• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2023-24 Wake Forest Basketball Season - 21-14 (11-9) - KP#29 / NET#43

spritethr said:
Seeing people on Twitter talk about how they can tell that we "aren't used to winning shit" like it's a knock or something. Yeah, we haven't been used to winning big in basketball for the past fifteen years. Great observation lmfao. Nothing but cope from Duke fans
Click to expand...
The comeback from the losing team in a court storm game is always this. At the end of the day, it misses the point entirely because it doesn't even attempt to understand the perspective of the other team.
 
spritethr said:
Seeing people on Twitter talk about how they can tell that we "aren't used to winning shit" like it's a knock or something. Yeah, we haven't been used to winning big in basketball for the past fifteen years. Great observation lmfao. Nothing but cope from Duke fans
Click to expand...
Guess they forgot losing at the Joel last season.
 
Some interesting tidbits from an Athletic article earlier this week interviewing the chairman of the selection committee, Charles McClelland. It's the first time I've ever seen someone talk about Quad 1A and 1B games. Seems like that notion would help us if Florida ends the season on the wrong side of the 30th NET ranking, for example. Seems like he is at least aware of some of the nuances that we discuss here, for better for worse.

theathletic.com

Bracket Watch: The selection committee chairman speaks!

Big 12 gaming the system? Importance of road wins? Those sliding quads? Commitee chair Charles McClelland answers our questions.
theathletic.com theathletic.com

Some excerpts from the article:

We caught up with the chairman this week to discuss some pertinent issues (and nominate ourselves for future committee membership … still waiting to hear back on that one).

How about the notion that certain leagues, like the Big 12, have gamed the system by playing soft nonconference schedules and then simply racking up quality wins against one another? Iowa State, for example, played the No. 323 nonconference schedule per the NET, yet had five Quad 1 wins before the reveal. (The Cyclones added another Saturday against Texas Tech before losing to Houston on Monday.) They were awarded an early No. 3 seed by the committee, 12th overall.

“We spend a significant amount of time discussing this exact topic,” McClelland said. “It’s always good for the game to play good nonconference schedules. If teams are going to play a weak nonconference schedule, it makes it critically important for them to do well in their league games. Even in the loss at Houston, it was a hard-fought game, and I think the nation could see, even if they watched just that one game and not the entirety of the season like we do, that Iowa State is a very good team and certainly deserving of the seed we gave them.

“But if you do play a weak nonconference schedule and then you get into the league and don’t win those games against the best teams and are just kind of floating there at let’s say 9-9 … just because you have a tremendous amount of wins doesn’t necessarily guarantee you a way into the tournament.”

This week provided more evidence that winning on the road is extremely difficult. McClelland said the stats provided to the committee show that top-10 teams are winning on the road against unranked teams at about half the rate they have in the previous several years. So will road wins be extra valuable on Selection Sunday?

“It’s a red flag when almost all of your quality wins come at home,” he said. “So it’s paramount that teams prove they can win away from their home court.

“But we look at several metrics. We have tons and tons of data. Who you play, where you played and what the outcome was will always be the fundamental core of what we do.”

The quad system always creates confusion and controversy. A team can get a Quad 1 win by beating the 75th-best team (on the road) or by beating the No. 1 team. McClelland said the committee puts all results of those in context; team sheets are set up so that there are both Quad 1A-1B and Quad 2A-2B wins that separate truly high-end victories from more pedestrian ones.

“It’s not just a matter of counting Quad 1s and Quad 2s,” McClelland said. “There’s no such thing as a bad win because winning is winning especially in those first two quadrants, but they are not all created equally. Having a Quad 1 win against a team that’s not seriously considered for a spot in the tournament is still a good win, but it’s not as good as a road win over a team we have on top four lines.”

Or how about those wins that once looked good but now aren’t so much, or vice versa? We presented McClelland the example of UCLA. The Bruins were as low as No. 209 in the NET after a brutal start, but a recent hot streak has them near the top 100, meaning what was once a Quad 3 win for somebody early in the season could be a Quad 2 at the end of it.

“There could be any number of reasons why a team is struggling — injuries, transfers, the coach not being there — so we have to take the entirety of the season into consideration,” McClelland said. “We also do that with the wins and the quads. We know this was a Quad 3 in November, but because UCLA has increased its overall level of competitiveness, it’s now a Quad 2 win. We take all that into consideration, absolutely.”
 
TCU is 37 in Net/28 in KP. We are 25/19. They are the perfect test case to compare us to the Big 12. We are 2-4 in Q1, they are 3-8. We have a better percentage of wins, just one less. They have had 11!!! chances.

Essentially identical records, no Q3/4 losses for either. Q2 is similar, the only difference is more of their losses are Q1 when we have Q2 losses. All caused by the over inflation of the big 12 vs the acc.

They are a 7-8 seed generally where we are 11. Bullshit.
 
Then what's the point!? I know...clicks. But that influences the committee
 
At season’s end, there are going to be 65 teams almost all agree on. They may dissect a handful to fill those last 3 spots, but I don’t believe it is a deep dive into every team. Also, every single year the seeding is criticized and is very hard to come to any sort of consensus on such a subjective topic.
 
deacfan123 said:
Thats the jump we were looking for. win twice this week and we won't even be on this graphic.
Click to expand...
For decades, I've grown accustomed to the late season slumps that we have in February. Doesn't seem to be the case this year, which is quite nice for a change.

3-1 the rest of the way for sure gets us in. 2-2 should still do the trick, but we'd probably need to win an ACCT game as well just to be on the safe side.
 
ChrisTheDeacm89 said:
For decades, I've grown accustomed to the late season slumps that we have in February. Doesn't seem to be the case this year, which is quite nice for a change.

3-1 the rest of the way for sure gets us in. 2-2 should still do the trick, but we'd probably need to win an ACCT game as well just to be on the safe side.
Click to expand...
I'm not all that confident 2-2 gets us there. 2-2 would either be failing to add any more Q1 wins or adding at least one pretty awful loss. 2-2 probably requires a significant win in the ACC tournament, certainly to avoid Dayton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top