Another Gonzaga Discussion

[ericd7633]

I agree that they haven't been too shoddy.

They've been well coached and consistent. I'm pretty sure that's more Sweet 16s than Villanova has in the past 30 years!

That said, I think they are knocking on the door. They've had 4 potential Final 4 teams. The one with Morrison, the one that lost to WSU, the one that lost to Duke, and this year.

It's only a matter of time before you make it if you get enough chances.

Yeah, I agree. It's not like they are Kansas and they are a 1 or 2 seed every year. Few has had 5 great teams in his tenure, and just happened to fall short in making the FF. Although the last 3 times he had a great team, they lost to a team that eventually wound up making the FF. I honestly think they make it in 2013 if not for WSU having a complete fluke game. And that type of stuff happens ALL the time in a one and done scenario.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

I'm not sure if it's refused. I don't know about Eastern and Idaho. With UW, they didn't play for awhile but UW was full of retards in their athletic department. With us just recently it was because neither team could find a sponsor for the proposed games in Seattle or Spokane. We aren't giving up the money for a home game to go to Seattle or Spokane for a neutral site game, which was the agreement. It's a scheduling issue, not because either team refuses. They don't want to play only on the Pac 12 networks and we aren't playing a game at midnight eastern on ESPN2. They have leverage and we are at the wims of our shitty conference commissioner.

I wasn't aware of the specifics. I know they just recently said they won't play EWU anymore and I assumed it was a similar situation with WSU. From what you're saying it sounds like WSU would be good with doing a home and home series and GU won't do it because they're too big to play in Pullman every other year. That's pretty god damn lame.

Idaho's athletic department dropped the ball with the GU game like 8 years ago but it was partly because of GU not wanting to travel to Moscow. Both parties are to blame there but the recent deal with EWU and WSU is still a joke IMO. Especially when they schedule teams like MVSU, Bryant, and Utah Valley in their place.

 

[CatsTopPac]

Nobody is trying to argue that they are a top 10 program or anything. The reason they are getting this much pub, like they did in 2013 is because they are a top 5 team this year. Will that translate into them making the FF? Who the hell knows. They are a top 20 program since 2000. They just haven't cracked through to the FF. But that has nothing to do with the schedule strength or lack there of.

How a team performs in the tournament isn't an indication on how a team performed in the regular season. Hell they may lose in the S16 this year to a team like WVU, that doesn't mean they didn't deserve to be a #1 seed or somehow playing in the WCC didn't prepare them for the tournament. I think that argument is bs.

I'm not looking at how many EEs they made. The Gonzaga team from way back made the EE. But they were not a FF team/

I watched those Gonzaga teams in 2006, 2013, 2015 and know how strong they were and how strong the tournaments were those years. And I think they could have made it those years.

Just like Arizona in 2014, 2015. Did they make the Final 4? No. Were they a FF caliber team? Yes.

I also think its funny you're making this argument since Arizona hasn't made the Final 4 since the days before I had my first cell phone.

Again, I like Few. I'd really like to be wrong about this because I'd like to see another team west of Kansas hang a banner. It's great for AZ because we do play them all the time. But I also see that it's much less difficult to play 3-4 top 25 teams a year, before January, win all of them or lose all of them, and then you coast to March. The best play the best and beat the best. GU rarely does either. I think most of that is not GU's fault, but Mark Few has only been to one EE. He's had 6 shots where they were playing for the EE. And Few won once. As a #1 or #2 seed, He was seeded to play for the FF 3 times and won once, just like his winning % against top 25 teams.

I think it's a difference of opinion. I think that not having the competition hurts. I just don't think that a team grows without adversity. Gonzaga almost literally isn't tested from Jan to the dance. Everyone else is playing the games we see where you go into a monster arena that is working against you with your back against the rope and having to persevere, together; going up against some of the best players in all of basketball, the best coaching, the best crowds. Doing that 5-10 times per year is a big deal I think. The competition are other tourney teams and those games aren't on neutral courts, they are on the road. I think that matters. I think it's what tests and develops a team. That's a big part of how chemistry is formed. That's how players develop during in-game situations (last shot, big free throws or 3pts). Teams get their weaknesses exposed. They have to deal with it. GU doesn't. They thump on Pepperdine, Portland, LMU, San Fran, Pacific, Santa Clara, and USD for half their wins in a season. Add 5-10 more scrubs they face to fill in the OCC. Those shitty teams are 20-25 of their wins right there, every year. Book it.

