The win might move us toward the NIT bubble................this prediction has us as 7th NIT seed before SLU game
https://www.dratings.com/predictor/bracketology/
https://www.dratings.com/predictor/bracketology/
Last edited:
2/25 Saint Louis - Senior Day
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
So A-10 in Total:
Davidson NCAA 8 Seed
SBU NIT 1 Seed
VCU NIT 2 Seed
SLU NIT 2 Seed
Dayton NIT 2 Seed
UR NIT 7 Seed
Davidson NCAA 8 Seed
SBU NIT 1 Seed
VCU NIT 2 Seed
SLU NIT 2 Seed
Dayton NIT 2 Seed
UR NIT 7 Seed
Join the A-10 and have a good shot at an NIT bid..................
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
if your conference is strong enough to have one 1-seed and three 2-seeds in the NIT then surely you deserve one at large bid to the big dance
Look most of us here want this team desperately to play & win to our potential. No different than you. We may not post as rah rah as you, and there's nothing wrong with what you say. Nor is there anything wrong with our perception of the team & how we might be a bit more grounded in our statements if I can use that term.
So lets slice your dice of "3 of those losses were Davidson by 3 points, VCU by 2 points and overtime to George Mason."
Davidson - very good team, beat us at buzzer, we played pretty evenly.
VCU - owns Mooney. We lost both home & away to them. At 7-22 in Mooney's career, I'm kind of surprised you'd even go there with VCU. You posted the 2 point loss but didn't mention the 20 point drubbing & embarrassment at VCU.
GM - We split with a team below us in the standings & team we should have swept. A team starting mostly transfers vs our experienced team. Should have beaten them in regulation in NOVA, but...
Bottom line - no matter how you post it & use numbers, we've under-performed expectations and are on the outside looking in for the elusive NCAA bid again this year. One & only one chance. Further we're still fighting for a double bye this late in the season in our own league.
I've said before - This is the year that was supposed to be as everything lined up perfectly.
We’re not getting an NIT bid but even if we did, we should decline it. This year was about one thing: the NCAAs. Anything less is a failure.
I actually think we would decline--or at least not host. The broadcast team keeps referring to "last home games in the Robins Center." In previous years they have always followed that up with something like "you don't know what will happen in the post season."
SLU scored in the paint repeatedly in the 1st half. not in the 2nd half. did anyone notice a tactical change on our part?
CM mentioned something about changing how we handled ball screens maybe? I didn't notice. but I'm certain SLU didn't just decide to stop going inside.
and I don't buy that we just played tougher or harder. we did something diferently. would love to know what it was. and let's keep doing it.
CM mentioned something about changing how we handled ball screens maybe? I didn't notice. but I'm certain SLU didn't just decide to stop going inside.
and I don't buy that we just played tougher or harder. we did something diferently. would love to know what it was. and let's keep doing it.
On screen in second half would hedge and roll was picked up by Cayo or person playing #4 position.
Did not allow penetration into lane. This was real evident last 10 minutes.
Did not allow penetration into lane. This was real evident last 10 minutes.
I have to agree with Mooney on that decision. After those 3 subs he has absolutely nothing else on the bench assuming Dji is hurt.
thanks. certainly worked. nice adjustment. need to figure that out quicker though. like in the pre-game film session.
CM also mentioned in the postgame that when Nate was doubling Okoro they specifically wanted him and grant/grace to deny Okoro passing out of the double to whatever open man Nate had left.
Sort of seems like something we should have been doing the prior 28 games.
Remember, we have been told that we are beginning to gel now. That is part of the prior 20 some game lead up to this strategy.
It’s very weird. I’m not a basketball expert but if you’re going to double a guy, isn’t one of the core objectives at that point to force a turnover, jump ball or timeout?
No, it's to stop that particular guy from scoring. Those other things are gravy.
That and for once just foul the crap out of somebody.
Not according to Mooney. Goal was to double Okoro at times, but when doing so, must also disrupt his ability to throw the ball out to an open teammate. Yes, too often that has been our double team strategy, to stop said player from scoring, which is pretty easy to do with a double team. What is much more difficult is disrupting the other teams ability to get an open shot off of a double team.
I agree with this. If there is parody in a conference it can hurt getting bids. Good but not great teams beating up on each other. If this happens in a power 6 conference they all get bids because its assumed the conference is "deep". In the A-10 its a down year.
Look at the Mountain West this year. They had a perfect storm to get a high number of bids. Top teams had great OOc conference records and there are also chances at quality wins in league.
This NET is almost 100% based on ooc play within a whole league and then it snowballs. A few teams have great ooc records, get a high NET and then that gives the whole league chances at quality wins. Having a league where many teams have mediocre ooc records and poor NET at start of conference completely closes the door to any chance of more than 2 bids, and 1 likely.
He said prevent the ball to go out to the teammate that was vacated by Cayo/person doing the double team. That's different.
Again, I certainly agree that it is great to create a turnover or held ball, but the question was whether that's the primary goal of the double team. It is not. The primary goal is to get the ball out of the hands of the guy with the ball and prevent that guy from taking the shot. The secondary responsibility is to cover the most likely next passes, and try and force a cross-court pass that allows the team to either rotate or recover, as applicable. Probably semantics.
