UCLA a 4 seed...

[cusetown1]

I'd love to be on the other side of that bet. You might want to let Vegas know - in the futures market the Pac 12 has three teams in the top 10 in terms of odds to win the NC.

Good and they'll make a lot of money on those morons who pick them.

 

[cuseattle]

All Pac 12 teams will be bounced by the elite 8.

Oregon is good. Don't want to see them.

 

[bpo57]

Good and they'll make a lot of money on those morons who pick them.

I'll bet you a hundred even up that at least one PAC 12 team makes the Final Four.

 

[dasher]

Pretty sure they are a 2... Showed graphic earlier.

This game is unreal.

Talent everywhere. Future NBA players on both teams.

Absolutely both teams could win it all.

That conference totally bombed in last years NCAA. Those teams look great to me.

 

[dasher]

UCLA would run a UVA or Dook right out of the building. Games against L'ville and UNC would be very competitive.

They look great to e but let's not forget how bad the Pac did last year in the NCAA's

 

[NineOneSeven]

They look great to e but let's not forget how bad the Pac did last year in the NCAA's

What does last year have to do with this year?

 

[dasher]

What does last year have to do with this year?

Very little but it was the whole conference. And that gives me pause. That's all. Much like pitt doing well every year until the NCAA

 

[CaptainJ]

What kind of odds do all of you folks who say no PAC12 has no chance at making the Final 4 want to give me on a wager? I'm not even certain how I feel, but being you are certain I'm guessing you will give me good odds, and I might take them.

 

[bpo57]

They look great to e but let's not forget how bad the Pac did last year in the NCAA's

No doubt they did poorly last year but each year is different. The old BE had years where they were great and years where they were God-awful in the tourney.

 

[OrangeDW]

Lonzo Ball wasn't running the show last year. I like UCLA's chances to go deep this year. That kid is a PG. Makes the right play almost every time.

 

[Alsacs]

The top 3 of the Pac-12 are all legit NC contenders. The rest of the conference sucks sans USC but to discount Oregon, Arizona, and UCLA is just stupid.
They are all high powered offenses and except UCLA can play D.

 

[Briancuse]

It's not just Lunardi. They were a consensus 4 on the bracket matrix before this game. I expect they will move up considerably after this win.

They should have been higher going into tonight, absurd that they were considered a 4 seed.

 

[jncuse]

If, (and this may certainly not be the case) considers the analytical rankings the Pac 12 will likely not be getting a #1 seed.

Arizona - 23,22, 19
UCLA - 14, 12, 13
Oregon - 17.13,12

Take out the games these teams play each other. The other 15 PAC12 games are not any more difficult than Gonzaga's 18 WCC games.

So all you have to do is take away 2 losses from Arizona, UCLA, and Oregon to try to compare records with Gonzaga.

 

[Alsacs]

If, (and this may certainly not be the case) considers the analytical rankings the Pac 12 will likely not be getting a #1 seed.

Arizona - 23,22, 19
UCLA - 14, 12, 13
Oregon - 17.13,12

Take out the games these teams play each other. The other 15 PAC12 games are not any more difficult than Gonzaga's 18 WCC games.

So all you have to do is take away 2 losses from Arizona, UCLA, and Oregon to try to compare records with Gonzaga.

USC, Utah, Cal, Stanford are miles better than the WCC 3-6 teams.
USC with luck could be a sweet 16 team.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Good teams but neither team looks unbeatable. Probably would finish between 3-5th in the acc

3-5th.

Good lord.

 

[realorange]

Ball is the real deal. He and his running mates will be a tough out if they are allowed to run by the opposition. There defense not at the same level.

The interesting team to me is the Zags. Traditionally they have flamed out early, but this is one of their best teams in a long time. Trouble is there has been no easy judgement due to the schedule they've played. They could be the dark horse as most people will blow them off.

 

[Cusefan0307]

There goes Gonzagas undefeated season. A home loss to BYU.

 

[bpo57]

If, (and this may certainly not be the case) considers the analytical rankings the Pac 12 will likely not be getting a #1 seed.

Arizona - 23,22, 19
UCLA - 14, 12, 13
Oregon - 17.13,12

Take out the games these teams play each other. The other 15 PAC12 games are not any more difficult than Gonzaga's 18 WCC games.

So all you have to do is take away 2 losses from Arizona, UCLA, and Oregon to try to compare records with Gonzaga.

Can't agree with that comparison between the PAC-12 and WCC. The next level down (4-6) is no comparison. USC and Cal particularly are far better than their counterparts in the WCC.

I think all three of the PAC-12 teams are likely to be #2 seeds. I suppose one of them could drift to #3 but no way will any of them be a 4 seed. I'm sure one of them will be delighted to be a #2 with Gonzaga a #1 in that bracket (assuming the Zags are a #1 - not a given I know).

 

[jncuse]

USC, Utah, Cal, Stanford are miles better than the WCC 3-6 teams.
USC with luck could be a sweet 16 team.

I was not comparing those with the 3-6 teams in the WCC. I was comparing them with the 2-4 teams in the WCC,

It's quite easy to compare the validity of Gonzaga's record vs the other 3 Pac 12 teams.

I am comparing Six games against USC, Utah, Cal, Stanford vs. Sis Games against St. Mary's, BYU, and San Francisco (unbalanced schedule). You can't argue one is harder than the other. Every game after that is pure fluff that any top 3 seed in America should sweep. So that component of the schedule is about the same.

The OOC schedule for all 4 teams is of similar difficulty.

So that leaves us with intra-conference games between Arizona, UCLA, and Oregon.

Take away 2 losses from UCLA. (1-1 vs Arizona, and loss at Oregon)
Take away 2 losses from Arizona. (1-1 vs Arizona, and loss at Oregon)
Take away 1 loss from Oregon (as they only played UCLA on the road and got to play Arizona at home)

Adjusted Standings


UCLA 28-1
Gonzaga 29-1
Arizona 28-2
Oregon 26-3

Let's assume Gonzaga wins the WCC tourney. Gonzaga will have to play one more high quality matchup against St. Mary's if they win the WCC conference. I know you will say they are not that good. But you can't use analytics to justify top 50 wins by Syracuse, and then ignore a neutral court win against a team with great rankings. Whether we use RPI, or KP, or BPI, the numbers say it is a great neutral court win.

If UCLA wins the Pac-12 tournament, to me they are the #1 seed. If they lose the Pac-12 Final after beating Zona or Oregon, it's a 50/50 debate. If they lose in the Semi's, I give it to Gonzaga.

If Arizona or Oregon win the Pac-12 tournament it is a 50/50 debate.

I think at the end of the day there is no clear cut answer here that we can be confident what the committee will do. Except if UCLA wins the PAC-12 tournament -- I think that is the only clear cut scenario where the #1 seed is determined.

 

[AZOrange]

Pretty sure they are a 2... Showed graphic earlier.

This game is unreal.

Talent everywhere. Future NBA players on both teams.

Absolutely both teams could win it all.

Wait I though the pac12 is horrible?

 

[jncuse]

Can't agree with that comparison between the PAC-12 and WCC. The next level down (4-6) is no comparison. USC and Cal particularly are far better than their counterparts in the WCC.

That was not the comparison I made. I am comparing 4-7 in the Pac-10 vs 2-4 in the WCC for a very specific reason. (6 games vs 6 games), Everything else is fluff that none of the teams have business losing.

The part that is not comparable on their conference schedules is the games between the 3 Pac-12 teams. So I am deducting 2 losses from Arizona, 2 losses from UCLA, and 1 loss from Oregon (as they only play one on the road)

In reality the Pac 12 vs WCC schedule is 1 game harder for Oregon, 2 games harder for UCLA, and 2 games harder for Arizona.

 

[manleyzoo]

I was not comparing those with the 3-6 teams in the WCC. I was comparing them with the 2-4 teams in the WCC,

It's quite easy to compare the validity of Gonzaga's record vs the other 3 Pac 12 teams.

