Bracketology - Let's Do This

[CuseJacket]

Since halftime of the ND game we're hot. There really shouldn't be any dispute over that.

The issue that what we consider hot isn't hot for Gonzaga, Baylor, or Michigan. Our 5 game winning streak is awesome, and for our program particularly noteworthy.

Here is Gonzaga's opening schedule (not including the back to back homegames against Northwestern state). They beat Kansas by 32, Auburn by 23, WVU by 5, Iowa by 11, and UVA by 23. That's gonzaga hot.

The relative comparison is my point and I guess a matter of semantics.

ND isn't good, but some labeled them "hot" in the middle of their schedule after they beat a bunch of bad teams.

On a "heat scale" that include relative strength, I guess I'd call us warm and playing well. I'm not disputing our results relative to who we've played (though I'm not a fan of pulling in a half game as part of the evidence).

 

[RyanS12]

Michigan might have just played the worst game a top 2 team has ever played. Personally I think they peaked a while ago and have benefitted from the overrating of the Big 10.

I thought the same thing. I actually think Michigan St takes one of these two against them.

 

[CuseJacket]

Gonzaga has really struggled in the first ten minutes of games lately. Another team that peaked way too early.

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're bored. They are absolutely filthy and have hardly been challenged for 40 minutes.

 

[orientalnc]

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're bored. They are absolutely filthy and have hardly been challenged for 40 minutes.

It's hard to know how teams compare across conference boundaries because COVID has so limited OOC games this year. I think there will be some brackets destroyed early in tournament.

 

[lv20gt]

ND isn't good, but some labeled them "hot" in the middle of their schedule after they beat a bunch of bad teams.

Well yeah, but being good and being hot aren't the same thing. One is a measure of quality and the other of momentum. Bad teams can get hot. Good teams can have a cold streak. Some times teams can ride a hot streak into overall improvement. Sometimes it simply is a flash in the pan and means nothing.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

It's hard to know how teams compare across conference boundaries because COVID has so limited OOC games this year. I think there will be some brackets destroyed early in tournament.

Agree. There will be some jaw dropping results that upon further reflection will make perfect sense given the defects of measuring a COVID season.

 

[CuseJacket]

I know you said you were just being devils advocate on our streak, but I'm taking the bait.

We lost to Clemson on the road when we had 1 day off while they had a week off to rest and prepare. We lost because a missed shot at the buzzer ricocheted in. Clemson's NET rating is 36.

Then we played Pittsburgh on 1 day of rest while they had a week off to rest and prepare. Pittsburgh was playing well then and had just beat Virginia Tech and only lost to Virginia by 7 on the road - it was neck and neck against Virginia.

Then we played Miami, who is terrible. But my God, it was 48-18 at half time. Its how we beat them that is important.

Then we beat Virginia Tech on the road. Yes they have an asterisk next to them, but they will finish 3rd in the ACC and are ranked.

Then we beat Syracuse, who is actually a strong team. After losing to us, when they could have easily given up, they beat both North Carolina and Clemson. They beat Clemson on 1 day off while Clemson had a week to rest and prepare.

Then we beat Duke, who has been up and down, but their 8 conference losses are by an average of 3.5 points.

I need to know how tall you are before I consider your opinion on 'Cuse and other basketball teams.

Yes, devil's advocate. We're playing well. I think our best game in the win streak was vs. Pitt due to the schedule.

Honestly I'd argue our best 3 game stretch was @ UVA, @ Duke, vs. FSU. While we didn't play well @ Duke and we finished 1-2 in that stretch, I thought the Virginia and FSU games were the most encouraging performances of the year. No one offers the "hot" label when you lose.

Clemson is an enigma. Their three quad 1 wins (3-6 overall) and undefeated record against quad 2-4 will carry them into the tournament, but there is no telling what team is showing up anymore.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I need to know how tall you are before I consider your opinion on 'Cuse and other basketball teams.

Freaking fantastic.

 

[CuseJacket]

Well yeah, but being good and being hot aren't the same thing. One is a measure of quality and the other of momentum. Bad teams can get hot. Good teams can have a cold streak. Some times teams can ride a hot streak into overall improvement. Sometimes it simply is a flash in the pan and means nothing.

We're debating semantics, and if you want to, I'll participate but probably not much longer. I find you knowledgeable, well-versed and basically agree with you.

I understand the point on momentum. So to hone in on that, I don't think we have momentum simply because we won. Our performance vs. Duke was arguably our worst in the 5 game stretch. We would have lost big to UVA or FSU the way we played vs. 'Cuse and Duke, imo. Worse than our prior outcomes vs. Virginia and FSU. I don't see how that type of performance projects forward any better than when we almost won @ UVA.

