MBB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[UWRF]

Ollie White did not play last night and left RF really thin on the front line. He is battling the flu or something, he didnt play much against SP either. Without White, Guerin, and Udo the front court for the Falcons is very small. Manor was forced to play inside more than usual. Cherry and Rumpel exploited the continual mismatches.

[Greek Tragedy]

What happened with Udo?  You can't really use Guerin as an excuse or part of that example because he hasn't been with the team the whole year.  It's like Point complaining about something going wrong because we don't have Jared Jenkins. 

[UWRF]

I know I wasn't complaining. I was just making a point. The loss has become much more prevalent lately than it was earlier in the season, the Falcons can't defend the post and teams have begun to exploit that.

Udo is academically ineligible for the remainder of the season.

[badgerwarhawk]

I'm still the president of the Jerrel Harris For Player of the Year Club, but my vote is for Tony Mane.  He simply is just a scoring machine.  La Crosse could still get as high as 3rd as well.  I think that would help his cause.  

And I'm still on the Chris Davis club.  It would be unfortunate if he were to fall out of favor simply because his streak of double-doubles was ended.  Though he did add another one last night which I think gives him 12 or 13 out of 24 games this season.  One thing that Davis faces every night and Mane doesn't is double and even triple teaming everytime he touches the ball.  Taking that into account the numbers he's been able to put up this year are remarkable.  Plus WHITEWATER could also finish as high as third as well.  Without Davis this would likely have been a disasterous season for the WARHAWKS.  Though you can easily say the same thing about LaCrosse's season without Mane.

That being said I have to agree with you, Greek.  My hunch is that when it is all said and done Mane will get the nod and it would be a good choice.  

[BanditUWSP]

It appears that UWSP has clinched the #1 seed in the tourney.  If RF and Point are tied after Saturdays games, I think Point wins the tiebreakers.  First, head-to-head would be 1-1.  Next, UWL would also be 1-1 because Point would have to lose to them on Saturday to create the tie.  Point is 2-0 against UWW and would win that tiebreaker.  Platteville doesn't enter the mix because RF would have to beat them on Saturday to possibly create a tie with UWSP and thus giving them 1 more loss.  If Platteville beats RF, there can be no tie for 1st.  I've tried to go over every scenario but can't come up with any where Point can lose the #1 seed. 

[John Gleich]

It appears that UWSP has clinched the #1 seed in the tourney.  If RF and Point are tied after Saturdays games, I think Point wins the tiebreakers.  First, head-to-head would be 1-1.  Next, UWL would also be 1-1 because Point would have to lose to them on Saturday to create the tie.  Point is 2-0 against UWW and would win that tiebreaker.  Platteville doesn't enter the mix because RF would have to beat them on Saturday to possibly create a tie with UWSP and thus giving them 1 more loss.  If Platteville beats RF, there can be no tie for 1st.  I've tried to go over every scenario but can't come up with any where Point can lose the #1 seed. 

I can't think up a scenario where it won't happen either... but it is as-yet-unposted on the WIAC site...  The slot that is set is #6 Superior.

http://www.wiacsports.com/sports/2011/1/10/MBB_0110114402.aspx?path=mbball

[John Gleich]

I'm going to talk through some scenarios to see if I can figure out a way that RF is the 1 seed and Point is the 2 seed...

The only way this is a possibility is if LaX beats Point and RF beats Platteville...

So SP and RF are 13-3, LaX is 10-6, Platteville is 8-8.  The un-reported game (the one that matters) is Sup @ Whitewater.  I'll ignore the fact that Whitewater has won 19 out of the last 20 match ups for a second and look at both results.

If Sup wins, then WW will be 9-7.  If WW wins, WW will be 10-6 (tied with WW).


