rutgers to the elite 8?
1 Like
Real tearjerker segment on BTNs The Journey on Brad Davison, the dirtiest player in the last decade of Big Ten play 
1 Like
Last year I had them beating Houston second round and the if I recall they had a suspect sweet 16 matchup that I had them winning.
Easily could have come true. They blew that Houston game then would have had Oregon st.
Edit: I had Rutgers over Houston then over cuse. Should have went own imo
1 Like
Does that plan involve giving Chase Audige a firm hand shake? If not, not sure it’ll help
1 Like
“I have tasked Coach Collins with making…” seems unusually blunt for one of these. The whole thing overall is pretty clear. Interesting
6 Likes
Grammar error. That should read “…share in the disappointment felt by our staff and avid fan.”
2 Likes
I guess you could say they’ve made progress since 2020. But man, how do you go from 24 to eight wins under the same coach, without sanctions?
Are they letting HS recruit() out of LOI? Seems like they should after a statement like that. (They have 1 3star PF/C from Massachusetts committed.)
1 Like
No way Greg Gard being one spot ahead of Juwan was a coincidence.
Just one of those tools that seems cool but needs a lot of context. Juwan in his only
potential tourney has made an E8 and was one shot from a F4. Gard has never made an E8 and has missed the tourney some seasons.
Juwan gets a little dinged for losing in the E8 as a 1 seed, with no context to the Livers injury. No one would objectively consider Gard’s tourney appearances better than Juwan’s.
13 Likes
they’ll completely ignore Livers’ Injury and being one shot away from the F4 and add the ‘context’ that Juwan ‘inherited’ a beautiful, sexy program from Belein whereas Gard took poor provincial cheese eaters Wisconsin to two Sweet Sixteen. Greg Gard literally inherited, midseason, a team that went to Championship game the previous season.
2 Likes
I mean, the stat is still useful. There’s obviously context that it doesn’t capture and coaches who get high seeds all the time are going to be ranked lower, but really it comes down to small sample size and Howard is still ranked 14th out of 49 coaches based on PAKE (KenPom expectations) and 26th based on PASE (seed expectations). I don’t really think that is negative.
2 Likes
Noticed that losses exclude play-in games, which is actually a benefit to Izzo…
No comment on whether that is really “in the tournament” but I find it funny.
3 Likes
If play-in games are not included in the data, that answers the question, doesn’t it?
3 Likes
Not sure how you would model PASE in the play-in game.
1 Like
How does the model handle two 1 seeds playing in the Final Four? Seems like play-in would be same?
1 Like
Well, the model is based on seed expectation (see here). So a 1 seed is expected to win 3.36 games and then compare how many games that team wins to that number.
The play-in game just doesn’t really fit into the same model so I think it makes sense to exclude.
Makes sense, thanks!