Sunday, February 9, 2020

Bubble watch: Pac-12


Oregon (18-6) (7-4) NET 25 SoS 15
Vital signs:  6-6 R/N, non-con SoS 19, avg win 107
5-4 vs. Q1, 4-2 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Arizona, N-SHU, @Michigan
Bad losses:  N-UNC?  @Wazzu

Your standard solid resume of a 4 seed in all likelihood.  .500 in Q1-A games.  Only real issue is two Q2-B losses.  Volume of losses may prevent a run at the 1 line.  NET also doesn't suggest a high seed.

Colorado (19-5) (8-3) NET 16 SoS 25
Vital signs:  7-3 R/N, non-con SoS 60, avg win 121
5-2 vs. Q1, 5-3 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  N-Dayton, Oregon, Stanford
Bad losses:  @UCLA?  home to Oregon St?

They're pretty solid up and down the board.  4-0 in neutral site games kind of warp the R/N record above.  Juuuuust maybe one too many Q2 losses to be a legit contender for the 2 line right now.

Arizona (16-7) (6-4) NET 11 SoS 6
Vital signs:  5-5 R/N, non-con SoS 13, avg win 126
2-5 vs. Q1, 5-1 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Colorado, @Washington?  Illinois?
Bad losses:  UCLA, N-St John's

Weird NET.  Very high, but the rest of the resume doesn't hold up.  They need better signature wins to get a top-4 seed.  Very strong SoS numbers, but those numbers are propped up by losses to Gonzaga and Baylor (which is no sin, but still).  A very weird team to try and seed correctly.


USC (17-7) (6-5) NET 50 SoS 55
Vital signs:  8-5 R/N, non-con SoS 148, avg win 149
3-6 vs. Q1, 5-0 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  N-LSU, Stanford
Bad losses:  Temple

Going 3-3 in Q1-B games (0-3 in Q1-A).  Not sure that's quite enough, but having only 1 loss outside of Q1 is a big deal, IMO.  Middling SoS numbers.  This is really a prime bubble resume example.

Stanford (16-7) (5-5) NET 30 SoS 101
Vital signs:  4-5 R/N, non-con SoS 211, avg win 170
2-5 vs. Q1, 2-1 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Oregon, N-Oklahoma, Washington?
Bad losses:  @Cal, Oregon St?

Shiny NET, not-so-shiny everything else.  13 Q3-4 games out of 23 so far is a rather ugly mark.  They've won juuuust enough quality games to be relevant.  Still have a game left apiece with the top 3 in the conference, so this resume will shift in quality dramatically, IMO.

Arizona St (15-8) (6-4) NET 53 SoS 29
Vital signs:  5-6 R/N, non-con SoS 119, avg win 137
3-6 vs. Q1, 4-2 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Arizona, @Washington?  @Oregon St?
Bad losses:  @Wazzu

Barely get listed because of the NET ranking, SoS numbers, and 1 signature win.  Need to get a move on.

Quick hits:

Utah (14-9) (5-6) NET 70 SoS 53 - wins over Kentucky and BYU aren't nothing.  Also not nothing:  1-6 in true road games, 2 Q3 losses, middling SoS numbers.
Oregon St (14-9) (4-7) NET 68 SoS 142 - their resume is a riddle.  Non-con SoS of 335 is a non-starter.  3-0 in Q1-A games (!!!!!!!!!!!!!).  3-9 in Q1-B, Q2, and Q3 games.  Sure, what the hell.  So if they can actually stumble their way to 18-12 or so, we've got a discussion on our hands.

Washington is 2-8 in conference, with a NET of 54.  You figure that one out.  I can't.

No comments: