Does a Quad 1 win outweigh a Quad 4 loss?
The 1-point loss to SLU also weighs heavily.
1 Like
They were in the hunt for a while last year on the strength of that win in Spokane. But they needed at least one of the latter SMC/GU games, especially after losing to LMU. Then the Pepperdine fiasco, and well… They probably still wouldn’t have had it considering that Stanford and Washington dropped to being Q3 losses. Even with another SMC/GU win, last year’s team would have had 3 Q3 losses on Selection Sunday which I think would have led to them getting passed on. But that’s just a guess. I read blogs but don’t pretend to really know.
@buckets – Here’s how the Bauertology describes the use of Quadrants, which he claims is roughly the second-most-important consideration after Resume Metrics (e.g. Wins Above Bubble, etc.)
" 2. Quadrants: However, it’s not enough to just have good résumé metrics—you can easily compile good numbers in that category by beating all the teams you’re supposed to beat and losing to all the teams you’re supposed to lose to. The quadrants defray that a bit by answering this question: How many big, meaty wins did you collect against fellow tournament-level teams? This is why you hear so much about Quad 1 wins, i.e., beating teams that rank 1-30 in NET at home, 1-50 on a neutral court, or 1-75 on the road. This is further broken down into Quad 1A, which is basically just Quad 1’s top half (1-15 home, 1-25 neutral, 1-40 road). These Q1A wins are the elite of the elite—the more, the better. But it’s also important to surround your Quad 1 wins with good, quality Quad 2 wins (beating other decent teams, even if they aren’t tournament-level), as well as avoiding losses in Quad 3 and 4 (teams you should have no trouble beating—though these “bad” losses are never as emphasized as the “good” wins are)."
2 Likes
The blessing in the SLU loss is that they are much better than we likely anticipated in the beginning of the year.
They’re 17-1, ranked in the AP Poll at 24, and so on. They could hit a brick wall, but they seem destined for the dance.
Of course, beating them would have been great (though, metaphysically, would they have reeled off this year with an early season loss to SCU - we can’t say for sure).
But a 1-point neutral site loss to a Top 30 type team (and still climbing) can’t hurt that much?
Just opportunity cost. If Knapper hits the last shot (or SLU doesn’t hit theirs), then even with Loyola, we aren’t looking at needing another GU/SMC win. Just beat all of the 4th-12th WCC teams, make the semis, and get Nash (and Nashty) their tickets to wherever a 10th seeded SCU is sent.
1 Like
If I am deciphering this correctly, a Quad 1 win, especially Quad 1A, would trump a Quad 4 loss.
Right now, SLU is at 22 in NET, which qualifies them as a Quad 1A win on a neutral court. Of course, their ranking wouldn’t be that high if they had lost to SCU, but the Broncos would’ve been much higher ranked, so still would’ve been a quality loss for the Billikens.
I think we’re saying the same thing, or talking around it:
On the one hand, a team like SCU is not likely to get many Q1 opportunities in any given year - two of which will be in Moraga and Spokane, and last year’s GU win aside, it’s really tough to win those.
Given where we are, we probably need 5-6 Q1 chances to win one - and nearly had one against SLU.
The other side of the coin is that the 1-point loss to SLU could have ended up in some other Quadrant - I didn’t personally think they looked that good. But here they are.
SLU is better than expected, LUC is way way worse. I think the staff really put us in position to get an at-large, and we’re walking the knife’s edge.
I hope we hold serve long enough to make the GU game in Santa Clara a massive event.
Perhaps there just isn’t the right case this year, but I don’t see a top 40 Net team with a Q4 loss balanced out by a few spectacular wins. Once you have one, you appear to bump into a ceiling around 40.
5 Likes
I actually fear this game less because it’ll be a Q2 opportunity and I think that will have the guys focused.
Pacific is good though. Wazzu scares me more.
Nashty, feel the EXACT same way about the Valentines Day battle in Leavey.
I think it legit has a chance to be the biggest SCU game in 25+ years.I really can’t think of a bigger one if we hold serve until then.
3 Likes
Joe Rexrode on the Athletic has us as part of the last 4 in, playing San Diego St in the first four with the winner playing (6) North Carolina in Portland.
@kevind716 is that supposed to be a link? I’m not able to click it.
Didn’t meant for it to be. I was just copy my and pasting his name.
But if you want to read the article:
1 Like
Thanks!
Darned paywalls!
It’s great to be having this convo - the hopes of 30 years being left out. With six road games in hard to win settings it’s a tall order and not likely. I feel our best chance is to save our biggest win for beating the Zags or SMC in the WCC tournament final and get the auto.
Looking ahead, keeping this young roster intact will be huge for next year with the Zags off to the PAC 12.
Keeping the core of Hammond, Graves., Sash, with the comeback next season of Normand, Tadjo, and Francis C developing and key transfer in resets our NCAA chances. I didn’t mention Bukky or Darlan. It would be great to keep them but we can live without them.
Not giving up hope by any means, but our track record in these situations is less than stellar in “big” games….
2 Likes
I watched some of the Nevada-SJSU game last night. The Wolfpack absolutely annihilated the Spartans last night, 87-54. Even though they beat a team with just one win in the MWC, the win catapulted Nevada up SEVEN spots in the NET ranking, from 72 to 65.
2 Likes
Yes, it is a tall order, but let’s be honest – the Broncos SHOULD run the table against the bottom eight teams. The roughest stretch will be at home vs. Gonzaga on Feb 14, followed by @USF on Feb 21 and @SMC on Feb 25. The one possible advantage is that the Dons will play Gonzaga at home on Feb 18, while SCU will be coming off of a full week off. Hopefully it will be rest not rust!
I’ll be at USD for the game on Saturday – halfway through the conference schedule!
5 Likes
My “swing thought” so to speak, on all this that helps keep me sane is essentially:
”As much as I want the Broncos in the dance, if they don’t run the table against the rest of the slate, they aren’t a Tournament team and don’t deserve to be there”.
GU and SMC have done it many times over the year, occasionally dropping a game against a WCC team, esp. on the road - but refraining from losing to a 300+ RPI/NET team as we have.
Gotta earn it!
If we could live between 35 and 65 in the NET rankings for a period of years, I’d be a happy man. Eventually, the ball has to bounce the right way for us.
4 Likes
I think you can argue finishing with one loss might be good enough. But i think this sentiment is very fair.
USD was on fire tonight. Nervous about that game now.
Inching closer in Lunardi’s latest view. Setting aside what we know SCU needs to do over the balance of the conference slate, we’ll need to keep an eye on (& obviously root against) those currently around of us. Stanford lost Okpara, their second leading scorer, to season ending injury…
1 Like
Offensively they were on fire. They played decent defense in the first half, but whatever halftime adjustments WSU made worked. USD had a hard time slowing them down. Almost reminded me of a 1990 LMU game - though Westhead would’ve called this one slow, relatively speaking!
The final team stats tell an interesting story:
The 2021-22 Dons, who received an at-large bid at 24-9, did so only making the WCC Semis and losing 6 WCC game (GU x2, SMC x2, BYU and a home game against Portland). The Portland team they lost two was not great but was .500+ in the end.
They had no head scratcher non-conference loss, having gone 13-2 in non-Conference with both losses to good teams (a good LUC and GCU).
Which is all to say, you can probably lose to a non-GU/SMC at get an at large bid if you refrain from the lame loss we already took. Our bad loss card seems to be very much burned.
2 Likes