2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

[kwcpantherfan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

Flattest half we've played in 2 years

[Taco Tico]

Goat meat for all 🐐

[alumnifan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

Oh, btw, the KWC women's team won their first Indoor Invitational at Depauw. They have some impressive athletes. It will be interesting to see how they do in the G-MAC Indoor Track and Field Championship.

Both Track and Field teams are improving. When will the new outdoor Track and Field complex be finished?

[alumnifan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

I already thought about the 4 - 5 seeds. A 4 seed is what I expected after the Michigan Tech road win. I just wanted revenge against UWP and I wanted KWC to play USI again. Now, it looks like Findlay will be our opener. That matchup is the future of the G-MAC. Bellarmine would love to get a shot at Findlay in the Regional. If that is Wesleyan's bracket, I like it. It's good exposure for D2 basketball in Kentucky.

[kwcpantherfan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

Agree 100%, except that #8 is perhaps the best seed of all if your other option is #9

Indeed.

[Knightmoves]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

If the seedings represented a significant gap in team strength then obviously alumnifan is correct in that you'd want to be as high a seed as possible, even if it was just a 4 or 5 rather than a 6. But I tend to agree with your point which I think rests on the premise that there is actually very little gap in team strengths seed to seed (in our region, at least) which means that by landing at 6 you get the advantage of the earliest possible matchup against the host school being in the regional finals. Obviously the same is true for the 3 seed. So to your point, it looks like in our region, where parity is king, the least desirable seeds to have are first #8, then #4/5.

Agree 100%, except that #8 is perhaps the best seed of all if your other option is #9

[KnightStalker]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

If the seedings represented a significant gap in team strength then obviously alumnifan is correct in that you'd want to be as high a seed as possible, even if it was just a 4 or 5 rather than a 6. But I tend to agree with your point which I think rests on the premise that there is actually very little gap in team strengths seed to seed (in our region, at least) which means that by landing at 6 you get the advantage of the earliest possible matchup against the host school being in the regional finals. Obviously the same is true for the 3 seed. So to your point, it looks like in our region, where parity is king, the least desirable seeds to have are first #8, then #4/5.

Exactamundo!

[kwcpantherfan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

I'm not sure why you would classify my statement as an untruth. First, it's an opinion and by definition not a matter of fact. Secondly, speaking with a forked tongue implies a desire to mislead, why would I mislead about my opinion? Thirdly, as to the substance of my opinion, it is based on the rather obvious fact that most teams would prefer to avoid the #1 seed playing at home, especially when there is likely little difference in quality bewteen the 3rd seed and the 4th and 5th seed. You tell me why it would be worse to be a 6th seed than a 4th or 5th seed?

If the seedings represented a significant gap in team strength then obviously alumnifan is correct in that you'd want to be as high a seed as possible, even if it was just a 4 or 5 rather than a 6. But I tend to agree with your point which I think rests on the premise that there is actually very little gap in team strengths seed to seed (in our region, at least) which means that by landing at 6 you get the advantage of the earliest possible matchup against the host school being in the regional finals. Obviously the same is true for the 3 seed. So to your point, it looks like in our region, where parity is king, the least desirable seeds to have are first #8, then #4/5.

[Knightmoves]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

As a native American might say, you speak with a forked tongue. No team would rather be a sixth or seven seed as opposed to a fourth seed.

I'm not sure why you would classify my statement as an untruth. First, it's an opinion and by definition not a matter of fact. Secondly, speaking with a forked tongue implies a desire to mislead, why would I mislead about my opinion? Thirdly, as to the substance of my opinion, it is based on the rather obvious fact that most teams would prefer to avoid the #1 seed playing at home, especially when there is likely little difference in quality bewteen the 3rd seed and the 4th and 5th seed. You tell me why it would be worse to be a 6th seed than a 4th or 5th seed?

[alumnifan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

As a native American might say, you speak with a forked tongue. No team would rather be a sixth or seven seed as opposed to a fourth seed.

[Knightmoves]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

That's your KWC paranoia talking. My suggestion was only a joke, but the only way KWC is out if they lose in their conf tournament is if the committee actually thought they lost on purpose. The added loss would not even have that significant effect on their PI compared to the other teams (almost all of which will have suffered a loss in their conf. tourney.) There is very little chance we will get an answer on the question, because KWC will win their tournament, but I for one would say they got screwed if a conf. tourney loss kept them out of the NCAA (assuming they win the rest of their other games).

[kwcpantherfan]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

Did you ever consider that KWC can screw up the whole bracket by intentionally losing in their conference tourney? There is no way that they still would not qualify for the tournament and they could get another one of their conference teams in.

I would almost guarantee you if KWC loses in the G-MAC tourney we will be left out.

[Knightmoves]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

Did you ever consider that KWC can screw up the whole bracket by intentionally losing in their conference tourney? There is no way that they still would not qualify for the tournament and they could get another one of their conference teams in.

[schnautza]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

With the #1 seed hosting, I think most teams would be better off being the 6th seed than the 4th seed. I would just prefer to stay out of the host's bracket. Ultimately, you have to beat some good teams to win the region, so I'm not sure it really matters.

I'd prefer it if you guys stay out of the host's bracket as well :)

[Knightmoves]

Re: 2016-2017 Kentucky Wesleyan basketball thread.

With the #1 seed hosting, I think most teams would be better off being the 6th seed than the 4th seed. I would just prefer to stay out of the host's bracket. Ultimately, you have to beat some good teams to win the region, so I'm not sure it really matters.