Men's Postseason chatter thread (Merged)

[Tiger 8,822]

Mizzou is awful I think we should be able to beat them twice in a row.

 

If we win do we get a chance to slide up to 10th and beat our preseason prediction?

[boomstick 1,315]

36 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Mizzou is awful I think we should be able to beat them twice in a row.

 

If we win do we get a chance to slide up to 10th and beat our preseason prediction?

No, I'm pretty sure we're locked into 11th because of our tiebreakers against the teams ahead and behind us. If we win, we'd be tied with UT who has the tiebreaker over us. If we lose and State wins, we'd have the tiebreaker against them. 

The interesting spot to watch is what happens with the 6 seed. Right now, it's OM, and I think it will stay that way because OM has USCe at home while UGA has to travel to Arkansas. I think either of those are games we could win. The interesting part is if Bama loses or there's a 4-way tie for the 6 seed, who comes out with it. Vandy or aTm would be horrible matchups for us. Bama, OM, and UGA would be better matchups for us.

[tigerbrotha12 2,362]

Mizzouri is really bad. Yeah they had a big win against Arkansas but that was with their home crowd, and when's arkansas was in absolute free fall. We are not in free fall. We've lost a few competitive games in the past month, but we are much better than Mizzouri. I expect to be able to beat them twice in a row. If we can do that, we will be 19-13 going into a game against the number 6 seed which could be Alabama, Ole Miss, or Georgia again. I like our chances against UGA or Ole Miss a third time. Especially if Maten doesn't make it back by then for UGA. If we draw Bama, that might be a tough win, but I'm thinking if we can beat mizzouri, and then win that next game, we are an NIT lock at 20-13 with a 9-11 SEC record. From then, it's just playing for seeding. If we drop that game after mizzou in the tourney, I think we would still be in at 19-14 and 8-12 in the SEC, but we would need a little help from other teams to ensure us of a spot. I think, now, it boils down to taking care of the business we have against Mizzouri. 

[Tiger 8,822]

I think we can give Bama another beat down. Unless we are cold as heck from the field they can't stay with us going up and down the floor on them for 40 minutes 

[jared52 4,354]

9 minutes ago, Tiger said:

I think we can give Bama another beat down. Unless we are cold as heck from the field they can't stay with us going up and down the floor on them for 40 minutes 

But that "three times" rule of thumb is way more likely to apply to uat than it is to Mizzou.

[Tiger 8,822]

Just now, jared52 said:

But that "three times" rule of thumb is way more likely to apply to uat than it is to Mizzou.

Good point. I'm trying to be optimistic right now. Bama doesn't like to run we like to run a lot and when we are shooting well they can't score with us. They are better than Mizzou undoubtedly but maybe we have the matchup advantage with Bama. I can dream, right?

[ellitor 33,091]

4 minutes ago, Tiger said:

I think we can give Bama another beat down. Unless we are cold as heck from the field they can't stay with us going up and down the floor on them for 40 minutes 

We won't see Bama again til next season unless we both get to the SEC Tourney final or somehow meet somewhere in the NIT. Bama is locked in the 5 seed in the SEC Tourney.

If we beat Mizzou we will get UGA, Rebs, or Vandy as the #6 seed. UGA has all the tie breakers between the 3. If they win at Arky Saturday we would play them again. If they are the only team of the 3 to lose Saturday then we get the Rebs.

[AU64 10,122]

Main thing we have going against Mizz is that they also seem to find ways to lose when necessary.....played some pretty tight games but when it's time to stand up and be counted....the just lay down and die.   

[Tiger 8,822]

Just now, ellitor said:

We won't see Bama again til next season unless we both get to the SEC Tourney final or somehow meet somewhere in the NIT. Bama is locked in the 5 seed in the SEC Tourney.

If we beat Mizzou we will get UGA, Rebs, or Vandy as the #6 seed. UGA has all the tie breakers between the 3. If they win at Arky Saturday we would play them again. If they are the only team of the 3 to lose Saturday then we get the Rebs.

Thanks for the info. I didn't even think to look at the bracket to be honest, that's my bad. I was just replying to some of the teams that were being mentioned.

[boomstick 1,315]

2 minutes ago, ellitor said:

We won't see Bama again til next season unless we both get to the SEC Tourney final or somehow meet somewhere in the NIT. Bama is locked in the 5 seed in the SEC Tourney.

If we beat Mizzou we will get UGA, Rebs, or Vandy as the #6 seed. UGA has all the tie breakers between the 3. If they win at Arky Saturday we would play them again. If they are the only team of the 3 to lose Saturday then we get the Rebs.

Guess that means none of the 9-8 teams could jump Bama if they lose Saturday?

[ellitor 33,091]

5 minutes ago, boomstick said:

Guess that means none of the 9-8 teams could jump Bama if they lose Saturday?

Nope. Bama has the tie breakers over all of them.

[au302 2,669]

I wouldn't mind playing Ole Miss or UGA. If we get Vandy or A&M I don't know if I would watch because those are bad matchups for us. I think we could beat Bama but I doubt we see them

[ellitor 33,091]

2 minutes ago, au302 said:

I wouldn't mind playing Ole Miss or UGA. If we get Vandy or A&M I don't know if I would watch because those are bad matchups for us. I think we could beat Bama but I doubt we see them

aTm is not an option. They aren't beating UK. Even if they do there is no way for them to win a tie breaker for the 6th seed. The best they can be is 7th.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

On 3/1/2017 at 8:33 PM, ellitor said:

We are already on the NIT Bubble. We are projected in now as a 6 seed. To make it though we gotta beat Mizzou twice (They will be our 1st round SEC Tourney opponent) and beat whoever the 6 seed is. That's between Bama, Rebs, Vandy, & UGA. No matter who it is we have to win that game. The rest of the quoted part is just wrong for the moment.

As of today we are a projected 8 seed and barely clinging to an NIT bid. We've not only got to beat Missouri twice and beat the 6 seed in the SEC Tournament, but we've also got to hope there are no upsets in the mid-major tournaments.

With that being said, Belmont lost to Jacksonville State tonight. Jacksonville State's RPI is in the 100's, so this was a bad loss for Belmont. Belmont's RPI is likely not be good enough now to get an at large bid to the NCAA Tournament. They're more than likely going to go to the NIT, which takes up another spot from us.

[AU64 10,122]

10 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

As of today we are a projected 8 seed and barely clinging to an NIT bid. We've not only got to beat Missouri twice and beat the 6 seed in the SEC Tournament, but we've also got to hope there are no upsets in the mid-major tournaments.

With that being said, Belmont lost to Jacksonville State tonight. Jacksonville State's RPI is in the 100's, so this was a bad loss for Belmont. Belmont's RPI is likely not be good enough now to get an at large bid to the NCAA Tournament. They're more than likely going to go to the NIT, which takes up another spot from us.

Would be better if the invitation was in our own hands to determine...tough sitting back hoping the right combination of other teams loses but we've benefited from that in the past so you never know ....but first....the team needs to take care of its own business and not be scoreboard watching.

[au302 2,669]

I don't know about you guys but I just hate the fact that we have to play Mizzou back to back. It just doesn't seem good at all. If we have to lose one hopefully it's today and not at the tournament 

[boomstick 1,315]

Oakland also lost tonight. So that's two automatic bids to teams that probably won't make the NCAAT. 

[ellitor 33,091]

If we had beat BC we would be a NIT lock right now. That's still so dad gum frustrating. As it is I think we have to beat Mizzou, the Rebs, & Arky to make the NIT.

[AU64 10,122]

Guess in life you mostly get what you earn and no way IMO to make the case that we earned an invitation at this point.  We lost some winnable ballgames off and on all season....letting big leads get away, etc. and are paying the price now.    

So as E notes above, it appears that we must win those game in the SEC tournament to get an NIT bid .       Yet look at the teams....all of them are teams we should be able to beat..... so the guys know the task ahead and it's not an insurmountable mountain.     Time for some folks to step up and play some aggressive basketball for 40 minutes each game. 

