Friday, February 22, 2019

Bubble watch: west coast basketball sucks


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.


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.

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


St Mary's (18-10) (9-4) NET 40 SoS 45
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


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: