The Impact of Tonight's Game on Tournament Seeding

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 4, 2008 10:41 AM PST Comment 22 comments

I've made my thoughts clear on the importance of patience this season and I agree with N that we need to keep things in perspective, but that doesn't diminish the importance of tonight's game. Tonight's game will not tell us whether or not we will be a good team or whether this team is capable of winning a national title, but it will play a HUGE part in our seeding for the tournament.

The Pac 10 was the nation's top conference last season, but six players from the conference were taken in the top 15 of the NBA Draft and it will take a toll on the conference. The conference will be down this season and a team will not have 12 or 14 chances in conference play to pick up quality wins. In addition, the RPI of Pac 10 teams will not be as high as they were last year for the same reason. That places greater emphasis on non-conference play because for a team to earn a high seed, it is imperative for them to have marquee non-conference win and a couple quality wins out of conference.

Last season, all four #1 seeds had RPI's in the top 5. On top of that, every #2 seed had a RPI in the top 10 and every #3 seed has a RPI in the top 15. You can argue that the RPI is flawed and not a true indicator of which teams are elite (and I would tend to agree with you), but the numbers don't lie. The selection committee places a lot of emphasis on the RPI and if you're aiming for a high seed, you need a high RPI. How do you get a high RPI? Well you not only have to win games, but you must do so against a difficult schedule and pick up road and neutral court wins (if you want to get detailed you need strong opponent's SOS, etc.).

That brings us to UCLA and tonight's game. The Bruins came into this season with three chances to pick up a marquee win or two. While other nice wins are out there, games against Duke, Texas and Notre Dame were UCLA's chance to pick up the marquee win. The loss to Michigan prevented the Bruins from the chance at the Duke win and now there are two chances left to pick up that big win. One of them comes tonight when UCLA plays a team that is not only outstanding, but they get a chance to do it on the road. If UCLA wants to pick up a seed similar to the ones they've had the past two seasons, they need to beat Texas or Notre Dame and they may need to win both.

This doesn't mean that I either expect UCLA to win tonight or that they're chances for a fourth consecutive Final Four are done if they lose tonight. The Bruins can certainly enter the tournament as a #4, #5 or #10 seed and still make it to Detroit, but we have all seen the benefits of being a high seed and playing out west and if the Bruins want to have that advantage again this season, a win tonight could be imperative.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 22 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Great analysis

There are never any meaningless games when you’re at the top, are there?

I’m working tonight, but will keep an eye on GameCast as much as I can. Go Bruins!!

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Dec 4, 2008 11:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pac-10 Championship will carry more weight

While I agree a victory against Texas and ND are important to the Bruins RPI, I don’t see a loss to either or both drops them to a 4 or 5 seed. If UCLA wins both the regular season and tournament titles and finishes the regular season with 25+ wins, I see them getting no less than a 2.
The Pac 10 is down from a year ago but I can’t imagine a championship team from a major conference with a proven track record not getting a top 4 seed.

richramus

by richramus on Dec 4, 2008 11:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

If we lose tonight and to Notre Dame

we could enter the tournament with zero wins over RPI top 25 teams. Is it likely? No, but it’s possible. Right now, only one Pac 10 team is in the polls and that’s Arizona St., who has a rather weak schedule this year and will need an outstanding record to be in the RPI top 25. It’s extremely difficult to get into the RPI top 10 without at least 3 top 25 wins. Throw in the fact that the committee only recognizes conference tournament championships when a conference has a tournament and not regular season conference championships and it could be tough to get a top 2 or 3 seed without a win over Texas and Notre Dame and possibly both.

If we lose both of those games, it would take an undefeated Pac 10 run and Pac 10 tourney title IMO to get a top 2 seed. More likely, we win the Pac 10 tourney and lose 4 in Pac 10 play and we’re looking at a #4 seed, #3 at best.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 4, 2008 11:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed, and thank you for your analysis!

Also, with Gonzaga already adding solid non-conference wins to their resume, the competition for the best draw out west will be fierce. Even landing a #2 or #3 seed, we may not find ourselves our preferred regional locations. So yes, the game tonight could be a huge factor in seeding, and more importantly, where we play come March.

by cabz on Dec 4, 2008 1:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Seeding

We have made a lot of comparisons this year to CBH’s first team that went to the final four and if I recall, we were like a 3 or 4 seed that year. Don’t get me wrong, I would love for us to have a number 1 seed, but it might not be the worst thing in the world to have a slightly lower seed. The main reason that I think this would be good for us this year is that if we were a #1 seed in the West bracket, we would meet North Carolina (assuming they make it there, which seems pretty safe right now) in the Final 4. But if we get a 2 or 3 seed we would get shipped out East where we wouldn’t play UNC until the championship. This is getting way ahead of ourselves, but I am just saying a #1 seed isn’t necessary for us to have a good shot at the championship.

by bruinponcho on Dec 4, 2008 2:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Actually

We were a no. 2 seed that year, with the best possible regional set up (San Diego and Sacramento).

by bluebland on Dec 4, 2008 4:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is an important game

Rye is right on the money. Tonight’s game is critical for seeding, not to mention the fact that it will show everyone how good we are really.

