Let's take a look at our losses

Our team is much better than it was a month ago.
And a little better than when we played Tammy a week and a half ago. I like our chances vs. Tammy.

 

Certainly no terrible losses there. The issue is … they were most lost opportunities for quality wins.

 

UConn is a NC contender. I haven't seen a better team, other than maybe Kansas. Kinda weird what has happened recently for Arkansas and A&M. Those two seem to be juxtaposed, according to expectations.

 

KenPom has us with #23 schedule. And #315 on "luck".

This next game is a measurement game. Where are we? Missouri was also, as like A&M, they have an inflated record. But A&M is pretty legit and it's an away game.

We need one more 3 point shooter to heat up, and we need the light to go on for one of the slashers (Kugel, Reeves, Fudge.)

 

No bad losses and plenty of opportunities for quality wins

 

This is the one rub, but, again, the way we are trending against such a tough schedule should easily make this a bette transition year than BD or MW, or even BD’s “second” transition year after our titles.

 

Well said. As someone else pointed out, will likely come down to how many spots the SEC gets. If it's 7, then I can easily see us being the 7th best team.

 

I still don't understand how "luck" is quantified.

 

Say you lose every game by one point and compare that to winning every game by one point with the same schedule. The difference in performance in offense and defense is small and yet the difference in W-L record is huge. Clearly the former is very unlucky and the later is very lucky. Now it is a matter of putting a metric on that and there are lots of ways to do that.

And don't give me that one team is "clutch" and the other isn't. There are scores of studies that dispel the existance of "clutch" performers.

Now "choking" can happen.

I don't know if Ken P is using the very best metric, but I bet he constructed a decent one.

 

In his ratings explanation: "The easiest one to understand is Luck, which is the deviation in winning percentage between a team’s actual record and their expected record using the correlated gaussian method. The luck factor has nothing to do with the rating calculation, but a team that is very lucky (positive numbers) will tend to be rated lower by my system than their record would suggest."

 

Are you going to sit there and tell me Larry Bird wasn't "clutch?" With the game on the line, I'm damn sure going to get the ball to him.

 

I think the point is that we remember (and thus exaggerate) their successes, but overlook (and thus minimize) their failures. Scoring rate in last 5 minutes is pretty helpful, but a one score game can be attributed to dozens of variables (foul outs, foul disparities, free throw attempts, press turnovers, single play success) that don't account for how well you played the entire game to that point.

 

He was a great scorer for all 48 minutes and not just special with the game on the line.

Same with MJ and Kobe.

In fact with the championship series on the line MJ passed the ball to Kerr to hit the series winning shot.

 

All true. Because they were all clutch players.

 

there are no bad loses but they are still loses. But they sure look like they turned it around. I gave them up to dead but now they have new life.

 

And Bird stole the inbounds pass and dropped it to DJ for the deuce. Sorry, had to get that one in there.

 

After the TAMU and Auburn losses, it was hard to see how this team could wake up. To their credit, they have done so.

I'll give Golden a lot of credit too. He's made some significant changes to his substitution patterns and has gotten the buy in necessary.

This team is more than capable of getting a spot in the NCAA tourney.

 

First year. Kids should get better as the season progresses and they gain familiarity and confidence with his system. Kugel playing well now. CC has really found stride in TG system. Recruiting needs to improve now.