I am comparing Six games against USC, Utah, Cal, Stanford vs. Sis Games against St. Mary's, BYU, and San Francisco (unbalanced schedule). You can't argue one is harder than the other. Every game after that is pure fluff that any top 3 seed in America should sweep. So that component of the schedule is about the same.

The OOC schedule for all 4 teams is of similar difficulty.

So that leaves us with intra-conference games between Arizona, UCLA, and Oregon.

Take away 2 losses from UCLA. (1-1 vs Arizona, and loss at Oregon)
Take away 2 losses from Arizona. (1-1 vs Arizona, and loss at Oregon)
Take away 1 loss from Oregon (as they only played UCLA on the road and got to play Arizona at home)

Adjusted Standings


UCLA 28-1
Gonzaga 29-1
Arizona 28-2
Oregon 26-3

Let's assume Gonzaga wins the WCC tourney. Gonzaga will have to play one more high quality matchup against St. Mary's if they win the WCC conference. I know you will say they are not that good. But you can't use analytics to justify top 50 wins by Syracuse, and then ignore a neutral court win against a team with great rankings. Whether we use RPI, or KP, or BPI, the numbers say it is a great neutral court win.

If UCLA wins the Pac-12 tournament, to me they are the #1 seed. If they lose the Pac-12 Final after beating Zona or Oregon, it's a 50/50 debate. If they lose in the Semi's, I give it to Gonzaga.

If Arizona or Oregon win the Pac-12 tournament it is a 50/50 debate.

I think at the end of the day there is no clear cut answer here that we can be confident what the committee will do. Except if UCLA wins the PAC-12 tournament -- I think that is the only clear cut scenario where the #1 seed is determined.

Doesn't take trained eyes to see that the Pac 12's top to middle are way better than the WCC's top to middle. As a left coaster I get to see both conferences on tv a lot. It's easy to see the difference in quality between the two. On most nights the WCC isn't any better than a high mid-major. Far better athletes, better coaches, bigger arenas, just all around better in the Pac 12. Nothing wrong with the WCC but if you stack a Pac 12 bottom feeder against any team in the WCC other than the top two, maybe three in an unusual season, it's not even competitive. Can BYU compete every once in a while? Yes, but they're playing 25 year-olds for the most part.

Now if you want to go back to USF's teams of Russell or Cartwright and Santa Clara's to the late 60s with Dennis Awtrey and the mid 80s with Kurt Rambis, well, that's a different story.

 

[jncuse]

Doesn't take trained eyes to see that the Pac 12's top to middle are way better than the WCC's top to middle. As a left coaster I get to see both conferences on tv a lot. It's easy to see the difference in quality between the two. On most nights the WCC isn't any better than a high mid-major. Far better athletes, better coaches, bigger arenas, just all around better in the Pac 12. Nothing wrong with the WCC but if you stack a Pac 12 bottom feeder against any team in the WCC other than the top two, maybe three in an unusual season, it's not even competitive. Can BYU compete every once in a while? Yes, but they're playing 25 year-olds for the most part.

Now if you want to go back to USF's teams of Russell or Cartwright and Santa Clara's to the late 60s with
Dennis Awtrey and the mid 80s with Kurt Rambis, well, that's a different story.

All I am trying to do is find a way to equate the records of Gonzaga and the 3 top PAC-12 teams. I am not arguing that the WCC = Pac 12 top to middle. It doesn't and I never stated that.

1. We are comparing Arizona-Oregon-UCLA vs Gonzaga. Of course the P12 is better at the top.

They have 3 great teams vs 1 great team. I agree they are better at the top. That is the very reason I am discounting 2 losses from those teams at the top of the Pac-12.

2. What I am trying to determine is if I should discount the Pac-12 records by even more than 2 games. So I need to compare the other decent teams in both conferences. 6 games in the WCC vs 7 or 8 in the Pac-12

Cal, USC, Utah, Stanford. Colorado

vs

St. Mary's, BYU, San Francisco

I am comparing them based on this year. Not prior year. Not their historical prestige, their fanbase, their arenas, the players they currently have in the NBA. And I don't care if BYU has 25 year olds on their team.

