Bear Down Wildcats

Olsondogg wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:
So your take is Rawle makes that much of a difference defensively for this team even though we have a 10 game stretch of evidence that doesn't suggest that at all.

We can tell fairy tales with fabrications when it suits us as well, guys.

No, I'm saying that having a valuable starter out in and out of a lineup affects the team. I don't know how you can point to the past as an example and discount that fact in the present.

Is defense an issue versus prior years? Absolutely...this is a poor defensive team under Miller's system. I just don't share the collective freak out that his happening.

You are always as cool as a cucumber when it comes to Arizona Basketball I'll give you that brother.

I know I’m a fool to think a #9 ranked first place PAC-12 team with one loss since November is pretty good.

Olsondogg wrote:I know I’m a fool to think a #9 ranked first place PAC-12 team with one loss since November is pretty good.

AP and Coaches rankings are nothing to brag about ever. Their sole purpose is for TV. Give me their Sagarin ranking of 14 at least.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:I know I’m a fool to think a #9 ranked first place PAC-12 team with one loss since November is pretty good.

AP and Coaches rankings are nothing to brag about ever. Their sole purpose is for TV. Give me their Sagarin ranking of 14 at least.

Agreed....but take whatever stat you want and I'll take wins over losses.

97cats wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:
The 2 seed in the West is still possible. Not the 1. The teams ahead of U of A are too far ahead that even running the table in all likelihood wont be enough

this is just so stupid - there are multiple top ten losses every week and its still January.

i dont think it will happen, in fact i think Arizona has two more losses left in them, but if for some stroke of luck AZ won its last 12 games, they would finish the season 30-4 winning 27 of their last 28 with one loss coming when the team was at full strength.

there is 100% chance, without a doubt on this planet, that in this scenario, as outright regular season and conf tournament champs, AZ would be the #1 Seed - WEST Region.

Idk if last year was any indication UNC had 7 losses and Duke had 8 they were both higher seeds. I see this year being the same . We were 30-4 last year and u could argue the conference was getting more respect . Think we top out at a 2 seed

this scenario is much different - last year Arizona lost 2 of its final 11 games and Gonzaga was 32-1 in the same region of the country.

Arizona was like the 5th #1 seed last year - there is no Gonzaga this season on the West Coast -- AZ entering the tournament in this unlikely scenario Arizona would have won 27 of 28 games including 18 in a row with outright conf and conf champ titles.

i repeat, Arizona will not win out, but if they did there is 100% chance they will be the #1 Seed West Region.

Well if they lose it'll be this stretch cause I don't see them losing in Vegas.

At this point I want to argue about everything.

Can we start an Ayton coming back thread?

He said if they win a title this year he will come back for a repeat

CatHoops wrote:He said if they win a title this year he will come back for a repeat

now youre talkin!

I've been told we are a first weekend exit, sorry.

Must've been a different bird. I was told not to sell my final 4 tickets

CatHoops wrote:Must've been a different bird. I was told not to sell my final 4 tickets

i like this guy

97cats wrote:i repeat, Arizona will not win out, but if they did there is 100% chance they will be the #1 Seed West Region.

Yeah, at least one more loss is coming, possibly two or three. Hard to say. I'm glad we get the L.A. schools at home. That Oregon roadie is going to be interesting. I hope our guys want some payback for what happened in Eugene last year.

Beachcat97 wrote:

97cats wrote:i repeat, Arizona will not win out, but if they did there is 100% chance they will be the #1 Seed West Region.

Yeah, at least one more loss is coming, possibly two or three. Hard to say. I'm glad we get the L.A. schools at home. That Oregon roadie is going to be interesting. I hope our guys want some payback for what happened in Eugene last year.

That didnt happen when U of A beat Oregon in the PAC-12 Tournament Final?

PHXCATS wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

97cats wrote:i repeat, Arizona will not win out, but if they did there is 100% chance they will be the #1 Seed West Region.

Yeah, at least one more loss is coming, possibly two or three. Hard to say. I'm glad we get the L.A. schools at home. That Oregon roadie is going to be interesting. I hope our guys want some payback for what happened in Eugene last year.

