Baylor

[6-4-3 Jackrabbit]

Re: Baylor

171 posts and barely a mention of Jordan Dykstra. Key to the game on both sides of the court. Can extend the Baylor defense to the three point line and has to play bigger than 6'8". Leaving for NM early Wednesday morning. Can't wait - Go Rabbits!

[Just Glad To Be Here]

Re: Baylor

I know its impossible to quantify, but I wonder what happens to those numbers when the 14 is an underseed?

My apologies if this has already been mentioned in this thread, but here's a stat that I like: 2 of Baylor's last three losses were to unranked teams. They are far from invincible.

KSU at home was a bad loss...Baylor abused them in the Big XII tournament for payback...

ISU at Hilton is in no way a bad loss...KU lost there too...they may be unranked, but they don't lose at home...

If I was looking for hope, I'd look back to the first round of the 10 tournament in New Orleans when Baylor's Elite Eight team came within a couple of minutes of spitting the bit against the mighty Sam Houston State Bearkats...

[Crashola]

Re: Baylor

This site has the 3 seeds with a record of 92-16 all time vs. 14 seeds. No doubt it will take a great effort to win, but history shows it does happen on occasion. I hope the Jacks win, but am far from expecting it.

I know its impossible to quantify, but I wonder what happens to those numbers when the 14 is an underseed?

My apologies if this has already been mentioned in this thread, but here's a stat that I like: 2 of Baylor's last three losses were to unranked teams. They are far from invincible.

[filbert]

Re: Baylor

filbert wrote earlier: "Thanks to those posters for reining it in. Let's keep things reasonably friendly from here on out."

Moderators are going to fight hard to keep the discussion on a high level. The usual rules apply including, for example, not attacking a poster which includes no name calling ("low rent dudes").

We try to keep to two major guidelines here:

No smack in non-smack sections/threads, and
Discuss posts, not posters.

These two things seem to go a long way towards keeping the place from degrading into an Internet shouting/screaming match which almost nobody finds particularly fun to read.

Friendly reminders are our main weapon for now (along with surprise, surprise and fear, surprise and fear and ruthless efficiency, surprise, fear, ruthless efficiency, and a fanatic devotion to the Pope, or something like that).

[JackJD]

Re: Baylor

filbert wrote earlier: "Thanks to those posters for reining it in. Let's keep things reasonably friendly from here on out."

Moderators are going to fight hard to keep the discussion on a high level. The usual rules apply including, for example, not attacking a poster which includes no name calling ("low rent dudes").

[Texasjeremy]

Re: Baylor

Perhaps the apples to apples comparison would be to other mid-major conferences where men's BB budgets are less than $5 million/yr?

Only if the tournament game is being handicapped based on mens BB budgets.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Baylor

TV's Twitter

AccuScore simulated 10,000 games between SDSU and Baylor. Average score: 74.4-68.6. Jacks' chances to win: 33 percent.

Gives us a little better chance than what history shows. This site http://mcubed.net/ncaab/seeds.shtml has the 3 seeds with a record of 92-16 all time vs. 14 seeds. No doubt it will take a great effort to win, but history shows it does happen on occasion. I hope the Jacks win, but am far from expecting it.

I'm just going to enjoy this ride because who knows when it will happen again.

And I just love the Baylor fans arguing on our message board. Low rent dudes.

And I'm shocked that the head to head comparison of the Summit and the Big 12 shows the Big 12 as the better conference. Like comparing an apple to an orange and coming up with the apple not being an orange and being suprised.

[JackJD]

Re: Baylor

Thanks, Bru-win. As you can imagine, making the tourney is a big deal for the Jackrabbit men. Our program was an excellent Divisiion II program but when we moved to Division I, we were snakebit -- everything that could go wrong seemed to go wrong. This program has scratched and clawed its way back and every one of its fans is rightfully proud of this season. Many thought next year would be the first year we'd enter the Tourney as the team matured another year so we're doubly proud to get there this year.

No question Baylor is a great basketball team. The odds-makers should and will pick Baylor and to do otherwise would be foolish. But, your coach and his family/coaching background with Valpo (which then belonged to the Summit League under its old name, the Mid-Continent Conference), knows what a mid-major can do if things fall into place just right. Baylor will be well prepared. And the Jackrabbits will be prepared too.

I predict a very entertaining game -- one a fan not connected with BU or SDSU will enjoy.

Welcome to this board.

[BudLight Jackrabbit]

Re: Baylor

TV's Twitter

AccuScore simulated 10,000 games between SDSU and Baylor. Average score: 74.4-68.6. Jacks' chances to win: 33 percent.

[Bru-win]

Re: Baylor

Congrats on a fine season, a great Summit tourney and a well-deserved bid to the NCAAs.

[slosho]

Re: Baylor

I'll be in Pierre for a meeting on Thursday. Can anyone from Pierre comment on the availability of TruTV out there? Any suggestions on a place where SDSU fans might be gathering to watch the game in Pierre?

You could also hit up Jake's place... better than the longbranch and less expensive then Pub-34

[Prairiehaas]

Re: Baylor

Perhaps the apples to apples comparison would be to other mid-major conferences where men's BB budgets are less than $5 million/yr?

While, yes, there are 2 quality teams in the Summit League, you have to see why fans of Big 12 teams that probably haven't seen a single Summit League game (maybe ever), would look down on it.

BIG 12 RPIs
6. Kansas 27-6
8. Baylor 26-7
10. Missouri 30-4
33. Iowa State 22-10
49. Kansas State 21-10
51. Texas 20-13
122. Oklahoma State 14-18
139. Oklahoma 15-16
165. Texas A&M 14-18
240. Texas Tech 8-23
AVERAGE - 82.3

BIG 12 Strength of Schedule Rankings
10. Baylor
11. Kansas
19. Texas
29. Oklahoma State
39. Iowa State
56. Kansas State
60. Texas A&M
64. Oklahoma
69. Missouri
71. Texas Tech
AVERAGE - 42.8

SUMMIT RPIs
42. South Dakota State 25-7
48. Oral Roberts 27-6
141. Oakland 16-15
151. Western Illinois 14-14
183. North Dakota State 15-13
210. IUPUI 12-18
227. Southern Utah 12-16
267. UMKC 9-20
279. IPFW 8-19
291. South Dakota 7-18
AVERAGE - 183.9

Summit Strength of Schedule Rankings
137. Oakland
143. Western Illinois
152. IUPUI
179. South Dakota State
188. Oral Roberts
194. UMKC
205. IPFW
222. Southern Utah
228. North Dakota State
247. South Dakota
AVERAGE - 189.5

[mango4]

Re: Baylor

I'll be in Pierre for a meeting on Thursday. Can anyone from Pierre comment on the availability of TruTV out there? Any suggestions on a place where SDSU fans might be gathering to watch the game in Pierre?

TruTV is on channel 42 on Midco in Pierre. People may be at the Longbranch or the Pub out by the golf course. I would join you but I'm headed to Rapid City for state basketball.

[Southeast]

Re: Baylor

I'll be in Pierre for a meeting on Thursday. Can anyone from Pierre comment on the availability of TruTV out there? Any suggestions on a place where SDSU fans might be gathering to watch the game in Pierre?

[filbert]

Re: Baylor

Having seen Texas Tech on TV on a number of occasions, they would have struggled to win a lot of games in the Summit League--I'd say the RPI is probably a fairly accurate measure in their case.

SDSU and ORU both would likely have been upper-division teams in the Big 12--probably not much above .500 but definitely not bottom-feeders either. Putting both of them in the Iowa State/K-State/Texas tier of teams is probably where they would have finished.

Several teams in the Summit: Oakland, Western Illinois, IUPUI mainly--got significantly stronger as the season went on, in the conference season, so that their improvement isn't represented in either the RPI or the strength of schedule (both of which are skewed towards success in the early, non-conference portion of the schedule, at least on a conference-wide basis).

The problem with both RPI and strength of schedule as measures of team strengths is that after the conference seasons begin, both naturally tend to regress towards the mean of whatever conference a team happens to be in, conflating conference-wide and individual team measures. (This is why stats that include margin-of-victory like Sagarin or KenPom provide a better overall guide to relative individual team strength than RPI--this tends to retain a larger measure of individual team strength vs. conference mean strength).