Here's the verbage on tie breakers, directly from the conference site:

Teams will be seeded 1 through 6 based on the final regular season conference standings.  If necessary, the following tie-breaker criteria will be applied to determine entry into the tournament or to seed teams with identical records:

1.     Head-to-head competition between tied teams.
2.     Cumulative Won/Loss record vs. teams placed higher in the conference standings.
3.     Record vs. teams in conference standings in descending order (i.e., #1 seed, #2 seed).
[Note:  When comparing tied teams against positions lower in the standings which are also tied, those "lower tied positions" shall be considered as a "single position" for purposes of comparison.  Example:  Team A and Team B tied for second would compare against Team X and Team Y tied for sixth as follows: Team A would compare its combined record against both X and Y versus Team B's combined record against both X and Y.]

4.     Team with the best road record in conference games.
5.     Coin toss conducted by the WIAC commissioner.

[Note:  If two teams remain tied after a third or other teams are eliminated, the tiebreaker reverts to criteria No. 1.  For example, if four teams are tied with 4-2, 3-3, 3-3, 2-4 head -to-head records, the 4-2 receives highest seed and the 2-4 team the lowest seed in the grouping.  Since two teams remain tied at 3-3, we revert back to criteria #1 (head-to-head) between those two teams and then (if necessary) utilize the remaining criteria in order.]

1. SP and RF would be 1-1, head to head, not resolved
2. Cumulative record against teams higher (N/A)
3. Record vs. teams in descending order:

So, two scenarios... if LaX and WW are tied, and if LaX is 2, WW is 3.

Either way, it comes down to the results against Whitewater, because SP swept the Warhawks and RF split (and both teams split against LaX).

So Point's got the #1 seed all wrapped up.




This is pretty much what BanditUWSP said... I just wanted to run through it more fully!

[frodotwo]

I'm going to talk through some scenarios to see if I can figure out a way that RF is the 1 seed and Point is the 2 seed...

The only way this is a possibility is if LaX beats Point and RF beats Platteville...

So SP and RF are 13-3, LaX is 10-6, Platteville is 8-8.  The un-reported game (the one that matters) is Sup @ Whitewater.  I'll ignore the fact that Whitewater has won 19 out of the last 20 match ups for a second and look at both results.

If Sup wins, then WW will be 9-7.  If WW wins, WW will be 10-6 (tied with WW).


Here's the verbage on tie breakers, directly from the conference site:

Teams will be seeded 1 through 6 based on the final regular season conference standings.  If necessary, the following tie-breaker criteria will be applied to determine entry into the tournament or to seed teams with identical records:

1.     Head-to-head competition between tied teams.
2.     Cumulative Won/Loss record vs. teams placed higher in the conference standings.
3.     Record vs. teams in conference standings in descending order (i.e., #1 seed, #2 seed).
[Note:  When comparing tied teams against positions lower in the standings which are also tied, those "lower tied positions" shall be considered as a "single position" for purposes of comparison.  Example:  Team A and Team B tied for second would compare against Team X and Team Y tied for sixth as follows: Team A would compare its combined record against both X and Y versus Team B's combined record against both X and Y.]

4.     Team with the best road record in conference games.
5.     Coin toss conducted by the WIAC commissioner.

[Note:  If two teams remain tied after a third or other teams are eliminated, the tiebreaker reverts to criteria No. 1.  For example, if four teams are tied with 4-2, 3-3, 3-3, 2-4 head -to-head records, the 4-2 receives highest seed and the 2-4 team the lowest seed in the grouping.  Since two teams remain tied at 3-3, we revert back to criteria #1 (head-to-head) between those two teams and then (if necessary) utilize the remaining criteria in order.]

1. SP and RF would be 1-1, head to head, not resolved
2. Cumulative record against teams higher (N/A)
3. Record vs. teams in descending order:

So, two scenarios... if LaX and WW are tied, and if LaX is 2, WW is 3.

Either way, it comes down to the results against Whitewater, because SP swept the Warhawks and RF split (and both teams split against LaX).

So Point's got the #1 seed all wrapped up.




This is pretty much what BanditUWSP said... I just wanted to run through it more fully!

YUP

[John Gleich]

I'm working through the 3/4/5 scenarios right now...

[John Gleich]

Darn... I went to lunch with most of it finished and the power went out!  Lost it all!

Back to square one...

To reiterate, we're looking at the different scenarios for the 3, 4, and 5 seeds, involving LaX, WW, and Platte.


There are 8 scenarios.  For simplicity, we'll talk about the 4 where La Crosse wins first, then deal with the 4 where La Crosse loses... just because.  And, for purposes of tiebreakers, all were season splits (WW and LaX, WW and Platte, Platte and LaX), so we'll automatically go to the second criteria


Scenario A   All three win
1. Point (13-3)
2. RF (12-4)
3. LaX (10-6)
4. WW (10-6)
5. Platte (9-7)
6. Sup (6-10)

LaX gets the 3 seed (2-2 against Point/RF) and WW the 4 seed (1-3 against Point/RF).


Scenario B   LaX and WW wins, Platte loses
1. Point (13-3)
2. RF (13-3)
3. LaX (10-6)
4. WW (10-6)
5. Platte (8-8)
6. Sup (6-10)

LaX gets the 3 seed (2-2 against Point/RF) and WW the 4 seed (1-3 against Point/RF).


Scenario C   LaX wins, and WW and Platte lose
1. Point (13-3)
2. RF (13-3)
3. LaX (10-6)
4. WW (9-7)
5. Platte (8-8)
6. Sup (7-9)

Pretty straight forward there... no ties 'cept for the top, and that's already been figured out.


Scenario D   LaX wins, and WW loses and Platte wins
1. Point (13-3)
2. RF (12-4)
3. LaX (10-6)
4. Platte (9-7)
5. WW (9-7)
6. Sup (7-9)

LaX is the 3, WW and Platte are tied.  Moving to criteria 2, cumulative record against teams above...

Platte 3-3 (1-1 vs. Point, 1-1 vs. RF, 1-1 vs. LaX)
WW 2-4 (0-2 vs. Point, 1-1 vs. RF, 1-1 vs. LaX)

Platte is the 4, WW is the 5.


Scenario E   All three lose
1. Point (14-2)
2. RF (13-3)
3. LaX (9-7)
4. WW (9-7)
5. Platte (8-8)
6. Sup (7-9)

Second criteria:   Wash; LaX (1-3 against Point/RF) and WW (1-3 against Point/RF)
Third criteria: Record vs. Each seed:

Point (LaX 0-2, WW 0-2)
RF (LaX 1-1, WW 1-1)
Platte (LaX 1-1, WW 1-1)
Sup (LaX 2-0, WW 1-1)

So, because, in this situation, Superior beat WW, LaX would be the 3 and WW the 4.



Scenario F   LaX and WW lose, Platte wins
1. Point (14-2)
2. RF (12-4)
3. Platte (9-7)
4. LaX (9-7)
5. WW (9-7)
6. Sup (7-9)

This is the most involved...  3 way tie.

All three split, so move to second criteria, record vs. teams higher:

Platte 2-2
LaX 1-3
WW 1-3

Platte becomes the #3 seed, and things revert back to the first criteria.  LaX and WW still split...

Second criteria:

LaX 2-4
WW 2-4

Third Criteria (record vs each seed)

Point (LaX 0-2, WW 0-2)
RF (LaX 1-1, WW 1-1)
Platte (LaX 1-1, WW 1-1)
Sup (LaX 2-0, WW 1-1)

So, because, in this situation, Superior beat WW, LaX would be the 4 and WW the 5.


Scenario G  WW wins, LaX and Platte lose
1. Point (14-2)
2. RF (13-3)
3. WW (10-6)
4. LaX (9-7)
5. Platte (8-8)
6. Sup (6-10)

Pretty straight forward there... Similar to Scenario C


Scenario H   WW wins, and LaX loses and Platte wins
1. Point (14-2)
2. RF (12-4)
3. WW (10-6)
4. Platte (9-7)
5. LaX (9-7)
6. Sup (6-10)

WW is the 3, LaX and Platte are tied.  Moving to criteria 2, cumulative record against teams above...

Platte 3-3 (1-1 vs. Point, 1-1 vs. RF, 1-1 vs. WW)
LaX 2-4 (0-2 vs. Point, 1-1 vs. RF, 1-1 vs. WW)

Platte is the 4, LaX is the 5.




So, in short...  

LaX is a 3 if they win.  They are a 4 if Platte wins and WW and LaX lose, and they are a 5 with a loss and a Whitewater and Platteville win.

Whitewater is a 3 with a win and a LaX loss.  They are a 4 if Platte loses or if WW and LaX both win and a 5 with a loss and a Platte win.

Platteville is a 3 with a win and a WW and LaX loss.   They are a 4 with a win and a loss by either WW or LaX and a 5 with a loss or if all 3 win.

[Greek Tragedy]

I have a headache now. 

[John Gleich]

Let me help you with that...

Whitewater beat Superior 79-63... so our 8 possibilities are how 4...

Scenario A   All three win
1. Point (13-3)
2. RF (12-4)
3. LaX (10-6)
4. WW (10-6)
5. Platte (9-7)
6. Sup (6-10)

LaX gets the 3 seed (2-2 against Point/RF) and WW the 4 seed (1-3 against Point/RF).


Scenario B   LaX and WW wins, Platte loses
1. Point (13-3)
2. RF (13-3)
3. LaX (10-6)
4. WW (10-6)
5. Platte (8-8)
6. Sup (6-10)

LaX gets the 3 seed (2-2 against Point/RF) and WW the 4 seed (1-3 against Point/RF).



Scenario G  WW wins, LaX and Platte lose
1. Point (14-2)
2. RF (13-3)
3. WW (10-6)
4. LaX (9-7)
5. Platte (8-8)
6. Sup (6-10)

Pretty straight forward there... Similar to Scenario C


Scenario H   WW wins, and LaX loses and Platte wins
1. Point (14-2)
2. RF (12-4)
3. WW (10-6)
4. Platte (9-7)
5. LaX (9-7)
6. Sup (6-10)

WW is the 3, LaX and Platte are tied.  Moving to criteria 2, cumulative record against teams above...

Platte 3-3 (1-1 vs. Point, 1-1 vs. RF, 1-1 vs. WW)
LaX 2-4 (0-2 vs. Point, 1-1 vs. RF, 1-1 vs. WW)

Platte is the 4, LaX is the 5.




So, in short... 

LaX is a 3 if they win.  They are a 4 if Platte wins and WW and LaX lose, and they are a 5 with a loss and a Whitewater and Platteville win.

Whitewater is a 3 with a win and a LaX loss.  They are a 4 if Platte loses or if WW and LaX both win and a 5 with a loss and a Platte win.

Platteville is a 3 with a win and a WW and LaX loss.   They are a 4 with a win and a loss by either WW or LaX and a 5 with a loss or if all 3 win.

[Greek Tragedy]

Old School's All Conference starting five:

PG - Jerrel Harris - SP
SG - Tony Mane - LC
F - Chris Davis - WW
F - Jake Smith - SUP
F - John Flanigan - OSH

[fredfalcon]

Correction:  Platteville wins, in o.t., 62-58. Previous score was listed on WIAC site, RF 54-52 winners.

[buf]

Correction:  Platteville wins, in o.t., 62-58. Previous score was listed on WIAC site, RF 54-52 winners.

Yeah, the live stats had RF winning 54-52.  It was weird because the play by play had a foul on Voeltz with 1 second left with RF up (54-52).  But the scoreboard on live stats said the game was final.  I just figured maybe there was a bang-bang play at the buzzer and that the refs determined that the foul occured afterwards.  I guess the live stats froze right after the Voeltz foul.