If this year's GT team played the MEAC and went undefeated, but played poorly in doing so, I'm not defining that as hot. I don't think we played materially different than the norm during our most recent stretch.

Re: ND, my perspective is they didn't play materially different. I don't know how you heat up by virtue of the bottom falling out of your schedule. Sure, maybe they gained some confidence, but the evidence suggests it was lost whenever they played a non-bottom feeder team.

Honestly I'm not even down on our performance of late as I think the pressure is part of the issue. We arguably played tight vs. Duke for a variety of reasons. So I think we're poised to take off in a tournament setting or when we get back to playing more freely.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Count me among the group who think a win is a win right now and the win against Duke was gutty.

Now to address the elephant in the room. Duke had an open shot at the end of regulation that rattled off the front rim. The mighty Duke teams of championship lore make that shot time after time. This is not one of those Duke teams.

However, we are due an off night periodically and to win on an off night is a good sign and a good confidence builder. Duke was banging us physically all night and playing really smart defense. I was in awe of how well they collapsed inside every time I thought we had opened a lane up.

I would not bet against Tech right now especially if our shooting gets hot again.

 

[RonJohn]

Count me among the group who think a win is a win right now and the win against Duke was gutty.

Now to address the elephant in the room. Duke had an open shot at the end of regulation that rattled off the front rim. The mighty Duke teams of championship lore make that shot time after time. This is not one of those Duke teams.

However, we are due an off night periodically and to win on an off night is a good sign and a good confidence builder. Duke was banging us physically all night and playing really smart defense. I was in awe of how well they collapsed inside every time I thought we had opened a lane up.

I would not bet against Tech right now especially if our shooting gets hot again.

I believe that if Jose had been 100% in that game, it would have been a much better game by GT and Duke wouldn't have had an opportunity to win it at the end of regulation. He was gimpy pretty much the whole game, and downright had problems walking for part of it. When he and Usher are playing with intensity, I think this team could beat anyone. The Duke game was an example of what the team looks like when one of those guys is slowed down.

 

[gt24]

Honestly I'm not even down on our performance of late as I think the pressure is part of the issue. We arguably played tight vs. Duke for a variety of reasons. So I think we're poised to take off in a tournament setting or when we get back to playing more freely.

said the same thing during 1st half, 2nd half, OT, and after the dook game. so much pressure on the team, the program, the fanbase (if that is even possible) to simply get back to the tournament. i suspect (hope?) that once we are actually in the tournament, we return to playing loose, free, confident, veteran bball as we had been. my best evidence-based guess is that we will do so is based on the VT game: a top-20 team, on the road, with everyone saying it was must win. we were excellent. only "nervous" game i have seen is dook on senior night.

 

[lv20gt]

I understand the point on momentum. So to hone in on that, I don't think we have momentum simply because we won. Our performance vs. Duke was arguably our worst in the 5 game stretch. We would have lost big to UVA or FSU the way we played vs. 'Cuse and Duke, imo. Worse than our prior outcomes vs. Virginia and FSU. I don't see how that type of performance projects forward any better than when we almost won @ UVA.

You're right that the Duke game was our worst in the 5 game stretch. But I think it makes the opposite point you're trying to make. We were playing with an obviously gimped Jose. For most of the year if Jose didn't play well we lost and often by a significant margin. I think it speaks to the fact that we are hot that we beat Cuse fairly convincingly with him going 1-4 shooting with just 1 steal and beat Duke with him going just 3-10 and clearly not himself. It projects forward better than our almost win at UVA because it showed a dynamic that the team really didn't have going back to last year, which was the ability to win without Jose playing well. We almost beat UVA when Jose put up 20 points on 7-12 shooting with 8 assists and 6 steals. Hot teams don't play amazing every game but they find ways to win. For example, people remember Kemba Walker leading UCONN to a championship. If that wasn't the definition of being hot then I don't know what was. And yet in the championship game they shot just 35% overall, 9% from 3, had almost twice as many turnovers as assists. They still won though.

I don't think we played materially different than the norm during our most recent stretch.

