A10 Tournament Stats 2006-Present

[nathanw19]

Decided to do a deeper dive into A10 tourney results across the board to see how Richmond has faired under Mooney.

Beat Better Seed:
Saint Joseph’s - 11
Saint Louis - 6
Xavier - 5
UMass - 5
Davidson - 5
Rhode Island - 4
Richmond - 3
La Salle - 3
Temple - 3
St. Bonaventure - 3
Duquesne - 3
VCU - 3
Fordham - 2
Dayton - 2
Charlotte - 1
Butler - 1
George Washington - 0
George Mason - 0

Lost to Worse Seed:
La Salle - 7
Xavier - 7
UMass - 5
Dayton - 5
Saint Louis - 4
Rhode Island - 4
St. Bonaventure - 4
VCU - 4
Richmond - 4
Temple - 3
Duquesne - 3
Charlotte - 2
Fordham - 2
George Mason - 2
Davidson - 2
George Washington - 1
Saint Joseph’s - 0
Butler - 0

Semifinals Made:
Saint Joseph’s - 6
Xavier - 6
Rhode Island - 6
Davidson - 6
VCU - 6
Temple - 5
St. Bonaventure - 5
Saint Louis - 4
Richmond - 3
Dayton - 3
UMass - 2
George Washington - 1
Fordham - 1
Duquesne - 1
Butler - 1
George Mason - 0
La Salle - 0
Charlotte - 0

Finals Made:
VCU - 6
Saint Joseph’s - 4
Temple - 3
Rhode Island - 3
St. Bonaventure - 3
Richmond - 2
Saint Louis - 2
Xavier - 2
Dayton - 2
George Washington - 1
Duquesne - 1
Davidson - 1
Charlotte - 0
La Salle - 0
Fordham - 0
UMass - 0
George Mason - 0
Butler - 0

Championships Won
Temple - 3
Saint Louis - 2
Saint Joseph’s - 2
Xavier - 2
Richmond - 1
George Washington - 1
Rhode Island - 1
Saint Bonaventure - 1
VCU - 1
Davidson - 1
Charlotte - 0
La Salle - 0
Fordham - 0
UMass - 0
Duquesne - 0
Dayton - 0
George Mason - 0
Butler - 0

Won more than 1 game:
VCU - 6
Saint Joseph’s - 5
Temple - 4
St. Bonaventure - 4
Saint Louis - 3
Rhode Island - 3
Davidson - 3
Richmond - 2
Xavier - 2
UMass - 2
Dayton - 2
George Washington - 1
Fordham - 1
Duquesne - 1
Butler - 1
Charlotte - 0
La Salle - 0
George Mason - 0

Winning Percentage:
VCU - .714
Temple - .706
Davidson - .667
Butler - .667
Saint Joseph’s - .622
St. Bonaventure - .591
Xavier - .588
Saint Louis - .536
Rhode Island - .476
Dayton - .464
George Washington - .455
Richmond - .440
UMass - .400
George Mason - .364
Fordham - .333
La Salle - .294
Duquesne - .278
Charlotte - .222

 

[nathanw19]

My take away is that Richmond has been exceptionally middling under Mooney in the A-10 tournament.

And obviously things change if you do the last 10 years...

Here is the link to the spreadsheet. It includes years for every team:

 

[urmite]

Some of those teams don't have 16 seasons of data...

I meant the original post...

 

[nathanw19]

Some of those teams don't have 16 seasons of data...

I meant the original post...

Correct. Some didn’t make the tourney every year. Some weren’t in the league all 16 years. And there is only a max of 15 years with 2020 being canceled.

 

[SpiderFan]

I'm not sure beating a higher seeded team or losing to a lower seeded one is a great metric. Teams that finish at the top of the standings or win the regular season are not going to get chances to play higher seeds as much. And vice versa, losing against lower seeded teams is tough when you're at the bottom of the standings.

All you had to show was the 440 winning percentage in my opinion, and then haven't been to a conference final since 2011 (10 years). Temple and Xavier have been to as many or more conf finals than Richmond and they haven't been in the conference for years now.

 

[Eight Legger]

We haven't really been a high seed very often though, so we should have had ample opportunities in ten years to beat higher seeds and haven't.

 

[spider fan]

Good side of that is it has reduced our chances to lose to a lower seed!

 

[urmite]

I'm not sure beating a higher seeded team or losing to a lower seeded one is a great metric. Teams that finish at the top of the standings or win the regular season are not going to get chances to play higher seeds as much. And vice versa, losing against lower seeded teams is tough when you're at the bottom of the standings.

All you had to show was the 440 winning percentage in my opinion, and then haven't been to a conference final since 2011 (10 years). Temple and Xavier have been to as many or more conf finals than Richmond and they haven't been in the conference for years now.

Really just show semi played, finals played, finals won, number of seasons.

You could even start in 2013-2014. No change in A-10 membership since then...

 

[SpiderTrap]

Not bad insight. I like the finals made statistic. Because many times in the A10 - teams are on the bubble and need to win games or make the final to secure their NCAA bid. Plus - you can't win it if you don't make the finals.

I have always said before - the goals for the program should be straightforward.

1) Make NCAA tourney
2) Win A10 Regular Season and/or A10 Tourney
3) Beat VCU

If you achieve goal 1 (make NCAA tourney) - chances are you are pretty close to achieving goal 2. You don't need goal 2 to make NCAA tourney, but if you achieve goal 2, goal 1 will likely follow. I would be okay never winning the A10 if we made the tourney consistently - but that is not the case. And quite frankly - we don't even make the NIT that much. Only twice under Mooney - and making the NIT basically just says maybe you were 2-3 games away from being in the dance. So in reality - we have not really been close to the dance on a consistent basis, cause if we were - we would be hanging NIT banners left and right.

 

[nathanw19]

I'm not sure beating a higher seeded team or losing to a lower seeded one is a great metric. Teams that finish at the top of the standings or win the regular season are not going to get chances to play higher seeds as much. And vice versa, losing against lower seeded teams is tough when you're at the bottom of the standings.

All you had to show was the 440 winning percentage in my opinion, and then haven't been to a conference final since 2011 (10 years). Temple and Xavier have been to as many or more conf finals than Richmond and they haven't been in the conference for years now.

I agree. As I went through process, more and more I felt like the beating a better seed or losing to a worse one didn’t matter a lot (other than indicating how many games you exceeded expectations vs failed to meet them). But I was already halfway through the process so decided to finish it...

 

[MrTbone]

I agree. As I went through process, more and more I felt like the beating a better seed or losing to a worse one didn’t matter a lot (other than indicating how many games you exceeded expectations vs failed to meet them). But I was already halfway through the process so decided to finish it...

You get an A for through analysis.