Lockbox:
Gonzaga (26-2) (13-0) NET 1 SoS 48
Vital signs: 10-2 R/N, non-con
SoS 68, 4-2 vs. Q1, 6-0 vs. Q2, avg win 150
Signature wins: N-Duke,
Washington, @San Fran?
Bad losses: none
They do have a bit of an issue with signature wins. No depth.
However, they’ve kept a clean sheet (losses to Tennessee and UNC). I can see it costing them a 1 seed if they
get into a head-to-head battle with UT or UNC for that spot, but the 2 seed out
west would be just fine.
Nevada (24-2) (11-2) NET 22 SoS 143
Vital signs: 12-2 R/N, non-con
SoS 56, 0-0 vs. Q1, 8-1 vs. Q2, avg win 156
Signature wins: Utah St, N-ASU? @USC?
Bad losses: @New Mexico, @SDSU?
Yikes. No Q1 games. @Utah St will fix that, but man it’s tough to
seed them up high when that big ‘ol 0 is hanging on their resume.
Bubble:
Washington (21-5) (12-1) NET 29 SoS 53
Vital signs: 8-5 R/N, non-con
SoS 19, 2-4 vs. Q1, 4-1 vs. Q2, avg win 143
Signature wins: uh. @Oregon?
@Colorado?
Bad losses: N-Minny is the worst
Go look at the signature win category.
Those are the Q1 wins. @Oregon St
might be the next best win. Good
God. This is not a strong resume, folks. The good news is the SoS holds up, but how does
this resume differ from a resume of a mid-major?
Arizona St (18-8) (9-5) NET 66 SoS 68
Vital signs: 6-5 R/N, non-con
SoS 46, 4-2 vs. Q1, 5-3 vs. Q2, avg win 125
Signature wins: Kansas, N-Miss
St, Washington
Bad losses: Utah, Wazzu,
Princeton, @Vandy, @Georgia…good God
Their 4 Q1 wins are more or less legit.
So they’re in decent shape, maybe.
But there’s a lot of marginal losses mixed in. They do have @Oregon schools and @Arizona
coming, which do represent borderline Q1 chances. That also means they have ample chance to
lose a bunch and eject from the bubble conversation.
Utah St (20-6) (11-3) NET 36 SoS 123
Vital signs: 9-5 R/N, non-con
SoS 23, 1-2 vs. Q1, 2-3 vs. Q2, avg win 212
Signature wins: N-St Mary’s,
@Fresno? @UCI?
Bad losses: Fresno at home I
suppose
It’s a bit deceptive non-con SoS, IMO.
Still, most of their metrics are in decent shape to the point where a
win over Nevada officially makes things very interesting.
Oregon St (16-9) (8-5) NET 85 SoS 118
Vital signs: 6-5 R/N, non-con SoS 228, 2-2 vs. Q1, 3-4 vs. Q2, avg win 166
Signature wins: @Oregon, @Colorado, N-ODU?
Bad losses: Kent St, Stanford, A&M
This is the 3rd best Pac-12 offering?
Oregon (15-11) (6-7) NET 72 SoS 64
Vital signs: 4-7 R/N, non-con SoS 47, 1-6 vs. Q1, 2-2 vs. Q2, avg win 169
Signature wins: N-Syracuse, @Arizona, @Utah?
Bad losses: Texas Southern, UCLA, Oregon St?
Okay, maybe? But not really.
Oregon St (16-9) (8-5) NET 85 SoS 118
Vital signs: 6-5 R/N, non-con SoS 228, 2-2 vs. Q1, 3-4 vs. Q2, avg win 166
Signature wins: @Oregon, @Colorado, N-ODU?
Bad losses: Kent St, Stanford, A&M
This is the 3rd best Pac-12 offering?
Oregon (15-11) (6-7) NET 72 SoS 64
Vital signs: 4-7 R/N, non-con SoS 47, 1-6 vs. Q1, 2-2 vs. Q2, avg win 169
Signature wins: N-Syracuse, @Arizona, @Utah?
Bad losses: Texas Southern, UCLA, Oregon St?
Okay, maybe? But not really.
Arizona (15-12) (6-8) NET 88 SoS 86
Vital signs: 4-8 R/N, non-con SoS 55, 1-6 vs. Q1, 3-5 vs. Q2, avg win 165
Signature wins: N-Iowa St, @UConn? Colorado? Jeez
Bad losses: Wazzu, @a bunch of Pac-12 teams
Sigh.
Vital signs: 5-8 R/N, non-con SoS 73, 1-5 vs. Q1, 1-2 vs. Q2, avg win 182
Signature wins: @NMSU, San Fran, BYU?
Bad losses: Harvard, @Pepperdine, UCI?
Meh. Maybe if NET matters.
BYU (18-11) (10-4) NET 82 SoS 65
Vital signs: 6-8 R/N, non-con SoS 59, 0-6 vs. Q1, 3-2 vs. Q2, avg win 199
Signature wins: Utah St, St Mary's, @San Diego? yikes
Bad losses: @Weber St, @Illinois St, N-UNLV
No.
San Francisco (20-6) (9-4) NET 48 SoS 141
Vital signs: 7-5 R/N, non-con SoS 275, 0-4 vs. Q1, 2-1 vs. Q2, avg win 209
Signature wins: St Mary's, swept BYU
Bad losses: @UCSB, @San Diego?
At least avoided the truly bad loss, but still.
NIT bubble teams: Utah, USC, Colorado, Fresno St, San Diego St
No comments:
Post a Comment