Woodall and Gibbs combine for 54

[jdubs30]

Pitt now has won 4 in a row with a very favorable schedule coming up. Uh oh...

We played them at the right time, I would hate to see them on Thursday in the Garden.

 

[Marsh01]

Pitt now has won 4 in a row with a very favorable schedule coming up. Uh oh...

We played them at the right time, I would hate to see them on Thursday in the Garden.

I said this a week ago. Pitt goes a minimum of 9-9 in conference and makes the NCAA's.

 

[jdubs30]

I said this a week ago. Pitt goes a minimum of 9-9 in conference and makes the NCAA's.

Eek that's a stretch. 0 good OOC wins.

 

[PoppyHart]

I said this a week ago. Pitt goes a minimum of 9-9 in conference and makes the NCAA's.

If they go 9-9 they could be a 4-5 seed. It won't even be close.

 

[Marsh01]

Eek that's a stretch. 0 good OOC wins.

Wont matter. Hot team with Woodall back. Committee will take that into consideration.

 

[jdubs30]

They've beaten GTown, @WVU(who's falling fast), OK State (under .500) and Tennessee (under .500). They have @Ville, WVU and @UConn left, they almost have to win all 3 of those.

Unless they do that and make it to Saturday in NYC, there is no way they are a 5 seed at 9-9 in conference.

 

[pearl31]

If they go 9-9 they could be a 4-5 seed. It won't even be close.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Wont matter. Hot team with Woodall back. Committee will take that into consideration.

This^^^
They lost their PG for 11 games & lost 8 in a row.
They get their PG back & have now won 4-5 in a row. Thats not a coincidence.
If we can find an excuse for playing 4 below average games w/out Melo, they definitely have a case for their past issues.

 

[rrlbees]

As I said in another thread, regardless of record etc, they are the 2nd best team in the BE right now with Woodall back.

 

[zhanjuzi]

As I said in another thread, regardless of record etc, they are the 2nd best team in the BE right now with Woodall back.

Agree .. I would hate to play them now.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

As I said in another thread, regardless of record etc, they are the 2nd best team in the BE right now with Woodall back.

2nd?

Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk

 

[MyMeloMyMan]

watch, this will be the year they sneak in as a 10 seed and get to a final four finally.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

If they go 9-9 they could be a 4-5 seed. It won't even be close.

9-9 puts them on the good side of the bubble, which would be about an 11 or 12 seed.

The Woodall injury and return will help them, though. A lot depends on what they do in the BET.

One thing that hurts Pitt is their OOC schedule is really bad. No decent wins and a couple of poor losses.

 

[PoppyHart]

I don't think there's a chance in hell 9-9 gets them an 11-12 seed. That implies 3-5 losses with a healthy Woodall, depending on how you view the ND and Lou games, in which he was clearly not back to full health.

An 11-12 seed would be the biggest injustice to a 5-6 seed ever.

9-9 puts them on the good side of the bubble, which would be about an 11 or 12 seed.

The Woodall injury and return will help them, though. A lot depends on what they do in the BET.

One thing that hurts Pitt is their OOC schedule is really bad. No decent wins and a couple of poor losses.

 

[pearl31]

I don't think there's a chance in hell 9-9 gets them an 11-12 seed. That implies 3-5 losses with a healthy Woodall, depending on how you view the ND and Lou games, in which he was clearly not back to full health.

An 11-12 seed would be the biggest injustice to a 5-6 seed ever.

You're wrong.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I don't think there's a chance in hell 9-9 gets them an 11-12 seed. That implies 3-5 losses with a healthy Woodall, depending on how you view the ND and Lou games, in which he was clearly not back to full health.

An 11-12 seed would be the biggest injustice to a 5-6 seed ever.

Woodall played in some of their losses.

If 9-9 gets them a 5 seed, you are saying 8-10 gets them a 6 to 8 seed, 7-11 gets them a 9-12 seed. I don't see any way possible that Pitt gets in at 7-11 in the BE. No chance.

Their resume still sucks right now. They only have 2 top 100 OOC wins, and only 2 quality in conference wins. They're not getting in based upon beating SJU and USF twice, they will need to beat Lville, UConn and WVU in their remaining schedule to even have a chance.

 

[PoppyHart]

Yes, he played in 3 games that they lost. But he played 18 and 21 minutes against ND and Lou, respectively, and put up zeros across the board, as he was clearly not healthy. The ND game was right in the middle of the 11 games he sat out. That's why I said it depends on how you look at those games. In games where he has played 25 minutes, though, they are 10-1. A 9-9 record implies 15-3 in games he plays when fully healthy, not counting the BET.

Yes, their OOC record is below average, but imo it's foolish to think a committee would take a team that was ranked 10th or 11th preseason, and fulfilled most expectations when at full strength, and distort the balance of the bracket like that.

Then again, this is the board that assumed Utah State was a lock for an at-large last year and would/should have received an 8-9 seed.

Woodall played in some of their losses.

If 9-9 gets them a 5 seed, you are saying 8-10 gets them a 6 to 8 seed, 7-11 gets them a 9-12 seed. I don't see any way possible that Pitt gets in at 7-11 in the BE. No chance.

Their resume still sucks right now. They only have 2 top 100 OOC wins, and only 2 quality in conference wins. They're not getting in based upon beating SJU and USF twice, they will need to beat Lville, UConn and WVU in their remaining schedule to even have a chance.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

Yes, he played in 3 games that they lost. But he played 18 and 21 minutes against ND and Lou, respectively, and put up zeros across the board, as he was clearly not healthy. The ND game was right in the middle of the 11 games he sat out. That's why I said it depends on how you look at those games. In games where he has played 25 minutes, though, they are 10-1. A 9-9 record implies 15-3 in games he plays when fully healthy, not counting the BET.

Yes, their OOC record is below average, but imo it's foolish to think a committee would take a team that was ranked 10th or 11th preseason, and fulfilled most expectations when at full strength, and distort the balance of the bracket like that.

Then again, this is the board that assumed Utah State was a lock for an at-large last year and would/should have received an 8-9 seed.

The problem is that you are still basing it off of Pitt's preseason expectations. Even when Woodall was healthy, they still weren't dominating teams.

They missed alot without Woodall, but he's not responsible for 8 losses in a row. They had some very bad losses in there to very weak teams (Depaul, Rutgers).

They will be a tough team to evaluate if they get to 9-9 in the BE, but I think they need to get to at least 9-9 with some wins over the likes of UConn and Lville to even be considered. You can't completely eliminate their horrific performance in the middle of the season and just act like it never happened. Giving them a 4 or 5 seed would require that type of special treatment.

 

[PoppyHart]

I don't look at it at special tratment. I think the committee is charged with identifying the best teams in country and seeding them accordingly. If they think a team, on March 12th or whenever is one of the 20 best teams in the country, they would get a top-5 seed. It's as simple as that.

If Harrison Barnes missed the first 9 games, for example, and UNC lost all of them, and then he returned and went undefeated, they would get a 1-2 seed imo, not the 8-9 seed that the record would typically dictate. To do otherwise would completely distort the competitive balance of the bracket.

People are too caught up in absolute win-loss records, imo, and not in comparing teams relative strengths.

The problem is that you are still basing it off of Pitt's preseason expectations. Even when Woodall was healthy, they still weren't dominating teams.

They missed alot without Woodall, but he's not responsible for 8 losses in a row. They had some very bad losses in there to very weak teams (Depaul, Rutgers).

They will be a tough team to evaluate if they get to 9-9 in the BE, but I think they need to get to at least 9-9 with some wins over the likes of UConn and Lville to even be considered. You can't completely eliminate their horrific performance in the middle of the season and just act like it never happened. Giving them a 4 or 5 seed would require that type of special treatment.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I don't look at it at special tratment. I think the committee is charged with identifying the best teams in country and seeding them accordingly. If they think a team, on March 12th or whenever is one of the 20 best teams in the country, they would get a top-5 seed. It's as simple as that.

If Harrison Barnes missed the first 9 games, for example, and UNC lost all of them, and then he returned and went undefeated, they would get a 1-2 seed imo, not the 8-9 seed that the record would typically dictate. To do otherwise would completely distort the competitive balance of the bracket.

People are too caught up in absolute win-loss records, imo, and not in comparing teams relative strengths.

Using the UNC/Harrison Barnes hypothetical to try to make your point doesn't make much sense.

First, Tray Woodall isn't Harrison Barnes. Second, the committee has a lot of Pitt's material with Woodall to adequately evaluate them. They played a very weak OOC schedule, and didn't exactly dominate their competition while doing it.

That being said, Pitt still has some games ahead of them to prove they belong in the tourney. They have a very small margin of error, imo. They absolutely must beat UConn, Lville and WVU to even be considered. They really need some quality wins. Eventually you have to beat somebody to prove you belong. Getting to 9-9 by beating the likes of USF (twice), SJU, Seton Hall along with 1 win over UConn, WVU or Lville won't get it done, imo. If Pitt loses one game to the lower half of the Big East, they are finished.

 

[pearl31]

I don't look at it at special tratment. I think the committee is charged with identifying the best teams in country and seeding them accordingly. If they think a team, on March 12th or whenever is one of the 20 best teams in the country, they would get a top-5 seed. It's as simple as that.

If Harrison Barnes missed the first 9 games, for example, and UNC lost all of them, and then he returned and went undefeated, they would get a 1-2 seed imo, not the 8-9 seed that the record would typically dictate. To do otherwise would completely distort the competitive balance of the bracket.

People are too caught up in absolute win-loss records, imo, and not in comparing teams relative strengths.

You're still wrong.

 

[DoctorBombay]

I don't look at it at special tratment. I think the committee is charged with identifying the best teams in country and seeding them accordingly. If they think a team, on March 12th or whenever is one of the 20 best teams in the country, they would get a top-5 seed. It's as simple as that.

If Harrison Barnes missed the first 9 games, for example, and UNC lost all of them, and then he returned and went undefeated, they would get a 1-2 seed imo, not the 8-9 seed that the record would typically dictate. To do otherwise would completely distort the competitive balance of the bracket.

People are too caught up in absolute win-loss records, imo, and not in comparing teams relative strengths.

Disagree.
Theoretically you're right, the committee wants the best teams and takes injuries & what-not into consideration.
But overall records still play a major role in seeding, regardless of the circumstances.
A 9 loss UNC team without Barnes, is still a 9 loss team. They'd maybe gain a few lines upon his return, but nothing as drastic as a 1-2 seed. At most maybe up to a 5-8 seed if they won all their remaining games.
More teams with better records will have filled the 1-2 lines, regardless of what UNC did with Barnes.

 

[pearl31]

Disagree.
Theoretically you're right, the committee wants the best teams and takes injuries & what-not into consideration.
But overall records still play a major role in seeding, regardless of the circumstances.
A 9 loss UNC team without Barnes, is still a 9 loss team. They'd maybe gain a few lines upon his return, but nothing as drastic as a 1-2 seed. At most maybe up to a 5-8 seed if they won all their remaining games.
More teams with better records will have filled the 1-2 lines, regardless of what UNC did with Barnes.

Correct.

 

[LAOrange]

I will root against Pitt in every game the rest of the way. I hate playing them. One more loss. Probbaly out. Two more definitely out. No way NCAA takes a team that is 7-11 in conference.