Game #12 - Santa Clara Thursday Dec 22, 7pm (CT) at the ARC

[IndyValpo]

Anyone else wanting to throw some shots at me? Raise your expectations for the program and maybe you'll be as frustrated as me. Should've capitalized after our sweet 16 run and we didn't. Should've capitalized after Bryce drew left and we didn't. We need to take steps and we aren't. We just lost to a team with a 300 RPI how is that okay? Butler would never do that. Cmon stop being so biased and be stern for once

Rather than piss and moan why don't you provide us with examples of what we should have done after Bryce left. Lay out a plan...bitching is easy....

[ValpoDad89]

First and foremost, as a father of a Valpo student, I encouraged her to attend Valpo based on the academic experience she would enjoy, not because of Athletics. As a fan it hurts to see Jubril out but I support the university's stance on his status with the team and one needs to fully understand that if taken care of properly in house than the NCAA will leave it alone and not introduce an inquiry. This program would be hurt if they took a scholarship or two away for a year or banned us from post season play. Not saying this matter is that egregious to warrant such penalties but the fact is you don't want them investigating you just ,Ike you don't want the IRS auditing you.

As far as the game, I was there and must say we were flat but to Santa Clara's credit and especially Brownridge, they came out of the box ready to go. Had a nice fan base their too. Alec Peters is a very special player but if he has to take nearly 50% and between him and Hammink, 2/3 of them, we are going to struggle a few more times this year. It seemed late in the game and especially overtime, we would get the ball to him and everyone would stand and watch instead of moving. Then when they collapsed on him we had guys open on the perimeter and he tried to force something or draw contact. Williams and Walker need to step up. I know Walker got into early foul trouble but he played some significant minutes and is far too good to score only 7 points. And in 50 minutes of basketball Williams put up 5 shots. That is one every 10 minutes of game play. Far too little. Ha minks 5 TOs didn't help the cause either.

The offense should go through Peters without a doubt but it doesn't need to end with him 1of every 2 possessions.

[M]

I agree with most of what you said. However, late in the game and in OT Peters needs a touch in every possession. Maybe it was a bit of fatigue, but that didn't really seem to be happening enough the last few minutes of regulation and thought the OTs.

[StlVUFan]

Not sure how that works, exactly, but would love to hear any ideas you have that might level the playing field.

I wish I had the answer, but I thought Mark Adams' rant last year was good starting place: outlaw all buy (guarantee) games.  Period.  Every non-conference game must be a straight home-and-home or on a neutral court.  If someone with leverage wanted to take this on, I'd suggest that they start with this and tell anyone with a frown on their face to come up with a better idea.

There are a, perhaps, a couple of things I don't like about that idea, but I think it would get the conversation started a lot better than my lame idea from a few years ago (which I shared with no one, I think) of establishing a neutral committee to approve all non-conference scheduling.

[wh]

I'm hearing a lot of "There goes our at-large hopes" talk. To that, I just want to point out that we had FOUR 'bad' losses last year (Ball State, Wright State x2, and Green Bay), a weaker non-conference resume, and still managed to be the last one out. If we run the table (or maybe drop one HL game) and lose in the tourney final, we'll have two or three 'bad' losses, with better non-conference wins. I'd like to think we'd still have a pretty good chance at getting in. LOTS of season left, and it will depend on other bubble teams. Is that scenario likely? No. But hope springs eternal.

According to "RPI FORECAST by FINAL RECORD" we have a ZERO chance of receiving an at-large bid.  As shown below, even if we run the table for the rest of the regular season and lose in the HL tournament championship game our final RPI will be 39.  By comparison, last year's final RPI was 31.  If 31 wasn't good enough last year, 39 won't be either.   

Record RPI Chance
27-3   32.1   0.19%
26-4   39.2   2.13%
25-5   47.7   6.20%
24-6   57.3   14.85%
23-7   68.7   20.72%

So, why a shorter leash on losses this year than last? Last year's strength of schedule was ranked much higher - both in-conference and out:
             
2015-16   22 OOC    127 Overall
2016-17   93 OOC    192 Overall (expected)

Simply put, after the Oregon and Kentucky losses, anything short of running the table prior to losing the HL Tournament championship game would take us out of contention for an at large bid. 

Last, but not least, even if we get the automatic bid, we are probably looking at a 13-15 seed, depending on how many additional losses we pick up between now and then. Essentially, the die is already cast on the final outcome of the 2016-17 season - an opening round NCAA Tournament loss to a 2-4 seed, an auto bid into the NIT, or an invitation to some low level post season tournament. If anyone has expectations higher than this, now might be a good time to dial them back to something more realistic. 

http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html



 

[ValpoFan1000]

My source tells me Alec peters is out tonight.

[vu72]

My source tell me Alec peters is out tonight.

Must be wrong.   Alec played in the Santa Clara game.  Had a pretty solid night.

[vu72]

I'm hearing a lot of "There goes our at-large hopes" talk. To that, I just want to point out that we had FOUR 'bad' losses last year (Ball State, Wright State x2, and Green Bay), a weaker non-conference resume, and still managed to be the last one out. If we run the table (or maybe drop one HL game) and lose in the tourney final, we'll have two or three 'bad' losses, with better non-conference wins. I'd like to think we'd still have a pretty good chance at getting in. LOTS of season left, and it will depend on other bubble teams. Is that scenario likely? No. But hope springs eternal.

According to "RPI FORECAST by FINAL RECORD" we have a ZERO chance of receiving an at-large bid.  As shown below, even if we run the table for the rest of the regular season and lose in the HL tournament championship game our final RPI will be 39.  By comparison, last year's final RPI was 31.  If 31 wasn't good enough last year, 39 won't be either.   

Record RPI Chance
27-3   32.1   0.19%
26-4   39.2   2.13%
25-5   47.7   6.20%
24-6   57.3   14.85%
23-7   68.7   20.72%

So, why a shorter leash on losses this year than last? Last year's strength of schedule was ranked much higher - both in-conference and out:
             
2015-16   22 OOC    127 Overall
2016-17   93 OOC    192 Overall (expected)

Simply put, after the Oregon and Kentucky losses, anything short of running the table prior to losing the HL Tournament championship game would take us out of contention for an at large bid. 

Last, but not least, even if we get the automatic bid, we are probably looking at a 13-15 seed, depending on how many additional losses we pick up between now and then. Essentially, the die is already cast on the final outcome of the 2016-17 season - an opening round NCAA Tournament loss to a 2-4 seed, an auto bid into the NIT, or an invitation to some low level post season tournament. If anyone has expectations higher than this, now might be a good time to dial them back to something more realistic. 

http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html



 

And a Happy New Year to you too!!!

[hailcrusaders]

I'm hearing a lot of "There goes our at-large hopes" talk. To that, I just want to point out that we had FOUR 'bad' losses last year (Ball State, Wright State x2, and Green Bay), a weaker non-conference resume, and still managed to be the last one out. If we run the table (or maybe drop one HL game) and lose in the tourney final, we'll have two or three 'bad' losses, with better non-conference wins. I'd like to think we'd still have a pretty good chance at getting in. LOTS of season left, and it will depend on other bubble teams. Is that scenario likely? No. But hope springs eternal.

According to "RPI FORECAST by FINAL RECORD" we have a ZERO chance of receiving an at-large bid.  As shown below, even if we run the table for the rest of the regular season and lose in the HL tournament championship game our final RPI will be 39.  By comparison, last year's final RPI was 31.  If 31 wasn't good enough last year, 39 won't be either. Record RPI Chance 27-3   32.1   0.19% 26-4   39.2   2.13% 25-5   47.7   6.20% 24-6   57.3   14.85% 23-7   68.7   20.72% So, why a shorter leash on losses this year than last? Last year's strength of schedule was ranked much higher - both in-conference and out: 2015-16   22 OOC    127 Overall 2016-17   93 OOC    192 Overall (expected) Simply put, after the Oregon and Kentucky losses, anything short of running the table prior to losing the HL Tournament championship game would take us out of contention for an at large bid. Last, but not least, even if we get the automatic bid, we are probably looking at a 13-15 seed, depending on how many additional losses we pick up between now and then. Essentially, the die is already cast on the final outcome of the 2016-17 season - an opening round NCAA Tournament loss to a 2-4 seed, an auto bid into the NIT, or an invitation to some low level post season tournament. If anyone has expectations higher than this, now might be a good time to dial them back to something more realistic. http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html

I would hope that RPI isn't THE deciding factor on who gets in and who does not. Otherwise, there would be no mystery on Selection Sunday. College hockey selects at-larges through computer rankings. Basketball and FCS football use human committees. Things don't always work out they way they do on computers. Again, I doubt we'll get an at-large, but I'm either not pessimistic enough or too naive to count us out yet.

As for the anti mid-major scheduling bias, I would love to see the committee start selecting high mids over middling power 5s. I know we've all been saying this and I doubt it will happen consistently, but it would make the problem go away.