That didnt happen when U of A beat Oregon in the PAC-12 Tournament Final?

Yes and no. Yes, because we won the game. No, because it was in Vegas, not Eugene. What happened in Eugene last year was one of the worst losses of the Miller era.

Payback doesn't carry over year to year. That is a completely different Oregon team than anything we saw last year.

Olsondogg wrote:Payback doesn't carry over year to year. That is a completely different Oregon team than anything we saw last year.

Fair enough. But Ristic, Trier, Rawle, PJC, Pinder...all part of that shellacking last year. I find it a little hard to believe that game won't be on their minds on 2/25.

Stewart Mandell has U of A as the 4 in the West. Why does it matter? Mandela over the last 5 years has been the 2nd most accurate out of 131 "brackettologist" in terms of who gets in and seeding.

With U of A's best win being a struggling asu or a struggling Texas A&M it will be very very very tough to jump teams with good wins even if those teams have less losses and titles.

PHXCATS wrote:Stewart Mandell has U of A as the 4 in the West. Why does it matter? Mandela over the last 5 years has been the 2nd most accurate out of 131 "brackettologist" in terms of who gets in and seeding.

With U of A's best win being a struggling asu or a struggling Texas A&M it will be very very very tough to jump teams with good wins even if those teams have less losses and titles.

Whatever Mandela accomplishes in bracketology, I'll always remember him more for his inspiring personal story of sacrifice and perseverance on behalf of an oppressed people.

PHXCATS wrote:With U of A's best win being a struggling asu or a struggling Texas A&M it will be very very very tough to jump teams with good wins even if those teams have less losses and titles.

Yep. Count me among those who did *not* expect us to win the Pac tourney last year, so CSM has surprised me lately. But if we finish strong enough to get all the way to a 2 seed (or really even a 3), I'd be just as surprised. Gonna be hard to leave OR with two wins, we have to go to ASU (maybe not as tough a game as it seemed a few weeks ago, though), and USC is playing much better. It's a tough final stretch. I've been bullish on this team all season, and remain so, but I still think we'll hit a few bumps before March.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:Stewart Mandell has U of A as the 4 in the West. Why does it matter? Mandela over the last 5 years has been the 2nd most accurate out of 131 "brackettologist" in terms of who gets in and seeding.

With U of A's best win being a struggling asu or a struggling Texas A&M it will be very very very tough to jump teams with good wins even if those teams have less losses and titles.

Whatever Mandela accomplishes in bracketology, I'll always remember him more for his inspiring personal story of sacrifice and perseverance on behalf of an oppressed people.

That's called "the Mengle Effect".

Bleacher Report:
San Diego, California

No. 3 Arizona vs. No. 14 Belmont

No. 6 Wichita State vs. No. 11 Missouri

Yeah, I know BR isn't thought of highly here, but I thought I'd post it since they usually rate U of A lower than others do.

DiehardDave37 wrote:Bleacher Report:
San Diego, California

No. 3 Arizona vs. No. 14 Belmont

No. 6 Wichita State vs. No. 11 Missouri

Yeah, I know BR isn't thought of highly here, but I thought I'd post it since they usually rate U of A lower than others do.

You talk about matchups that make me shiver, WSU is one of those.

PHXCATS wrote:Stewart Mandell has U of A as the 4 in the West. Why does it matter? Mandela over the last 5 years has been the 2nd most accurate out of 131 "brackettologist" in terms of who gets in and seeding.

With U of A's best win being a struggling asu or a struggling Texas A&M it will be very very very tough to jump teams with good wins even if those teams have less losses and titles.

I did not realize ASU was struggling when we beat them... I thought they were undefeated and ranked #2.

Same with A&M. I don't know what they did in their games leading up to ours... but I seem to recall them being in the Top 10 and not having a loss since earning that ranking.

Funny how how you can piss all over a Top 10 win in a neutral setting and a solid home victory over a Top5 undefeated team.... and then make excuse after excuse for a program well under 0.500 in conference play over a 6 year tenure.

I wouldn't call it talent... but you have something that is unique.

For what Mandell has

U of A is 2-3 vs Tournament teams and two games remaining

For his #1 seeds
Purdue is 5-2 and two remaining games
Villanova is 7-1 and six remaining games
Virginia is 5-1 and four remaining games
Kansas is 7-3 and five remaining games

There is NO chance for a number 1 seed

While U of A beat two ranked teams earlier this year, those two teams are now ranked 25 and not ranked. Not a good look when trying to get a #1 seed

PHXCATS wrote:For what Mandell has

U of A is 2-3 vs Tournament teams and two games remaining

For his #1 seeds
Purdue is 5-2 and two remaining games
Villanova is 7-1 and six remaining games
Virginia is 5-1 and four remaining games
Kansas is 7-3 and five remaining games

There is NO chance for a number 1 seed

While U of A beat two ranked teams earlier this year, those two teams are now ranked 25 and not ranked. Not a good look when trying to get a #1 seed

Your posting would be better if you stopped making declarative statements like NO chance. What if Villanova loses every remaining game?

I mean, it's just frustratingly conclusory on a topic that's not conclusive.

if Arizona won out (which they wont) they will have won 27-28 games since Alkins returned - the committee looks and weighs its slotting and line placement heavily around teams playing shorthanded, which is exactly what Arizona was when it lost three games in a row....in NOVEMBER.

couple this with natural attrition of the other teams in the top 8 to end the season and there is almost no way possible Arizona wouldnt be the #1 see WEST Region if they won out.

Machina, like always, is making declarative statements as facts to strengthen his own position.

is it probable? no

is it possible? yes

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:For what Mandell has

U of A is 2-3 vs Tournament teams and two games remaining

For his #1 seeds
Purdue is 5-2 and two remaining games
Villanova is 7-1 and six remaining games
Virginia is 5-1 and four remaining games
Kansas is 7-3 and five remaining games

There is NO chance for a number 1 seed

While U of A beat two ranked teams earlier this year, those two teams are now ranked 25 and not ranked. Not a good look when trying to get a #1 seed

Your posting would be better if you stopped making declarative statements like NO chance. What if Villanova loses every remaining game?

I mean, it's just frustratingly conclusory on a topic that's not conclusive.

I will rephrase in then. Since you care about that and not the facts I presented that U of A will only play 7 games vs likely tournament teams and now has a losing record in those games.

There is a very very slight possibility, similar to the chances of winning the lottery, that U of A gets a #1 seed.

PHXCATS wrote: There is a very very slight possibility, similar to the chances of winning the lottery, that U of A gets a #1 seed.

i appreciate your ability to break down almost anything into laymen’s terms for me -- its so refreshing to have such a clairvoyant and clear thinker around here, able to quantify and slot just about anything.

If by “win out,” that includes winning the Pac tourney, then yeah, we’ll be a #1 seed. It’s a huge “if,” but if AZ actually won its next 7 + 3 in the Pac tourney, the national media would be calling us the hottest team in the country and a strong favorite to win it all. It would be the version of AZ many expected heading into the season.

Beachcat97 wrote:If by “win out,” that includes winning the Pac tourney, then yeah, we’ll be a #1 seed. It’s a huge “if,” but if AZ actually won its next 7 + 3 in the Pac tourney, the national media would be calling us the hottest team in the country and a strong favorite to win it all. It would be the version of AZ many expected heading into the season.

Sort of this. If we finish the season on a 25-1 run with a single, 3 point road loss and having incurred 3 of 4 L's in a 72 hour span, we'd get consideration.

The committee always talks about going beyond pure numbers and we'd be a poster child for that. Our resume is hurt because A&M fell off a cliff with suspensions.

Beachcat97 wrote:If by “win out,” that includes winning the Pac tourney, then yeah, we’ll be a #1 seed. It’s a huge “if,” but if AZ actually won its next 7 + 3 in the Pac tourney, the national media would be calling us the hottest team in the country and a strong favorite to win it all. It would be the version of AZ many expected heading into the season.

if Arizona won out including the Pac 12 Tournament (which it wont) that would be 18 wins in a row and 27 of the last 28 games.