I disagree. Although you'll probably scoff at my reasoning. To me in every game starting with Pitt it felt like we were the team in the driver's seat even when the game was even or we were slightly behind. Basically when we were playing good we were beating teams by double digits in the halves. When we were playing "bad" our opponent was slightly ahead on the back of individuals having halves that they were almost certainly not going to reproduce. To me I was confident that Griffin wasn't going to keep scoring the way he was in the first half, that we'd adjust, slow him down, make a run, and win. And we did, in an almost methodical manner. Duke was similar and nearly played out the same. Moore wasn't going to keep going off for them. It took a little longer, but we erased the lead, and the built it up just like we did against Cuse. Now the difference was against Cuse we put it away while against Duke we screwed around and let the pressure get to us. However, even after that we took control in OT, built a 7 point lead up with a minute to go. To me, I don't think the end of the half 4 minutes and the last 30 seconds are really anything more than flukes. We had uncharacteristic bad decision making that we hadn't seen all year and I get no feeling we will see again. I'm much more likely to think that the way we took control in the second half, again, and then again in OT will more likely be indicative of future play.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

What day do we expect to first play in the ACC Tourney next week?

Will be good to get some rest and have Jose heal up a bit after Wake. Hope we can rest him against Wake but we have to win that game.

 

[lv20gt]

What day do we expect to first play in the ACC Tourney next week?

Will be good to get some rest and have Jose heal up a bit after Wake. Hope we can rest him against Wake but we have to win that game.

Take this with a grain of salt but on reddit there is a guy who keeps track of odds for teams to finish with certain seeds. Our highest was 55% for a 4 seed which would give us a double bye.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Take this with a grain of salt but on reddit there is a guy who keeps track of odds for teams to finish with certain seeds. Our highest was 55% for a 4 seed which would give us a double bye.

If we beat Wake we can be no worse than a 5 seed. If Louisville loses to Virginia, and we beat Wake, we then move to a 4 seed. Since VT took their ball and went home, nobody can take the 3 from them even though 9 teams already have 9 wins and Louisville could win a 9th game too.

 

[CINCYMETJACKET]

If we beat Wake we can be no worse than a 5 seed. If Louisville loses to Virginia, and we beat Wake, we then move to a 4 seed. Since VT took their ball and went home, nobody can take the 3 from them even though 9 teams already have 9 wins and Louisville could win a 9th game too.

Unless VT's COVID plan prevents them from playing in the tourney. Then I assume everyone else moves up a spot.

 

[jbix80]

A couple mocks have Georgia tech playing USC in the first round. Would be a very interesting matchup. Moses would give Mobley fits.

Usher and Sturdivant revenge game

 

[Fatmike91]

Lunardi's Bubble:

It's amazing to me how bad the recent resume's are for most of the teams on the list. And think about how much worse the resume's are of the teams that have bounced off the bubble (like Indiana). I think Syracuse has a good shot to play themselves in.

Last Four Byes:
Louisville: Played 4 games since the end of January (NET 50)
Rutgers: Losing record in conference. Lost 3 of last 4. (NET 37)
GT: Won 5 in a row (NET 38)
VCU: Lost 2 of the last 3, including losing to George Mason and Davidson. (NET 35)

Last 4 in:
Drake: Just lost to Bradford. They're not Duke. (NET 42)
Mich St: 8-11 in conference. Lost 2 of the last 3. (NET 74)
Xavier: 6-6 in conference. Lost 4 of last 6. (NET 53)
Boise State: Lost 3 in a row (NET 45)

First 4 out:
Seton Hall: Lost 3 in a row. (NET 57)
Utah St: Mostly winning in the Mtn west conf. Hard to judge. (NET 48)
St Louis: 2-2 in last 4. Lost to Dayton and VCU. (NET 40)
Duke: 1-2 in last 3 against other teams on this list. (NET 58)

Next 4 out:
Syracuse: 5-2 in last 7 (NET 51)
SMU: Played 1 game in the past month (NET 54)
Memphis: Mostly winning in the American Conf. Hard for me to judge. (NET 55)
Ole Miss: 9-8 in conference. 2-2 in last 4. (NET 56)

I think we're probably more safely in the tourney than most folks realize with how weak the bubble action has been.

/

 

[lv20gt]

I think we're probably more safely in the tourney than most folks realize with how weak the bubble action has been.

I agree, although I also think it has to do with the fact we are very well liked by computers in comparison to the others on the bubble watch, and I think the committee is more likely to closely look at those than pollsters (I can't really blame pollsters for not looking at it for ~100 teams trying to update it as often as they do). FWIW, it isn't just the NET. BPI, SOR, KPI, Sagrin, Pomroy. They are all pretty much in agreement about GT (we're between 30-40 for all of them). Most of the others have a lot more variance. Some examples are UL that is ranked above 30 in 3 and below 45 in the other 2. Rutgers has three in the thirties and 2 at 50. VCU has a spread of 22 to 62. MSU has a spread of 36 to 69.

I have to think that if we are even still on the bubble come tourney time we'd have a resume that stands out because of that (if that trend holds). At the very least I would think that would cause them to look closer at the two bad losses to see if there is a reason to believe they are outliers.