Gonzaga seems to lose to good teams early, or win, whatever, and then wipe everyone until March. Then of a sudden, they can't seem to past the S16 but once in the last 17 years under Few. 1/17 chance of the EE is what his consistent record shows. I think it's connected to the fact that they don't have to go into Allen FH, or Cameron, or Lexington, or Matthew Knight, or the Kohl Center--let alone 2-4 of those per conference. They don't have to travel like the ACC, B12, B1G, PAC and SEC, or BE do. Everyone else does that, and everyone else is getting better right now. GU doesn't seem to improve over the course of the season as much as everyone else, by March. They just don't lose, and crush weak opponents so the numbers and polls look good, despite the SOS.

He's consistent. Hell, he may even get to the Elite Eight again this year. In that case, I think I'd say that he is starting to put it together for knocking on the door to a FF. But again, he's consistent. So there is no reason for me to believe that he is going to all of a sudden get to the FF and play for the NC. His schedule doesn't change, so I see no reason March will change.

And by the way, jones, Over the same period we're talking about, AZ was runner-up, with a final four, 6 EEs (with the 5 losses by a total of 10 points and all by one possession). That's called knocking on the door. Miller has been to 3 EEs in the last 5 years and lost by 6 total. That's knocking on the door. They also had 4 coaches in 4 years right in the middle of that while Few was in full swing and has been ever since. And yet AZ still had as many Final Fours as GU has EEs, and as many EEs as GU has S16s. And that wasn't even Lute's (or probably Miller's) heyday. I'm also not going around saying that AZ deserves a #1 seed. But the years they do get one, you can expect them to compete for the Final Four--like a #1 and #2 seed should.

I think both AZ and Gonzaga need to have games where they go to Oregon and get worked; have games where they go to Pauley and control the game. have to play a tough USC before UCLA and not overlook them. Play two games in two days in Vegas against tourney teams, if not top ten teams back to back. I think that helps the freshmen, it helps the leaders and the ones we depend on in pressure situations. It helps them all know how each other are going to respond and how to play through. It gives them a measure on all of this not just once or twice in Nov or Dec, but for the other 60% of the season before the dance. It helps Miller know how his guys develop over the course of a whole season in these situations. I think that equals a better shot at competing for a FF, again, as a #1 or #2 seed should.

 

[ericd7633]

Again, I like Few. I'd really like to be wrong about this because I'd like to see another team west of Kansas hang a banner. It's great for AZ because we do play them all the time. But I also see that it's much less difficult to play 3-4 top 25 teams a year, before January, win all of them or lose all of them, and then you coast to March. The best play the best and beat the best. GU rarely does either. I think most of that is not GU's fault, but Mark Few has only been to one EE. He's had 6 shots where they were playing for the EE. And Few won once. As a #1 or #2 seed, He was seeded to play for the FF 3 times and won once, just like his winning % against top 25 teams.

I think it's a difference of opinion. I think that not having the competition hurts. I just don't think that a team grows without adversity. Gonzaga almost literally isn't tested from Jan to the dance. Everyone else is playing the games we see where you go into a monster arena that is working against you with your back against the rope and having to persevere, together; going up against some of the best players in all of basketball, the best coaching, the best crowds. Doing that 5-10 times per year is a big deal I think. The competition are other tourney teams and those games aren't on neutral courts, they are on the road. I think that matters. I think it's what tests and develops a team. That's a big part of how chemistry is formed. That's how players develop during in-game situations (last shot, big free throws or 3pts). Teams get their weaknesses exposed. They have to deal with it. GU doesn't. They thump on Pepperdine, Portland, LMU, San Fran, Pacific, Santa Clara, and USD for half their wins in a season. Add 5-10 more scrubs they face to fill in the OCC. Those shitty teams are 20-25 of their wins right there, every year.

Gonzaga seems to lose to good teams early, or win, whatever, and then wipe everyone until March. Then of a sudden, they can't seem to get past to or S16 but once in the last 17 years under Few. 1/17 chance of the EE is what his consistent record shows. I think it's connected to the fact that they don't have to go into Allen FH, or Cameron, or Lexington, or Matthew Knight, or the Kohl Center. They don't have to travel like the ACC, B12, B1G, PAC and SEC, or BE do. Everyone else does that, and everyone else is getting better right now. Gonzaga is not. They don't seem to improve over the course of the season as much as everyone else, by March. They just don't lose, and crush weak opponents so the numbers and polls look good, despite the SOS.