Meanwhile.....time for some serious assessments by BP about next season. 

 

[jared52 4,354]

4 hours ago, ellitor said:

If we had beat BC we would be a NIT lock right now. That's still so dad gum frustrating. As it is I think we have to beat Mizzou, the Rebs, & Arky to make the NIT.

Don't forget, they do pay attention to attendance for these tournaments. If AU gets Mizzou and Ole Miss, I would think that would get them in with the fact AU does a good job putting butts in seats. 

[boomstick 1,315]

6 hours ago, ellitor said:

If we had beat BC we would be a NIT lock right now. That's still so dad gum frustrating. As it is I think we have to beat Mizzou, the Rebs, & Arky to make the NIT.

I think winning our first two SECT games will be enough to get in. Beating Arkansas would lock us in IMO. The automatic bids are going to play a massive role in whether we get in or not if we don't get to and beat Arkansas. 

[steeleagle 2,945]

8 hours ago, AU64 said:

Guess in life you mostly get what you earn and no way IMO to make the case that we earned an invitation at this point.  We lost some winnable ballgames off and on all season....letting big leads get away, etc. and are paying the price now.    

So as E notes above, it appears that we must win those game in the SEC tournament to get an NIT bid .       Yet look at the teams....all of them are teams we should be able to beat..... so the guys know the task ahead and it's not an insurmountable mountain.     Time for some folks to step up and play some aggressive basketball for 40 minutes each game. 

Meanwhile.....time for some serious assessments by BP about next season. 

 

playing with 4 freshmen and one that still should be in HS? Pearl's assessment will come AFTER next year if this team of youngins doesn't get better next year and our D is still swiss cheese.

But there is no assessment of him with this team he recruited..

[AU64 10,122]

27 minutes ago, steeleagle said:

playing with 4 freshmen and one that still should be in HS? Pearl's assessment will come AFTER next year if this team of youngins doesn't get better next year and our D is still swiss cheese.

But there is no assessment of him with this team he recruited..

Sure there is....lots of teams have a bunch of freshmen and it's not the freshmen that let huge leads get away...JMO but that's on the coaching. And after 30+ games and still playing swiss cheese defense ?      which was mostly about effort and motivation, not just scheme. JMO..I will say that the coaches started using time outs more effectively toward the end of the season which was good to see.

[au302 2,669]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

Sure there is....lots of teams have a bunch of freshmen and it's not the freshmen that let huge leads get away...JMO but that's on the coaching. And after 30+ games and still playing swiss cheese defense ?      which was mostly about effort and motivation, not just scheme. JMO..I will say that the coaches started using time outs more effectively toward the end of the season which was good to see.

These are good points. One of my big questions if why Bruce hasn't recruited more guys who are better on defense than offense. The only ones I can think of on his team are Horace, Laron, and maybe Brown and McLemore. Only two of those guys have been playing lately. The guys he recruits are fun to watch but the lack of defense and poor shot selection will kill anyone. I wish he would recruit a few guys who play good D and maybe some guys who aren't as athletic as the guys we have now but more disciplined and fundamentally better. I think having a good mix is better than having one style all together. 

[AU64 10,122]

17 minutes ago, au302 said:

These are good points. One of my big questions if why Bruce hasn't recruited more guys who are better on defense than offense. The only ones I can think of on his team are Horace, Laron, and maybe Brown and McLemore. Only two of those guys have been playing lately. The guys he recruits are fun to watch but the lack of defense and poor shot selection will kill anyone. I wish he would recruit a few guys who play good D and maybe some guys who aren't as athletic as the guys we have now but more disciplined and fundamentally better. I think having a good mix is better than having one style all together. 

I suspect the problem is that most teams don't play it much in HS.....nobody get's their name in the paper holding some shooter to 15 points below his average.  But there are few coaches out there who can teach it...not overnight I'm sure but watch UVA....they were all in the face of Carolina last week and one of their leading defenders was a scrawny looking white kid with a "man bun" on his head.   That guy is proof that anyone can learn to play defense if they are motivated.