(Official) Hoops Post-Season Tourney Watch Thread

I think he is steadily building something, but what scares me is that any progress we could make next year will be nullified if we don't sign at least 1 post player. We really could use 2 in this class but there don't seem to be that many on our radar.

 

It's a legitimate concern. But, word on the recruiting circuit was that Trent was not getting as much traction with bigs in the 2012 class with some of the "negativity" around the last two years, his one year extension, etc. As a result some of the bigs he was on early (Robert Upshaw, for example) sort of dropped off. Then, so much energy was frankly devoted to Gathers... what's not being talked about is how much Gathers' "teasing" LSU and his "wait and see" attitude probably kept other bigs like the JUCO targets we're targeting or the like, from being recruited harder by Brent and Trent. If he just didn't want LSU, he should have just let them know.

That said, I think we certainly should hope for 1 post player in the 2012 class, although Trent's really loading up on bigs for the 2013 class. I think if you look at our current team, yes, Hamilton and O'Bryant will get a lot of minutes next year. Frankly, I see a guy like Andrew Del Piero may get some minutes as a walk on next year. Then, you at times go smaller with Ludwig/Courtney playing a little bit at 4--as long as you have one of Hamilton or O'Bryant, a legit 250-260 guy, down low, I think Trent can go one more year perhaps without signing a true "big". Rather, in the SEC, I think if you can load up on athletic wings/small forwards, of the 6'6-6'8" variety, they can also help crash the boards and get rebounds.

Word is that Trent is certainly looking at bigs, for 2012 but more so for 2013, and really looking at more 2/3 depth, because he's seen what this year's shooting slumps by Turner and Stringer, can lead to. Another big wing for this team would look really good as a bridge to Turner/Courtney as a Juniors and Ludwig as a Senior next year.

You look at a Shane Hammink (a versatile big, 6'5-6'6 guard) and/or Shavon Coleman (a solid 6'6-6'7 SF), in those spots, and then signing a big man who might be a little bit of an unknown, a JUCO, or someone with some upside, and I think we're still pretty solid in 2012.

 

A bubble team every year? Not even Dale Brown had consistently high seeds. It's the nature of basketball in a football driven south. I still think we can be successful with 3 and 4 star recruits. Dale Brown made a living out of it. Occasionally we had a team that was obviously headed for a 6+ seed in the tourney but some of our best successes were below that.

 

Post-GA game...

Ok, back to the tourney watch.

Let's say this. After another home win against Georgia, the computer geeks will realize this. The RPI is a funny animal. Latest RPI polls show LSU not really moving. Right around that 61 ish area. Despite being in a two way tie for fourth in the SEC (right now, 'Bama plays tonight), LSU moves little. Despite not playing, and losing to UK, Miss State actually moved up.

RPI for 2012-02-23 - College Basketball - StatSheet.com

Now, for those wondering how critical the RPI is, take a look at this article on ESPN (granted it's about a week old, and that's why LSU isn't mentioned):

College Basketball Bubble Watch - For better or worse, the RPI still plays a major role in the bubble world - NCAA Men's Basketball - ESPN

What we know is this. The RPI is used, even though the committee doesn't like admitting it, as some sort of baseline. Some sort of "legitimacy" test. Now, certainly the committee wants to pick the at-large bid teams based upon resumes and the "eyeball" test and the like. But the RPI sort of gives a gauge. Other things such as conferences, standings, etc., also may be a baseline. If LSU finishes in the top 4 teams in the SEC, but only 5 or 6 SEC teams get in, you'd think LSU would get in, right? Not necessarily (see Alabama last year, or even Miss St a few years back). All you can do is hope that enough factors weigh in favor of LSU getting a nod. Finishing in the top 4/5 in the SEC is a start, and LSU controls its own destiny in that regard.

But, back to the RPI. If wins against inferior RPI opponents don't really move the needle, what does? Actually losses, especially those to worse teams, does--in the wrong direction. As does beating teams similarly ranked or higher. The Mississippi game this weekend may be dubbed the "game of the season", because although we would never publicly admit it as such, and Trent will call it "just another game" in the "one game at a time" mantra", Mississippi is a top 100 (roughly 67 RPI due to its SOS) team, and beating them on the road, should add additional points. So winning this Saturday's game would likely move the needle, and perhaps put LSU in that sub 60 level in the RPI. While it may be counter intuitive, we are in a tie with Tennessee. Tennessee's RPI is currently only around 100. But, we want them to win (other than against LSU), because when we play them next week, we'd prefer for them to be sub 100 in the RPI. It counts as another win against a RPI 50-100 team (for those that care, Auburn sits around 120ish level).

Now, the other thing here of course is losses hurt you in the RPI almost more than wins help. We sort of hence become Arkansas fans (or for that matter, South Carolina, Auburn or Ole Miss fans (when they're not playing us) now. If Arkansas beats Bama tonight, and Miss St later, Bama and Miss St may topple--they also have to play each other, so one team is going to fall some. Which is ironic, because Arkansas, who noone has been talking about in the last couple of weeks, is actually also 17-10, but with a far weaker SOS than LSU. If they beat Bama and Miss St, are they back in the discussion? Not to pick on the bulldogs, but we want to paint the picture here that they (being the most likely to drop below LSU in the RPI) are sliding fast and trending downwards. Bama may not fall far enough, simply because of who they chose to play early in the season. If Arkansas loses to Bama, but beats Miss St, and then Bama beats Miss St, and then to add insult to injury Miss St loses on the road to USC, LSU fans are really sitting pretty going into the SECT.

It's crazy when you think about the fact that games in far reaches of the country will still affect LSU's chances up until the selection show. In the end, the committee may throw much of this out the window and see what happens in the SEC Tournament, which is another very key element in this. And, frankly, that is where I wouldn't want to play Miss St.

Enough madness for you?

 

So what is better for us, in regards to the SEC tournament? Are we better off as a 4 seed, getting a first round bye and possibly playing a much better team in the 5 seed for our first game? Or are we better off as the 5 seed, drawing a much more beatable 12 seed in the opening round, then advancing to meet the 4 seed?

21-11 is better than 20-11, any way you slice it, right?

 

This is a good question and I know hotly debated. Me personally, I don't think it's ever good to "shoot" for a lower seed. We should win out, have a 10-6 SEC record, get a first round bye, because it is EXTREMELY rare to win the entire tournament, without the rest and a bye game. That's still the ultimate goal--to try to win the tournament. I'd of course, use that bye game rest and BEAT that lower seed team (#5/12) when they come up. I think winning that game perhaps against a Miss St, Bama or Arkansas, gets you in the NCAA, b/c that's either your higher ranked RPI opponent, or at least its LSU defeating another SEC bubble team. Going in as the 5 seed just to play a 12 seed, an Auburn or GA who you've already beat, does you little good in that scenario and can only hurt you if you lose it. We're just trying to add quality wins to the resume--and, if you get by that 5/12 team, you have fresher legs to presumably take on UK. If you lose that game to UK, no big deal. In this Scenario LSU finishes either 20-11, or 21-11.

Now, if you change the scenario and say LSU doesn't win out, but maybe loses one before the end of the season. Then, they're 19-11 going into the SECT. I think then, maybe it serves you to have an extra game to get to 20 wins. But, I think that probably happens naturally, as LSU might be a 5 seed anyway. In that scenario, we're either 19-12, or 20-12 (get by one game and lose to #4) or 21-12 (get by two games and lose to #1).

I guess what I'm saying is I'd rather be in a position of arguing that we're the 4th best team in the SEC, period, and we finish in the top 4 in the SEC Tournament, than saying we're the #5 team, and having to scrap and win 2 games in the SECT to say that.

 

Getting some pub....

LSU gathering some attention. First Andy Katz at ESPN.

Now CBS Sports...

http://eye-on-college-basketball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/26283066/34951538

Are we officially on the bubble now?

Can you hear me now?

:geaux:

 

It has been a remarkable turnaround. Here's hoping they can keep this momentum going.