Arizona would have one recorded loss after Alkins returned from injury and three losses in NOVEMBER when Alkins wasnt available.

i have no doubt whatsoever that Arizona would be the #1 seed WEST Region if they win their last 12 games, which they wont.

Truth be told, I don’t really care what our seed is, as long as we’re completely healthy and playing better D by March.

PHXCATS wrote:For what Mandell has

U of A is 2-3 vs Tournament teams and two games remaining

For his #1 seeds
Purdue is 5-2 and two remaining games
Villanova is 7-1 and six remaining games
Virginia is 5-1 and four remaining games
Kansas is 7-3 and five remaining games

There is NO chance for a number 1 seed

While U of A beat two ranked teams earlier this year, those two teams are now ranked 25 and not ranked. Not a good look when trying to get a #1 seed

2 months ago there was NO chance that Rich Rodriguez would be terminated as the FB coach at Arizona, and even on a (winning lottery ticket level) chance that he was - we would NEVER get someone better to replace him.

Or so said some genius on the interwebz.

97cats wrote:

PHXCATS wrote: There is a very very slight possibility, similar to the chances of winning the lottery, that U of A gets a #1 seed.

i appreciate your ability to break down almost anything into laymen’s terms for me -- its so refreshing to have such a clairvoyant and clear thinker around here, able to quantify and slot just about anything.

"Taking 'dumbing it down' to a new level... one post at a time."

PHXCATS wrote:I don't think UA can get Sumlin but if you could you hire him you get him right this second

Dated November 2017

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology" target="_blank

97cats wrote:

PHXCATS wrote: There is a very very slight possibility, similar to the chances of winning the lottery, that U of A gets a #1 seed.

i appreciate your ability to break down almost anything into laymen’s terms for me -- its so refreshing to have such a clairvoyant and clear thinker around here, able to quantify and slot just about anything.

While it is always great when asu loses come Monday U of A will have no wins vs teams ranked on 2/5/18.

PHXCATS wrote:While it is always great when asu lose

Yes.

PHXCATS wrote:While it is always great when asu loses come Monday U of A will have no wins vs teams ranked on 2/5/18.

Passiv aggressive much?

Duke, Kansas, and Kentucky have already lost today.

Such bullshit. We're being looked at like we're in the WCC, meanwhile, teams like North Carolina have 7 losses at #19 (they'll drop, but Clemson will just replace them). And they haven't even looked good in their wins...

Meanwhile, Texas will get talked about as a tourney team at 15-8, having just beaten an Oklahoma team ranked 12th, that is 16-6. Because the media has decreed the Big 12 as a great conference, losses won't hurt, and wins will count as wins against tourney teams, so despite 5 or 6 teams finishing with 10-12 losses, they'll still get 8 or 9 teams in.

Florida, a 3-point team with not much else, who lost to goddamn Loyola Chicago, just got shellacked at home by Alabama, which leaves both at 15-8. But, since the SEC is considered good, both of those teams are tourney bound, despite the fact that it's a conference led by an Auburn team of nobodies lead by Bruce f*cking Pearl! Mizzou, led by Cal reject Cuonzo Martin, just knocked off UK. Guess who's still in the tourney conversation at 15-8?

I understand that the PAC12 did poorly out of conference. But I'm not seeing great teams anywhere else in the country now. Because if there were any, mediocre-to-shitty schools wouldn't be handing out L's every week to these supposedly good ranked teams!

qwertyus wrote:Such bullshit. We're being looked at like we're in the WCC, meanwhile, teams like North Carolina have 7 losses at #19 (they'll drop, but Clemson will just replace them). And they haven't even looked good in their wins...

Meanwhile, Texas will get talked about as a tourney team at 15-8, having just beaten an Oklahoma team ranked 12th, that is 16-6. Because the media has decreed the Big 12 as a great conference, losses won't hurt, and wins will count as wins against tourney teams, so despite 5 or 6 teams finishing with 10-12 losses, they'll still get 8 or 9 teams in.

Florida, a 3-point team with not much else, who lost to goddamn Loyola Chicago, just got shellacked at home by Alabama, which leaves both at 15-8. But, since the SEC is considered good, both of those teams are tourney bound, despite the fact that it's a conference led by an Auburn team of nobodies lead by Bruce f*cking Pearl! Mizzou, led by Cal reject Cuonzo Martin, just knocked off UK. Guess who's still in the tourney conversation at 15-8?

I understand that the PAC12 did poorly out of conference. But I'm not seeing great teams anywhere else in the country now. Because if there were any, mediocre-to-shitty schools wouldn't be handing out L's every week to these supposedly good ranked teams!

That's why the non-conference schedule is so important. It's sets the table for perception. What people don't realize is that many teams like Stanford, USC and Arizona were not even close to full strength because of injuries. All three played a good portion of their non-conference schedule without a key player.

zonagrad wrote:

qwertyus wrote:Such bullshit. We're being looked at like we're in the WCC, meanwhile, teams like North Carolina have 7 losses at #19 (they'll drop, but Clemson will just replace them). And they haven't even looked good in their wins...

Meanwhile, Texas will get talked about as a tourney team at 15-8, having just beaten an Oklahoma team ranked 12th, that is 16-6. Because the media has decreed the Big 12 as a great conference, losses won't hurt, and wins will count as wins against tourney teams, so despite 5 or 6 teams finishing with 10-12 losses, they'll still get 8 or 9 teams in.

Florida, a 3-point team with not much else, who lost to goddamn Loyola Chicago, just got shellacked at home by Alabama, which leaves both at 15-8. But, since the SEC is considered good, both of those teams are tourney bound, despite the fact that it's a conference led by an Auburn team of nobodies lead by Bruce f*cking Pearl! Mizzou, led by Cal reject Cuonzo Martin, just knocked off UK. Guess who's still in the tourney conversation at 15-8?

I understand that the PAC12 did poorly out of conference. But I'm not seeing great teams anywhere else in the country now. Because if there were any, mediocre-to-shitty schools wouldn't be handing out L's every week to these supposedly good ranked teams!

That's why the non-conference schedule is so important. It's sets the table for perception. What people don't realize is that many teams like Stanford, USC and Arizona were not even close to full strength because of injuries. All three played a good portion of their non-conference schedule without a key player.

Losing without key players is fine against good teams but you don't get a pass when you lose to bad teams (mainly talking about Stanford).

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-tourn ... cketology/" target="_blank

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... acketology" target="_blank

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... cketology/" target="_blank

https://theathletic.com/226303/2018/02/ ... ournament/" target="_blank

Give me this region and set up please

qwertyus wrote:Such bullshit. We're being looked at like we're in the WCC, meanwhile, teams like North Carolina have 7 losses at #19 (they'll drop, but Clemson will just replace them). And they haven't even looked good in their wins...

Meanwhile, Texas will get talked about as a tourney team at 15-8, having just beaten an Oklahoma team ranked 12th, that is 16-6. Because the media has decreed the Big 12 as a great conference, losses won't hurt, and wins will count as wins against tourney teams, so despite 5 or 6 teams finishing with 10-12 losses, they'll still get 8 or 9 teams in.

Florida, a 3-point team with not much else, who lost to goddamn Loyola Chicago, just got shellacked at home by Alabama, which leaves both at 15-8. But, since the SEC is considered good, both of those teams are tourney bound, despite the fact that it's a conference led by an Auburn team of nobodies lead by Bruce f*cking Pearl! Mizzou, led by Cal reject Cuonzo Martin, just knocked off UK. Guess who's still in the tourney conversation at 15-8?

I understand that the PAC12 did poorly out of conference. But I'm not seeing great teams anywhere else in the country now. Because if there were any, mediocre-to-shitty schools wouldn't be handing out L's every week to these supposedly good ranked teams!

This has been happening repeatedly the past few years; but more so this year than last....sorta like SEC football teams always being more highly ranked than non-SEC teams, even when they play as weak of a OOC schedule.