[ml2]

According to "RPI FORECAST by FINAL RECORD" we have a ZERO chance of receiving an at-large bid.  As shown below, even if we run the table for the rest of the regular season and lose in the HL tournament championship game our final RPI will be 39.  By comparison, last year's final RPI was 31.  If 31 wasn't good enough last year, 39 won't be either.    Record RPI Chance 27-3   32.1   0.19% 26-4   39.2   2.13% 25-5   47.7   6.20% 24-6   57.3   14.85% 23-7   68.7   20.72% So, why a shorter leash on losses this year than last? Last year's strength of schedule was ranked much higher - both in-conference and out:               2015-16   22 OOC    127 Overall 2016-17   93 OOC    192 Overall (expected) Simply put, after the Oregon and Kentucky losses, anything short of running the table prior to losing the HL Tournament championship game would take us out of contention for an at large bid.  Last, but not least, even if we get the automatic bid, we are probably looking at a 13-15 seed, depending on how many additional losses we pick up between now and then. Essentially, the die is already cast on the final outcome of the 2016-17 season - an opening round NCAA Tournament loss to a 2-4 seed, an auto bid into the NIT, or an invitation to some low level post season tournament. If anyone has expectations higher than this, now might be a good time to dial them back to something more realistic.   http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html

I'd add one caveat to this analysis. Our RPI on Selection Sunday last year was 49, not 31. We only got to 31 AFTER our NIT run. Just my 2 cents but if we get our RPI into the low 30s we have a great chance at an at-large. Upper 30s is dwindling, but still possible. Anything over 40 and our chances are zero. Based on the RPI Forecast WH cited, it's not impossible to get back to those levels, but certainly a very tall order.

[wh]

I'm hearing a lot of "There goes our at-large hopes" talk. To that, I just want to point out that we had FOUR 'bad' losses last year (Ball State, Wright State x2, and Green Bay), a weaker non-conference resume, and still managed to be the last one out. If we run the table (or maybe drop one HL game) and lose in the tourney final, we'll have two or three 'bad' losses, with better non-conference wins. I'd like to think we'd still have a pretty good chance at getting in. LOTS of season left, and it will depend on other bubble teams. Is that scenario likely? No. But hope springs eternal.

According to "RPI FORECAST by FINAL RECORD" we have a ZERO chance of receiving an at-large bid.  As shown below, even if we run the table for the rest of the regular season and lose in the HL tournament championship game our final RPI will be 39.  By comparison, last year's final RPI was 31.  If 31 wasn't good enough last year, 39 won't be either.   

Record RPI Chance
27-3   32.1   0.19%
26-4   39.2   2.13%
25-5   47.7   6.20%
24-6   57.3   14.85%
23-7   68.7   20.72%

So, why a shorter leash on losses this year than last? Last year's strength of schedule was ranked much higher - both in-conference and out:
             
2015-16   22 OOC    127 Overall
2016-17   93 OOC    192 Overall (expected)

Simply put, after the Oregon and Kentucky losses, anything short of running the table prior to losing the HL Tournament championship game would take us out of contention for an at large bid. 

Last, but not least, even if we get the automatic bid, we are probably looking at a 13-15 seed, depending on how many additional losses we pick up between now and then. Essentially, the die is already cast on the final outcome of the 2016-17 season - an opening round NCAA Tournament loss to a 2-4 seed, an auto bid into the NIT, or an invitation to some low level post season tournament. If anyone has expectations higher than this, now might be a good time to dial them back to something more realistic. 

http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html



 

And a Happy New Year to you too!!!

I take no delight in delivering a dose of reality. I wish it were otherwise.

[wh]

Tournament selection is nowhere near an exact science. I would bet that should valpo win every game but the HL finals they will get an at large. Eye test and makes for an interesting story

That's exactly what I said:

"Simply put, after the Oregon and Kentucky losses, anything short of running the table prior to losing the HL Tournament championship game would take us out of contention for an at large bid."

[justducky]

One more regular season loss would keep us close because of our NIT success after our NCAA omission.  Think Tulsa last season. They were just out in 2015 then won a few NIT games and were included in the NCAA in 2016 when they probably should not have been. Not saying it is right but the selection committee recognizing a past mistake might slightly slant a close vote.

With 2 more regular season losses even divine intervention wouldn't sway the selection committee.

With Jubril we have almost 0% chance for an at-large. Without him why are we even talking about it?

[valpo84]

That is not an official site

[justducky]

Santa Clara now sits at 9-9, 4-2 WCC, with an RPI of 187. They are 2-2 on the road by winning at San Diego which BYU failed to match.

In the next 2 weeks they will host Gonzaga, LMU, BYU and Saint Mary's. A split or better from those 4 games might raise their RPI 55 or 60 points and I am very curious on how it goes.

I hope Matt is already plotting his revenge.