Debunking the conference tournament myth

by Mike Rutherford on Mar 10, 2008 11:06 AM EDT in News

Over the past few years, I've heard an increasing number of fans voice the opinion that their team's chances of making a deep run in March would be bettered if it lost early in its respective conference tournament. The two main points that these people use to defend their stance are: 1) sometimes a good team needs a loss before the big dance in order to restore focus, 2) playing three (or four) games in as many days will leave the team exhausted and vulnerable in its first round game.

To put it mildly, this is a sentiment I take issue with.

I formed the opinion at a young age that there was no such thing as a good loss, and rolled my eyes every time I heard a coach bust out the cliché from that point forward (and then had to run sprints). I'm also a firm believer in game-to-game momentum, that a winning streak actually inspires a team to play harder rather than go through the motions while thinking about how great it is.

The groups that need more than three days of rest to be 100% for a game and the ones that aren't mature enough to approach each and every contest with the right mindset are probably the ones you want to avoid advancing too far in your office pool. If a team doesn't have the focus to win in early March or the legs to win three games in three days, then it likely doesn't have the focus to win in late March or the legs to win six games in three weeks.

The point I'm trying to make and will now hammer you over the head with is that conference tournament performance matters, even for the teams that are locks to hear their names called on Selection Sunday.

People nowadays are always bringing "facts" into arguments, and since I'm a sucker for fads (anyone wanna compare pogs later?), I'll go ahead and share a few for you all to wrap your heads around (literally).

Three of the four national semifinalists a year ago were conference tournament champions. UCLA - which lost to California in the Pac-10 quarterfinals - was the lone exception.
There were 12 conferences that sent multiple teams to the NCAA Tournament in 2007. Of those 12, only three (WAC, A-10, Pac-10) had a team that didn't advance to its conference tournament championship game advance further in the NCAA Tournament than a team that did. Of those three teams, only UCLA won more than one game.
All six BCS conference tournament champions advanced to the Elite Eight last season. The other two quarterfinalists were Memphis - which won the Conference USA Tournament - and UCLA.
The combined NCAA Tournament record of the six BCS conference tournament champions in 2007 was 24-5. Of those five losses, only one (Kansas' Elite Eight loss to UCLA) came against a non-fellow BCS conference tournament champion.
Seven of the last ten national champions have won their conference tournament. North Carolina in '05, Syracuse in '03 and Maryland in '02 are the exceptions.
Ten of the last 16 Final Four teams have been conference tournament champions, and three of those six teams that didn't win their league title played in the same conference as the fellow semifinalist which did.

Now I'm not saying that you should write this team off if it stumbles on Thursday or Friday, I'm just saying that there should be no small part of your brain quietly wondering if winning this thing is going to have a detrimental affect in the succeeding weeks. Don't give it a second thought; we want to win the Big East Tournament.

Make it happen boys.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I agree completely,

but especially so with this team. Normally, the theory is that a loss will make the team listen more closely to coach and focus more on the details of a game. But it seems this version of the Cards is more likely to be confused by a loss, and to have individual players take a loss as a sign that they need to try to take over offensively to carry the rest of the team on their back (e.g., E5, DC, and the Sosa twin with the handlebar mustache and beard; even TWill is more apt to shoot a bad 3 when the team is struggling than when it is up).

I don't think the G-town loss will cause these sorts of problems with this team because of the circumstances (although I will be watching Jerry closely Thursday night). But another loss to someone not named G-town and they might lose the confidence in the system and in the team that they have slowly built since DP's return.

by 83fan on Mar 10, 2008 11:28 AM EDT reply actions

Pogs

I havent seen one of those in forever. How did you even play that game? Its been so long. I think there may be a need for the return of POGS

by adam10001 on Mar 10, 2008 11:30 AM EDT reply actions

The BET Is Important Unto Itself

Personally, I am somewhat agnostic about whether a loss AFTER a streak and BEFORE a tournament is a good thing. In our case, Saturday's loss (well, you know, in a way the texture of the balloon WAS stretched a little tight and was gonna burst at some point) was not a bad thing. An early loss here WOULD be a bad thing and would treble our concerns ongoing.
Moreover, an early loss here would be bad merely because at some point the BET, and success therein, has to stand by itself as an event, as a VERY VERY important event. I kind of think of it a little like the pre AT LARGE ACC Tournament, where even a dominant Dean Smith team could quickly disappear from both the Greensboro tourny and the NCAA. One minute you are the struttin' ACC conference champs, the next minute you're going home. And here, even knowing that there will be a tomorrow, it is very serious all by itself.

Is it too late to fit the beautiful praying baby with a pog?

by Roz on Mar 10, 2008 12:52 PM EDT reply actions

Persuasive

I like it.

Winning close games makes you more confident in close games. The third-to-last possession against Georgetown is a great example of that (what Mike called the worst possession in Cardinal history).

Georgetown came out of the timeout fired up and you could just tell they said, we are getting a stop RIGHT NOW. We, on the other hand, were not prepared for that jump-up-a-notch intensity, and turned it over with like 3 bad passes.

Hopefully in NYC we are down a bucket with less than a minute, and score to take the lead. That's a situation we haven't faced much this year, but I think each time we've lost. BYU, Dayton, Cinci, UConn, Georgetown were all games we missed a shot in the last minute that could have tied/taken the lead.

I imagine we'll face at least 1 situation like that again in the next three weeks. Hopefully pulling out a close one will give us the confidence to do it again, when the stakes are much much higher.

by CardsFan922 on Mar 10, 2008 1:09 PM EDT reply actions

couldn't agree more

Yes you can learn from losing but I think teams learn a lot more by winning close games when it matters than getting what's been affectionately termed a wake-up call in early march... Bull$#%+. Its one of the biggest fallacies in NCAA bball and its a sneaky way of spinning a bad thing into a half-positive thing, which I can understand from a coaching standpoint...but dont tell me its better for the team to lose in a tournament environment...

I might be the only one on this but I think Andre is the X factor for UL the next two weeks...

by UL is my hot hot sex on Mar 10, 2008 1:43 PM EDT reply actions

Exactly

I can buy "good loss" as a motivational coaching tactic to use on impressionable kids, but I completely reject the notion that one has ever actually taken place.

by Mike Rutherford on Mar 10, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions

2cents

I think that greater part of this is that the best teams win conference tournaments and the best teams go the final four. This maxim is true regardless of who was played, amount of games played and the time they were played in. Looking at Syracuse in 05 when McNamara carried them to the BE title it can be said that they would have been a better suited team if they had gotten a couple more days off (excluding that they would have made the field had they not won the BET). But a more compelling fact is that the Cuse in 05, just wasn't that good and didn't have shot regardless.

by Blocky on Mar 10, 2008 2:55 PM EDT reply actions

That's true

And I think that a lot of what happens in conference tournaments foreshadows what will take place in the succeeding weeks. Connecticut was easily the most talented team in the country in 2006, and everybody sort of played off that loss to Syracuse like they'd be able to turn it on when they need to. Then they end up playing half-assed basketball for three games before getting bounced by George Mason in the regional final.

You're right, the best teams - the ones with both talent and character - win their conference tournament more times than not.

I'm just tired of hearing people dismiss the first part of the postseason as insignificant or even disadvantageous.

by Mike Rutherford on Mar 10, 2008 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions

good loss/bad loss

I actually believe there are "good losses."
Like Mike said - a good loss can give a coach talking points and will give a team a reason to listen. Good losses also serve as pressure valves. Teams that stack up too many W's in a row can start to heave under the pressure of the imaginary goal of "keeping the streak alive" (see 2007-08 Patriots as an example).
Good losses don't happen all the time, most losses are crappy ones with no meaning at all except to say: You aren't that good.
But they do happen. I think Memphis got handed a good loss by UT this year. I bet they will advance deep into the tourney b/c they no longer have to worry about going undefeated.
I'm not sure if UofL's loss to GTown will turn out to be a good loss, unfortunately CBS saw to it that I didn't get to watch the game (lousy *&%%$#s). But from what I've heard from friends at the game - UofL wasn't as fired up as they needed to be. The Hoyas were. UofL managed to make it a close game by playing pressure D and gave themselves a legit shot to win but in the end couldn't make it happen. Nothing tragic, just a good team losing to another good team on their home court. I've certainly heard nothing that would lead me to think our last game was a tragedy that may render the Cards impotent going into the post season.

That said, I completely agree that there is no such thing as a good post-season loss. At this point we need to have our shit together. Yes it is nice that we get a good trial run in the BET before we step up on to the main stage. But that run is not for fun. Championship teams win big games, conference and otherwise. From here on out these are all big games. We've clearly had enough losses this year and it's simply too early to say which, if any, may have worked in our favor. One thing is for sure - our next loss (if we have one)is going to be a really bad one.

by ericdedwar on Mar 10, 2008 5:09 PM EDT reply actions

Darrell and the boys in 80 had to gulp down a

"good loss" 77-60 in their last regular season game

They seemed to get the picture.

What worries me is the 1) <70% free throw shooting; 2) erratic shooting-- we really aren't great shooting team or individuals even --- Jerry comes closest, but...); 3) bad last 3 min of game

Keeping my fingers crossed

by frankpos on Mar 10, 2008 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Fingers Crossed??!!

Fingers crossed, Hell, Frank, did you get out your Crazy Clothes yet?

I'm nervous as all get up. I would love love love to win Thursday. I think that would settle us all down a bit. And we only scrutinize Jerry so much cause he's been so faithful. Don't you think?

Roz

by Roz on Mar 10, 2008 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Crystal Cold

Crystal Cold, your analysis, Eric, like that bottle of Stoly you put behind the creamsicles in the freezer last summer and somehow forgot about till now. Nice.
Have a good one, Roz

by Roz on Mar 10, 2008 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Good loss/bad loss

The point has been made (well, by the way) that there are such things as good loses. And if they occur at an opportune time in the season, I suppose the argument will hold water. When the conference tournament begins, with the big show right on its heels, the "opportune" time is gone.

We could have won both the UConn and Georgetown games this year. Both were last possession games and to my way of thinking we'd be better off had we won them both.

Like Frank, I worry about our lack of scoring ability; we just don't have a night-in-night-out dead-on shooter. And a long run in the tournament usually demands such a thing. However, defense does win championships, so the cliche' goes. And we play defense as well as anyone in the country -- at times anyway. It's going to be a great couple of weeks.

by theoldman on Mar 11, 2008 10:37 AM EDT reply actions