Gonzagas actual numbers

mtsuhog85

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 19, 2007
10,876
15,126
113
GA
Team
Arkansas
Duke has just as a high ceiling as Gonzaga. We are title contenders. But, Gonzaga is much more consistent than Duke. They've never lost to a sub-50 team in the past 5 years. Duke has lost to 3 sub-50 teams alone this year. No, I don't believe Gonzaga is losing 4 ACC games. Maybe 2.

And you're taking too much away from one game in November.

It's the same thing as Boise St in football beating a powerhouse. Game prepping for 1 game every 2-3 days is totally different than game prepping for 1 every other week.

The Ncaat is the great equalizer, but being a high rated seed cures lots of problems. Over-inflating the WCC RPI helps give Gonzaga that top seed.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
It's the same thing as Boise St in football beating a powerhouse. Game prepping for 1 game every 2-3 days is totally different than game prepping for 1 every other week.

The Ncaat is the great equalizer, but being a high rated seed cures lots of problems. Over-inflating the WCC RPI helps give Gonzaga that top seed.

Here are the tournament wins since 2015. In parenthesis, I've labeled the number of times the schools were a 1 or 2 seed. So, Gonzaga has 3 more wins than everyone else... and they were a 1/2 seed just as much as Villanova, UNC, Duke, Kansas and Virginia.

NCAA Tournament Wins Since 2015 (Parenthesis = # of times a school was a 1 or 2 seed)
Gonzaga- 20 (4)
Villanova- 17 (4)
UNC- 16 (4)
Duke- 15 (4)
Kansas- 13 (4)
Kentucky- 13 (3)
Michigan- 12 (2)
Oregon- 12 (2)
Virginia- 11 (4)


Maybe, just maybe you should consider giving them credit for being one of the most consistent programs for the past 6-8 years.
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
11,338
7,822
113
Team
Kansas
It's the same thing as Boise St in football beating a powerhouse. Game prepping for 1 game every 2-3 days is totally different than game prepping for 1 every other week.

The Ncaat is the great equalizer, but being a high rated seed cures lots of problems. Over-inflating the WCC RPI helps give Gonzaga that top seed.
Being a slightly lower seed is a foolish thing to argue about. The higher seed might be the difference in advancing one extra round but it's not going to get a team into the title game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

mtsuhog85

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 19, 2007
10,876
15,126
113
GA
Team
Arkansas
Being a slightly lower seed is a foolish thing to argue about. The higher seed might be the difference in advancing one extra round but it's not going to get a team into the title game.

Dumbest statement ever.

Might wanna tell those 64 coaches that seeding doesn't matter.

Hogs have played the eventual NC in around 3/4 of tournaments they've appeared in.

Yeah, seeding doesn't matter.
 

FaithPlusOne

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Mar 18, 2017
2,720
5,127
113
Haven't looked up the numbers, but I'm 100% confident that number is not accurate.

2021 and 2017, yes.

2000, 2001, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2015, 2018, no.

So, 2 of the last 3 they were in. No other time for a while. There was a stretch in the 90s where they had a few.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
Okay, I take it back. I actually do have a spreadsheet which details the most times lost to the National Champion.

Kansas- 14
Duke- 12
Utah- 11
UNC- 10
Kentucky- 9
UCLA- 9
Michigan- 9
Villanova- 9
Oklahoma- 8
Ohio State- 7

Arkansas ain't in the top 10.

They've lost 6 times to the NC. 1977, 1978, 1993, 1995, 2017, 2021.

33 Tournament appearances. So, 6/33 = 18.2%
 
Last edited:

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
Looks to me like Utah might be the unluckiest team in NCAA Tournament history. Kansas, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, and UCLA are going to be there, of course, because you're more likely to face the national champion in the latter rounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: englandnu

AuHoosier420

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 9, 2008
28,303
8,579
113
Auburn lost by a combined two points to the eventual national champion in two of our last three tourney appearance. Uva by 1 point in 2019. Syracuse by 1 point in 2003.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
Here are Utah's 11 losses to the eventual national champion. And this doesn't even list all of their tournament losses to Kentucky lol.

2015- Duke, Sweet 16
2000- Michigan State, Round of 32
1998- Kentucky, National Championship
1996- Kentucky, Sweet 16
1983- NC State, Sweet 16
1966- UTEP, Final Four
1961- Cincinnati, Final Four
1959- California, Sweet 16
1956- San Francisco, Elite 8
1955- San Francisco- Sweet 16
1945- Oklahoma State- Elite 8 (Utah was the defending champs)

From 1993-2005, Utah lost to Kentucky 6 times in the tournament (93, 96, 97, 98, 03, 05). Sheeesh! That's some bad luck. Not that any of those Utah teams could have won the title, outside of maybe 97 or 98.
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
11,338
7,822
113
Team
Kansas
Dumbest statement ever.

Might wanna tell those 64 coaches that seeding doesn't matter.

Hogs have played the eventual NC in around 3/4 of tournaments they've appeared in.

Yeah, seeding doesn't matter.
Maybe you missed the "slightly lower" part.

To pretend that getting a 2 or 3 instead of a 1 is the difference between one team going all the way and the other getting bounced early is ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
Title % by seed
1- 62%
2- 14%
3-12%
4-2%

Hot damn if you think you're happy about a 4 seed don't be!

Are 4 seeds typically as good as 1 seeds?

On the S-Curve you're looking at teams 13-16. Typically just outside the range of your most likely contenders.

Obviously 4 seeds have a much tougher path. I think 1 seeds are winning the title at a higher rate has more to do with the fact that you're dealing with a dominant team, whereas 4 seeds are good teams, which usually have a ceiling of the Final Four.

Here's one of the more interesting tournament stats.

2nd Round Wins
8 seeds- 13
9 seeds- 7
10 seed- 23
11 seed- 24

10-11 seeds have more than double the 2nd Round wins as 8-9 seeds. The 8/9 seeds are getting crushed in the 2nd Round by the 1s. Collectively, they're winning less than 14% of the time (20-124). And it makes sense because they're playing a top 4 team.

10/11 seeds, on the other hand, are a combined 47-64 (42.3%) in the Round of 32. The 10-11 seeds are presumably worse than the 8-9 seeds. But, your odds of advancing to the Sweet 16 are much, much higher as a 10 or 11 seed if you face a 2/3 seed in the 2nd Round.

Edit: I was looking at this page for the tournament records, which I believe goes back to when the field expanded to 64 teams in 1985. I added on the 2021 numbers myself. Looks like your page goes back to 1979, when seeds were first introduced. So, there are some slight discrepancies in the numbers.
 
Last edited:

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
Anybody notice Nebraska whip the top B10 team the other day?

Bad loss. Makes me feel a lot better about Duke losing the other night.

Wisconsin without Johnny Davis is essentially an NIT team. He's that valuable. To be fair, Wisconsin was losing in the 2nd half when Davis left the game.
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
11,338
7,822
113
Team
Kansas
Title % by seed
1- 62%
2- 14%
3-12%
4-2%

Hot damn if you think you're happy about a 4 seed don't be!
Well, duh....elite teams tend to be 1s and an elite team often wins it all.

But the argument being made is basically that the same team would have failed if they were a seed or two lower. That's silly.
 

Ipartiedwithhopgood

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2011
20,375
5,828
113
Are 4 seeds typically as good as 1 seeds?

On the S-Curve you're looking at teams 13-16. Typically just outside the range of your most likely contenders.

Obviously 4 seeds have a much tougher path. I think 1 seeds are winning the title at a higher rate has more to do with the fact that you're dealing with a dominant team, whereas 4 seeds are good teams, which usually have a ceiling of the Final Four.

Here's one of the more interesting tournament stats.

2nd Round Wins
8 seeds- 13
9 seeds- 7
10 seed- 23
11 seed- 24

10-11 seeds have more than double the 2nd Round wins as 8-9 seeds. The 8/9 seeds are getting crushed in the 2nd Round by the 1s. Collectively, they're winning less than 14% of the time (20-124). And it makes sense because they're playing a top 4 team.

10/11 seeds, on the other hand, are a combined 47-64 (42.3%) in the Round of 32. The 10-11 seeds are presumably worse than the 8-9 seeds. But, your odds of advancing to the Sweet 16 are much, much higher as a 10 or 11 seed if you face a 2/3 seed in the 2nd Round.

Edit: I was looking at this page for the tournament records, which I believe goes back to when the field expanded to 64 teams in 1985. I added on the 2021 numbers myself. Looks like your page goes back to 1979, when seeds were first introduced. So, there are some slight discrepancies in the numbers.
Great post brother I just put a little data into the thread but not much deep thought on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz

Bert Higginbotha

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 9, 2003
18,648
4,693
113
Smiths Grove, Kentucky
kentucky.rivals.com
They played 14 conference games. 2 were cancelled due to COVID issues - the road games against Pacific and LMU.



Yes, they played at Texas A&M two years ago and won by 30.
Texas A&M ain't done shit in the SEC. GEEZE. You go back two years ago and that is when Kentucky won the SEC by three games. A&M can't win anything in basketball in the SEC.

You pick Texas A&M to show Gonzaga's power? Why not Alabama beating the Zags at the Zags this year and then going 5th in the SEC. Why bring up A&M from two damned years ago?

The zags would suck in the SEC.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
Texas A&M ain't done shit in the SEC. GEEZE. You go back two years ago and that is when Kentucky won the SEC by three games. A&M can't win anything in basketball in the SEC.

You pick Texas A&M to show Gonzaga's power? Why not Alabama beating the Zags at the Zags this year and then going 5th in the SEC. Why bring up A&M from two damned years ago?

The zags would suck in the SEC.

Because I was told Gonzaga wouldn't win on the road in the SEC. Certainly you can't take too much from one game. But, it's the only SEC road game the Zags have played in the last decade. And they won handily. Not against a great team, but it was a team was above .500 in league play. That at least gives some indication that the Zags might be okay in the SEC.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Bert Higginbotha

RR30

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 16, 2013
4,898
5,502
113
Team
Kentucky
Gonzaga beat Texas A&M on the road, a school with a winning record in SEC play, just two years ago by 30 points.

I agree with you but I'm not sure a one off game matters much. The whistle road teams get in the SEC is shockingly bad. If Gonzaga had to play half of their games on the road in the SEC it would be a lot tougher than the WCC. Even bad teams like Vandy are different compared to most of the WCC.

I think it's obvious. Gonzaga would still be an elite team in a top conference but would suffer more losses. That could cost them a seed line or two most years as well.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
I agree with you but I'm not sure a one off game matters much. The whistle road teams get in the SEC is shockingly bad. If Gonzaga had to play half of their games on the road in the SEC it would be a lot tougher than the WCC. Even bad teams like Vandy are different compared to most of the WCC.

I think it's obvious. Gonzaga would still be an elite team in a top conference but would suffer more losses. That could cost them a seed line or two most years as well.

I've said all along that the Zags would lose 3-4 conference games in a good conference. In a year like 2018 where they were a 4 seed, they may have lost 6-7 conferences games.

A lot of people here seem to think the Zags are getting a 1 seed every year. That's hasn't been the case. 2017, 2019, and 2021. That's it. 2017 and 2021 teams made the title game. 2019 they lost a close one in the Regional Finals to Texas Tech. They were contenders all three years.

On the flip side, teams from power conferences are given a higher margin for error. Gonzaga was 30-4 in 2018 and was given a 4 seed. Meanwhile, UNC was 25-10 that same year and awarded with a 2 seed. Yes, the SOS was vastly different between the two. And maybe the committee got it right. But, how do you quantify all the data which is hardly comparable? UNC had a lot of impresses wins in 2018.. but they also had 10 losses to account for.
 

Montana81

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 12, 2004
6,952
1,422
113
I've said all along that the Zags would lose 3-4 conference games in a good conference. In a year like 2018 where they were a 4 seed, they may have lost 6-7 conferences games.

A lot of people here seem to think the Zags are getting a 1 seed every year. That's hasn't been the case. 2017, 2019, and 2021. That's it. 2017 and 2021 teams made the title game. 2019 they lost a close one in the Regional Finals to Texas Tech. They were contenders all three years.

On the flip side, teams from power conferences are given a higher margin for error. Gonzaga was 30-4 in 2018 and was given a 4 seed. Meanwhile, UNC was 25-10 that same year and awarded with a 2 seed. Yes, the SOS was vastly different between the two. And maybe the committee got it right. But, how do you quantify all the data which is hardly comparable? UNC had a lot of impresses wins in 2018.. but they also had 10 losses to account for.

And a lot of people complained about unc getting a 2 seed that year as well. That was a joke and a gift from a selection committee full of guys with heavy ACC ties. UNC then preceded to get molly whopped by texas a&m in the 2nd round was it?

also power conference teams don’t always get more room for error. Duke, who we all hate, could be a 5 loss 2 seed this year despite actually beating Gonzaga and Kentucky(potentially both 1 seeds).
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
And a lot of people complained about unc getting a 2 seed that year as well. That was a joke and a gift from a selection committee full of guys with heavy ACC ties. UNC then preceded to get molly whopped by texas a&m in the 2nd round was it?

Well, they had 14 Quad 1 wins. That was the reason why they were considered for a 2 seed.

But yes, I tend to think they were a bit overvalued. And they ran into a buzzsaw against A&M.
 

Ipartiedwithhopgood

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2011
20,375
5,828
113
Seeding these teams can be slippery some years much easier than others.

The introduction of the computer # crunching has probably improved the process you guys are probably following all that closer than I am.
 

Montana81

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 12, 2004
6,952
1,422
113
Seeding these teams can be slippery some years much easier than others.

The introduction of the computer # crunching has probably improved the process you guys are probably following all that closer than I am.

i just want them to pick one thing or the other and stick with it. Either use quad wins or use net. but they use one to justify where one team is while ignoring it in their justification of another.

Arizona is a good example this year. Why isn’t arizona being punished for lack of quad 1 wins versus other teams but Duke is?

If the reasoning is eye test or zona has performed better, better MOV, better computer ratings etc that’s fine. If that’s how it’s going to be then just take the top 4 teams in the NET.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AuHoosier420

AuHoosier420

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 9, 2008
28,303
8,579
113
i just want them to pick one thing or the other and stick with it. Either use quad wins or use net. but they use one to justify where one team is while ignoring it in their justification of another.

Arizona is a good example this year. Why isn’t arizona being punished for lack of quad 1 wins versus other teams but Duke is?

If the reasoning is eye test or zona has performed better, better MOV, better computer ratings etc that’s fine. If that’s how it’s going to be then just take the top 4 teams in the NET.
Good post
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert Higginbotha

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
11,338
7,822
113
Team
Kansas
I will say that I'd like to have the luxury of playing more weak teams throughout the conference season. It allows you to rest key players and experiment more with rotations. KU is gassed right now, especially after being forced to squeeze in a makeup game and play four games in a week. As a result, Agbaji nearly went 0-fer the other day and it almost cost them the conference title. He has no legs and wasn't even close on a lot of his jumpshots. Harris has played too many minutes too, although that's partly due to injuries to the other two PGs.

A lot of KU fans are actually hoping for an early exit from the Big 12 tourney and/or want Bill to sit some of the starters, even though it would probably cost them a chance at a 1 seed. Would be nice to be as fresh as Gonzaga likely is. It also would have been nice to get more minutes for bench players with potential like Clemence, Yesufu and Adams.
 

kyjeff1

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2012
5,232
4,235
113
Gonzaga beat Texas A&M on the road, a school with a winning record in SEC play, just two years ago by 30 points.
That was 2 years ago.

THIS year, they lost to Alabama in their own backyard and it wasn't close. Check Alabama's schedule. Heck, Georgia has 1 league win… .Alabama.

You just can't defend Gonzaga's road schedule this year. I think they have played 6 total road games… .total… ..all against mid major competition… . in high school gyms (sans BYU) and actually lost one of those road games to a very small and unathletic smc team.

If Gonzaga had to play in the SEC, BIG10 and B12, they would not be in play for a 1 seed, they would get everyone's best shot. Just like UK, KU, duke, Auburn, Arkansas, Baylor and UT get.

Getting a WCC's best shot, is not the same as getting everyone’s best shot in a power 5 conference in karge arenas on the road. The metrics don't compensate for a lot of things, road environments are one of those things.

There's a reason UK, UT, AU and Ark, only have 1 home loss combined this year.

This years Gonzaga team is just so much bigger and strongerthan the competition theyre playing in the WCC, so their offense looks all world, but beyond Chet, Timme and Nembhard, there is a drop off. This isn’t their 2017 or 2021 team.
 

kyjeff1

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2012
5,232
4,235
113
Well, they had 14 Quad 1 wins. That was the reason why they were considered for a 2 seed.

But yes, I tend to think they were a bit overvalued. And they ran into a buzzsaw against A&M.
The quad 1 wins argument is so bad. Quad 1 needs levels. Winning a game by 1 point at St Louis should not hold the same value as winning at top 5 Kansas by 18.

All Q1 wins are not equal, not by a long shot.
 

kyjeff1

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2012
5,232
4,235
113
I would love to see Gonzaga play (UK's 2021/22 schedule):
@ Auburn
@ UT
@ Vandy (don't laugh, trust me)
@ Bama
@ Kansas
@ Arkansas
@ LSU
Bama
UT
@ Florida (fighting for the NCAAT)
Florida
LSU
@ aTm
Duke
@ Notre Dame

Anyone that thinks this Gonzaga team would even be in contention for a 2 seed, is just being a homer.

You can do this with Kansas' schedule, Baylor's schedule, Tennessee's schedule and Arkansas' schedule. All of those teams had it really rough this year. You can list a few BIG10 teams schedules too.

Don't do it with Arizona's schedule though.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
That was 2 years ago.

THIS year, they lost to Alabama in their own backyard and it wasn't close.

Yes, I'm well aware that it was 2 ago. I only mentioned it because it's literally the only SEC road game they've played in the past decade.

And don't you think your Alabama comment is a bit disingenuous? Actually, very disingenuous. It was a 4-point game when they came to the under 4 minute TV timeout. Making 13 threes, especially for a below-average shooting team, certainly helped their cause.

Check Alabama's schedule. Heck, Georgia has 1 league win… .Alabama.

And what does Georgia have to do with Gonzaga? Do you think winning at Georgia is just as hard as winning at Saint Mary's?

You just can't defend Gonzaga's road schedule this year. I think they have played 6 total road games… .total… ..all against mid major competition… . in high school gyms (sans BYU) and actually lost one of those road games to a very small and unathletic smc team.

It's true, they're taking the Duke route, just playing neutral court games OOC. But, they still have 3 Quad 1 road wins. And here's a stat worth considering.

Record against Top 50 Teams Away from Home Court
Gonzaga: 5-3, 62.5%
Auburn: 3-3, 50.0%
Kentucky: 3-6, 33.3%
Tennessee: 2-7, 22.2%
Arkansas: 1-4, 20.0%

I know. I know. It's because the SEC crowds are so daunting.

But as I said previously in this very thread, if the home court is such a big factor, how come there wasn't a material difference in road winning percentage from 2021, a year without fans, to a typical year?

Road winning percentages from the last 3 seasons
2020- 35.16%
2021- 39.25% (no fans)
2022- 37.87%

If Gonzaga had to play in the SEC, BIG10 and B12, they would not be in play for a 1 seed, they would get everyone's best shot. Just like UK, KU, duke, Auburn, Arkansas, Baylor and UT get.

I've said multiple times that Gonzaga would lose 3-4 times in a good conference. And heck, Auburn and Arkansas only played 4 road games against top 50 teams all season long. So, it kind of seems like I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the SEC when I say Gonzaga would lose 3-4 games, most likely all road games.


This years Gonzaga team is just so much bigger and strongerthan the competition theyre playing in the WCC, so their offense looks all world, but beyond Chet, Timme and Nembhard, there is a drop off. This isn’t their 2017 or 2021 team.

Uh.... What? You realize the gap has closed on Gonzaga considerably, right? Saint Mary's and San Francisco are both in the top 25 of the metrics.

I would agree that this team is most likely a notch below 2017 and 2017. However, there isn't a juggernaut team in college basketball. They have just as a high ceiling as anyone out there.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Bert Higginbotha

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 3, 2002
9,477
12,238
113
The quad 1 wins argument is so bad. Quad 1 needs levels. Winning a game by 1 point at St Louis should not hold the same value as winning at top 5 Kansas by 18.

All Q1 wins are not equal, not by a long shot.

Obviously not all wins are the same. But, the idea is every Quad 1 game is tough. In level of difficulty, a Quad 1 game should at bare minimum match the difficulty of playing an 11 seed or better in the NCAA Tournament.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lurkeraspect84

AuHoosier420

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 9, 2008
28,303
8,579
113
Yes, I'm well aware that it was 2 ago. I only mentioned it because it's literally the only SEC road game they've played in the past decade.

And don't you think your Alabama comment is a bit disingenuous? Actually, very disingenuous. It was a 4-point game when they came to the under 4 minute TV timeout. Making 13 threes, especially for a below-average shooting team, certainly helped their cause.



And what does Georgia have to do with Gonzaga? Do you think winning at Georgia is just as hard as winning at Saint Mary's?



It's true, they're taking the Duke route, just playing neutral court games OOC. But, they still have 3 Quad 1 road wins. And here's a stat worth considering.

Record against Top 50 Teams Away from Home Court
Gonzaga: 5-3, 62.5%
Auburn: 3-3, 50.0%
Kentucky: 3-6, 33.3%
Tennessee: 2-7, 22.2%
Arkansas: 1-4, 20.0%

I know. I know. It's because the SEC crowds are so daunting.

But as I said previously in this very thread, if the home court is such a big factor, how come there wasn't a material difference in road winning percentage from 2021, a year without fans, to a typical year?

Road winning percentages from the last 3 seasons
2020- 35.16%
2021- 39.25% (no fans)
2022- 37.87%



I've said multiple times that Gonzaga would lose 3-4 times in a good conference. And heck, Auburn and Arkansas only played 4 road games against top 50 teams all season long. So, it kind of seems like I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the SEC when I say Gonzaga would lose 3-4 games, most likely all road games.




Uh.... What? You realize the gap has closed on Gonzaga considerably, right? Saint Mary's and San Francisco are both in the top 25 of the metrics.

I would agree that this team is most likely a notch below 2017 and 2017. However, there isn't a juggernaut team in college basketball. They have just as a high ceiling as anyone out there.
San Francisco is the poster child of why the kenpom and net rankings are somewhat bullshit