He's consistent. Hell, he may even get to the Elite Eight again this year. In that case, I think I'd say that he is starting to put it together for knocking on the door to a FF. But again, he's consistent. So there is no reason for me to believe that he is going to all of a sudden get to the FF and play for the NC. His schedule doesn't change, so I see no reason March will change.

And by the way, jones, Over the same period we're talking about, AZ was runner-up, with a final four, 6 EEs (with the 5 losses by a total of 10 points and all by one possession). That's called knocking on the door. Miller has been to 3 EEs in the last 5 years and lost by 6 total. That's knocking on the door. They also had 4 coaches in 4 years right in the middle of that while Few was in full swing and has been ever since. And yet AZ still had as many Final Fours as GU has EEs, and as many EEs as GU has S16s. And that wasn't even Lute's (or probably Miller's) heyday. I'm also not going around saying that AZ deserves a #1 seed. But the years they do get one, you can expect them to compete for the Final Four--like a #1 and #2 seed should.

I think both AZ and Gonzaga need to have games where they go to Oregon and get worked; have games where they go to Pauley and control the game. have to play a tough USC before UCLA and not overlook them. Play two games in two days in Vegas against tourney teams, if not top ten teams back to back. I think that helps the freshmen, it helps the leaders and the ones we depend on in pressure situations. It helps them all know how each other are going to respond and how to play through. It gives them a measure on all of this not just once or twice in Nov or Dec, but for the other 60% of the season before the dance. It helps Miller know how his guys develop over the course of a whole season in these situations. I think that equals a better shot at competing for a FF, again, as a #1 or #2 seed should.

What you said is all well and good, but there's no evidence to suggest that playing a weak conference schedule prohibits a team from getting to the EE or FF. Just in the time frame you're talking about, we've had a team from C-USA(x2), Colonial Athletic Association, Horizon League(x2), Missouri Valley and the American Conference all make a FF, and we've had teams from the A-10, WCC, MAC, Southern Conference, and WAC make the EE. There's only been 3 tournaments since 2000 that haven't had a team from outside the Power 6 conferences advance to the EE. If you're good enough and fortunate enough you can make the EE or FF regardless of how crappy your conference schedule is.

 

[CatsTopPac]

What you said is all well and good, but there's no evidence to suggest that playing a weak conference schedule prohibits a team from getting to the EE or FF. Just in the time frame you're talking about, we've had a team from C-USA(x2), Colonial Athletic Association, Horizon League(x2), Missouri Valley and the American Conference all make a FF, and we've had teams from the A-10, WCC, MAC, Southern Conference, and WAC make the EE. There's only been 3 tournaments since 2000 that haven't had a team from outside the Power 6 conferences advance to the EE. If you're good enough and fortunate enough you can make the EE or FF regardless of how crappy your conference schedule is.

Like I said, It's not a hard and fast rule, the lose and go home is part of what makes the madness great, and the ability for those teams to get to the FF. But you're talking about 5 times it's happened out of 68 FF teams during that span. That's pretty strong evidence that FF teams benefit from the tougher schedules. Teams that have such weak conference schedules have a 7% chance of getting to the FF since 2000.

 

[wazzu31]

I wasn't aware of the specifics. I know they just recently said they won't play EWU anymore and I assumed it was a similar situation with WSU. From what you're saying it sounds like WSU would be good with doing a home and home series and GU won't do it because they're too big to play in Pullman every other year. That's pretty god damn lame.

Idaho's athletic department dropped the ball with the GU game like 8 years ago but it was partly because of GU not wanting to travel to Moscow. Both parties are to blame there but the recent deal with EWU and WSU is still a joke IMO. Especially when they schedule teams like MVSU, Bryant, and Utah Valley in their place.

My understanding, which is limited and in no way is professional, is that it was a scheduling conflict for just this year. We've played them every year for years and mocked UW and cry baby Romar over their Gonzaga drama. It's my understanding that both teams agreed to either Seattle or Spokane but neither could sponsored to make it worth the hassle of either team traveling to Seattle or essentially playing a road game in Spokane.

 

[ericd7633]

Like I said, It's not a hard and fast rule, the lose and go home is part of what makes the madness great, and the ability for those teams to get to the FF. But you're talking about 5 times it's happened out of 68 FF teams during that span. That's pretty strong evidence that FF teams benefit from the tougher schedules. Teams that have such weak conference schedules have a 7% chance of getting to the FF since 2000.