It’s unfortunate, but the fact is this UCLA team isn’t like UCLA the last two years—where we sort of expected huge years. It is way more like 3 years ago, when we expected a good year, but hoped for a huge year. We are not going to win as many games this year as we did in the last two years, in my opinion. We are less athletic, have less experience, and have WAY more question marks.

This year MIGHT be like three years ago, when we made the national final and got a # 2 seed. But recall, that # 2 seed was not only a little surprising (at least to me), it was most certainly the product of a dominating end of the season, where we played our best basketball of the season without question. We rocked the Pac-10 Tourney that year in amazing fashion.

Also like three years ago, there is a problem with us staying out West this year. Gonzaga. I don’t know if anyone has been watching their games, but they are extremely good, and have been playing off the charts. That does not bode well for us in terms of staying in the West. Sure, it’s possible the Committee could place us both in the West bracket again (assuming of course we earn a top-4 seed). But I think it is unlikely. Also, Gonzaga’s # 5 ranking currently puts them in great position, since games get relatively easier for them as the season progresses because of their conference.

Ok, I’ve regressed. But back to Rye’s point, I totally agree this game will be huge for our team. If we win, it makes life a little easier. If we lose, it will hurt. I am really scared of this game, because while I think we could win, I also think we could get clobbered.

Go Bruins.

by rfirpo on Dec 4, 2008 4:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Uh no ...

It wasn’t a dominating end in the regular season. We pulled out some tough games on the road especially nerve wrecking wins against Cal and Stanford. We gelled really well in the Pac-10 tourney but by that time a high seed out West was looking pretty solid. It was a matter of whether we ended up a 2, 3 or 4 seed out West.

Also in 1996 under Lavin we got massacred at Maples (if people can remmeber that) and then lost to them at home. Our major non conference win was a victory over a mediocre Duke team at Pauley. Yet after we won the Pac-10 we ended up with a 2 seed out West.

This game is a marquee one …. but it’s not some kind of armageddon game in terms of high tourney seedings.

by Nestor on Dec 4, 2008 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Uh

I rfirpo meant dominating end to the season as in we won a lot of games in a row. We went on to win our last 4 regular season games (that “nerve wrecking” win against Stanford was by 19 points) then 3 more in a row in the Pac-10 tourny (whereas the year before and afterwards we were bounced in the first round) and then another 5 in a row in the NCAA tournament only coming up one game short. The NCAA seeding puts a lot of weight on how you finish out the season so winning those last 7 games in a row was huge (our #2 seed actually put us at #5 overall on the S-curve). So if well put it all together at the right time of the season it will take a similar effort of winning a bunch of games in a row at the end of the year sprinkled in with a marquee victory over a top team that will help get us there.

by turs12 on Dec 4, 2008 8:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

*I think

is what that first sentence is supposed to say

by turs12 on Dec 4, 2008 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Right about the Stanford game

But if my memory serves me correctly the game against Cal was close. We closed the season with 7 wins and got that number 2 seed, which makes my point above that it doesn’t matter all that much if we lost a close game tonight.

If we keep improving, win the Pac-10, and close the season strong, we are going to be allright.

BTW watch your tone turs. We have deleted couple of your comments recently for insulting moderators. We won’t tolerate that here on BN. Consider it a warning. Thanks.

by Nestor on Dec 4, 2008 8:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think we are making the same point

I wasn’t try to put words into rfirpo’s mouth but I just read “dominating end of the season” to mean we won a bunch of big games in a row at the end of the year when they mattered most, not necessarily we blew everyone out of the water. You are definitely right about the Cal game, it was a nail biter because that was the game we needed to win to clinch the Pac-10 and they didn’t want that to happen on their home court but it took some late game heroics from Afflalo to deny the Cal fans. I do think, especially given the state of the Pac-10 that we can go on a similar type of run this season once we figure it out all out and I really wish this matchup had been played later on in the season because I have no doubt we would have played a much different game. In regards to your final comment, is there any way to send you a PM or something because I feel that I have more to say to you privately about the matter. But if you don’t care to hear what I have to say then that is your prerogative too.

by turs12 on Dec 4, 2008 10:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If I remember correctly

That game at Cal went to overtime, and we would have split the conference if they had won.

by SuperBruinMan on Dec 5, 2008 5:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

I am not really all that caught up on the importance of this game neither I am worried about getting a number 1 seed or a higer seed our West. What is important for me is for our team to focus game to game, improve week to week and be in best form in March.

I will be happy if we can win the Pac-10 championship for the fourth year in a row and then win the Pac-10 tourney. If we can do that I feel pretty good about getting a very high seed out West.

True we made the Final-4 last year thanks to a 1 seed out West with favorable pairings. A good Pac-10 conference had to do something with that.

Yet we also made the Final-4 the year before as a 2 seed even though we lost two games in a row to end the regular season and the first game of Pac-10 tourney (against very mediocre Washington and Cal game).

In 2005-06 we lost to Memphis in our only marquee non conference matchup. We also lost to West Virgina (which wasn’t as good as Texas this year) … at home. We lost to Cal at home. We lost to Washington at home. And we lost to a really bad/irrelevant SC team on the road. Yet we finished the season strong, made a run in the Pac-10 tournament to win it, and got a 2 seed out West.

Given what I have seen over the years I am not worried about RPIs just 6 games into the season. RPIs do matter. As do conference championships, conference tournament championships and the track record we have established in last three years. We also have DG in the selection committee as well.

I will leave the RPI madness to Lunardis of the world and keep an eye on how our team is improving game to game. Losing a tough one tonight is not going to mean much to me in terms of the big picture.

by Nestor on Dec 4, 2008 4:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Agree

We have to remember that this is a young team with only two returning starters.

Obviously, our freshmen played no college ball last year.

Roll, Draovic and Keefe played very little.

We lost critical players LMM’s D and rebounding, KL’s everything, and RW’s D and fearlessness.

With any other team and/or coach, this would be called a “rebuilding year”. With us, it’s a “visions of a title” year.

If that is to come, it will take shape later in the year, not now.

We may well lose tonight — and it will kill me because I am surrounded by neighbors who worship UT. But, I can promise you that by the end of the year we will have come together in a way that we will beat UT or ND or any of the very tough teams we will face in this formative period.

There certainly are no “meaningless games”. But, there are “meaningless goals”. And, to expect this team, at this time of the season, to play like a number 1 seed is meaningless.

My goals? Develop chemistry and avoid injuries.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 4, 2008 5:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

In 05-06 our smaller teams were better

Albany made the tournament, Nevada was a top 25 team and we didn’t have a team on our schedule that was a RPI killer. This season we play an awful Depaul team in the Wooden Classic, an FIU team predicted to finish near the bottom of the conference and a LMU team that is currently 0-7. We have weaker teams on our schedule this year that are going to drag down our RPI, increasing the need for a marquee win or two.

I’m not trying to say that seeding is the focus of tonight’s game. This team isn’t anywhere near as good as it’ll be in a couple of months and the continued development of the team is most important, but there are major seeding ramifications tonight. Seeding isn’t most important right now, but it’s something to keep in mind.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 4, 2008 5:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think we are mostly in agreement here re RPI

As usual your research and analysis is fairly on the money rye. I think though we have to wait a little longer to see how the RPI shakes out. Texas has all the talent in the world …but what if they don’t gel and collapse down the stretch? What if Michigan emerges as a very solid team? I think if we take care of business in the Pac, we should be all right. Like I said I agree we will be out of it in terms of a number 1 seed if things don’t go our way, however, not sure how much it will be really impact us definiively beyond that.

by Nestor on Dec 4, 2008 6:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Mostly agree

As a fan I would like to see more marquee matchups but I like the purpose and philosophy of Howland’s scheduling. As discussed in the past, CBH schedules teams with differing styles to prepare our warriors for March Madness.

In terms of RPI, that Michigan loss hurt us. Was hoping they would take down Maryland Hopefully they battle for a bid in Beilein’s 2nd year. This is 1 of the 2 remaining marquee OOC games left. This isn’t the end all but without a W here and against ND, our resume will not be seen as #1 seed worthy due to the talent hit the Pac 10 took. ASU and likely Wazzu are the only other teams IMO that are Top 25 material. The other teams have various issues for which the effects are unknown at this time. At max, I see 5 bids for the Pac 10.

N has it right. Our focus should be on the development of this team and to be firing on all cylinders come March. Even if we lose the OOC games, if we hold serve on defending the Pac 10 title, we’ll have a good shot at being a #3 or #4 seed out west IMO. Being out west would continue to be a huge advantage for us but this is something to be determined later and is a long ways away. I’m looking to see how the FR develop to provide depth, seeing if we’ll have some post options and see how our seniors lead this team.

by BlueReign on Dec 4, 2008 5:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

off topic but don't know where else to post this...

anyone watching the SC-Oklahoma game? Some SC thug just gave Blake Griffen an unprovoked low-blow. What a cheap shot

by bucknellbruin on Dec 4, 2008 5:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Was gonna post this too

Leonard Washington. Originally is a 2007 recruit but surprise, surprise…he didn’t qualify until this year. sc sure knows how to recruit such stellar student-athletes. By the way, that has gotta be one of the dirtiest plays I’ve ever seen. He INTENTIONALLY punched Blake under the belt. And they wonder why we call them scum.

by BlueReign on Dec 4, 2008 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

that was ridiculous. And I know he got ejected but it really didn’t cost SC a thing. Griffen was still clearly in pain and missed both FT’s, then SC got the ball back. Just sad…i hope he gets suspended

by bucknellbruin on Dec 4, 2008 5:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs