(01-22-2024 10:21 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote: Well they made it semi interesting. Still loving my -8.5
Technically I made my UC+7.5 points bets prior to reading this, but it's reassuring to see fading your picks still pay off!
In game is where it seems to be at. Grabbed UC +14 about 5 min in the game.
In game is about the only way I consistently make money. If there's a big swing early on, it makes sense to bet the other way. I was so disappointed with how we started that I completely forgot.
(01-22-2024 10:21 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote: Well they made it semi interesting. Still loving my -8.5
Technically I made my UC+7.5 points bets prior to reading this, but it's reassuring to see fading your picks still pay off!
In game is where it seems to be at. Grabbed UC +14 about 5 min in the game.
In game is about the only way I consistently make money. If there's a big swing early on, it makes sense to bet the other way. I was so disappointed with how we started that I completely forgot.
I've had a good fall betting on in-game drive result props in NFL games as well.
(01-22-2024 11:44 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: So the hardest 6 game stretch in modern uc history is over. Uc went 2-4.
Uc lost by 3 and 5 to the two most talented teams in the conference.
They went 2-2 against the teams in the talent range of uc.
They did what they had to but missed some great chances to do more.
A lot of work to do but this is an ncaa tournament team. Need to find a way to get to .500 or better in conference.
Q1 record: 1-5
Q1+2: 2-6
That’s not an NCAA tournament record.
Going to need at least 8 Q1/2 wins on Selection Sunday. Unfortunately, this isn't last year's B12 where every win helps the resume. A third of the remaining games are likely Q3 and do nothing to help us. Need to go at least 5-3 in these games and win the first round of the conference tournament:
@ Texas Tech
Vs Houston
Vs Iowa St
@ UCF
@ TCU
@ Houston
Vs KSU
@ OU
Getting to .500 or better in the B12 will normally have you as a tournament lock, but not when you'll be heading into February with only two good wins.
(01-22-2024 11:44 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: So the hardest 6 game stretch in modern uc history is over. Uc went 2-4.
Uc lost by 3 and 5 to the two most talented teams in the conference.
They went 2-2 against the teams in the talent range of uc.
They did what they had to but missed some great chances to do more.
A lot of work to do but this is an ncaa tournament team. Need to find a way to get to .500 or better in conference.
Q1 record: 1-5
Q1+2: 2-6
That’s not an NCAA tournament record.
Going to need at least 8 Q1/2 wins on Selection Sunday. Unfortunately, this isn't last year's B12 where every win helps the resume. A third of the remaining games are likely Q3 and do nothing to help us. Need to go at least 5-3 in these games and win the first round of the conference tournament:
@ Texas Tech
Vs Houston
Vs Iowa St
@ UCF
@ TCU
@ Houston
Vs KSU
@ OU
Getting to .500 or better in the B12 will normally have you as a tournament lock, but not when you'll be heading into February with only two good wins.
I don't think it's nearly that bleak. Using Bartorvik's teamcast feature I gave UC wins the next 3 games, which made their projection 20-11 (9-9). It had UC has the last 7 seed...well inside the bracket with a 91.3% chance of a bid.
I think 9-9 is very likely to get them in. It will likely have them in the 30s, minimal bad losses, and enough good wins.
Still a long way from Selection Sunday, but 8-10 looks good to me (though would likely need a first round win in the Big XII tournament).
7-11 looks awfully iffy. Add in two conference tournament wins (likely at least one of which would be a Q1/Q2 and against another bubble team) and there might be hope. So much can happen between now and then, however.
With our crappy OOC 7-11 is hosting a NIT game no matter what computer says. 8 wins is a maybe...depends on who else besides the bottom of the conference they beat going forward and how they do in the conference tourney.
(01-22-2024 11:44 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: So the hardest 6 game stretch in modern uc history is over. Uc went 2-4.
Uc lost by 3 and 5 to the two most talented teams in the conference.
They went 2-2 against the teams in the talent range of uc.
They did what they had to but missed some great chances to do more.
A lot of work to do but this is an ncaa tournament team. Need to find a way to get to .500 or better in conference.
Q1 record: 1-5
Q1+2: 2-6
That’s not an NCAA tournament record.
Going to need at least 8 Q1/2 wins on Selection Sunday. Unfortunately, this isn't last year's B12 where every win helps the resume. A third of the remaining games are likely Q3 and do nothing to help us. Need to go at least 5-3 in these games and win the first round of the conference tournament:
@ Texas Tech
Vs Houston
Vs Iowa St
@ UCF
@ TCU
@ Houston
Vs KSU
@ OU
Getting to .500 or better in the B12 will normally have you as a tournament lock, but not when you'll be heading into February with only two good wins.
I don't think it's nearly that bleak. Using Bartorvik's teamcast feature I gave UC wins the next 3 games, which made their projection 20-11 (9-9). It had UC has the last 7 seed...well inside the bracket with a 91.3% chance of a bid.
I think 9-9 is very likely to get them in. It will likely have them in the 30s, minimal bad losses, and enough good wins.
I wish I was that confident. They can get to 9-9 and have just 2 Q1 wins and 5 Q1/2 wins total. The Last 4 teams in Dayton the last few years have all had 7-10 Q1/2 wins and they barely made it. The teams with a very weak OOC schedule and not a lot of good wins, with plenty of chances, are easily left out by the committee.
(01-23-2024 12:19 PM)CincyBro Wrote: How about 7-11 or 8-10 which is more realistic......
Depends who is in that win total and how bad the losses are.
Can't stumble against the weaker teams on the schedule.
Gotta keep the losses close like we've been doing.
Manage to get a big win against Houston? Gigantic.
Don't forget the B12 tournament... Advance deep there and even a sub-par showing (7-11 or even 6-12) can be turned around.
Flame out in the First Round of the tournament and maybe even 9-9 starts looking a bit shaky depending on what happens in other Conferences.
Of course, the unspoken is: "Win the whole damn thing" and you remove all doubt.
(01-23-2024 12:19 PM)CincyBro Wrote: How about 7-11 or 8-10 which is more realistic......
Depends who is in that win total and how bad the losses are.
Can't stumble against the weaker teams on the schedule.
Gotta keep the losses close like we've been doing.
Manage to get a big win against Houston? Gigantic.
Don't forget the B12 tournament... Advance deep there and even a sub-par showing (7-11 or even 6-12) can be turned around.
Flame out in the First Round of the tournament and maybe even 9-9 starts looking a bit shaky depending on what happens in other Conferences.
Of course, the unspoken is: "Win the whole damn thing" and you remove all doubt.
Lunardi has 10 Big 12 teams in. So does the Bracket Matrix.
Barttorvik (which includes a projection based on expected record against your remaining games) has 9 Big 12 teams in.
With 9 or 10 out of 14 teams getting in, a .500 record in conference play will guarantee a tourney bid.
(01-23-2024 01:17 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote: Skillings should start some nights, but how is Coach to know which nights? He was hopeless out last game, then good again tonight.
If Simas keeps playing as poorly as he has been, it makes the decision easier. How long do you hang onto hope that Simas get hot? Last year he shot poorly for most of first half of the season, then went on a tear the second half, so there is precedent that he can turn in around.
But when Simas's man scores 20+ and grabs over half of his teams offensive rebounds, it makes it hard to justify keeping him in the game.
It's a tough situation. It's where losing CJ kills. They just desperately need someone to extend the defense and stop them from overhelping when we get it inside. Simas is capable of being a big time shooter. Even after this crazy slump he's still shooting about 34%. He shot 38% last year. They need that kind of production. They need him to make open shots and force defenses to worry about it more. Right now way too many of the inside shots are contested, often against double teams.
Yup, we desperately need a three point shooter, teams don't respect our three point shooting and just clog the paint. Simas can be that guy, but lately teams aren't even guarding him all that close and he's missing threes he made regularly in the past.
Shooting is usually improved on in the off-season, so at this point it's either Fredrick gets healthy, Simas breaks out of his slump or we are in trouble. I'd be tempted to give CJ Anthony a chance if he can shoot it as well as some have claimed, we need someone who scares the other team into extending their defense.
The big question is at what point (if ever) do you give up on Simas getting hot. Play a combination of Skillings and Reed, try to hold the other team under 60 and hope to score more than that with the chuck it and get the offensive rebound style offense. When Simas isn't scoring, he is such a big negative on the other end that it's tough to justify keeping him on the court.
(01-23-2024 01:17 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote: Skillings should start some nights, but how is Coach to know which nights? He was hopeless out last game, then good again tonight.
If Simas keeps playing as poorly as he has been, it makes the decision easier. How long do you hang onto hope that Simas get hot? Last year he shot poorly for most of first half of the season, then went on a tear the second half, so there is precedent that he can turn in around.
But when Simas's man scores 20+ and grabs over half of his teams offensive rebounds, it makes it hard to justify keeping him in the game.
The issue is, there is still some pretty good data that our offense runs better with Simas out there by a massive margin, even during the slump...and the defensive improvement with him on the bench isn't enough to compensate. So, I think you just have to ride him. Give him his 20-25 mintues and hope he finds his shot.
It's a tough situation. It's where losing CJ kills. They just desperately need someone to extend the defense and stop them from overhelping when we get it inside. Simas is capable of being a big time shooter. Even after this crazy slump he's still shooting about 34%. He shot 38% last year. They need that kind of production. They need him to make open shots and force defenses to worry about it more. Right now way too many of the inside shots are contested, often against double teams.
Yup, we desperately need a three point shooter, teams don't respect our three point shooting and just clog the paint. Simas can be that guy, but lately teams aren't even guarding him all that close and he's missing threes he made regularly in the past.
Shooting is usually improved on in the off-season, so at this point it's either Fredrick gets healthy, Simas breaks out of his slump or we are in trouble. I'd be tempted to give CJ Anthony a chance if he can shoot it as well as some have claimed, we need someone who scares the other team into extending their defense.
The big question is at what point (if ever) do you give up on Simas getting hot. Play a combination of Skillings and Reed, try to hold the other team under 60 and hope to score more than that with the chuck it and get the offensive rebound style offense. When Simas isn't scoring, he is such a big negative on the other end that it's tough to justify keeping him on the court.
/
Cincinnati at #7 Kansas Game Thread
