patsweetpat said:

---

R90 said:

---

I've seen it in writing somewhere recently, that recent performance doesn't matter (unless there's an injury issue that will keep a key player out of the tournament).

---

Is there any chance you recall where you may have read that?

I see that the *men's* tournament committee has instituted a new ranking system ("NET") which equalizes early-season and late-season performance, but this article seems to indicate that the women's committee has not made such a switch.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/division-i-men-s-basketball-committee-adopts-new-ranking-system

---

Eh, you know what, I just now looked at the "Selection Sheet" for UCLA that WBB State posted and-- unlike in previous years-- there's no mention of recent wins or losses. So I'm thinking you're probably right. Yikes! Apologies for being dumb, above!

patsweetpat said:

---

Eh, you know what, I just now looked at the "Selection Sheet" for UCLA that WBB State posted and-- unlike in previous years-- there's no mention of recent wins or losses. So I'm thinking you're probably right. Yikes! Apologies for being dumb, above!

---

Not at all dumb. I can't keep all the details straight either.

It's a confusing system, and sometimes I think that's by design, so the committee can just end up doing whatever they want and rationalize it later.

I usually get the top seeds wrong, which tend to be the most political, where both the men's and women's committees seem to abandon their methods and respect the national polls in order to dodge public criticism.

patsweetpat said:

---

ncbears said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

I don't like title of thread
We are not on bubble

We are playing for seeding

Gotta get out of dreaded 8/9 spots

---

Creme still has Cal in the 8/9 game to face Notre Dame in the second round.
He also moves UCLA from a 7-10 to the 8-9.

---

I certainly don't expect any Bear fans to particularly care about this, but as a Bruin fan, I'm super-annoyed that after UCLA's win at Oregon (for which he placed UCLA in the 6-seed), the Bruins have gone 2-1, with the sole loss being a tight 3-point shortfall in Corvallis, and Charlie's reward for the Bruins is to knock 'em down to a 7-seed... and then to procedurally bump then down yet further, to an 8. A 3-point loss to OSU in Corvallis is worth *that* kind of a demotion? Really?

---

I too don't see UCLA as an 8.

I think that if the Pac-12 Tournament plays out according to seeding, then UCLA and ASU will be in the 6-7 range for the NCAA Tournament. And Cal would be in the 8/9 range.

But much will depend on all the conference tournaments, of course. Any team with a couple of good upsets could drastically improve their seed this year, because outside of the top 5-6 teams, I think there is quite a bit of parity and thus similar resumes.

But this also means that outside of avoiding the 8/9 seed (and playing a #1 in the second round), it might not make much difference if you face a 2 or a 3 in the second round. I don't think ASU or UCLA would be scared of any of the teams currently projected for the 2/3 seeds. And with Oregon/Stanford/OSU all projected in that range (which ASU and UCLA won't face in the second round), that leaves only a handful of other teams. Then it's about matchups.

As for Cal, how far would the Bears have to go in the Pac-12 Tourney to get to a 7-seed? Getting to the Final? Or would beating Stanford do it? I would think beating Stanford twice this season gets us to the 7th seed.

pearbear said:

---

...outside of avoiding the 8/9 seed (and playing a #1 in the second round), it might not make much difference if you face a 2 or a 3 in the second round. I don't think ASU or UCLA would be scared of any of the teams currently projected for the 2/3 seeds. And with Oregon/Stanford/OSU all projected in that range (which ASU and UCLA won't face in the second round), that leaves only a handful of other teams. Then it's about matchups.

---

This is a good point.

pearbear said:

---

it might not make much difference if you face a 2 or a 3 in the second round.

---

Using these power rankings: http://sonnymoorepowerratings.com/w-basket.htm
And the NCAA's latest top-16: https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-women/2019-03-04/womens-basketball-rankings-ncaa-tournament-top-16-reveal

1 BAYLOR 94.85 (1-seed)
2 NOTRE DAME 94.82 (1-seed)
3 CONNECTICUT 93.31 (1-seed)
4 OREGON 92.23 (2-seed)
5 MISSISSIPPI ST. 91.89 (2-seed)
6 LOUISVILLE 88.52 (1-seed)
7 MARQUETTE 87.23
8 IOWA ST. 85.31 (4-seed)
9 STANFORD 84.58 (2-seed)
10 OREGON ST. 84.05 (3-seed)
11 IOWA 83.10 (2-seed)
12 ARIZONA ST. 80.97
13 MARYLAND 80.65 (3-seed)
14 SOUTH CAROLINA 80.08 (3-seed)
15 SYRACUSE 79.85 (4-seed)
16 NORTH CAROLINA ST. 79.70 (3-seed)
17 UCLA 79.62
18 KENTUCKY 79.61
19 WEST VIRGINIA 79.18
20 TEXAS 78.81
21 MISSOURI 78.24
22 MIAMI FLORIDA 78.22 (4-seed)
23 TEXAS A&M 77.99 (4-seed)

29 CALIFORNIA 76.39
30 UTAH 76.30
34 SOUTHERN CAL 75.09
38 ARIZONA 74.46

The Pac-12 is severely underrated by the selection committee, according to the computer ratings. We didn't game the RPI nearly as well as the ACC did.
Pac-12 #1 Massey: https://www.masseyratings.com/cbw/ncaa-d1/ratings?c=1
Pac-12 #2 RPI: http://www.realtimerpi.com/rpi_conf_Women.html
(The key to boosting RPI is playing the best teams from weak conferences, because they'll have inflated win-loss records.)

Cal, as a 7-seed, going up against 2-seed Iowa would be an appealing matchup for the committee. Then Kristine Anigwe (6th scoring, 1st rebounding) would be matched up against Megan Gustafson (1st scoring, 4th rebounding). Both are contenders for national Player of the Year and the committee likes creating matchups like that.

Mathematically it would be about the best Cal could hope for as a 7. We wouldn't have to worry about getting Oregon or Stanford as a 2 because we're in the same conference.

Mississippi State would be the worst case for a potential 2nd round opponent, matching Anigwe up against PoY candidate 6'7" Teaira McCowan.

Getting a 6-seed would give us a significantly easier opponent if the Top-16 stays the same, as we wouldn't get matched against Oregon St. from the Pac-12.
The 2-seeds are 91.89 and 83.10.
The 3-seeds are 80.65, 80.08 and 79.70.

UCLA is more likely to get a 6-seed (or 5-seed) than we are, both because of their current RPI and because of the Anigwe matchup factor.

Interestingly, Kristine Anigwe is the only Naismith Trophy semifinalist not playing for a 1 or 2 seed:
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-women/2019-03-03/uconn-duo-oregons-sabrina-ionescu-headline-2019-womens-basketball

pearbear: Interestingly, Kristine Anigwe is the only Naismith Trophy semifinalist not playing for a 1 or 2 seed

And that's the problem. KA would have a better shot at winning the award if cal had the season I thought we would have

When is award given? End of regular season or post NCAA?

HoopDreams said:

---

When is award given? End of regular season or post NCAA?

---

http://naismithtrophy.com/keydates/

Voting to cut the the list from 10 to 4 lasts from March 8th-17th.

The 30-30 game came just in time. If we reach the Pac-12 tournament final and KA gets the single season rebounding record it would help her become one of the 4 finalists.

Final voting lasts from March 22nd-April 3rd.

If she shines in the tournament she can win the award.

Laughing

Russ Steinberg

Has Utah in Tournament

This sports writer has Cal in as a #9 playing #8 Rutgers

Laughing. Utah also in. It's all guess work.

Check out @HighPostHoops's Tweet:

Kookiebean said:

---

Laughing

Russ Steinberg

Has Utah in Tournament

This sports writer has Cal in as a #9 playing #8 Rutgers

Laughing. Utah also in. It's all guess work.

---

Yep, we're all just making educated guesses.

Utah and USC certainly deserve to be in based on the true strength of their teams, and I hope they make it. That's just not what the committee has historically valued.

I can't see Utah's #75 RPI being accepted with only one Quadrant 1 win. I don't think Steinberg is doing all of his homework.

None of the bracketologists seem to be considering USC, probably because of their 7-11 conference record. Cal got in two years ago with a 6-12 conference record, though, with a conference tournament win against 5-13 USC before a 15-point loss to Oregon St. USC's current #42 RPI is better than Cal's #56 was in 2017.

Re. Kristine's various nominations, I'd like to see her win this one:

http://www.hoophall.com/news/basketball-hall-of-fame-womens-basketball-coaches-association-narrow-watch-list-for-2019-lisa-leslie-award/

BearBint said:

---

Re. Kristine's various nominations, I'd like to see her win this one:

http://www.hoophall.com/news/basketball-hall-of-fame-womens-basketball-coaches-association-narrow-watch-list-for-2019-lisa-leslie-award/

---

I'd like to see her win them all, but Lisa Leslie seems to be her best chance for a national award.

For fun, imagine a regional bracket with

1-seed
Kalani Brown Baylor, or
Brianna Turner Notre Dame
2-seed
Teaira McCowan Mississippi St, or
Megan Gustafson Iowa
5-Seed
Beatrice Mompremier Miami
7-Seed
Kristine Anigwe California
8-Seed
Janelle Bailey North Carolina
9-Seed
Hallie Thome Michigan
10-Seed
Jordan Moore TCU
12-Seed
Channon Fluker CSUN

Re. R90's "I'd like to see her win them all, but Lisa Leslie seems to be her best chance for a national award.":

I agree, and I really like the idea of K.A.'s being associated with Lisa Leslie--both of them graceful, agile players and fierce competitors.