Bear Down Wildcats

This list includes teams 1-20 and their W/L after 2/11 when the selection committee issued their top 16

Results through Sunday. Just conf tourneys to go there won't be too much movement before selection sunday

This is how I see it


Virginia (5-0)
Villanova (4-2)
Xavier (4-1)
Duke (5-1)

Kansas (5-1)
Tennessee (5-1)
Purdue (4-2)
Michigan St. (5-1)

North Carolina (3-2)
Cincinnati (4-2)
Michigan (5-0)
Gonzaga (5-0)

Arizona (4-1)
Auburn (3-3)
Clemson (2-4)
Wichita St. (5-1)

West Virginia (4-2)
Texas Tech (3-3)
Ohio State (2-3)
Kentucky (0-1)

I believe if UA wins Thursday there will be no doubt that UA will play in San Diego

PHXCATS wrote:I believe if UA wins Thursday there will be no doubt that UA will play in San Diego

Yeah I don't see any way that the Pac12 regular champ (by 2 games) won't get their geographic preference. Plus, just looking at the records of teams since the preview, it seems like there's a huge gap between 1-13 and the rest. There's not gonna be 4 teams to jump us in conference tourneys.

All enlightened college basketball fans are awakened to the importance of seeding, region, and the predictive value of advanced stats.

The importance of Kenpom especially changed the way many of us predict the tourney.

Studies have demonstrated the importance of location for games, particularly for flight duration, time zone, and game start time.

But I don't buy any of it anymore. I think it's a based on a lot of spurious stuff. In reality, it's all just as senseless, mad, and unpredictable as it seems.

I don't care anymore where Arizona is seeded or where they play. When the goal is to survive the first two rounds and then try to win another four in row against really good teams, why should anyone care?

No path is better than any other path. No team has a good chance to win the tourney. It's all about being good, playing well, and getting lucky. None of the rest matters.

Amen, LH. We haven’t had that extra bit of luck lately. Maybe we’re due this year. Sorta think Deandre Ayton makes his own luck.

Here's the best demonstration of tourney odds for me:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... edictions/" target="_blank

Look at the pre-tourney predictions and the highest chance of making the Final Four was 41%. That's 6 in 10 you don't make the Final Four, and that's the BEST odds. That's how all over the place this stuff is.

With quadrant wins and everything being the major factor this year, kinda pointless to worry about this. Especially since the committee doesn't factor in last 10-12 games anymore. Arizona is a #4 seed lock in the West. Gonzaga is likely a #5 seed lock and will likely get placed in San Diego and be our 4/5 matchup. Kansas will likely be put #1 seed in the West since Xavier is getting the Midwest, Villanova the East and Virginia the South.

Most important thing is being in the region that magically falls apart. Somehow that hasn't been the West in the last decade.

We owe Gonzaga payback for last year at Staples. Bring it on.

I hope Cincinnati is the 2/3 in our bracket. They are a defensive team but I think they will have no chance at Ayton or Dusan.

SunnyAZ wrote:I hope Cincinnati is the 2/3 in our bracket. They are a defensive team but I think they will have no chance at Ayton or Dusan.

I don't see how any team could watch our last games vs. Cal and Stanford and NOT zone us. It forces us to play a halfcourt game, where we've been turnover prone AF lately.

Beachcat97 wrote:

SunnyAZ wrote:I hope Cincinnati is the 2/3 in our bracket. They are a defensive team but I think they will have no chance at Ayton or Dusan.

I don't see how any team could watch our last games vs. Cal and Stanford and NOT zone us. It forces us to play a halfcourt game, where we've been turnover prone AF lately.

they are the #2 adjD because their style of their defense. I doubt they have much, if any reps, playing zone d this year. And Cronin seems like the stubborn coach who will lose instead of break their style of play ala Miller and the St. Mary's coach.

SunnyAZ wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

SunnyAZ wrote:I hope Cincinnati is the 2/3 in our bracket. They are a defensive team but I think they will have no chance at Ayton or Dusan.

