Kdug

How was that not a hook and hold and tomenaga? Seemed blatant and Leal was even asking for a review.

Spot on. The one thing I’d add is that if IU would have picked up several big wins, that could make up for poor Effie my metrics. Rutgers 2 years ago was able to make the tourney with bad efficiency numbers because they picked off a bunch of wins against high level teams. This year’s IU team doesn’t have that - we don’t have the efficiency or the resume.

The quads are just a way of sorting, not the end all be all. A neutral court win vs Baylor is much more impressive than a home win vs Wisconsin.

We might have a case then, but the B1G isn’t necessarily entitled to 6 bids, especially with how mediocre the conference did in the non-con. I think there’s a better argument for MSU being out than us being in.

The NET is meant to be an efficiency metric. My point is that even the resume metrics would have us 10-20 spots outside of the tourney assuming 40ish at large bids after the auto bids. We just really don’t have a case at this point whether you look at resume or efficiency. If we beat Nebraska and Illinois, our resume would probably be more comparable to a bubble teams. But then the issue is we’ll be compared to other bubble teams with similar resumes, but likely better efficiency.

They use both resume and efficiency metrics, with resume metrics historically be given more weight. IU is poor in both, which is why we aren’t in the conversation. MSU is slightly higher in the resume metrics they use (KPI and SOR) and has good efficiency, which is why they’re considered in as a 10 seed

Bates shot 37% from 3 and 93% from the line last year. Bates had showed that he could actually provide some positive production while Gunn and Banks never have. He’s definitely improved this year at Missouri, but he showed signs of this last year and was one of our better bench players.

Again, I think there’s a substantial gap in overall efficiency (which is what the NET is) between MSU and IU. 70 spots doesn’t seem all that off from what I’d expect when looking at the results. Pure wins and losses we’re closer to MSU, but even then MSU has wins over some top tier teams like Baylor and Illinois, while IU’s best win is probably vs MSU or Wisconsin (and basically nothing after those 2), who are mid to lower seeded teams. There’s also a reason MSU is in the bubble conversation, and that’s because their resume isn’t as strong as their efficiency numbers. IU is very weak in both areas. And I don’t know that citing IU’s losses to top teams - almost all of which we got blown out in - is a good argument for us being in or close to being in. Who cares if you played good teams if you can’t compete with them. If anything that shows that we can’t compete consistently with good competition.

Ageeed, you don’t ignore the last 3 weeks either. Which is why I said we’ve played like a tourney caliber team during that stretch. But that’s only 5 games out of the 32 we’ve played. You can’t just ignore the other 27 games, or 85% of the season, of mostly mediocre to bad basketball. If we would’ve played like this most of the season, we would be in the tourney. Unfortunately we didn’t, and we dug a hole too deep both in terms of wins and losses and efficiency metrics. I’d bet most of the top 100 teams have a stretch of games where they’ve looked tourney caliber. But it’s about doing that consistently throughout the year, not just the last 5 games of the year.

A home win by 1 point doesn’t prove anything lol. And you can’t use head to head when evaluating 360 teams or you’d end up in a never ending loop. Penn State is 2-1 against us, but I’d bet we’re closer to an at large bid than they are.

The quads have 0 impact on the net, so not sure why referencing them proves anything. It’s pretty simple to see the difference in MSU vs IU. MSU has a lot of blowout wins, including over solid to good teams like Butler, Baylor, and ISU. They also only have 3 double digit losses, with none of them being by 20+ points. They also blew out every single 100+ rated team on their schedule. IU has almost no blowout wins, and as we all know struggled in almost all of the games against inferior opponents. We also have 8 double digit losses, including 4 by 20+ points. Any objective evaluation of MSU vs IU would show that MSU is the better team (which is what all the metrics show) with the better resume (which is why they’re in the tourney and we are not).

Might be unpopular, but I agree with the NET, kenpom, and other advanced metrics assessment of this IU team. For 75% of the year, we played like one of the worst big ten teams, and really one of the 10-15 worst power conference teams. This last stretch we’ve played tourney caliber basketball, but you can’t ignore the first 3.5 months of the season. Even with this stretch, we’ve still probably only beat 2 at large tournament teams the whole year. Better late than never, but this improvement in play needed to happen at least a month earlier if we wanted any shot at an at large bid.

I’d imagine the G league would be a paycut vs what he’d get in NIL. Agreed with everything else.

He won’t be drafted if he goes, and I feel very confident saying that - unless he puts up some crazy numbers in the BTT. He’s not on any draft board, or even top 100s. Sure, he could declare and go undrafted, but I don’t think that’s likely.

Mgbako is not even in consideration for the nba this year. He’s either back or transferring.

I never got this argument. Yes Archie got a 4th year, but his 3rd year was his best so you could argue things were trending in a positive direction. His 4th year also was a disaster that became very toxic, so no idea why that’s pointed to like it was a successful example. If anything, it’s an example of what it could look like if things go poorly.

A little behind on this thread, but wanted to reply to this. You kind of get at it at the end, but those teams use the inside part to setup the outside part. Uconn was top 70 in 3 point rate last year and made a lot of those. Purdue is more inside focus, but that’s because Edey is one of the most efficient scorers that’s played in college in awhile - and even they’re 234th in 3 point rate with the 2nd best percentage. Really since the start of Archie IU has been inside in. We throw it inside, and if that doesn’t work we still force inside. That style has become more extreme under Woodson. Archie at least had a few teams that were top 300 in 3 point rate. Woodson’s first year was the highest 3 point rate at 322. I think a big part of the issue is that Woodson’s teams seem to use deep 2s as the “outside” part of the offense, which is just a losing strategy.

Probably the best game we’ve played since Minnesota, or maybe Iowa? Either way, tonight’s win was needed.

What was that foul Malik?

Truthfully, I feel like we’ve been better with him out tonight. More ball movement and more of a focus on Ware.

Ware with 26 points on 11/12 fg, 5 blocks, and 11 rebounds. Sheesh, what a game so far from him

Kel’el Ware happened

I’ve been as frustrated as anyone with this season, but I try to keep my complaints practical. Anyway, we need someone else to step up in the second half. We can’t expect Ware to duplicate that half, even if he does continue to play well.

I don’t think Ware had sat to that point had he? Ware isn’t the type of player who can go 40 minutes, he needs some rest.

Important last few minutes here. Can’t let them get any closer with how well we played for the first 15 minutes.