Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 603
1
South Region / Re: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: Today at 01:18:41 am »
In case no one noticed, #1 GC and #2 E&H both lost today. Both were regionally ranked -- E&H #2 and GC #9. Gotta wonder now if either of them will get an NCAA tourney bid.

Should have just responded here. I think E&H still gets into the NCAA tournament. Guilford, though, is done.

2
South Region / Re: MBB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: Today at 01:18:03 am »
I think E&H still gets in, but Guilford doesn't have any chance.

3
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Pool C
« on: Today at 01:17:36 am »
Just keep in mind, while you had the Drew vRRO tabulated, the NCAA hasn't as of yet. So, I was referring to the data that still needs to change. But it could still change. Drew may fall out of the rankings (for all we know).

And that isn't helping the cause in my opinion. The committee looks at the vRRO and sees two teams. One team out of conference. That hurts Scranton's resume.

.525 is what Matt Snyder has calculated. I don't know what the NCAA has. I don't know what it will be come Sunday.

I've had Scranton as a "win the AQ or season done" team for a few weeks now. When the RAC kept putting them below the CAC blockade, it was a sign.

4
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Pool C
« on: Today at 12:40:48 am »
ronk - comparable opponents is when it comes to other teams others have played. Again, Scranton with all the primary and secondary criteria examined is not even regionally ranked. I haven't seen a reason they should suddenly vault forward with yet another loss to Drew. BTW - if Drew were to stay ranked, that means a third loss in the vRRO category.

Again, when you talk about the York win ... it has been considered in Week 2 and Week 3's rankings already. When comparing and contrasting to other teams in the Mid-Atlantic Region, the win over York has resulted in Scranton being ranked seventh (out of eight) last in Week 2 and out of the rankings in Week 3. The conference games will only help solidify York's position in the rankings right now. I am not sure I see how it is going to, again, move Scranton up the rankings by five slots, suddenly.

Scranton's rankings to this point: 7 (without vRRO), 8, and N/A. I think you guys don't understand ... Scranton is in a really tough spot. The only thing that has worked in their advantage is that their SOS appears to have moved from a .508 to a .525 since Sunday (and will continue to adjust). That might allow them to get back into the rankings, but I just can't see them vaulting into a Pool C considered slot.

Granted more games have to be played, but the rankings leading up to this point have been pretty clear where Scranton sits in the Mid-Atlantic pecking order.

5
South Region / Re: South Region Rankings and Playoffs
« on: Today at 12:00:46 am »
I suspect ETBU fans are going to be the most Mad Online on D3Hoops social media when the bracket comes out. #16 in the poll this week but not in the regional rankings and barring something completely unforeseen, not going to be in the NCAA Tournament.

No ... they won't be in the NCAA Tournament.

And they shouldn't be attacking our social media account. We don't make the decisions.

6
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Pool C
« on: Yesterday at 11:59:47 pm »
I wouldn't say that about E&H. They were pretty high up in the South Regional Rankings. They will get to the table and their SOS was .529. It is now .540 (subject to still change).

I think they still get in.

7
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Pool C
« on: Yesterday at 11:21:20 pm »
The women's committee tends to favor the WL% a slight bit more than the men or prognosticators. I think that is why St. Joe's has been relatively high in the regional rankings.

Also, in the past we have selected teams with other data seeming to give the advantage and the committee has gone with the better record.

Not sure if that continues, but something to chew on.

8
Clock started fine. I saw a low-angle phone video and the clock starts the moment he touches the ball. No one can use the graphic on the broadcast because it wasn't getting the data clean and thus jumps.

Sorry to Olivet, but it was a clean play.

9
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Pool C
« on: Yesterday at 11:17:20 pm »
Expecting Arcadia and Drew to be excluded from pool C; Hopkins and UMW will have much worse W/L %; Scranton's vrro will be 2-2; it won't change any more.

I think it could change. There are two more rankings to be done. One team drops out by chance and it changes the data.

They did crush York a team that is 3rd in region and someone said they are not good this year!

That is already factored into the rankings currently. If it didn't get them ranked last week and had them at the bottom of the rankings previously, why do you think it will suddenly become an item that vaults them into the national tournament?

10
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: 2019 NCAA Tournament
« on: Yesterday at 11:16:06 pm »
Well Dave if that is the case why have regionally rankings then?For talking points

There is a lot more things involved in regional rankings than hosting information. That is how teams are selected to the NCAA tournaments in nearly all sports across all three divisions. Regional Rankings have a lot of importance when it comes to selecting teams to tournaments, bracketing, hosting as well, and so on. BTW - I believe D1 MBB has them as well, just not known as much.

Sorry to disappoint you.

11
Thanks.  I remember hearing you talk about it.  Never seen it called before last weekend.

Ha - I think I've seen it a couple of dozen times this season alone LOL

12
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: 2019 NCAA Tournament
« on: Yesterday at 09:45:57 pm »
Both system teams get thrown to the curb, by lower seeds.  Maybe conf. foes are figuring things out, when it counts most.

System games have been around for a long time. MWC has seen the system for how many years? Greenville has been in it now for three years. I am not sure I jump on the idea that conf opp are "figuring things out." I think they can beat them for a lot of reasons on any given night.

But I am going to be disappointed Greenville won't be in the NCAAA tournament. This team looked like it could have made the opening weekend interesting.

13
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Pool C
« on: Yesterday at 09:41:43 pm »

 Disagree with saying MA has no competitive Pool C candidate after Salisbury; I offer Scranton .769/.515estimate/2-2; most of the Pool C candidates have another loss to detract from their W/L %

No chance. Scranton wasn't even ranked in the last regional rankings behind Drew ... and they just lost to Drew. That SOS is not going to do them any good, ronk. It is average best and their 2-2 isn't going to remain that way. Their non-conference SOS is currently about a .529, meaning the committee will see Scranton didn't try to change their resume with competitive out-of-conference scheduling.

Scranton is not a competitive Pool C candidate. I don't see how they get ahead of Mary Washington, Johns Hopkins, Arcadia, and Drew (in the rankings; at least half of those will probably still be there) after Salisbury.

14
Multi-Regional Topics / Re: 2019 NCAA Tournament
« on: Yesterday at 09:38:15 pm »
Thanks, sac. I got a bit gready. Saw the St. John's host, but when looking at other things somehow transplanted UWSP into that role.

So three hosts. Oops.

15
That up and down signal-thing from the officials was called last week.  I asked a few people and we all had guesses but no one had seen it before.

That's the "cylinder" call - or basically invading the space of an offensive player to keep them from moving without making contact or causing a foul. Was introduced I believe actually two years ago. The idea was to, along with this rule, cut down on the number of elbows being thrown by offensive players to clear out space. However, it was also decided that defenders can't encroach on an offensive player leaving little option than to cause a foul due to contact.

So a defender can't get within a "cylinder" to keep an offensive player from having the ability to avoid contact - essentially.

I actually may not be describing that very well. It isn't that new.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 603