Sunday, March 1, 2020

Bubble watch: A-10/AAC

Again, lumping these 2 conferences together oughta get AAC fans riled up again.


Dayton (27-2) (16-0) NET 3 SoS 25
Vital signs:  11-2 R/N, non-con SoS 33, avg win 138
4-2 vs. Q1, 7-0 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  N-St Mary's, @Richmond, @VCU
Bad losses:  none

I don't think they have a strong enough collection of wins to make it to the 1 line.  I think.


Houston (22-7) (12-4) NET 22 SoS 78
Vital signs:  9-5 R/N, non-con SoS 221, avg win 139
2-4 vs. Q1, 7-3 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  swept WSU, Cincy?  @South Carolina?
Bad losses:  Okla St?

Not a lock.  See the non-con SoS, the general lack of signature wins.  However, without a truly catastrophic loss, I think they'll be fine.  But there's still time to absorb a couple more losses.

Rhode Island (20-8) (12-4) NET 43 SoS 70
Vital signs:  8-6 R/N, non-con SoS 42, avg win 154
1-5 vs. Q1, 6-2 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  @VCU, Bama, Providence?
Bad losses:  @Brown, St Louis?

With their season sweep of VCU evaporating into not much resume help, it's closer to the bubble than you think.  I think they should be safe still, but I'm having a tricky time figuring out just how valuable these decent Q2 home wins are.

Wichita St (22-7) (10-6) NET 47 SoS 81
Vital signs:  6-5 R/N, non-con SoS 136, avg win 145
2-4 vs. Q1, 7-3 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Oklahoma, @UConn and @Okla St?
Bad losses:  @Temple

Oklahoma at home might very well represent their only win over a tourney team.  That is a major resume hole.  Okay SoS numbers and road numbers, and no one part of this profile sticks out as unassailable.  I would highly suggest handling your business next week, because a volume of losses would be a problem that this resume isn't designed to overcome.

Cincinnati (18-10) (11-5) NET 53 SoS 9
Vital signs:  6-8 R/N, non-con SoS 26 avg win 119
2-6 vs. Q1, 6-0 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Houston, swept WSU, Memphis?
Bad losses:  Colgate, UCF, N-Bowling Green, @Tulane

4 Q3 losses is a problem.  The SoS numbers are well inflated by scheduling the right mid-majors (Vermont, Colgate, BGU).  Problem is they sure lost to a bunch of them.  I don't know how much those Houston/WSU wins will matter, but they sure better hope they mean everything.  How high they end up rated will likely cause a trickle down effect to Cincy's bubble hopes.

Richmond (22-7) (12-4) NET 48 SoS 93
Vital signs:  9-5 R/N, non-con SoS 100, avg win 168
3-4 vs. Q1, 1-2 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  N-Wisky, @URI, VCU?
Bad losses:  N-Radford, @St Bona?

Only 4 wins in the top 2 quads isn't the greatest mark.  8-3 in true road games is.  I would highly suggest keeping your nose clean against non-tourney teams the rest of the way.  That might be enough, given there's at least the 2 solid legit Q1 wins on the board above.

Memphis (20-9) (9-7) NET 60 SoS 89
Vital signs:  6-6 R/N, non-con SoS 162, avg win 162
2-4 vs. Q1, 5-2 vs. Q2
Signature wins:  Houston, Cincy, N-NCSU
Bad losses:  USF, Georgia, SMU all at home

Well, they have Houston and Wichita left.  So there's time yet.  But this isn't a tournament team right now.

NIT watch:
Tulsa (20-9) (12-4) NET 83 SoS 171 - non-con SoS in the 330s.  That's a non-starter for this resume.
SMU (19-9) (9-7) NET 81 SoS 133 - non-con SoS in the 310s.  That's a non-starter for this resume.
UConn (17-12) (8-8) NET 61 SoS 69 - just too many losses to have any kind of chance.
St Louis (20-8) (10-6) NET 66 SoS 84 - a couple decent road wins, a couple dumb losses.  In other words, your quintessential NIT resume.
VCU (18-11) (8-8) NET 56 SoS 56 - good lord did the bottom drop out here.  Home wins over LSU and Richmond, but too many losses to be bubble relevant.
Duquesne (20-8) (10-6) NET 96 SoS 134 - poor SoS numbers, 5 losses in Q3/4.  Despite being 5-3 in the top 2 quads...this is a NIT bubble team.
Davidson (15-13) (9-7) NET 71 SoS 116 - gets a quick glance because of the NET, but probably not viable for the NIT.
St Bonaventure (17-11) (10-6) NET 115 SoS 115 - their resume looks better than NET 115.  But probably not a NIT team either.

No comments: