REAL Standings: The We Ames to Please Edition

           
  MIDWEEK RECAP

I came across a retweet this afternoon from a KU fan rejoicing in the “fact” that KU has a two game lead over Mizzou.

Were that this were true in the REAL world. In the REAL world, the Jayhawks are in first place, but by a tenuous half game margin over its arch-rival for more than 100 years and for a few more weeks. This due to the fact that Mizzou has Ames, Waco, Manhattan, and–yes–Stillwater in its past. All places the Jayhawks have yet to visit.

Meanwhile, KU has only Norman, Austin, and Lubbock in its rear view mirror.

Of course, the Jayhawks, as competitors, would prefer zero losses and a daunting schedule to two losses and a softer road out ahead. But a loss in Ames this Saturday, and all bets are off. We will then have a flat-footed tie atop the REAL Standings.

in the meantime, KU enjoys a 1/2 game lead in the REAL Big 12 Standings, thanks to 49 points from two Okie St freshmen in the Cowboys’ 79-72 victory over Mizzou. And Mizzou can take scant comfort in the fact that this was a Road loss, because the team that wins the Big 12 title would be expected to beat Okie St wherever the two teams play.

The saving grace for Mizzou is that Okie St has some impressive young talent and a senior later in Page Keeton, the late Dean at the University of Texas School of Law. All right, this guy only seems that old.

At any rate, if Okie St has come of age, that game could be a test for the Hawks.

Aside from the Stillwater Surprise, the other Midweek contests went as projected: KU outlasted A&M; Texas took down Iowa St in Austin, in the game that nobody saw, either in person or on TV; Baylor downed OU in Norman; and K-State happily accepted its working-bye in Lubbock.

                       
                                                          THE TIERS

           
Tier 1:  Baylor, KU, Mizzou
 
Tier 2:  Iowa St, K-State, Texas
 
Tier 3:  Oklahoma, Okie St, Texas A&M 

Tier 4: Texas Tech

 
                             REAL BIG 12 STANDINGS

1-26-12
 
     
1.     15-3

KU      (7-0)                Projected L’s:  at Mizzou, at Baylor
                                   At Risk games: at ISU, at K-State

2. 14.5-3.5

Mizzou (5-2)              Projected L’s:  at KU
                                 At Risk games: at UT

3. 14-4

Baylor (5-2)               Projected L’s:  at Mizzou
                                  At Risk games: at UT, at ISU

 
4. 10-8

K-State (4-3)              Projected L’s:  at ISU, at Texas, at Baylor, at Mizzou
                                   At Risk games: vs. KU, at A&M

Iowa St (4-3)              Projected L’s:  at Baylor, at K-State, at Mizzou

                                 At Risk games: vs. KU, at OU, at Okie St, vs. Baylor

6. 9.5-8.5

Texas (3-4)                Projected L’s:  at Baylor, at KU
At Risk games: vs. Mizzou, at A&M, at OU, at Okie St, vs. Baylor

7. 5.5-12.5

Oklahoma (2-5)        Projected L’s:  at K-State, at
KU, vs. Mizzou, at ISU, at Baylor, at Texas

At Risk games: vs. ISU, at Tech, vs. Texas

Okie St (3-4)              Projected L’s: at A&M,  vs. Baylor, at KU,
at Mizzou, at OU, vs. KU, at K-State

                                   At Risk games: vs. ISU, at Tech, vs. Texas

 
9. 4.5-13.5
                                  
Texas A&M (2-5)      Projected L’s:  vs. Baylor, at K-State, at ISU, vs.
Mizzou, vs. KU, at Okie St, at OU

                                   At Risk games: vs. UT, at Tech, vs. K-State

10  1.5-16.5
 
Texas Tech (0-7)         Projected L’s:  at Mizzou, at Texas, at K-State, at KU,
At ISU, vs. Texas, at Baylor, vs. Mizzou
                               
                                    At Risk games: vs. Okie St, vs. OU, vs. A&M
 
 
                                               ON THE TUBE

SATURDAY
 
           Texas at Baylor****: (Noon—CBS) (Projected W: Baylor)

Texas is desperate for a nice Road W to strengthen its case for inclusion in the Big Dance. The Fighting Calipari-Lites, however, are despert themselves; they can ill afford another loss at Home. Well worth watching. For an hour, anyway.

