Maedhros

Turning my attention to this thread, with the conclusion of the IUBB season. Go Braves. Might be our best roster yet in this current run, enough that I bought MLB the Show for the first time in three years. Can't wait to see what Acuña is going to do next. His ZIPS projections are pornographic.

I ended up buying a small hacksaw. It was a pain given the angle and the tight space, but it got the job done.

Malik is still just a sophomore. Mgbako a freshman. Both have flaws in their game, sure, but part of the fun of college ball is watching guys improve year over year. Of course I want them back. I'm not giving up on underclassmen because they aren't yet fully actualized.

It wasn't a fun season, but I'm still always sad to see each one go. Anyone who's been on a team in high school or college knows those years are fleeting. This group of guys will never be together again, and say what you will about how they played as a team, I never thought they weren't trying to win the best way they knew how. For some they've played their last game at this level. There's always sorrow in parting, and that's the feeling I'm left with at the end of every season.

Nebraska has more points off just threes than we have total points. 12 makes in a game is more than they average per game, and it's only halftime.

Not going to beat just about any team when they're shooting like this. Tip your cap and move on. Get to work on building a team capable of going off like this in turn.

Hey folks, I'm trying to replace some parts in my toilet tank, but one of the bolts holding it to the bowl is rusted tight to the nut. Tried a penetrating oil, tried some 8" built cutters, neither have been up to the task. Any suggestions on a tool to cut through it?

Let's go get some of their '24 recruits.

I have a theory that Archie Miller - perhaps overwhelmed by the Indiana job - knew at least that Indiana fans wanted players from the state, so he pulled up the rankings at 247 or Rivals and just went down the list. To be fair, he landed all those guys, but he couldn't fill in with anyone out of state, and they didn't make for very good teams. Woodson seems to be stuck in an NBA comfort zone, thinking only guys with length and athleticism similar to what he's coached his whole will be able to help him win. You need players like Ware to hang banners, but you need to surround them with players like Leal to keep your team floating along in the regular season. Purdue bringing in 3-star, 328th ranked 6'1" Lance Jones from Southern Illinois might be why they get to their first Final Four in over 40 years. With the availability of the portal, and the yearly turnover of rosters, I really do think any serious college program needs a GM role, to scout available talent, identify priorities, and make sure the pieces fit.

I missed any sirens, thankfully. I would have heard it too, as there's one immediately in our backyard! After that first line passed through, we were just south of the next group of cells that popped up, and north of the group that passed over Indy and parts south. I used to love storms, but that was before I had to worry about things like property damage. After we had the siding blow off, that was enough for me. My car is parked outside at the moment, so I wanted no part of baseball sized hail.

Even in Strength of Record, we're sitting at 51. MSU is at 46. KPI likes us the least of the resume metrics at 60, with MSU 39. Meanwhile the NET has us 94 and MSU 24. For both teams, those ranks are within just a few spots of their efficiency metrics at KenPom, Torvik, and ESPN's BPI. It's very apparent the NET is weighted toward efficiency, not resume. Somehow the NET has Indiana ranked lower than we are anywhere else, including KenPom, Torvik, BPI, Massey, EvanMiya, WAB, SOR or KPI.

My problem with the NET is its not being used in a manner consistent with the way it was designed. It's clear from this season that NET ratings are weighted heavily toward efficiency metrics. Those measures, like KenPom and Torvik, are predictive. They tell you what you should expect from teams going forward, even project spreads in a matchup between any two teams. What those measures don't tell you is what a team has accomplished over a season. NCAA Tournament selection is supposed to be about your resume. Who did you play. Who did you beat. Who beat you. Yes, we need a way to sort teams, a way to identify which games are quality wins and which are bad losses. That's a fine use for efficiency metrics. But efficiency doesn't care if you won or lost. As long as the NET is going to depend so heavily on efficiency metrics, a team's own NET ranking shouldn't be used a proxy for the worthiness of their resume. I'm as much an advocate for analytics as anyone, but wins and losses have to matter. Six wins in a row by one point over lousy teams still wins you a National Championship. And the thing is, we have statistics that measure resumes. We could use Wins Above Bubble or Strength of Record. By WAB, Indiana started the day at 53 and Michigan St at 52. Those numbers make a lot more sense, based on actual outcomes, than the two teams being ranked 70 spots apart. I have no problem saying that on a neutral floor, Michigan St would be the favored team. That's a categorically different thing, though, than saying MSU is more deserving of an NCAA Tournament bid.

I was tracking the warnings from NWS Indy, and think I saw just about every size descriptor for hail. I counted tennis ball sized, baseball sized, golf ball sized, ping pong ball size, nickel sized, quarter sized, half dollar sized, and here at the house we had pea sized. Apparently these are standard comparisons, it's just rare that I ever see so many used in the same night.

Derik, buddy... you sure?

Don't know. It's being promoted on the Star's Twitter account, so I assumed some compensation. If so, bully for him on making a quick easy buck.

All I learned from that article is they'll let anyone write for the Indy Star these days. Time for us to stop wasting our time here for free. We could get paid for the same effort and quality of work by a legitimate publication!

Imagine being upset by any of that. What are we doing here?

No. I'm going to have a hard time buying anyone put off by Leal and Galloway publicly supporting their embattled coach feels that way because they wanted Senior Night to be about celebrating Xavier Johnson. Be honest.

Dakich wouldn't know.

Starting from 2/27, and our win against Wisconsin, we rank 21st on Torvik. That's not as good as the best in the country, but it's not nothing.

I have strategic concerns - they've regularly not been placed in the best position to succeed - but I've enjoyed this team. This group of guys has continued to play hard all year, and hasn't stopped caring. When they're on they're a fun watch, and it's been happening more and more often.

Appreciate the kind words, but there might be a misunderstanding. I'm saying the resumes of the two schools are closer than bracketologists are projecting. Efficiency metrics are disparate because of scoring margins, and that drives KenPom, Torvik and NET rankings. But NCAA resumes are outcome based, and after today the actual wins, losses and quality of opponents aren't far off between us and MSU.

That's not how the NET is used.

NET should only ever matter when it comes to the ranking of a team's opponents, not of the team itself. NET has shown to be heavily reliant on efficiency metrics, but those are predictive, not descriptive. A team's own ranking in the NET tells you nothing about who they played, who they beat, or who didn't. Too many analysts, and fans too, are using NET interchangeably with an S-curve, and that's not at all how the tool should be used. MSU has a quality win against Baylor that we don't have, and that's really the only thing that should have them in the field ahead of us. By Wins Above Bubble they rank 60. We rank 61.