Bubbling 2/22 update
- Thread starter Pitt666
- Start date
Says Gonzaga must "win big" over Portland to remain in and keep Wake out. This is so stupid where point spreads are such huge determining factors.
Wow I didn’t know that next line even existed for his updates. I guess it’s there to keep fans like us reading his updates.
If you believe Lunardi, Pitt almost has to win out. There really isnt a path to pass 10 teams and potential bid stealers by winning 4 more Q2 games.
Steve Forbes absolutely obliterated Joe Lunardi today. It was hilarious
Wake's NET is 27 which correlates to a 7 seed. P6's only deviate 2 seed lines. So they'd be a 9 at worse. However, their very unique resume (only 1 Q1 win) knocks them down another line. That said, they are a 100% stone cold lock if the field was announced right now. They arent even on the bubble. The NET is fantastic and they have 0 Q3/4 losses.
Not sure we are the 10th team out but I do think we need to go 5-0. At 4-1, we need 2 in DC.
Before the Wake game, in our last six game if we go 6-0 we were in and not even close to the bubble, if we were 5-1 we'd be in and only near the bubble if there were a bunch of bid stealers, if we were 4-2 we'd be squarely on the bubble and probably need to win one in DC, and if we were 3-3 or worse we'd need to win the tournament.
After the Wake game, in our last six game if we go 6-0 we were in and not even close to the bubble, if we were 5-1 we'd be in and only near the bubble if there were a bunch of bid stealers, if we were 4-2 we'd be squarely on the bubble and probably need to win one in DC, and if we were 3-3 or worse we'd need to win the tournament.
The only thing that has changed is that we've lost an opportunity for a really good win. Losing to a Q1 on the road doesn't really hurt. Losing big doesn't really make much difference at all. UConn lost by 19 in a game they were favored in. Former board darlings South Carolina lost a game last week by 40. Marquette lost over the weekend by 28. Texas lost last weekend by 21. Teams lose by big margins sometimes.
By the way, you want to know how dumb Lunardi is about college basketball? In his update on the web site on Tuesday he posited that UConn is so good that "you want Connecticut or the field next month? These Huskies are making it a very tough question."
Anyone who thinks that if you can pick either UConn or the field to win the championship that's a tough call has no idea, literally, no idea what they are talking about. I mean UConn is the favorite, and UConn certainly could win. But UConn's odds to win are surely not even 20% at this point. You'd have to be an idiot to take UConn over the field.
Proof? You can actually bet on these sorts of things. And UConn isn't even close to even money. They are, depending on where you look, 4-1/2 or 5 to 1. Meaning between a 15-20% chance to win.
Anyone who thinks that if you can pick either UConn or the field to win the championship that's a tough call has no idea, literally, no idea what they are talking about. I mean UConn is the favorite, and UConn certainly could win. But UConn's odds to win are surely not even 20% at this point. You'd have to be an idiot to take UConn over the field.
Proof? You can actually bet on these sorts of things. And UConn isn't even close to even money. They are, depending on where you look, 4-1/2 or 5 to 1. Meaning between a 15-20% chance to win.
You dont believe that NET rank is a big selection criteria. I do. The blowout cost us a game. Had we lost by 4, I'd say we can finish 4-1 and have a good shot. But not anymore.
Well to be fair, you don't really believe it either, you just don't seem to understand what some of the stuff that you post means.
The loss to Wake didn't cost us anything more than the win against Louisville got us. Had we won both of those games by more "normal" scores we'd be in pretty much the exact same place right now.
Yes.
I mean is there a scenario where there are a bunch of bid stealers or something really unusual happens these last couple weeks and it's not quite enough? Maybe? But it's almost like people forget that every year, all these teams on the bubble lose lots of games over the last few weeks of the season. Because if they were good enough to not lose games they wouldn't be on the bubble in the first place.
Even if there's no bid stealers, the numbers dont work at 4-1, 1-1. That would give us only 3 Q1 wins in addition to 5 Q2 wins. The 2 Q3 losses arent helpful. There's too many MWC/B12/SEC/B10 with loads of Q1 wins and good NETs. We'd need 2 in DC.
You need to get the Clemson game, have NC St finish high enough to become a Q1 and Wake to stay a Q1.
That’s a 5-5 Q1 record. And probably around 2-3 (assuming we drop the BC game) in Quad 2 games.
That’s about the only way I see getting close. We’d be right there.
I sort of agree though, Pitt probably needs to win out. At some point, you need to start appearing in projected brackets. It’s hard if you are counting that the first set of brackets you will be in will be like the second week of March - I just don’t see it.
I agree, except Pitt is one of those teams too, and I don’t think we’ve still really seen anything to suggest we are gonna go 4-1 in the last 5, where one of the wins is Clemson. Also, all of those bubble teams are ahead of us right now, so even if they drop a game or 2, we’re not gonna jet past them beating mediocre ACC teams at home.
As much as I really do like this Pitt team, they will have, by far, the worst OOC profile of any bubble team. They have a couple nice road wins, and pass the eye test, but this feels like a relatively easy team for the committee to leave out for a number of reasons.
I think Pitt better go 5-0, don’t lose a bad game in the ACCT and hope for some help. Anything less…how exactly are we passing teams beating nobodies? Even teams ahead of us lose, we just seem a little too far back.
Even if we discount the fact that most bracketologists have us as like the 8th-10th team out and figure we are much closer than that, losing at Clemson and winning 2 Q2s and 2Q3s (FSU and NC St being Q3s is ridiculous) just doesnt move the needle enough. I realize other bubble teams will lose. But they'll also win a few games. We are pretty far back and dont have enough at-bats left.
If I had to select 2 games to win, it would probably be @ Clemson and @ BC. Because that would give us a Q1, Q2 and 8 road wins which would rank near the top.
We 100% have to win the Clemson game. And the VT game I think. Maybe if we have to go 4-1, the game to lose is NC St because it bumps the earlier road win to Q1 lol?
But if you go 4-1, you need the Clemson game for sure
The only way I see us getting in at 4-1 without Clemson is if we blow everyone out so our NET is like 39. Good point about NC State. If you had to pick one, that's probably the game to lose to bump our road W to Q1 and we'd probably need Wake to stay Q1 but then their in over us.
I think the road wins is the last lifeline. Barring 5-0, I think the Wake game was a sudden death bubble game and eliminated Pitt.
I think if they win today against Virginia Tech and win at Clemson on Tuesday I think Pitt would be right there once again back in first four next four out in the brackets. They would have at least 4 Quad 1 wins maybe 5 depending if NC State can get their NET back up to 75 and with all of them being against the top 5 teams in the ACC right now in the standings.
They would also be 9-2 in their last 11 games within the last 5-6 weeks and 19–9 overall and 10-7 in the conference and their NET would probably jump back into the Low to mid 40’s probably between 40-45. You just can’t ignore that completely if your the committee and one of the people running bracketology. That resume is still pretty strong and deserves consideration for sure even if you factor in the blowout loss at Wake. So not all is lost yet after the Wake Forest disaster on Tuesday night but if you’re Pitt right now you damn well better win these next 2 games today against VT and at Clemson Tuesday night.
They would also be 9-2 in their last 11 games within the last 5-6 weeks and 19–9 overall and 10-7 in the conference and their NET would probably jump back into the Low to mid 40’s probably between 40-45. You just can’t ignore that completely if your the committee and one of the people running bracketology. That resume is still pretty strong and deserves consideration for sure even if you factor in the blowout loss at Wake. So not all is lost yet after the Wake Forest disaster on Tuesday night but if you’re Pitt right now you damn well better win these next 2 games today against VT and at Clemson Tuesday night.
Pitt can only afford to lose 1 more game the rest of the year, not including the ACCT. It's pretty much a given we'll lose 1 there. We have to start with disposing of VT tonight. Clemson at Clemson will be very difficult. If we lose that one, and I don't see us winning there, we're down to no wiggle room whatsoever. At that point, we have to win out or, if we lose another one, winning the ACCT outright.
Being realistic, this Pitt team is probably headed to the NIT. Which is fine considering how we started, the youth on the team, and maybe even getting a game or 2 at The Pete for the NIT. That may be fun. And certainly better than what we had the first few years under Capel.
We obviously need a win today to at least have a chance at the tourney.
Who else are we rooting for to help our chances?
Who else are we rooting for to help our chances?
I disagree that they can’t win at Clemson Tuesday night. I definitely think they can win that game and I personally just think they are due to beat Clemson and win a game there which hasn’t happened in 10 years. I think if they win today against VT and at Clemson Tuesday that puts them in a pretty good spot to get in. Pitt’s resume is a lot better then a lot of the bubble teams out there now and adding another Quad 2 win tonight and a Quad 1 win Tuesday at Clemson will make it that much better. You gotta look at how Pitt has been playing the last 5-6 weeks as well as they would be 9-2 in their last 11 games if they win today against VT and at Clemson on Tuesday. No bubble teams are playing that well so that needs to be and should be taken into account moving forward.
Yea. Lets say we lose at Clemson but win the rest and in DC we beat like GT but lose to Wake. No one would have us in. But there's a chance Pitt could be one of those teams in that surprised everyone and when they ask the chair why, he says "they won 7 true road games which was more than all but 3 teams" (estimating the all but 3 teams part).
Sure they do. If we go 4-1 there is a pretty good chance we finish in 4th in the conference. Do that and your one in the ACC tournament is against someone like Wake or Clemson or Virginia. Which would be a huge win. And then the loss would probably be to Duke, which isn't going to hurt you at all.
The problem is that you think that all these games that we play are going to happen in a vacuum. And they don't.
Look at the other teams on the bubble. Wake plays Duke today. They still have to play at Virginia Tech and at Clemson. Texas A&M plays at Tennessee today. They also still have to play board darlings South Carolina and Mississippi State. Providence has games left with Marquette, Villanova and UConn. Villanova has UConn, Providence, Seton Hall and Creighton. Seton Hall has Butler, Creighton, UConn and Villanova. Mississippi has South Carolina, Alabama and A&M. Utah has Colorado and Oregon both on the road. And so on.
Almost every team that is on the bubble is going to lose games over these last couple weeks of the season. The ones that don't aren't going to be on the bubble, they are going to be in. And there aren't going to be many (and maybe not any) of those, because the reason that all these teams are on the bubble is because they are good enought to, say, beat Duke at Duke, they are also bad enough to lose to, say, Missouri at home.
I was operating under the assumption that 4-1/12-8 gets us a 5 or 6 seed. So 1-1 in DC means wins over a bad team and then a loss to a good team. If we do get a double bye after going 4-1 and lets say we beat Wake in the quarters, then yes, I think we could get in. But I highly doubt we get a double bye at 4-1. That would mean Wake would have to lose 2 just for us to tie with them and then I'm not sure what the tiebreaker is since we split.
And you highly doubt that because you think that we play all of our games in a vacuum.
Just because they are handy, look at the Pomeroy final projected ACC standings as of right now.
Duke 16-4
NC 16-4
Virginia 13-7
Wake 12-8
Pitt 11-9
Clemson 11-9
So right there, if Pitt gets to 12-8 they are tied for 4th, and they probably win the tiebreaker over Wake for 4th. In fact if that happens and we get one "extra" Virginia loss then we end up in a three way tied for 3rd, and we probably win that tiebreaker as well.
IF, and it is certainly a big if, we go 4-1 in our last five it is probably more likely we get the four seed or better than we get the five seed or worse.
But all of those teams you mentioned are ahead of us, most of them comfortably ahead of us. If those teams go say…3-2 or 2-3 in their last 5, and we go 4-1, why would we jump them, when really only one of the 4 wins (assuming it’s Clemson) would be any good. If, for example, one of the Big East bubble teams (Seton Hall, Butler, Providence) goes 2-3, and we go 4-1, we aren’t jumping them. We are like 12 spots below them on the bubble, at best. I just don’t see it.
This isn’t last year where like Pitt was always sort of in the field, maybe some people had us as the 1st or 2nd team out.
We are 12th out on Lunardi, other sites don’t even have us in the next 12 out. We might not even be on the “bubble” at that point. We’re basically Iowa or Memphis right now, sort of on the fringe of the bubble but no one in the world would have us in the field today, nor even if we win today and both next week. That might get us into like 7th-8th out?
I'd suggest you stop listening to the guy who earlier this week said that if you had the choice between UConn or the field winning the national championship that that would be a really tough choice when he gives an opinion about college basketball, but to each his own.
I’m not listening to him lol. I used him as an example.
How about this, to be on the bubble, you need to be on 1 of the 111 brackets on bracket matrix? We aren’t.
You can’t possibly make a bracket today with us on it.
That site has like 8 teams in the field as 11-10 seeds, and then 8 teams out. Is the bubble really deeper than that?
We basically are Clemson from last season. Unforgivable OOC schedule. Probably a pretty nice ACC record, but that’s just not enough.
I think we need to go 5-0, or if we are gonna lose one, make it the last game of the season and get 1 really, really good win (Duke or UNC) in the ACCT
Nope. There's so little variance in those brackets it's meaningless.
Of course not.
The argument in favor of us getting in is that we finish 4-1 or better, while the remaining bubble teams continue to bob up and down in the sea of mediocrity that they (and us) currently reside in. That would separate Pitt from several of the teams Joe mentioned who will not finish as strongly.
It depends on your definition of bubble. We're on the fringe. ESPN's bubble watch mentions us. CBS's does not, but our profile is not much different from many of the teams they do include.
Win today and we're closer than we were right now. That's about all that matters, because there are scenarios where we'd be in good shape at 4-1 and scenarios where 5-0 isn't good enough.
That's the big thing. None of this happens in a vacuum. There absolutely are scenarios where 5-0 would not be good enough. Are any of those scenarios likely? No, they aren't. But they are possible. Are there scenarios where 4-1 isn't enough? Yes, absolutely. And those scenarios are much more likely. If a bunch of those teams that I mentioned before, as well as some others, all win their remaining games (to the extent possible) then we are in trouble no matter what we do. If a bunch of those teams lose several of those remaining games (and there are some other upsets) then if, again, big if, we go 5-0 or 4-1 then we are in good shape.
Win today, and then let's see where we stand tomorrow.
I'll add that my definition of the bubble is: starting in February (because there is no such thing as the bubble before then), any team that can still theoretically win enough games to make a reasonable case to get in as an at-large is included.
Teams can move up and down, or drop off entirely, but if you still have a chance, you're in the conversation and therefore on the bubble.
That's almost certainly more broad than most people's definition, which is fine with me because it's fun to talk about this, make projections, and keep that shred of hope alive if you're us this year!
Teams can move up and down, or drop off entirely, but if you still have a chance, you're in the conversation and therefore on the bubble.
That's almost certainly more broad than most people's definition, which is fine with me because it's fun to talk about this, make projections, and keep that shred of hope alive if you're us this year!
Pitt made the tournament with a net ranking 10 spots lower than they are current at. Everyone needs to chill
I think there's a lot of validity to what you said. If we went 5-0 the rest of the year and even got 1 ACCT win, I'm pretty sure we'd be in. Going 4-1 the rest of the way means we probably have to win 2 in the ACCT to get in, one being against a Duke or UNC.
Beating VT tonight isn't going to be easy. I hope it is, but Pitt has been revealed as a team with weaknesses that other teams will exploit. If we happen to beat VT, then we go on the road again to face Clemson, a team we can't seem to beat no matter what we do. Clemson would have to have a very off night and we'd have to be shooting on all cylinders to beat them at their place. It's possible, but highly unlikely.
I think we go 3-2 the rest of the year and get 1 ACCT win. That puts us in the NIT, which is better than not going anywhere at all. And maybe we'll even get a game at The Pete for the NIT.
I guess we will agree to disagree that there are scenarios where 4-1 puts us in “good” shape. I define “good shape” as 50%+ to make the field prior to the ACCT.
4-1 (my opinion) puts us in a place where we maybe get one big ACCT win and make it. But it has to include the Clemson win.
Pitt’s NET last year was artificially bad because of a lot of close wins. We were 14-6 in the ACC. We almost won the league. We were projected to be in the field for months. And we were a last 4 team in against a significantly worse bubble (as of now).
Again, could enough of the 11-14 bubble teams ahead of us not in the field, and 4-6 bubble teams in the field have collapses where we pass them without winning out? I mean maybe, but that seems awful unlikely to me.
A very mediocre team like Utah, Texas A&M, Miss St, Colorado, Villanova, Butler, or Iowa, (I could keep going, but I hope you get the point by now) going 3-2, 2-3, or even 1-4 down the stretch isn't a "collapse", it's the expected outcome for most of them.
Let's take the 3 SEC bubble teams in front of us: A&M is expected to go 2-3, MSU is projected to go 3-2, and Ole Miss is projected to go 3-2. They have opportunities for some quality wins, but also all play each other still. A&M's 2 projected wins are a toss up vs. MSU and a game vs. USC-east.
Oh, and that USC-east team is projected to go 0-5 for the rest of their regular season, which will absolutely put them on the bubble and weaken the resume of the other teams who beat them.
Now let's look at the Pac-12: Utah is projected to go 3-2, Colorado is expected to go 3-2, and Oregon is expected to go 4-1, all against weak competition generally. They have minimal room for improvement and plenty of opportunities to stumble, as each of them aren't favored by much in games they almost certainly have to win.
Now let's consider that Lunardi sucks at this, so the fact that he has numerous teams with what seem to be objectively worse profiles in front of us makes our situation look more dire than it probably is in reality.
We're projected to go 3-2 ourselves, so the idea is that we're exceeding expectations while about half of the 15 - 20 Lunardi has between us and the teams that are comfortably in meet their expectations or do worse than that (again, keeping in mind a number of these teams probably are already behind us because Lunardi sucks at this).
Any of the teams I listed could absolutely go 2-3, 1-4, or 0-5 in their last 5 games, and if several of them do that while we're going 4-1, we'd be in good shape. It's not going to take some miracle for mediocre teams to continue to be mediocre or slightly worse, which is all we need based on the existing projections from competent forecasters (i.e. not Lunardi).
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
The Morning Pitt: 2/5/2025 - What can Pitt do to bounce back?- Latest: Zeldas Open Roof
-