           Texas Tech at Mizzou *: (12:30p.m.—Big 12 Network) (Projected W: Mizzou)

Projected W for Mizzou? Don’t we have something stronger than “Projected”? “Guaranteed” might not be too strong in this case.

KU at Iowa St****: (1:00p.m.—ESPN) (At-risk Game)

KU’s first opportunity to cut into Mizzou’s “venues already won in” advantage. Now if Royce White will just cooperate by getting into foul trouble and playing only 27 minutes

           Oklahoma St at A&M***: (3:00p.m.—Big 12 Network) (Projected W: A&M)

Okie St’s opportunity to validate its W over Mizzou.
 
Oklahoma at K-State***: (6:00p.m.—Fox Sports) (Projected W: K-State)

Lonnie tries to go Home again.

 –Mark
           

Ken Pomeroy on the Oakland Bracket.

Friend of Phog Blog Ken Pomeroy breaks down the Bracket today, using his efficiency numbers, and I think Jayhawks will be pleased:
(more…)

Reminder on how to win that bracket…

Once again, I repeat:

You could go on gut instinct, and lose, or spend hours and hours poring over endless statistics.

Or if you’re smart, you could spend a few bucks to have access to the same proprietary tools that Vegas uses to pick games. I know I’ll be using the BracketBrains tool this year, and I recommend you do the same. Click on the banner below to check it out, but I’m pretty sure you’ll be as impressed as I am, and if you end up signing up, a little bit of dough will go to keeping the Phog Blog’s server’s running.



As Brandon goes, so go the Hawks?

posted by Jeremy Chrysler on 3/8/2006 - -

Luke Winn explores the importance of individuals to teams in a column today. I was surprised to find Brandon Rush in his list at #6.

I think the miserable performance at UT probably hurts him the most, but it’s still an interesting exercise.

Check it out.

All-Bellwether Team
Which players’ scoring averages differed the most between wins and losses?
Rk. Player Team Conf. Rec. Avg. in wins Avg in Ls Diff.
1 Richard Roby Colorado (9-7) 23.7 13.1 10.6
2 Steve Novak Marquette (10-6) 23.9 14.5 9.4
3 Paul Davis Michigan State (7-8) 20.4 11.6 8.8
4 Devan Downey Cincy (8-8) 13.5 5.3 8.2
5 Chris Lofton Tennessee (12-4) 19.9 12.8 7.1
6 Patrick O’Bryant Bradley (13-8) 15.6 8.6 7.0
7 Brandon Rush Kansas (13-3) 16.4 9.7 6.7
8 Dee Brown Illinois (11-5) 17.2 10.8 6.4
9 Adam Haluska Iowa (11-5) 15.8 10.2 5.6
10 Cameron Bennerman N.C. State (10-5) 17.6 12.0 5.6

How to win your 2006 NCAA Tournament Bracket Pool

You could go on gut instinct, and lose, or spend hours and hours poring over endless statistics.

Or if you’re smart, you could spend a few bucks to have access to the same proprietary tools that Vegas uses to pick games. I know I’ll be using the BracketBrains tool this year, and I recommend you do the same. Click on the banner below to check it out, but I’m pretty sure you’ll be as impressed as I am.



Projecting the 2006 NCAA Basketball Tournament Field…

Most of the bracket predictions out there are pretty lame. Most have Boston College and KU as 6-7 seeds, which, in my opinion, is bad, bad math. The tournament is less than a month away now, and I think it’s time to start making actual predictions about what seed teams will end up with. This seems to me to be a better use of time than “if the season ended today” predictions. The season doesn’t end today. This is a predictive bracket. I encourage your feedback. I admit I’m mailing it in for the 13-16 seeds.

The First Phog Blog Bracket (2/20/06):

1 Seeds:
Duke, UConn, Villanova, Memphis

2 Seeds:
Gonzaga, Pittsburgh, Texas (-), Ohio State

3 Seeds:
Boston College, Florida, Tennessee, Iowa

4 Seeds:
Kansas, Illinois, West Virginia, GW

5 Seeds
UCLA, North Carolina State, Michigan State, Georgetown

6 Seeds
LSU, Oklahoma, UNC, George Mason

7 Seeds
Northern Iowa, Wisconsin, Bucknell, Washington

8 Seeds
Cal, Nevada, Marquette, Alabama

9 Seeds
Creighton, So. Illinois, Seton Hall, Wichita St

10 Seeds
Arizona, Kentucky, Arkansas, Missouri State

11 Seeds
UAB, Air Force, Syracuse, Colorado

12 Seeds
W. Kentucky, San Diego State, UW-Milwaukee, NC-Wilmington

13 Seeds
Northwestern State, Montana, Akron, Iona

14 Seeds
Winthrop, Murray State, Penn, Pacific

15 Seeds
FDU, Belmont, IUPUI, Northern Arizona

16 Seeds
Georgia Southern, Albany, Delaware State, Play-in

I’ve got a feeling this thing has more holes in it than a horse-trader’s mule, or will have come Selection Sunday, but hey, there’s only so much you can do.

Vulnerability in the time of Bill and Roy

UT is a good team, but as Mark pointed out, they are a vulnerable team. This strikes me as an important point and one that I should have considered more.

Last year, we were a good team, but we were an extremely vulnerable team, particularly once JR started going cold. Indeed, a lot of Roy’s teams were vulnerable - to athleticism, to cold shooting, to slobberknocking fisticuffs. I hadn’t considered it before, but Self seems to want to build teams that don’t have these vulnerabilities.

Using one primary ballhandler leaves you up a creek if he gets injured or foul prone. Self’s solution: have two to three guys who can handle and dish the rock. Not only does this work as a sort of insurance policy, but it also makes it harder for opposing coaches to prepare for you.

Having guards that can penetrate and create offense leaves you much less reliant on warm shooting. Heck, on Monday we shot 1/7 from behind the arc and still won by 15 on the road in Stillwater to a team that owned UT (and by the way, OSU may have played better on offense against UT, but I think you have to give credit to KU’s defense for that).

And in slobberknocking fisticuffs we’ve shown ourselves more than capable of knocking more slobber and cuffing more fists. Want to slow up the game and keep it ugly? Fine. You’ll be tired at about the 8 minute mark and we’ll run you silly from then on out.

I’ve been a big Self supporter, but I think that was more a result of my dovish personality towards KU hoops than any keen understanding of exactly what he was doing. But now his vision for the program is coming into focus for me, and I really like what I’m seeing. This Self team is tough, athletic and enthusiastic, and I love it.

And this team is not very vulnerable, at least not in the Williamsian sense. Our key vulnerabilities are probabably intense ball pressure at the guard spots and really hot three point shooting (but for whom is this not true?). I would add cold free throw shooting as well, but we’ve really excelled at that over the last 8 weeks, so I don’t think I can.

I just love where this team is going. I got to watch a lot of college basketball this weekend and I must echo the comments from Jayhawk fans everywhere - when national media folks ignore or denigrate Kansas, they shine a harsh light on their overpaid ignorance. The Seth Davis OU thing was perfect. We’ll probably beat OU in the league by 2-3 games and a tiebreaker, and they’re the threat?

That’s rich. This is the same guy who ELEVEN DAYS AGO called KSU - with UT, CU, OU, TT and KU still left on their schedule - a possible NCAA tournament team.

Seth, bubby! Tell me you don’t believe the things you say on TV!

KU is up to 18 in the ESPN/USA Today poll as well.