No, the majority of the best teams in the country play in the P6 leagues, therefore, their going to make it a lot more of the time. Not because they play tough schedules. UVA played the toughest SOS in the country last year, and made the EE. Gonzaga played their crap schedule the year before and made the EE. Meanwhile Kansas who played the toughest SOS that year got bounced in the 2nd round, by a team that played a crap conference schedule.

 

[CatsTopPac]

No, the majority of the best teams in the country play in the P6 leagues, therefore, their going to make it a lot more of the time. Not because they play tough schedules. UVA played the toughest SOS in the country last year, and made the EE. Gonzaga played their crap schedule the year before and made the EE. Meanwhile Kansas who played the toughest SOS that year got bounced in the 2nd round, by a team that played a crap conference schedule.

I think that if you ask the majority of coaches worth their weight in salt, they will tell you that by and large, playing 20-25 sub 100 teams (with most sub 150) per season isn't the best way to get to the FF. They want to face the competition throughout the year and go through those difficult times and get better. I can hear it in post game press conferences, when they talk about the difficulties and working through it, the lessons the players learn in the environments they play, against the coaches and players, and the week to week grind. And to me, that has to happen more when teams play tough games in tough conferences, than when GU beats up on scrubs for a couple dozen wins per season.

Again, it must be a difference of opinion. You can point to some team with a tough schedule and bowing out early against some mid-major who played no one and then turned it up in March. Those seem anecdotal to me. I think it's pretty clear that the overall pattern is that teams get more prepared for March by playing March teams in tough games leading up to March, rather than beating up on scrubs for the last half of the season.

 

[ericd7633]

I think that if you ask the majority of coaches worth their weight in salt, they will tell you that by and large, playing 20-25 sub 100 teams (with most sub 150) per season isn't the best way to get to the FF. They want to face the competition throughout the year and go through those difficult times and get better. I can hear it in post game press conferences, when they talk about the difficulties and working through it, the lessons the players learn in the environments they play, against the coaches and players, and the week to week grind. And to me, that has to happen more when teams play tough games in tough conferences, than when GU beats up on scrubs for a couple dozen wins per season.

Again, it must be a difference of opinion. You can point to some team with a tough schedule and bowing out early against some mid-major who played no one and then turned it up in March. Those seem anecdotal to me. I think it's pretty clear that the overall pattern is that teams get more prepared for March by playing March teams in tough games leading up to March, rather than beating up on scrubs for the last half of the season.

Its really not an opinion. There's no direct correlation to suggest playing a difficult schedule during conference play will help you get to the EE or FF. Teams have played shitty schedules in conference and have gotten to an EE or FF and teams have hard schedules and gotten bounced early. Its about how you play in the tournament not who you played during the regular season.

 

[jontaejones]

And by the way, jones, Over the same period we're talking about, AZ was runner-up, with a final four, 6 EEs (with the 5 losses by a total of 10 points and all by one possession). That's called knocking on the door. Miller has been to 3 EEs in the last 5 years and lost by 6 total. That's knocking on the door. They also had 4 coaches in 4 years right in the middle of that while Few was in full swing and has been ever since. And yet AZ still had as many Final Fours as GU has EEs, and as many EEs as GU has S16s. And that wasn't even Lute's (or probably Miller's) heyday. I'm also not going around saying that AZ deserves a #1 seed. But the years they do get one, you can expect them to compete for the Final Four--like a #1 and #2 seed should.

Of course. Arizona recruits at a different level. And next year, they will preseason #1. Gonzaga will never be at that level. Well, never say never, but...

I'm just saying, the tourney is a game of odds. You don't make it in 2014 and 2015 as a top 2 seed because of bad luck/draws. But you might make it this year as say a 4 seed. A lot of it is about how many shots you get. Take Kansas. Kansas has had a final 4 team virtually every year in the past 20 years. How many times did they actually make it? Like a few times.

 

[CatsTopPac]

Of course. Arizona recruits at a different level. And next year, they will preseason #1. Gonzaga will never be at that level. Well, never say never, but...

I'm just saying, the tourney is a game of odds. You don't make it in 2014 and 2015 as a top 2 seed because of bad luck/draws. But you might make it this year as say a 4 seed. A lot of it is about how many shots you get. Take Kansas. Kansas has had a final 4 team virtually every year in the past 20 years. How many times did they actually make it? Like a few times.

I get what you are saying. And I agree to a point. KU having a FF team almost every year doesn't have to translate to a FF year, and most years it won't. I agree. But You can also point to them getting bounced early as games where they don't show up. But much more often, they are actually playing for those FF games like they should.

 

[CatsTopPac]

Its really not an opinion. There's no direct correlation to suggest playing a difficult schedule during conference play will help you get to the EE or FF. Teams have played shitty schedules in conference and have gotten to an EE or FF and teams have hard schedules and gotten bounced early. Its about how you play in the tournament not who you played during the regular season.

I get that there is no evidence. I don't think the absence of evidence means that it doesn't exist. I think the chemistry and leadership exist and there is no evidence in stats, a box score, or a rating system that points to leadership or chemistry. You can't put a finger on a stat and say "that's so and so leading the team". That player could be the locker room leader and not score the most, or even get the most PT. Same with chemistry. Where do you find that? Points? Wins? Assists? Where is the stat for a team building chemistry? Which metric shows that? There is no evidence of it. But it shows in March a lot of times, right?

For the 50th time. I understand that a team with a tough conference schedule during the year can certainly get bounced early, and that a team with a weak one can go far. I get that. Please stop repeating it. I never said it can't happen. The win or go home format allows for a puncher's chance for essentially every game.

If you want to tell me that there is no evidence and so you don't believe it. That's fine. I happen to believe that when you say "It's how you play in the tournament not who you played in the regular season" that how you play in the tournament largely depends on who(and how) you played in the regular season. I think it's impossible to separate the two. Yes, a team can do the opposite in March of how they played during the season. But for the most part, it's a solid indicator. And to me, GU winning 3/4 of their games against completely inferior competition doesn't make them as solid as they need to be (on any given year) to make the final weekend.

If we disagree, we disagree. I look at Gonzaga and they are a solid program with solid teams every year. I think it takes a lot for them not to play anyone in the last half of the year and to get to as many S16s (or EEs for that matter) as they do. But I don't think they are a FF or NC team in any given year. They can sure get there, like anyone who does can, but they are never a team that going into March, I see as a team that has showed me they can get past the second weekend, or really even play for it.

That's my opinion. If you think they can, that's your opinion.

 

[ericd7633]

I get that there is no evidence. I don't think the absence of evidence means that it doesn't exist. I think the chemistry and leadership exist and there is no evidence in stats, a box score, or a rating system that points to leadership or chemistry. You can't put a finger on a stat and say "that's so and so leading the team". That player could be the locker room leader and not score the most, or even get the most PT. Same with chemistry. Where do you find that? Points? Wins? Assists? Where is the stat for a team building chemistry? Which metric shows that? There is no evidence of it. But it shows in March a lot of times, right?

For the 50th time. I understand that a team with a tough conference schedule during the year can certainly get bounced early, and that a team with a weak one can go far. I get that. Please stop repeating it. I never said it can't happen. The win or go home format allows for a puncher's chance for essentially every game.

If you want to tell me that there is no evidence and so you don't believe it. That's fine. I happen to believe that when you say "It's how you play in the tournament not who you played in the regular season" that how you play in the tournament largely depends on who(and how) you played in the regular season. I think it's impossible to separate the two. Yes, a team can do the opposite in March of how they played during the season. But for the most part, it's a solid indicator. And to me, GU winning 3/4 of their games against completely inferior competition doesn't make them as solid as they need to be (on any given year) to make the final weekend.

If we disagree, we disagree. I look at Gonzaga and they are a solid program with solid teams every year. I think it takes a lot for them not to play anyone in the last half of the year and to get to as many S16s (or EEs for that matter) as they do. But I don't think they are a FF or NC team in any given year. They can sure get there, like anyone who does can, but they are never a team that going into March, I see as a team that has showed me they can get past the second weekend, or really even play for it.

That's my opinion. If you think they can, that's your opinion.

We'll just disagree.

 

[tabascojet]

smc 3500 basketball gym.....i think my high school seats more

 

[tabascojet]

smc 3500 basketball gym.....i think my high school seats more

so i looked it up they both seat the same....but only one is a college with ncaa basketball aspirations

 

[douggie]

Zags looking good early on at SMC. Up 9 on the road, they look all the part of a #1 seed.

 

[douggie]

Now it's tied at 23. I spoke too soon.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

This thread really blew up lol. No idea what the convo is

I do think this years Zags team is constructed to finally be the one that makes that final 4 run. Not predicting it, just saying.

 

[ericd7633]

At this point it looks like the #1 seeds are pretty clear:

Villanova
Gonzaga
Kansas/Baylor
ACC Tournament winner( assuming its UNC, FSU, UVA, Louisville or Duke)

 

[Lions=TeHsUcKs]

Zag probably will be undefeated until tourney time. Huge prediction I know.