. In the past, when throwing out comparisons between teams during games/bracketology shows/etc they would put up random records and top wins sometimes using top 25, top 50, top 75, or top 100.
  6. I think it makes sense. The thought is to give more value to road/neutral wins. They used to just say what teams' records were against top 50, top 100, etc. but this way you're giving more value for beating Michigan on the road or neutral site vs at home. Let's be honest if we beat Michigan at home it's not the same as another team going to Michigan and winning. In the past those two wins would simply be tabbed top 50 wins on the sheet. Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus.
  7. But it's not updated to include our latest win. When I was on there earlier there were 93 total brackets and we were in 1. Now there are 94 and we were in that 94th bc you're right we're in 2 total. That update was at 8:35 pm. Will be interesting to see everyone's perception as we keep tallying wins.
  8. We've got 3 road games left starting tonight. Currently, we sit around RPI 65. How big of a boost do we anticipate from any one road win considering for RPI purposes a road win equals 1.4 and a home win is only 0.6? Definitely need to avoid the bad losses but the majority of the NCAA discussion seems to be around Nebraska's lack of quality wins. If we get our RPI into the low 50s, maybe high 40s maybe that does the trick? The index as a whole takes into account who you beat, where you beat them, and then basically your SOS with opponents winning percentage and opponents opponents winning percentage. If you lack quality wins, but also avoid bad losses, and stack yourself favorably in the RPI, doesn't that speak to your overall winning ability with regard to overall toughness of schedule you played? Seems like theres a lack of 'opportunities' in quality wins but our best chances may lie in notching these road victories.
  9. I'm in the camp that if we get the 4 seed we should just make the Big Ten tourney championship game and lock things up. We win enough down the stretch to get the 4 seed then we still end up waiting around wondering and depending on what everyone else does. As some have mentioned, that 4/5 game would then be huge. Get there and lose that one and we're left hoping. Win that one we're pretty much good. Get to the 'ship and our bid is sealed win or lose.
  10. Rutgers

    With their grind it out style and the pace they try to play this seems to be the way to go. Force tempo on them, make them play from behind with as poor as they are in all offensive categories.
  11. A couple have mentioned it, but it's a real testament to the talent and depth of this team that we can go out, play so poorly, and still notch the win against a Wisconsin. It wasnt long long ago where if we didn't bring our best against a conference opponent it was lights out, no chance, even against the leagues worst.
  12. Scouting Wisconsin

    Miles probably sees it as beneficial that he can improve upon the lineup he starts the game with. Firepower off the bench. All the while preserving his best lineup for crunch time and when the opponent is worn down or in foul trouble. There's been lots of ideas on here on who should start and how Miles should look at this. Bottom line is if coach thinks he will use Jordy (meaning he isn't completely dropped from the rotation) then you can't really argue against starting him. Otherwise you're just saving Jordy's minutes for later. Especially if he's potentially trying to preserve a foul prone player from being in trouble prior to crunch time.
  13. Going forward

    Yes yes yes! Spread the floor. Create space.
  14. Going forward

    Yes. I would love for Roby's minutes to climb to the mid 20s at least. Hopefully he progresses to a point that that can happen.
  15. Going forward

    I could get on board with having another lethal 3 point threat (Gill) starting. Give us a chance to jump out on teams. But, as you mentioned, having firepower to bring in off the bench is beneficial. It's what we've not had in years past when there were literally 2 guys who could score on the entire team. Then it came time to substitute and we would have zero scorers on the floor. The same can be said for saving Roby for first substitution. And, I guess I should clarify since I agree with everyone...my lineup up there isn't necessarily a starting lineup, just a minutes distribution. Don't necessarily agree with starting Roby but we just need to find a way to get him more minutes. And fouls are an issue like many stated. Does no good to put Roby out there just so he can pick up 2 fouls right away. If we have to play Jordy I'd rather get it out of the way at the beginning.
×