|
Post by orangedw on Feb 21, 2024 10:54:47 GMT -5
This encourages teams to run up the score, press to the very end of the game, not play the deep bench no matter what, etc.
And on the other end, if you’re getting blown out….you leave your best guys in and press right to the end of the other team puts their walkons in?
It’s a scrubby thing to take into account. We’ve all seen a million games that are over 10 minutes into the second half, but the score ends up looking “respectable” because the losing team scored 10 meaningless points in the last 2 minutes of the game, when the winning team is just running clock and avoiding fouls.
|
|
|
Post by alsacs on Feb 21, 2024 11:02:18 GMT -5
This encourages teams to run up the score, press to the very end of the game, not play the deep bench no matter what, etc. And on the other end, if you’re getting blown out….you leave your best guys in and press right to the end of the other team puts their walkons in? It’s a scrubby thing to take into account. We’ve all seen a million games that are over 10 minutes into the second half, but the score ends up looking “respectable” because the losing team scored 10 meaningless points in the last 2 minutes of the game, when the winning team is just running clock and avoiding fouls. I would cap how much margin of victory could be calculated in NET ratings. Like 15 PPG would be the cap as I would say it is a metric I would use to evaluate the top teams for seeding purpose but the teams in the middle I don’t care if your margin of victory is any better. The bubble teams have all shown they can lose games. The metrics should evaluate who has the best metrics to win neutral court games and has shown they are a solid team. But I wouldn’t mind the margin of victory used to determine who the best top teams are for seeding. Just cap it so teams like Gonzaga used to get a lot of credit for pounding shit teams in their conference.
|
|
|
Post by orangedw on Feb 21, 2024 11:03:40 GMT -5
And I should add, we’ve also all seen games that were highly competitive for 30-35 minutes, but the losing team ran out of gas and the winning team pours it on a little bit in the last few minutes and the final score looks like a blowout.
|
|
|
Post by orangedw on Feb 21, 2024 11:07:58 GMT -5
This encourages teams to run up the score, press to the very end of the game, not play the deep bench no matter what, etc. And on the other end, if you’re getting blown out….you leave your best guys in and press right to the end of the other team puts their walkons in? It’s a scrubby thing to take into account. We’ve all seen a million games that are over 10 minutes into the second half, but the score ends up looking “respectable” because the losing team scored 10 meaningless points in the last 2 minutes of the game, when the winning team is just running clock and avoiding fouls. I would cap how much margin of victory could be calculated in NET ratings. Like 15 PPG would be the cap as I would say it is a metric I would use to evaluate the top teams for seeding purpose but the teams in the middle I don’t care if your margin of victory is any better. The bubble teams have all shown they can lose games. The metrics should evaluate who has the best metrics to win neutral court games and has shown they are a solid team. But I wouldn’t mind the margin of victory used to determine who the best top teams are for seeding. Just cap it so teams like Gonzaga used to get a lot of credit for pounding shit teams in their conference. I wouldn’t even look at it. You either won or lost. Just look at that. Random example, but in our 2003 tourney run…..we were in high danger of losing to Oklahoma State, but the Auburn game we were basically in control the whole way. We ended up beating Ok. State by 12, and we beat Auburn by 1. Auburn made a completely meaningless 3 at the buzzer when we were just standing there. They kept scoring when we were trying to avoid fouling in the last minute or 2. Oklahoma State was a far scarier game, but you’d never know that if you just looked at the final scores. If the press didn’t work and Jeremy McNeil didn’t keep completely stopping 2 on 1s and 3 on 1s by himself, it’s highly possible we lose that game by double digits. Auburn was down the whole game and never really had anything going beyond Marquis Daniels scoring in the middle of the zone.
|
|
|
Post by Ghost on Feb 24, 2024 20:43:53 GMT -5
Man.
We had so much margin for victory in our sights today. And then..........none.
So, is that why I'm seeing so many more wild blowouts than usual this year? Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Ghost on Mar 3, 2024 11:57:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by orangedw on Mar 3, 2024 13:43:15 GMT -5
Pitt being 33 spots ahead of us is absurd. More or less the same record overall and league. We beat them both times. They beat NC A&T, Jacksonville, and South Carolina St. by 40-50 points in non league games. Is that why they’re so far ahead of us? It’s the only real difference I can find?
|
|