Before you say the Pac12 group is clearly better. Consider the following

- St. Mary's is clearly the best of the group based on any analytical system.
- Analytics say that San Francisco is about the same level as Stanford
- The above group of WCC teams is 3-1 against those Pac 12 teams this year.

St. Mary's wins by 15 at Stanford
BYU win over Colorado
San Francisco win over Utah on a neutral court
USC wins over BYU on a neutral court

I don't understand how one could then argue the Pac12 group above is that much harder. I am not arguing that the group of WCC is better. But are they certainly no worse.

I view it as a wash. So I am not going to discount the records of Arizona, Oregon or UCLA anymore.


3. I don't care if Washington, Washington St, Oregon St, and Arizona St, have been good teams in the past. Any top 3 seed will sweep the above teams and will sweep the bottom teams in the WCC. They are all irrelevant games.

 

[bpo57]

All I am trying to do is find a way to equate the records of Gonzaga and the 3 top PAC-12 teams. I am not arguing that the WCC = Pac 12 top to middle. It doesn't and I never stated that.

1. We are comparing Arizona-Oregon-UCLA vs Gonzaga. Of course the P12 is better at the top.

They have 3 great teams vs 1 great team. I agree they are better at the top. That is the very reason I am discounting 2 losses from those teams at the top of the Pac-12.

2. What I am trying to determine is if I should discount the Pac-12 records by even more than 2 games. So I need to compare the other decent teams in both conferences. 6 games in the WCC vs 7 or 8 in the Pac-12

Cal, USC, Utah, Stanford. Colorado

vs

St. Mary's, BYU, San Francisco

I am comparing them based on this year. Not prior year. Not their historical prestige, their fanbase, their arenas, the players they currently have in the NBA. And I don't care if BYU has 25 year olds on their team.

Before you say the Pac12 group is clearly better. Consider the following

- St. Mary's is clearly the best of the group based on any analytical system.
- Analytics say that San Francisco is about the same level as Stanford
- The above group of WCC teams is 3-1 against those Pac 12 teams this year.

St. Mary's wins by 15 at Stanford
BYU win over Colorado
San Francisco win over Utah on a neutral court
USC wins over BYU on a neutral court

I don't understand how one could then argue the Pac12 group above is that much harder. I am not arguing that the group of WCC is better. But are they certainly no worse.

I view it as a wash. So I am not going to discount the records of Arizona, Oregon or UCLA anymore.


3. I don't care if Washington, Washington St, Oregon St, and Arizona St, have been good teams in the past. Any top 3 seed will sweep the above teams and will sweep the bottom teams in the WCC. They are all irrelevant games.

I don't see the logic of comparing the middle of the P-12 to the top of the WCC. I just think the first five teams in the P-12 are miles ahead of the top five in the WCC. The rest is fluff.

The WCC sucks to be quite honest. St. Mary's is a mediocre squad that would have trouble finishing 5th in the P-12 imo. Until last night Gonzaga had won every single WCC game by double digits. Are they really that great or does their league suck? I am going with the latter.

 

[jncuse]

!!!.

Why would you expect me to argue any of your points when you are failing to do the courtesy of the same for me? When you are moving the goalposts all the time and attributing comments to me that I never made.

I clearly laid out 2 assumptions to compare the records of the two. You then said the Top 5 is much better than the Top 5. No crap -- but that has nothing to do with the process I went about equating records. I can't argue that the Top 5 are anywhere close to equal -- but it has nothing to do with the assumptions you made.


#1. I discounted 2 games because the top 3 in the Pac 12 play each other. Is that not fair. Is that wrong?

Yes or No.

#2.

Cal/USC/Stanford/Colorado/Utah is better than St. Mary's / BYU / San Francisco.

The head to head records are in favour of the WCC
The analytics are a draw.

So basically you are saying
a) I ignore the head to head records
b) I ignore the analytics
c) My eye test is better.