How to salvage a 4-5 seed?

[OsideCat]

1. Win out reg. season. 3 games all at home, all must wins. With this team easier said than done. I believe a 3 game PAC 10 wins streak would equal the longest of the year.

2. Has to get to Championship of PAC 10 tourney. Winning it would make everyone feel 100% better, but lets just get there.

That would put the Cats & 22-8 for the season. If that can't get us in the top 16-20 teams in this weak year, then I guess I don't know hoops at all.

The game Thursday is the biggest. Followed by Sat. then next Sunday, hell they're all HUGE!

[g92]

If we win out (thats 6 games)...we finish 23-7...12-6...5-5 road...9-6 road neutral....9-1 last 10.....guarantee thats a 4 seed (maybe an outside shot at a #3 with others tanking).

Forget Joe Lunardi and his bracketology, he simply uses RPI and that's it. Believe me the comittee uses the polls as well and if the above happen we will be ranked near #10 (we are #14 now) which would make this team a #4 seed (maybe a #3).

Of course this is assuming that we beat Stanford in the final which would greatly help our RPI, Ranking and schedule strength.

[Mustache Man]

Lunardi is actually very accurate with his tourney predictions. He has missed exactly ONE team per year in terms of who gets in, and the large majority of his seeding predictions are within one seed (+ or -) of the team's actual seed. So, if Lunardi is predicting we will get a 7 seed, the chances that we will be seeded between 6-8 are VERY high.

I still say that we can get all the way up to a 4 seed, if this team can get their act together for the rest of the regular season and the Pac-10 tourney, since I don't think that there's more than 4-5 teams that are "locks" to be high seeds.

[popque]

Originally posted by g92

Of course this is assuming that we beat Stanford in the final which would greatly help our RPI, Ranking and schedule strength.

Beating Stanford will have zero effect on our schedule strength and only minimal effect on our RPI. Theoretically it would help us quite a lot in the polls...but I don't think there is a poll between the PAC-10 tourney and selection sunday. All it would do is make us look good in the eyes of the committee, and I have a feeling our seed will be determined long before the PAC-10 tourney final game is played.

[killervibe]

Baring an undefeated run starting now and leading us to the Pac 10 tourney championship (not going to happen) we are a 6 seed. If by some stroke of inspired play we do accomplish that feat we will get a 4 seed. I have been dead on with this team since the start so you can mark it down and put it in the bank.

[OsideCat]

Originally posted by killervibe
I have been dead on with this team since the start so you can mark it down and put it in the bank.

You throw so much crap out there, then you claim you've been dead on with this team. Wow. I guess in your mind you saying they completley suck after every loss than your right on.

[g92]

the thing about Lunardi is his rankings are as of today, they dont factor in any future outcomes or take into account rankings. Teams ranked high (top 10 or so) from major conf dont get seeded based on RPI only.

Example:
UA ranked 10 or 11 by USA & ESPN (end of season)
RPI is 21

rankings indicate a 3 seed
RPI indicates a 6 seed

most likely we would be a 4 seed.

That said one more slip up (at home or in round 1-2 at pac-10 tourney) and we will have sealed a 6-7-8 seed. Win out while others are losing and we can and will get to a 4 seed.

[Mustache Man]

g92, the committee bases their tourney selections and seeding FAR MORE on RPI (their own "secret" formula; Lunardi's is the most similar, because it's based on an extrapolation of last year's committee formula) than rankings. Think of Gonzaga for the last few years...they haven't been able to get above a 6 seed, even though they've been ranked consistently in the 2-4 seed range (top 10-15). It's because their strength of schedule (and RPI, as a result) is too low.

Lunardi is basing his seedings on today's information, where Arizona has an RPI in the low 30s. 35 and under is usually "lock" territory, but no way would we get a 4 seed with an RPI that low. And, realistically, our RPI will not improve much over the next 3 games: UW, WSU, ASU. The only way to get some substantial improvement would be to beat Stanford in the Pac-10 tourney...nobody else in the Pac-10 can really improve our RPI. And a loss to UW/WSU/ASU might really hurt us...put us in the 8-10 seed range.

[killervibe]

Originally posted by OsideCat
You throw so much crap out there, then you claim you've been dead on with this team. Wow. I guess in your mind you saying they completley suck after every loss than your right on.

Oside, despite being flamed by people like you all year long I have always said the same thing. So dont give me that lame "you throw so much stuff out there" bull****.

Remember, being a homer is not a prerequisite to being a UofA fan or college basketball enthusiast. I just call them like I see them and all year long I have been saying what the majority of posters are saying now, even though it wasnt a popular sentiment back then.

Why dont you spend your time slamming the bandwagoners who were gung ho "this team is the best ever" earlier in the year but are now preaching "we suck" philosophy.

Back to your bandwagoning Mr. Simpson.

[g92]

Thats why I said major conf....Gonzaga is from a mid-major which doesnt get the same benefits as a major conference team.

When it's all said and done the RPI is completely based on subjective perception (much like the BCS). A perception that a loss to another "good" team from a "strong" conference helps you more than a win vs a "bad" team from a "medicore" conference.

Example:

Winning at home for UA vs UW is FAR LESS important than GT losing at Wake

When in reality GT. Wake. UNC.NC St. UA are very EQUAL in terms of the teams abiliy (id even say UA is better tha these teams), just watch their games. However their respective RPI are a joke
15.10.13.14.33.....come on????????

[Mustache Man]

The problem with Arizona is, as good as we look at times, and as good as this team has the potential to be, they have almost zero marquee wins to this point, which is surprising for an Arizona team, and also have a losing road/neutral record. They have nothing to back up the contention that they are a "good" team.

The only win against the RPI top 50 this year is against Texas; we lost to Florida and Stanford (twice). And those are the ONLY games we played against the RPI top-50. Whereas in most years, at least 2 other Pac-10 teams are RPI top-50 teams, this year, there are none besides Arizona and Stanford. Most years, we have played far more than 4 games against the RPI top-50, and have won more than 1 of those games.

The RPI is not based on perception...it's based on quality wins against quality opponents, and not playing (and losing) to subpar competition. Losses to OSU, UW, and USC are bad because those are bad teams, based on their performance the rest of the year. Losses to Wake Forest and GT (for UNC) are not as bad, because Wake and GT have performed considerably better than OSU/UW/USC this year.

Arizona does not have the resume of a 4 seed right now, and it's doubtful they can get there without some serious help, regardless of how far they rise in the polls (which are often voted on by coaches' assistants and athletic department employees).

[Merkin]

Back to your bandwagoning Mr. Simpson.

Oside is Corky?:wink2: