Started By
Message
Found this interesting talk about BBall
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:24 am
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:24 am
LINK
I am not an intense BBall fan who gets into the breakdown of the game but do enjoy good games. I did find this guy interesting in his breakdown so far. If correct and we keep it up we have a great chance this year. Be prepared for graphs...
I am not an intense BBall fan who gets into the breakdown of the game but do enjoy good games. I did find this guy interesting in his breakdown so far. If correct and we keep it up we have a great chance this year. Be prepared for graphs...
5
Posted on 12/26/24 at 8:56 am to 88TIger
That’s an interesting breakdown. We have the ability to play multiple styles this year and I hope that helps us in the tourney. The only “weakness” is that we don’t force a lot of turnovers.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 9:07 am to 88TIger
So far we check every metric and some we blow out of the water to make a very deep run and potentially win a natty. Sometimes it is hard to say that this early in the season, but with how tough our schedule has been so far, you can easily make that claim.
The main issue with CBB is the tournament (as fun as it is, it is just a bad metric for determining the best team in the country). No matter how good you are, one injury or just a cold streak or you just get an opponent that can't miss that day from 3 and all that goes out the window in a one game tournament format.
The main issue with CBB is the tournament (as fun as it is, it is just a bad metric for determining the best team in the country). No matter how good you are, one injury or just a cold streak or you just get an opponent that can't miss that day from 3 and all that goes out the window in a one game tournament format.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 9:09 am to TailbackU
quote:
That’s an interesting breakdown.
I agree. I found it very interesting to see where we were on the graphs. Made sense when it was broken down.
quote:
We have the ability to play multiple styles this year
And it looks like we experiment with line up combos. We do have times in the game where it looks like we are sloppy playing but that could be that they just want to rev it up and try some stuff just to have fun.
quote:
The only “weakness” is that we don’t force a lot of turnovers.
This is true but we haven't really needed it except for the Duke game.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 9:30 am to 88TIger
Turnover margin is the one that can't really be Adjusted for oppoent strength. We've had an incredibly tough schedule, but we've kept the ball safe. Forced turnovers are going to be much lower just because of the strength of schedule
Posted on 12/26/24 at 10:20 am to 88TIger
The conference schedule is when weaknesses truly get exposed. There's not as much game planning in the non-con part of the schedule.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 11:44 am to 88TIger
quote:
We do have times in the game where it looks like we are sloppy playing
But we are not nearly as sloppy as a lot of Pearl’s teams here. Even in the Jabari/Kessler year we were notortious for turning the ball over on fast breaks. We are much more under control in breaks even as this team has the best half court offense and defense we’ve ever had.
This post was edited on 12/26/24 at 11:45 am
Posted on 12/26/24 at 12:13 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
So I just wanted to point out about this misnomer that the NCAA tournament is a flawed way to see who the best team is in the country. If you look back in the past 10 years. Besides one team that’s an outlier, like an 8 seed or below, most of the final 4 games are between #1-#4 seeds. Only the 2022-2023 season where the highest ranked seed was UCONN and they were a 4 seed and everyone else was below a #6 seed. Other than that season though in the past 10 years, the top teams in the regular season usually dominate the final 4. I think people see upsets happening in the first two rounds and think that the tournament is just random chaos, when in fact, for the most part, the teams that have been the best throughout the year vie for the championship. I mean, anyone want to argue that Purdue and UCONN weren’t the two best teams last year? Since 2014, at least #1 seed has been to the championship game. It’s actually no different than any other sport’s postseason.
Most of the time the champion has been a top 10-15 team the whole year. Yes, luck of the draw and who is hot comes to play at times, but the elite teams overcome those obstacles and more times than not make it to the final 4 and win it. There haven’t been any surprise champion in the past decade, yet the NCAA tournament gets a bad rap because of the upsets that happen in the first weekend when in reality it’s just weeding out most of the so called great teams who were frauds. Remember when we had Jabari and Kessler? Did anyone actually think we were going to win the whole thing that year? I didn’t because of our guard play and how we played down the stretch, and guess what happened? We lost to a team who had great guards. Again, the tournament actually exposes those types of teams and for me, makes it a better way to decide a champion.
Most of the time the champion has been a top 10-15 team the whole year. Yes, luck of the draw and who is hot comes to play at times, but the elite teams overcome those obstacles and more times than not make it to the final 4 and win it. There haven’t been any surprise champion in the past decade, yet the NCAA tournament gets a bad rap because of the upsets that happen in the first weekend when in reality it’s just weeding out most of the so called great teams who were frauds. Remember when we had Jabari and Kessler? Did anyone actually think we were going to win the whole thing that year? I didn’t because of our guard play and how we played down the stretch, and guess what happened? We lost to a team who had great guards. Again, the tournament actually exposes those types of teams and for me, makes it a better way to decide a champion.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 12:13 pm to 88TIger
quote:
And it looks like we experiment with line up combos. We do have times in the game where it looks like we are sloppy playing but that could be that they just want to rev it up and try some stuff just to have fun.
From a team format everyone getting time together on the big stage is pretty rare... You thinking it may be intentionally done?
Posted on 12/26/24 at 1:36 pm to 88TIger
I posted this to another forum yesterday. It’s an interesting watch.
I like the contrast he draws between the Auburns and Dukes of the world with to the Bamas and Houstons.
Auburn and Duke are “complete” teams that can handle any style of ball thrown at them. While teams like Bama and Houston, while good, are hyper-specialized to the point of being faulty.
Further I like the contrast he drew between Bama and Houston. Houston is one of those teams with a great floor but a low ceiling, while Bama has a lower floor but a higher ceiling when they’re on. That is to say Houston will beat who they’re supposed to beat, and comfortably, but will not have much luck against top level competition like us or Duke. Meanwhile Bama is that team that will lose games they have no business losing, but will occasionally blow the doors off of a quality opponent. Bama is the riskier bet with a higher chance of a better payout.
I like the contrast he draws between the Auburns and Dukes of the world with to the Bamas and Houstons.
Auburn and Duke are “complete” teams that can handle any style of ball thrown at them. While teams like Bama and Houston, while good, are hyper-specialized to the point of being faulty.
Further I like the contrast he drew between Bama and Houston. Houston is one of those teams with a great floor but a low ceiling, while Bama has a lower floor but a higher ceiling when they’re on. That is to say Houston will beat who they’re supposed to beat, and comfortably, but will not have much luck against top level competition like us or Duke. Meanwhile Bama is that team that will lose games they have no business losing, but will occasionally blow the doors off of a quality opponent. Bama is the riskier bet with a higher chance of a better payout.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 1:57 pm to AUSCgrad2016
quote:
Most of the time the champion has been a top 10-15 team the whole year.
This is pretty counter to your argument and to the point i'm making. Is a team that is consistently in the 8-10 range all season, that gets a good draw or just gets hot in the tournament definitively the best team in the country? I don't see how you could argue March Madness does a good job proving that.
quote:
in reality it’s just weeding out most of the so called great teams who were frauds.
Does it though? Even with our big weakness in guard play in 2021 as you mentioned, I'm not convinced we don't win a 5 game series with Miami. Maybe we don't as they weren't a great matchup for us.
It isn't the early round upsets that really give the tournament a bad rap as you are arguing. The flaw of any single game elimination tournament is that by its very design, is going to give greater exposure to items that don't necessarily prove that one team is better than another.
We can look at Duke this year. Are they a better team than we are? Maybe, but I don't think anyone can definitively say that from a one game snapshot. If we play them 5 times, who wins that series? It is why NBA style playoffs is a better format (though I know that would never work in CBB).
This post was edited on 12/26/24 at 1:58 pm
Posted on 12/26/24 at 2:21 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
Actually if you just look at the past 10 champions my argument is consistent with how the best teams for that year have won the tournament. You also have to remember there are over 360 teams in D1 compared to only 140 I believe in football FBS. So, there are more teams that are good in basketball than in football. So yes, if you are a top 10-15 team throughout the year, you are going to be a top 3 seed, which are usually the seeds that win the tournament for the most part. I also gave you the most recent 10 year time frame for champions where only UCONN of 2022-2023 wasn’t a top 1-3 seed to win it all. So, once in 10 years for that to happen isn’t some flawed way to pick a champion, it actually just proves that 90% of the time the champion has been deserving for their whole year.
As for Auburn with Jabari and Kessler, we would still lose in a best of 5 because of our guards. If you remember, that team was floundering the last few games of the season and our guard play was atrocious. We literally relied on Kessler and Jabari to win games, that’s it.
Also, the Duke game is irrelevant because that was on their home court. The tournament games are in neutral sites, it’s why it’s on a level playing field. I believe if Auburn faces Duke on a neutral court, we win.
But again, in saying all of this, one of the best teams in college basketball usually wins the tournament. Yes, a team can get hot or have an amazing game to upset a team they weren’t supposed to beat, but that’s hard to do 6 straight games like in the tournament. The best of the best will beat those teams who are hot or did have an earlier upset in the tourney. Anyone can beat someone for one game, hence the upsets in the first two rounds. However, there’s a reason why you see less and less of those underdogs as the tournament goes on: they don’t have the consistency, talent and depth that the best teams have to sustain that level of play. So yea, the tournament weeds out those one off teams for the most part. Also, you have to remember that most college basketball teams have flaws and aren’t unbeatable. That’s why it’s fair game to go on a neutral court and see who is the best. Again, it hasn’t stopped for the best teams to matchup in the final 4 and championship for the last 10 years. I think people forget how many teams there are in college basketball and don’t realize that the top 10-15 teams in basketball is only 4% of college basketball compared to football, where the top 12 football teams is almost 10% of college football teams. The tournament is the best way to determine a champion, it’s like any other sport that only plays one game as well in college.
As for Auburn with Jabari and Kessler, we would still lose in a best of 5 because of our guards. If you remember, that team was floundering the last few games of the season and our guard play was atrocious. We literally relied on Kessler and Jabari to win games, that’s it.
Also, the Duke game is irrelevant because that was on their home court. The tournament games are in neutral sites, it’s why it’s on a level playing field. I believe if Auburn faces Duke on a neutral court, we win.
But again, in saying all of this, one of the best teams in college basketball usually wins the tournament. Yes, a team can get hot or have an amazing game to upset a team they weren’t supposed to beat, but that’s hard to do 6 straight games like in the tournament. The best of the best will beat those teams who are hot or did have an earlier upset in the tourney. Anyone can beat someone for one game, hence the upsets in the first two rounds. However, there’s a reason why you see less and less of those underdogs as the tournament goes on: they don’t have the consistency, talent and depth that the best teams have to sustain that level of play. So yea, the tournament weeds out those one off teams for the most part. Also, you have to remember that most college basketball teams have flaws and aren’t unbeatable. That’s why it’s fair game to go on a neutral court and see who is the best. Again, it hasn’t stopped for the best teams to matchup in the final 4 and championship for the last 10 years. I think people forget how many teams there are in college basketball and don’t realize that the top 10-15 teams in basketball is only 4% of college basketball compared to football, where the top 12 football teams is almost 10% of college football teams. The tournament is the best way to determine a champion, it’s like any other sport that only plays one game as well in college.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 3:11 pm to awestruck
quote:
You thinking it may be intentionally done?
I think it might be because when is a better time to experiment with your lineups? Pre-conference or conference games. I think that you would be able to tell what meshes well in case of injury or off nights.
This team looks like they are having fun out there and that is what counts. Looks like the freshmen have settled into their roles and seem happy also.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 3:19 pm to AUSCgrad2016
The NCAA Tournament is a great way to ensure a really damn good team wins the championship. You don't win 6 games in a row against good to elite competition at a neutral court without being great.
But it's not a good way to find the best team. The best way to do that would probably be a boring tournament of 4 or 8 teams.
But it's not a good way to find the best team. The best way to do that would probably be a boring tournament of 4 or 8 teams.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 5:11 pm to 88TIger
AU's defense is not getting enough love. They routinely take away the opponent's strength, and heaven help you if you depend on shooting 3's in a half court set... Because not only is AU not giving you good looks, you are going to get up about 1/3 of the number of attempts you want and your main shooter is going to shut down. Yet to be seen how we deal with a transition 3 team like Bama, although UNC was a poor man's preview. The D metrics are also hurt by the number of games up by 30+ with 8 min to go, and giving up late points to backups. I expect the numbers to improve over league play. I do wonder a bit about the Duke game, where it looked like the intensity level was not as high 'on the ball'. BP has talked about how they were not able to keep Duke from running their offense, and I would like to know more about that. But AU was clearly not as disruptive as usual for whatever reason and that game stands out as an outlier in terms of defense and a few other areas. I would like AU's chances in a neutral court re-match.
This post was edited on 12/26/24 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 12/26/24 at 5:54 pm to auburnnyc94
See, that’s where I still disagree. Even though 68 teams might appear to be a large number, it’s really just %19 of all of college basketball being able to compete for a national title. I also enjoy it because it allows every team to have a chance to win, no matter what conference you play in. Now, I do believe the regular season champions from mid majors should get auto bids to the NCAA tournament, but that’s a whole other issue.
Getting back to this, the tournament more often than not gets the top teams playing for the championship. Facts back this up. As much chaos it can create in the beginning, in the end it does come down to the best teams of that year.
Getting back to this, the tournament more often than not gets the top teams playing for the championship. Facts back this up. As much chaos it can create in the beginning, in the end it does come down to the best teams of that year.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 6:27 pm to AUSCgrad2016
Sometimes it who's best that day.
Different day, different something, different outcome. Why they play best of series on TV.
Different day, different something, different outcome. Why they play best of series on TV.
Posted on 12/26/24 at 7:25 pm to AUSCgrad2016
Oh I love it and wouldn’t change it, it’s just not the best format for finding the best team. That’s just the truth of it. 40 minute basketball games are too fluky
Posted on 12/26/24 at 9:29 pm to auburnnyc94
Yea, I’ve had many conversations about this over the years, and I can understand the argument. Honestly, if it was in an ideal world, it would be similar to the NBA playoffs. Best of 3 from first round to the elite 8 and then best of 5 for the final 4 and championship. However, that would never happen because that’s way too many games and the tournament wouldn’t end until May, ??.
But really, the tournament does a great job for the most part picking the best teams form that year and the if you just look at the past, it shows you that usually one of the top teams wins it all. Yea, the game of basketball is fluky, but the great teams usually will find a way to be the most consistent. Again, I think for the most part, before the tournament starts, people have those 6-8 teams who actually have a chance to win it, and 90% of the time, you’re right. I just think it’s really the only way to logically and logistically to pick the best team. I’m also bias towards college basketball, I think it’s the best sport. I take the conference championship week off and then the first two days of the tournament. Nothing beats that ??
But really, the tournament does a great job for the most part picking the best teams form that year and the if you just look at the past, it shows you that usually one of the top teams wins it all. Yea, the game of basketball is fluky, but the great teams usually will find a way to be the most consistent. Again, I think for the most part, before the tournament starts, people have those 6-8 teams who actually have a chance to win it, and 90% of the time, you’re right. I just think it’s really the only way to logically and logistically to pick the best team. I’m also bias towards college basketball, I think it’s the best sport. I take the conference championship week off and then the first two days of the tournament. Nothing beats that ??
Posted on 12/27/24 at 6:46 am to TigerTime Burrito
Good post burrito. Post more
Page 1 of 2
Latest Auburn News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News