Author Topic: K-State/Gonzaga rematch in Sweet Sixteen? (Read 13808 times)

catzacker · « **Reply #50 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:25:10 AM »

Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:23:23 AM

Smock = BITB

his intention was to subtly twist the knife about us losing to whisky. the thread turned into debating gonzaga's worthiness as a 1 seed. so, it failed.

catzacker · « **Reply #51 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:27:57 AM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on March 19, 2013, 10:24:34 AM

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 10:21:16 AM
Why would you assume that Kansas would beat anyone after they lost to TCU or got actually blown out by Baylor?

I would assume that because their roster is stacked with NBA talent and they have more quality wins than any other team. I would give them the #1 overall seed. The losses don't really bother me at all. I think it's better to beat good teams and lose to bad teams than it is to beat bad teams and lose to good teams.

The zags have NBA players. I think you have to weight everything, not just ignore things you don't want to look at. I'm not saying KU isn't a #1, I'm not saying there isn't a case for some other team to take the Zags #1 seed, but their resume stacks up, they have a good team. If they lose, it's not because they shouldn't have been seeded as they were.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #52 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:30:38 AM »

Hey dumbass Gonzaga has two first round draft picks at the 4 and the 5 and another coming off of their bench at the 5. You are talking in circles, we won't think less of you if you call it a day with this talking point.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #53 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:33:47 AM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on March 19, 2013, 10:30:38 AM

Hey dumbass Gonzaga has two first round draft picks at the 4 and the 5 and another coming off of their bench at the 5. You are talking in circles, we won't think less of you if you call it a day with this talking point.

I have said several times that I think Gonzaga is great. I just have a problem with seeding them higher than teams like Miami and Duke when they have only played one tournament team (Butler) in 2013, and didn't even win that game. It's been almost 4 months since Gonzaga won a game against a relevant basketball team.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #54 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:45:46 AM »

That's an odd qualifier you are using to confirm your notion, not to sway it. Gonzaga is a very good team, who have beaten other very good teams. Pretty dumb to place a higher value on where said wins fell on the calendar. They have had no injuries or have even been challenged by the bad teams on their schedule. You want to focus on Gonzaga not beating any good teams in 2013 (what if that OSU game was 24 hours later) but chose to place little to no value on other teams bad losses less than 2 weeks ago.

Also Duke had no business being anywhere near a 1 seed. I think they should have been, in order, Louisville, Gonzaga, Kansas, Miami.

EllRobersonisInnocent · « **Reply #55 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:50:59 AM »

Duke's resume w/ Ryan Kelly absolutely deserves a #1 seed

And I don't give 2 shits about NBA players on college teams, UCLA has multiple NBA players and they suck terribly

Lucas Scoopsalot · « **Reply #56 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:52:10 AM »

Quote from: EllRobersonisInnocent on March 19, 2013, 10:50:59 AM

Duke's resume w/ Ryan Kelly absolutely deserves a #1 seed

And I don't give 2 shits about NBA players on college teams, UCLA has multiple NBA players and they suck terribly

Ya, I have UCLA going out first round. They are bad.

pissclams · « **Reply #57 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:56:16 AM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on March 19, 2013, 10:45:46 AM

That's an odd qualifier you are using to confirm your notion, not to sway it. Gonzaga is a very good team, who have beaten other very good teams. Pretty dumb to place a higher value on where said wins fell on the calendar. They have had no injuries or have even been challenged by the bad teams on their schedule. You want to focus on Gonzaga not beating any good teams in 2013 (what if that OSU game was 24 hours later) but chose to place little to no value on other teams bad losses less than 2 weeks ago.

Also Duke had no business being anywhere near a 1 seed. I think they should have been, in order, Louisville, Gonzaga, Kansas, Miami.

where do you think duke belongs? such a different team w/ kelly on the floor but they also are very inconsistent shooting the ball and they tend to rely on the 3 pt shoot too much.

GCJayhawker · « **Reply #58 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:56:36 AM »

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 10:25:10 AM

Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:23:23 AM
Smock = BITB

his intention was to subtly twist the knife about us losing to whisky. the thread turned into debating gonzaga's worthiness as a 1 seed. so, it failed.

Disagree. His first post asked what KSU fans thought about a possible rematch with Gonzaga and how good they were. Debating how good Gonzaga is directly relates to the topic.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #59 on:** March 19, 2013, 10:59:54 AM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on March 19, 2013, 10:45:46 AM

That's an odd qualifier you are using to confirm your notion, not to sway it. Gonzaga is a very good team, who have beaten other very good teams. Pretty dumb to place a higher value on where said wins fell on the calendar. They have had no injuries or have even been challenged by the bad teams on their schedule. You want to focus on Gonzaga not beating any good teams in 2013 (what if that OSU game was 24 hours later) but chose to place little to no value on other teams bad losses less than 2 weeks ago.

Also Duke had no business being anywhere near a 1 seed. I think they should have been, in order, Louisville, Gonzaga, Kansas, Miami.

Those bad losses by the other teams 2 weeks ago weren't really all that bad, though. Baylor is still a pretty good team. If the WCC were filled with teams that are as good as Baylor, I would look at Gonzaga much differently. Instead, the WCC, other than Gonzaga, is nothing but teams that are at TCU's level or worse. I just don't see how anybody can evaluate how good a team is playing nothing but teams like that for 3 and a half months. Honestly, those teams are so bad that I wouldn't even look at Gonzaga much differently if they had dropped one or two of them, because they just don't matter. Yes, they looked terrific coming into conference play, but a lot has changed since then. Gonzaga is a big unknown going into the tournament. They very well could be one of the four best teams in the country. I just wouldn't seed them there because I have seen absolutely nothing of them lately.

catzacker · « **Reply #60 on:** March 19, 2013, 11:03:55 AM »

Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:56:36 AM

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 10:25:10 AM
Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:23:23 AM
Smock = BITB

his intention was to subtly twist the knife about us losing to whisky. the thread turned into debating gonzaga's worthiness as a 1 seed. so, it failed.

Disagree. His first post asked what KSU fans thought about a possible rematch with Gonzaga and how good they were. Debating how good Gonzaga is directly relates to the topic.

I don't think you understand how this works.

EllRobersonisInnocent · « **Reply #61 on:** March 19, 2013, 11:06:24 AM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on March 19, 2013, 10:59:54 AM

Quote from: MakeItRain on March 19, 2013, 10:45:46 AM
That's an odd qualifier you are using to confirm your notion, not to sway it. Gonzaga is a very good team, who have beaten other very good teams. Pretty dumb to place a higher value on where said wins fell on the calendar. They have had no injuries or have even been challenged by the bad teams on their schedule. You want to focus on Gonzaga not beating any good teams in 2013 (what if that OSU game was 24 hours later) but chose to place little to no value on other teams bad losses less than 2 weeks ago.

Also Duke had no business being anywhere near a 1 seed. I think they should have been, in order, Louisville, Gonzaga, Kansas, Miami.

Those bad losses by the other teams 2 weeks ago weren't really all that bad, though. Baylor is still a pretty good team. If the WCC were filled with teams that are as good as Baylor, I would look at Gonzaga much differently. Instead, the WCC, other than Gonzaga, is nothing but teams that are at TCU's level or worse. I just don't see how anybody can evaluate how good a team is playing nothing but teams like that for 3 and a half months. Honestly, those teams are so bad that I wouldn't even look at Gonzaga much differently if they had dropped one or two of them, because they just don't matter. Yes, they looked terrific coming into conference play, but a lot has changed since then. Gonzaga is a big unknown going into the tournament. They very well could be one of the four best teams in the country. I just wouldn't seed them there because I have seen absolutely nothing of them lately.

Gonzaga is a #1 seed because their jerseys say "Gonzaga". If St Mary's, Santa Clara or San Fransisco had the Zag's season they would be a 3 seed at best

ChiComCat · « **Reply #62 on:** March 19, 2013, 11:12:25 AM »

Whoever was talking about the "pressure" of being a 1 seed is an idiot (don't care to reread to find out who it was)

OregonSmock · « **Reply #63 on:** March 19, 2013, 01:29:48 PM »

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 10:25:10 AM

Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:23:23 AM
Smock = BITB

his intention was to subtly twist the knife about us losing to whisky. the thread turned into debating gonzaga's worthiness as a 1 seed. so, it failed.

Nope. I'm honestly just looking for some HBBIQ bracket advice. There's a good chance Wisconsin loses to Ole Miss.

OregonSmock · « **Reply #64 on:** March 19, 2013, 01:31:36 PM »

Quote from: EllRobersonisInnocent on March 19, 2013, 10:50:59 AM

Duke's resume w/ Ryan Kelly absolutely deserves a #1 seed

And I don't give 2 shits about NBA players on college teams, UCLA has multiple NBA players and they suck terribly

Duke didn't even win the ACC, and lost to Maryland in the ACC tournament.

pissclams · « **Reply #65 on:** March 19, 2013, 01:32:52 PM »

Quote from: OregonSmock on March 19, 2013, 01:29:48 PM

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 10:25:10 AM
Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:23:23 AM
Smock = BITB

his intention was to subtly twist the knife about us losing to whisky. the thread turned into debating gonzaga's worthiness as a 1 seed. so, it failed.

Nope. I'm honestly just looking for some HBBIQ bracket advice. There's a good chance Wisconsin loses to Ole Miss.

BITB

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #66 on:** March 19, 2013, 01:33:35 PM »

Quote from: OregonSmock on March 19, 2013, 01:29:48 PM

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 10:25:10 AM
Quote from: GCJayhawker on March 19, 2013, 10:23:23 AM
Smock = BITB

his intention was to subtly twist the knife about us losing to whisky. the thread turned into debating gonzaga's worthiness as a 1 seed. so, it failed.

Nope. I'm honestly just looking for some HBBIQ bracket advice. There's a good chance Wisconsin loses to Ole Miss.

Anything less than an elite 8 appearance for the Zags would be pretty surprising, imho. Everything after that is a crapshoot.

pissclams · « **Reply #67 on:** March 19, 2013, 01:37:28 PM »

Quote from: OregonSmock on March 19, 2013, 01:31:36 PM

Quote from: EllRobersonisInnocent on March 19, 2013, 10:50:59 AM
Duke's resume w/ Ryan Kelly absolutely deserves a #1 seed

And I don't give 2 shits about NBA players on college teams, UCLA has multiple NBA players and they suck terribly

Duke didn't even win the ACC, and lost to Maryland in the ACC tournament.

WITB. duke with RK is a completely different team and one that certainly deserves their #2 seed (which coincidentally, is near a #1 seed).

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #68 on:** March 19, 2013, 01:41:51 PM »

Whatever you do guys DO NOT factor in a teams opponents into your overall evaluations.

OregonSmock · « **Reply #69 on:** March 19, 2013, 02:04:24 PM »

Quote from: pissclams on March 19, 2013, 01:37:28 PM

Quote from: OregonSmock on March 19, 2013, 01:31:36 PM
Quote from: EllRobersonisInnocent on March 19, 2013, 10:50:59 AM
Duke's resume w/ Ryan Kelly absolutely deserves a #1 seed

And I don't give 2 shits about NBA players on college teams, UCLA has multiple NBA players and they suck terribly

Duke didn't even win the ACC, and lost to Maryland in the ACC tournament.

WITB. duke with RK is a completely different team and one that certainly deserves their #2 seed (which coincidentally, is near a #1 seed).

Duke deserves a 2-seed. No disagreement there.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #70 on:** March 19, 2013, 02:11:07 PM »

I don't like the belief that because a player was injured, you just ignore a large portion of their season. Injuries or not, resumes are what they are. If an injury completely boned you, you should've had more depth

pissclams · « **Reply #71 on:** March 19, 2013, 02:39:25 PM »

Quote from: ChiCat on March 19, 2013, 02:11:07 PM

I don't like the belief that because a player was injured, you just ignore a large portion of their season. Injuries or not, resumes are what they are. If an injury completely boned you, you should've had more depth

his injury didn't bone them. they went 27-5 this season, all 4 regular season losses they had were without him. #1 seed indiana lost more games than they did (6). #1 KU seed lost 5 games (including 1 to TCU). the point is that without their mvp, duke still only lost 5 games. now they have him back. i'm basing my opinion on the quality of the team as it sits going into the tournament.

catzacker · « **Reply #72 on:** March 19, 2013, 02:40:55 PM »

didn't duke lose to maryland w/ and w/out him?

pissclams · « **Reply #73 on:** March 19, 2013, 02:43:41 PM »

Quote from: catzacker on March 19, 2013, 02:40:55 PM

didn't duke lose to maryland w/ and w/out him?

duke split with maryland without him. lost last weekend with him.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #74 on:** March 19, 2013, 02:53:08 PM »

Quote from: pissclams on March 19, 2013, 02:39:25 PM

Quote from: ChiCat on March 19, 2013, 02:11:07 PM
I don't like the belief that because a player was injured, you just ignore a large portion of their season. Injuries or not, resumes are what they are. If an injury completely boned you, you should've had more depth

his injury didn't bone them. they went 27-5 this season, all 4 regular season losses they had were without him. #1 seed indiana lost more games than they did (6). #1 KU seed lost 5 games (including 1 to TCU). the point is that without their mvp, duke still only lost 5 games. now they have him back. i'm basing my opinion on the quality of the team as it sits going into the tournament.

Yea, Duke is a high seed regardless of anything. Re: team boning, I meant it in general. People kept talking about Texas getting the benefit of they could have even a reasonable record without Kabongo. Would've annoyed me if they would've got in with a Baylor-esque record without having to win games and just having people assume they would've won more.