re: MBB: LSU 90 vs. Southern Miss 62 FINAL...Tigers Win! Improve to 12-1!

If you have YouTube TV, then you also have ESPN and can watch it on that channel SEC plus.

There was a mens BB game today?

quote:

---

yes this is troubling. the bench is not scoring and were massively outscored by the southern miss bench

---

I agree, the bench isn’t holding momentum. Watching the game it seems the team doesn’t trust miller like they do Nwoko.

quote:

---

the terrible athleticism of zipper is not encouraging

---

I honestly would rather see Mosley, who does appear that he might need to gain some muscle, but is in under control and has a good shot.

quote:

---

but the energy of tamba

---

Watching him in person as opposed to on tv give me a little more appreciation for him. He’s doing the right things off ball. And he is aggressive with loose balls. Really like him and Sutton.

I think Miller will play up to tougher competition. I am hopeful that King or Carter picks things up on offense in conference play. Mostly has looked good but not sure he will get many opportunities.

Yes, keep watching the children

quote:

---

1-1 vs q2 teams.

---

Q1 teams. Currently, we have no Q2 games. Of course the net rankings are fluid so that could changeafter the next update.

Q1 - 1-1
Q2 - 0-0
Q3 - 3-0
Q4 - 7-0

quote:

---

Don’t think Mosley, carter, zipp can be more that 3-5 minute subs because they haven’t scene the floor enough

---

Yeah, Zipper has looked a little overwhelmed at times. I think Carter and Mosely could add quality minutes, from time to time, but I wouldn't want to have to depend on them just yet. I also find there is a big drop-off when Reese is in for Thomas.

Net is probably the largest factor the committee looks at but it is not all of it. Here is what AI tells me.

quote:

---

March Madness seeding uses a mix of predictive metrics (NET, KenPom, BPI, Torvik) and results-based metrics (Strength of Record, KPI, Wins Above Bubble) to evaluate teams, with the NCAA Committee focusing heavily on the NET rankings, especially its quadrant system for quality wins and losses, alongside qualitative factors like injuries and travel to create the final 1-68 seed list.

Key Metrics Used

NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET): The NCAA's primary tool, combining game results, strength of schedule, location, scoring margin (capped at 10 points, overtime at 1), and adjusted efficiency.

Quadrant System (part of NET): Ranks wins/losses based on opponent NET ranking and game location (home, neutral, away).

Strength of Record (SOR): A resume-based metric judging a team's record against its schedule.

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Another resume metric for evaluating win quality.

Wins Above Bubble (WAB): A newer metric showing how many more/fewer wins a team has than a typical bubble team would have on the same schedule.

Basketball Power Index (BPI) (ESPN): A predictive measure of team strength, considering factors like efficiency, opponent strength, and game environment.

KenPom (Pomeroy) Ratings: Predictive metrics focusing on offensive and defensive efficiency.

Torvik (Bart Torvik) Metrics: Also predictive, based heavily on adjusted efficiency, with games degrading in value over time.

How the Committee Uses Them

No Single Metric: The committee doesn't rely on just one system, acknowledging that outliers exist.

Balancing Act: They use predictive metrics (NET, KenPom, BPI, Torvik) to assess a team's quality and results-based metrics (SOR, KPI, WAB) to evaluate their accomplishments.

Qualitative Factors: The committee also considers non-statistical elements like key player injuries, travel, and other game-specific context.

Voting Process: Committee members vote on teams, using these metrics as guides, to build the final seed list from 1 to 68.

---

quote:

---

Net is probably the largest factor the committee looks at but it is not all of it.

---

NET is really the only data metric the committee uses. The reason is because it bakes in the other important criteria. KenPom, BPI, etc are included in the formula along with greater emphasis on wins away from home. True road wins count 2x as much as home wins. Neutral wins are 1.5x a home win. You also see that reflected in the quadrants where a Q1 home win requires a win over a top 30 team. A Q1 road win only requires a win over a top 75 team.

LSU's NET ranking right now is 34. Given they have one of the weaker SOS of the top 40 and are only 1-1 in Q1 games, the reason for the high ranking is LSU's data metrics are good. That's largely the result of a really efficient offense top 25-30. Plus, even though LSU has played a weak schedule, they've generally dominated it. They are in the top 20 nationally in average scoring margin (+18)

History has shown one of the biggest non-data metrics the committee places emphasis on is wins vs. other NCAA Tournament teams. Particularly in the non-conference portion of the schedule. A good case study may be 2024 Ole Miss vs. Miss. St.

Ole Miss was (in the regular season) 20-11 (7-11). Miss. State was 19-12 (8-10). Ole Miss went 13-0 vs a weak non conf. schedule. MSU went 11-2 in non-conf with the two losses coming to a bad Georgia Tech team and Southern. Yet, MSU was an 8 seed in the NCAAT. Ole Miss was left out. It wasn't because MSU had one more SEC win. It's because Miss St had two non-conf. wins over other NCAAT teams (Washington St and Northwestern). Ole Miss only had one such win and that was a complete fluke because it was over NC State who ONLY made the NCAAT because they had a miracle run in the ACC Tournament.

What DOES NOT matter, even though people seem to think it does, is conference standings. The conference standings don't even show up on the committee's team sheets they use to evaluate the teams. That's why, in part, LSU, who finished ahead of both Ole Miss and MSU in the SEC that season was still well behind both teams in the postseason selection order. What also DOES NOT matter is how a team performs in its last 10 games. That used to matter (it's why LSU made the tournament in 2003). It doesn't anymore.

Unfortunately, LSU's weak non-conf. schedule means that despite 12 wins, there is really only one of those wins (SMU) who look like a potential NCAAT team. LSU fans should be big SMU fans this year. That also means LSU is going to have to rack up SEC wins. As of now, I just don't see a scenario where a 7 SEC win LSU team gets in. They don't have enough good non-conf. wins to overcome that. IMO, 8 is the target to be in the discussion. And if we are really being picky, you'd LOVE to see 4 (or more) of those wins come on the road.