I don't see how any team could watch our last games vs. Cal and Stanford and NOT zone us. It forces us to play a halfcourt game, where we've been turnover prone AF lately.

they are the #2 adjD because their style of their defense. I doubt they have much, if any reps, playing zone d this year. And Cronin seems like the stubborn coach who will lose instead of break their style of play ala Miller and the St. Mary's coach.

When you do it well it's hard to argue you should change it. Cincy is where they are based off how well they play man. Dance with who brung you, etc.

So I was browsing YouTube and saw a video about the worst NCAA Tournament collapse of all time. I got worried...but then it wasn't us.

https://youtu.be/znMqvRjoY3Q" target="_blank

Longhorned wrote:All enlightened college basketball fans are awakened to the importance of seeding, region, and the predictive value of advanced stats.

The importance of Kenpom especially changed the way many of us predict the tourney.

Studies have demonstrated the importance of location for games, particularly for flight duration, time zone, and game start time.

But I don't buy any of it anymore. I think it's a based on a lot of spurious stuff. In reality, it's all just as senseless, mad, and unpredictable as it seems.

I don't care anymore where Arizona is seeded or where they play. When the goal is to survive the first two rounds and then try to win another four in row against really good teams, why should anyone care?

No path is better than any other path. No team has a good chance to win the tourney. It's all about being good, playing well, and getting lucky. None of the rest matters.

It only matters to fans trying to attend the games. Buying a flight 5 days before you travel is never a recipe for success.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
When you do it well it's hard to argue you should change it. Cincy is where they are based off how well they play man. Dance with who brung you, etc.

that's why I hope they are in our bracket, I don't think they have the guys capable of guarding either Ayton or Dusan, much less both. And then they switch a lot, which hopefully we would be able to take advantage of.

NYCat wrote:With quadrant wins and everything being the major factor this year, kinda pointless to worry about this. Especially since the committee doesn't factor in last 10-12 games anymore. Arizona is a #4 seed lock in the West. Gonzaga is likely a #5 seed lock and will likely get placed in San Diego and be our 4/5 matchup. Kansas will likely be put #1 seed in the West since Xavier is getting the Midwest, Villanova the East and Virginia the South.

I doubt that we are a lock for a 4 seed. All of the projections I have seen show us as the weakest of the 4 seeds as of today.

The PAC12 tournament is likely a nothing to gain, everything to lose proposition for us this year. Win the first 2 and I think we cement a 4 seed. Win it and I doubt we jump over the other three 4 seeds and at least one 3 seed to get to the 3 seed line.

Lose the first or second game and we may well drop to a 5 seed.

Unfortunately, the other PAC12 teams have RPI's that reside in the gutter. We gain little or nothing by winning the tournament.

SunnyAZ wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
When you do it well it's hard to argue you should change it. Cincy is where they are based off how well they play man. Dance with who brung you, etc.

that's why I hope they are in our bracket, I don't think they have the guys capable of guarding either Ayton or Dusan, much less both. And then they switch a lot, which hopefully we would be able to take advantage of.

Personally, I just want to avoid the balanced teams. Give me a good offense/bad D team to shoot it out with or a bad offense/good D team to attack and minimize our own weaknesses.

All you have to do is win games. That's the only thing to do. This idea of jumping teams etc only comes into play when teams don't win. If Arizona wins games and others do not, they will move up.

NYCat wrote:With quadrant wins and everything being the major factor this year, kinda pointless to worry about this. Especially since the committee doesn't factor in last 10-12 games anymore. Arizona is a #4 seed lock in the West. Gonzaga is likely a #5 seed lock and will likely get placed in San Diego and be our 4/5 matchup. Kansas will likely be put #1 seed in the West since Xavier is getting the Midwest, Villanova the East and Virginia the South.

Buy.

Kansas v Arizona would be a heck of a match-up with their big sweet shooting guards and lack of post... and our big post and lack of perimeter defense. Gonzaga is hard to get a read on because everyone they play is dogshit, but given I know their guards don't attack the basket much and I like Ayton and Ristic over Tillie and Williams.

Duke is the one single team that I want no part of. At all.

YoDeFoe wrote:

NYCat wrote:With quadrant wins and everything being the major factor this year, kinda pointless to worry about this. Especially since the committee doesn't factor in last 10-12 games anymore. Arizona is a #4 seed lock in the West. Gonzaga is likely a #5 seed lock and will likely get placed in San Diego and be our 4/5 matchup. Kansas will likely be put #1 seed in the West since Xavier is getting the Midwest, Villanova the East and Virginia the South.

Buy.

Kansas v Arizona would be a heck of a match-up with their big sweet shooting guards and lack of post... and our big post and lack of perimeter defense. Gonzaga is hard to get a read on because everyone they play is dogshit, but given I know their guards don't attack the basket much and I like Ayton and Ristic over Tillie and Williams.

Anything can go any way in a single game, but I think Arizona rises to the occasion on perimeter defense in a way that Kansas is unlikely to be able to make a similar adjustment to Ayton and Ristic. They're the 1-seed you want.

dmjcat wrote: I doubt that we are a lock for a 4 seed. All of the projections I have seen show us as the weakest of the 4 seeds as of today.

The PAC12 tournament is likely a nothing to gain, everything to lose proposition for us this year. Win the first 2 and I think we cement a 4 seed. Win it and I doubt we jump over the other three 4 seeds and at least one 3 seed to get to the 3 seed line.

Lose the first or second game and we may well drop to a 5 seed.

Unfortunately, the other PAC12 teams have RPI's that reside in the gutter. We gain little or nothing by winning the tournament.

USC, Utah, and UCLA provide Q1 wins if we face them. ASU, UW, CU, Stanford are Q2.

Q1 wins would do a lot for our seeding as we're only 4-3 there. So 6-3 would look a heck of a lot better, pushing us into the Xavier / Duke / Purdue / Cincy grouping.. though some of those have games to play as well.

After this weekend, I have a bad feeling about us. I'm hoping it's what they say as far as mental fatigue with what's been going on the past two weeks, but there is no way we should have played that close to Cal. If we let ANY team in the tourney stay with us, then it could be a quick exit. This team has to be ready and PJC cannot continue his 16-15 assist to turnover ratio trend.

BE4RDOWN21 wrote:After this weekend, I have a bad feeling about us. I'm hoping it's what they say as far as mental fatigue with what's been going on the past two weeks, but there is no way we should have played that close to Cal. If we let ANY team in the tourney stay with us, then it could be a quick exit. This team has to be ready and PJC cannot continue his 16-15 assist to turnover ratio trend.

For 18-22 year olds, I'm not sure mental fatigue exists. Every game is a new one.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

BE4RDOWN21 wrote:After this weekend, I have a bad feeling about us. I'm hoping it's what they say as far as mental fatigue with what's been going on the past two weeks, but there is no way we should have played that close to Cal. If we let ANY team in the tourney stay with us, then it could be a quick exit. This team has to be ready and PJC cannot continue his 16-15 assist to turnover ratio trend.

For 18-22 year olds, I'm not sure mental fatigue exists. Every game is a new one.

We have seen some teams look flat/not in it during finals week or right before xmas, so maybe mental fatigue/preoccupation with something outside of the sidelines could be the cause.

BE4RDOWN21 wrote:After this weekend, I have a bad feeling about us. I'm hoping it's what they say as far as mental fatigue with what's been going on the past two weeks, but there is no way we should have played that close to Cal. If we let ANY team in the tourney stay with us, then it could be a quick exit. This team has to be ready and PJC cannot continue his 16-15 assist to turnover ratio trend.

Well, when 2 of your top 4 scorers combine for 2-19 shooting, it is surprising we didn't lose. If they just shoot 40%, that is 6 more buckets, some of them 3's, so that alone would add 12-15 points to our total. Can't have them do that from here on in, though. Not sure what it was -- maybe nerves or trying too hard in their last game at McKale, maybe? I hope that is what it was.

rgdeuce wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

BE4RDOWN21 wrote:After this weekend, I have a bad feeling about us. I'm hoping it's what they say as far as mental fatigue with what's been going on the past two weeks, but there is no way we should have played that close to Cal. If we let ANY team in the tourney stay with us, then it could be a quick exit. This team has to be ready and PJC cannot continue his 16-15 assist to turnover ratio trend.

For 18-22 year olds, I'm not sure mental fatigue exists. Every game is a new one.

We have seen some teams look flat/not in it during finals week or right before xmas, so maybe mental fatigue/preoccupation with something outside of the sidelines could be the cause.

Fatigue, I meant in terms of an accumulated exhaustion. Lack of focus, yeah, that's very, very real. I just don't think college teams wear down from the stress of the outside factors over time as much. It's not a demanding schedule and the overall mental state of a team changes a lot.

We just need to get fired up and transition that into the tourney. Ayton seems to have flipped a switch, now we just need others to join him.

Trier was really struggling. He didn't even score until fairly deep in the 2nd half. Lots of open looks from 3 too.

Beachcat97 wrote:Trier was really struggling. He didn't even score until fairly deep in the 2nd half. Lots of open looks from 3 too.

He had one layup and was 0-9 and 0-7 from three otherwise. If he plays normally, we'd have looked better.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Trier was really struggling. He didn't even score until fairly deep in the 2nd half. Lots of open looks from 3 too.

He had one layup and was 0-9 and 0-7 from three otherwise. If he plays normally, we'd have looked better.

They were good looks. Think it was just one of those days

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Trier was really struggling. He didn't even score until fairly deep in the 2nd half. Lots of open looks from 3 too.

He had one layup and was 0-9 and 0-7 from three otherwise. If he plays normally, we'd have looked better.

He and Ristic both. If they both shot within shouting distance of their average, we win by 25.

The two best shooters on the team couldn’t buy a shot. Can happen to anyone, and if it’s the tourney, they’re done. Happened to Kerr in the Final Four loss to Oklahoma. Painful.

Myth #12: Elite defense will save you on a cold shooting night in the tourney.

Nope. You’re done.

Longhorned wrote:The two best shooters on the team couldn’t buy a shot. Can happen to anyone, and if it’s the tourney, they’re done. Happened to Kerr in the Final Four loss to Oklahoma. Painful.

Myth #12: Elite defense will save you on a cold shooting night in the tourney.

Nope. You’re done.

So true.

It really does make a FF run seem like catching lightning in a bottle. So many things have to swing in your favor. It doesn't matter how loaded your team is (ex: the many Duke and UK teams in recent years who got knocked out) or what you did up to that point. The tourney is merciless and nasty, and it will tear your heart out if you come out slow or unfocused or unaggressive.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Longhorned wrote:The two best shooters on the team couldn’t buy a shot. Can happen to anyone, and if it’s the tourney, they’re done. Happened to Kerr in the Final Four loss to Oklahoma. Painful.

Myth #12: Elite defense will save you on a cold shooting night in the tourney.

Nope. You’re done.

So true.

It really does make a FF run seem like catching lightning in a bottle. So many things have to swing in your favor. It doesn't matter how loaded your team is (ex: the many Duke and UK teams in recent years who got knocked out) or what you did up to that point. The tourney is merciless and nasty, and it will tear your heart out if you come out slow or unfocused or unaggressive.

March Madness brings all the excitement of Christmas. But instead of a Santa bringing you presents, fate falls down your chimney and takes everything you have.

BE4RDOWN21 wrote:After this weekend, I have a bad feeling about us. I'm hoping it's what they say as far as mental fatigue with what's been going on the past two weeks, but there is no way we should have played that close to Cal. If we let ANY team in the tourney stay with us, then it could be a quick exit. This team has to be ready and PJC cannot continue his 16-15 assist to turnover ratio trend.

Yeah and this right here is why given where our team is at, and that our fate in the tourney is much more up to how we play rather than what our seed is, I would hate to see it but I would really notttt mind an early exit from the Pac-12 tourney and a chance to rest for a week

https://sports.yahoo.com/changes-format ... 34534.html" target="_blank

Changes to the format of the Selection Show may eliminate some of the drama

CBS Sports and Turner Sports announced Tuesday they intend to begin Sunday’s show by unveiling the 68 teams that made the NCAA tournament. Hosts Greg Gumbel and Ernie Johnson will reveal the 32 teams that secured automatic bids and the 36 recipients of at-large bids one by one in alphabetical order before moving on to releasing the brackets and the matchups.

Can someone tell me why, in Lunardi's most recent Bracketology, 11 seed ASU is not one of the last 4 byes, and yet 10 seeds Kansas St, St. Mary's and Providence are?

the bracket matrix site has asu listed anywhere from an 8 seed to not in the tournament. overall they're averaged out as being like the bottom 10 seed. if they beat colorado i think they are in no matter what as a 9-10 seed. if they lose they will literally be the most bubbly of all the bubble teams and will either be the last team in or the first team out.

ProfessorFate wrote:Can someone tell me why, in Lunardi's most recent Bracketology, 11 seed ASU is not one of the last 4 byes, and yet 10 seeds Kansas St, St. Mary's and Providence are?

There is a reason why. I am not sure exactly but it has to with the conferences of the teams in the "play in" games and the conferences of the teams in their region as well as travel considerations. If you play on Tuesday in Dayton you must play Thursday in the first round. Same for Wednesday in Dayton and Friday in the first round.

The First Four is horseshit. However, if you're going to do it they should not involve conference champs.

Asu has wins over 2 #1 seeds,

NYCat wrote:Asu has wins over 2 #1 seeds,

yes

Kansas is one of the more undeserving #1s in recent years.

ProfessorFate wrote:Can someone tell me why, in Lunardi's most recent Bracketology, 11 seed ASU is not one of the last 4 byes, and yet 10 seeds Kansas St, St. Mary's and Providence are?

The committee can move teams up or down a line to deal with geographic issues or early rematches. I would think that is the case, although it may not be for asu specifically.

azgreg wrote:The First Four is horseshit. However, if you're going to do it they should not involve conference champs.

The first four is only for at large teams (disregarding the 16/16 matchups).

NYCat wrote:Asu has wins over 2 #1 seeds,

And went 8-10 in a mediocre conference since then.

I believe the committee got rid of the last 10/12 game metric. If so, it will be interesting judging the scummies against other bubble teams, assuming they only get 1 win in Vegas. 2 wins over #1 seed vs. 8-10 in a pretty mediocre conference, with their only win(s) against Cal (and/or CU) in the last month. Doesn't really scream tournament team as of March.

I'm rooting for the latter. Would be hilarious to see all the sudden asu fans deal with the agony of their team rising to #3 in December just to crash and burn and not make the tournament.

NYCat wrote:Asu has wins over 2 #1 seeds,

Sucks for them the Tournament didn't start on 12/29/17.

prh wrote:

ProfessorFate wrote:Can someone tell me why, in Lunardi's most recent Bracketology, 11 seed ASU is not one of the last 4 byes, and yet 10 seeds Kansas St, St. Mary's and Providence are?

The committee can move teams up or down a line to deal with geographic issues or early rematches. I would think that is the case, although it may not be for asu specifically.

azgreg wrote:The First Four is horseshit. However, if you're going to do it they should not involve conference champs.

The first four is only for at large teams (disregarding the 16/16 matchups).

4 of the 8 first four teams last year were conference champs. The first four should be for at large teams only.

those turds in Tempe would be an interesting case if they were to lose today...