KU ***** Official 2017-2018 Kansas Basketball Repository Thread ***** - Page 154

Self and Beard coach of the year

Devonte player of the year in big 12
[Reply]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Don't really care what the media does or doesn't say about this program, but I would rather not be the first #1 seed that loses to a #16. And I should warn you that if KU is a #1 seed this year, they are likely the weakest #1 seed of all time from a pure quality standpoint. From what we've seen this year, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility that they could lose such a game.

I don't think a #1 will ever lose to a #16 as long as they let in the small schools.
[Reply]

The worst I've felt about a team going into the tourney was the 14-15 team (the Oubre one).

While I feel this current team has that floor, they have a much higher ceiling. They can run with anyone in the tourney, but they could potentially lose to anyone too. Hopefully we'll make it out of the first weekend.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Did I say they would lose? No. They�d be significant favourites still.

But do I think they could depending on the quality of the 16 seed? Absolutely. This team has the normal statistical profile of a 4 seed. If they end up being a #1, they�ll be worse than any 1 that came before them.

This is what people don�t understand. KenPom runs their data based on the year at hand. They don�t have a set standard, like, this year�s numbers will get you this seed, etc. They base it on the teams in that year and you can judge the other teams and years as you wish.

Will the committee ever get rid of RPI?
[Reply]

Originally Posted by KChiefs1:
I don't think a #1 will ever lose to a #16 as long as they let in the small schools.

It's going to happen eventually. Not to specifically bring up the Missouri/Norfolk State game to a Missouri fan, but it's just the best illustration of my point. This Kansas team is significantly worse than that 2012 Missouri team and it is quite likely that this Kansas team will end up playing a team better than 2012 Norfolk State (#183 in KenPom that year). If a good #2 seed like Missouri can lose such a game (likely the biggest upset in NCAA history), a bad #1 seed certainly could too.
[Reply]

Who cares if we are a 1 or 2. Now if we don't end up in Wichita and the Midwest then we can bitch.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by cmh6476:
Who cares if we are a 1 or 2. Now if we don't end up in Wichita and the Midwest then we can bitch.

I would rather be a 2 and play close to Lawrence than be the last 1 and play further away.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Did I say they would lose? No. They’d be significant favourites still.

But do I think they could depending on the quality of the 16 seed? Absolutely. This team has the normal statistical profile of a 4 seed. If they end up being a #1, they’ll be worse than any 1 that came before them.

This is why it shouldn't have anything to do with how good a team is in their predictive analytics on what seed they can get. This KU team has overachieved. Fact. But since they did, they deserve a high seed. Seeding is about what youve ACTUALLY done. Not how good you could have been.

The committee should also not factor a loss of an injured player, or the addition of a prized player like in ND's situation. You EARN your seed.
[Reply]

I'm pretty relaxed about the tournament this year.

Most years I would consider winning the Big 12 conference (and hopefully not having a home loss) as pretty good but still needing to make a FF to consider it a great year.

This is down year, especially without Preston. This team winning the Big 12 outright, no shared title, was a great year.

If they flame out of the tournament it won't bother me like years past.

On the other hand, this is sort of team that KU has been upset by in the past. We can probably make it through the first weekend just by not having a bad game. And then this is totally the sort of team that could get really hot from the 3 and beat more talented teams to go deep in the tournament.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan:
I would rather be a 2 and play close to Lawrence than be the last 1 and play further away.

Not me, give me the 1 all day
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan:
I would rather be a 2 and play close to Lawrence than be the last 1 and play further away.

I think higher seeds should get home games until the Final Four. That would reward regular season success more and make the tournament less of a luckbox.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Don't really care what the media does or doesn't say about this program,

I don't care a lot. But the media narrative probably has at least a little bit of influence on recruiting.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by TambaBerry:
Not me, give me the 1 all day

Remember when we got a #1 and had to play UCLA in Southern California? That was alot of fun.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by BWillie:
I think higher seeds should get home games until the Final Four. That would reward regular season success more and make the tournament less of a luckbox.

I agree with that. Not that is going to happen.

You can play at home, or if your home arena is too small, you can play at the venue of your choice. "Home" games at Sprint would be fine.
[Reply]

Actually, if it was up to me, I would let the top, #1 seed pick their opponent. I would do the same thing in the NBA and NFL.
[Reply]