HuskerActuary

What? A team with the history of Nebraska does not turn down an NIT appearance. Heck, Kentucky played in the NIT about five years ago.

We only need 19 wins to get in. Feel pretty good about that. The bubble is very weak this year.

It's a good point. I struggle to see how, but we are still near the cut line in many brackets. Our level of play flipped in January, suddenly and for unknown reasons. If it flips back, we'll be in the tournament.

Trying to come up with a funny response. Too depressed to try!!

I don't know, I'm pretty mixed on that. He's 32% for his career (30-94) from behind the arc. Every year of his career, he has been more effective at 2s than 3s: Junior: 56% on 2s (1.12 points per shot); 30% on 3s (0.91 points per shot) Sophomore: 62% on 2s (1.24 points per shot); 40% on 3s (1.21 points per shot) Freshman: 44% on 2s (0.89 points per shot); 16% on 3s (0.47 points per shot)

Agreed. And, not getting to 0.500 is nearly a given at this point. If Miles can pull that off, he certainly deserves to be retained. Going 7-4 needs we need to go undefeated at home and beat Illinois or Penn State on the road. Or, drop one at home (Purdue seems most likely) and beat Illinois and Penn State on the road. So unlikely at this point.

Assuming Tanner's minutes go up, we're going to start seeing some foul-outs from him. He's averaging 7.0 fouls per 40 minutes played - top (bottom) 0.1% of NCAA. Next highest on the team is Roby at 4.9.

I actually kinda like it. Start playing for the future. But, Miles has to play for now, unfortunately for us.

No on Nana. I've seen enough contested three's chucked up with 20 seconds left on the shot clock for the season.

The last two, yes. The first one seems like a long shot but not completely crazy.

There are five components to the ranking. The NCAA hasn't been fully transparent about how each one works or how they are weighted, and I'm not sure if anyone has completely reverse-engineered it yet (I saw Bart Torvik got close), but here they are: "Team Value Index" which rewards you for who you have beaten, taking into account location of the game. This is kind of like strength of record "Net Efficiency" which is basically how many more points per possession you score than your opponent. This is where Nebraska has got to be pretty strong based on our big wins. This component likely lines up closely with KenPom, I would guess Winning percentage Adjusted winning percentage, based on location Scoring margin <-- this is the one that is capped at 10 It's kind of a weird system and I'm sure they will tweak it. It's just strange that some of those components are so clearly overlapping.

This is not quite correct. In only one of the components is the scoring margin capped at 10. The efficiency components have no such cap and therefore you still benefit from winning big, which is how we are #13.

Both of these next two games should be quad 1 so as long as we get one of them, we'll be in good shape. Lose both and the bubble talk starts to increase a bit.

Based on Stubhub ticket prices, it looks like there will be a lot of empty seats tonight. That's too bad.

We need to start winning games, stat. We are down to #47 in the KPI rankings, which is basically "who you have beaten?" and I believe this still shows up on the team sheets. We're not anywhere near the bubble yet, but our resume is starting to show some holes.