Selection Sunday thread...

[rrlbees]

 

[jncuse]

Since the tweeter introduced "insanity" into the equation. I think its insane for the tweeter to make observations based on a few OOC games, rather than the 150+ games these conferences played OOC.

The SEC won 36% of its Q1 OOC games. ACC won 28%.
SEC won 44% of its Q1+Q2 OOC games. ACC won 40%
SEC won 85% of its Q3 games. ACC won 76%

SEC scheduled 42% of its games against Q1+Q2. The ACC 31%. (The big 12 28%) They deserve credit for not "gaming" things like others.

I don't know if the gap should be as large as it is in terms of seeds of us vs SEC. But the SEC certainly deserves more seeds if we are going to fully look at OOC play.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I don't think Michigan St did anything "devious" or "gamey" - they just played.
Is it better they got to their NET that way, then by abusing way (like B12) Probably. But it doesn't make NET any less flawed.

It needs some real tweaks. As I have said for a little while now -- half RPI, half NET would fix a lot of things. Both NET and RPI are flawed individually, but the strengths and weaknesses of each tend to be different which creates a nice hedge.

And it also needs to committee to focus purely on W and L's at the end of the day, and not standalone NET - and for bubble teams needs their quad edges scrubbed. Things the committee has always done which is why team's in the high 30's miss sometimes, and teams in the 70's get in. But avoiding a team that is at #25 is hard to expect. Biggest NET aberration I have seen.

But NET #25 - that will be really hard for them to ignore given who it is, and that add in a win like Baylor. Do I think they deserve to get in - they are very close to the other teams, but I personally think they fall just short in a true W/L perspective if I was selecting.

Leaving MSU out would send the perfect message that you actually have to win games to get in the tournament

 

[tbonezone]

it's my understanding that selection sunday is one of the biggest pizza delivery nights (+19%). pizza and st paddy don't really blend for me. will it affect sales ? i'm making stew.

 

[SU91]

I’ll keep saying it, it’s just unfathomable as a stand alone and if you actually include the posts here about their situation 5+ years ago. Yikes. A literal horror story. Literally can’t be made up.

Anyway, I will actually be shocked if they don’t repeat. How often can that ever be said?

You are correct. It makes me want to throw up. I hate UConn more than any team including G’town.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

it's my understanding that selection sunday is one of the biggest pizza takeout nights.
pizza and st paddy don't really blend for me. will it affect sales ? i'm making stew.

I’m sure someone out there is putting corned beef as a topping on their pizza today

 

[jncuse]

Leaving MSU out would send the perfect message that you actually have to win games to get in the tournament

I don't disagree with the notion, because I think there are teams on the outside that arguably have better W/L's when we analyze purely at that level.

In prior years they have sent that message to [6 teams with NET's or RPI's in the high 30's, low to mid 40's. I don't have faith that they will do the same to a team with NET 25. Especially when Michigan St does have 3 quality wins. NET does some crazies, but for whatever reason there are more this year. (the best comparison is actually Michigan St vs Indiana, 2 teams in the exact same conference)

Last year this Michigan St resume would have been fair to allow in. This year its tougher to get in.

 

[jncuse]

Providence's resume was surprisingly good to me once I really jumped in. And Johnnies' was surprisingly lacking. I just don't see it with OU but there are enough bracket guys with them in Dayton that I shouldn't be surprised if they get in. Agreed on Northwestern 100% and lean towards agreeing on Texas. Was very close to moving both of them to the tier above with Miss St and TCU but the margins are so thin this year.

I try to look at the matrix as little as possible as I go through it but looking after and reading bracketologist's opinions on Twitter, the variance this year is just nuts. I think there will be one shocking team that gets in and one shocking team that gets left out. Fingers crossed Indiana St is the shocking one that gets in and Colorado St isn't the shocking that get left out. Would much rather see each of them than one of the handful of middling P5s. Especially A&M. That many bad losses is ugly.

I use the matrix as a starting point throughout the year to help follow things -- I don't have the desire to dig thoughout the year as much as I used to. For the past few weeks though I think the Matrix has been overrating certain NET "Darlings". Once it gets to the mid 30's then it goes back to more of a pure W/L analysis for the matrix. Never had so many bubble teams with NET's in the 20's or the low 30's. I kept bolding them thinking they may be overrated.

Which gets to the item I bolded above. I think we will disagree on these two teams, which is fine. I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt to Indiana St. But this is just not the year for them to get it. I just have to commit to my picks shortly. I have been higher on A&M than the matrix for the last 10 days or so, and I grouped Indiana St as one of the "empty-ish" resumes (Colorado, Nova, New Mexico, Indiana st) even though I would give Indiana St benefit of doubt. 2 of those teams took care of business which really hurt Indiana St.

I sort of view Indiana St as a "NETtish" resume as well with not much else there -- 1-4 in Q1 games. 5-5 in Q1+Q2, with one really bad loss.. Its not terrible by any means Last year I would have no problem putting in Indiana St... against an NC St, a Clemson they clearly would be better. And with one or two bubble busters this year instead of 5, probably the same.

But over Texas A&M - no. They do have those 4 bad losses, but they are not like Clemson 2023 bad either. (its crazy when you look at Clemson last year vs Texas A&M this year, and they are in similar positions enterting Selection Sunday -- I'll make an additional post for that)

It's just so much "good" for Texas A&M it outweighs the bad.
7 Q1 wins -- including wins over Tennessee and Iowa St.
13-10 in Q1+Q2.

If you ignored Q3 games, this is a resume of maybe a 4 seed. Of course you can't ignore those games, and they should be on the bubble. But compared to others

Let's also remember that Texas A&M got arguably a big screw job in 2022. I'm not sure if that is in the back of minds of anybody.

 

[007]

I'll just put my summary findings above ... so people don't have read the whole thing below. This isn't an argument for them getting in, but just showing how well Michigan St did in the margin game vs Syracuse.

Michigan St vs Syracuse is a convenient comparison, because neither team piled on playing Q4 games which is the typical form of abuse (both only played 4) which is less than the average Q4 team -- especially a B12, but even a Pitt or a Wake.

I don't they "tricked" or "gamed" the system because they didn't pile on Q4 which is the abuse. They just did very well in the margin game - you could then say the system itself is bad or stupid, but it wasn't really gaming.

Michigan St vs Syracuse (adjusted to Syracuse's # of games in each quadrant)
Q4 = 93 points better
Q3 = 103 points better
Q2 = 18 points better
Q1 = 105 points better

At eye level this makes sense - we did really bad against poor teams. But we did well against middle of the pack solid teams (Q2). And we got destroyed in Q1 games.

Overall - 229 points better, over 31 games, That is 7.4 points per game, adjusted to 70 possessions, and our KP rating would be 10.6 higher. Add 10.6 to our current KP of 9.3, and we would raise to 19.9 and from #87 to #20.


--------------------------

I don't think they did anything to game or trick the system. Unlike so many teams in the P6, they only played 4 games against Q4 - so they didn't go the B12 route either.

It just came down to the margin game which they did well in. I think its worth looking into vs Syracuse, so I dug down

Looking at their Quad's, looks like they did well in the "margin" game in Q1, Q3, and Q4. In fact it looks like Q3 margin is where they distinguished themselves vs others instead of Q4, which I don't mind as much as you can't control narrative as much against these "better" teams.

I'll compare it to Syracuse, which is convenient since neither team piled on a bunch of Q4 games - we played the same amount of 4, which is lower than the average of a P6 team. Neither team did the B12 thing or what many P6 teams did.

Q4 - (MSU went 4-0 winning by an average of 33, we won 4 games by an average of 9 points) Winning by 33 by MSU was better than the average tournament team, but its less than a lot of B12 teams and even a Pitt. What we did in our Q4 games hurt us as much as anything -- that is the system, as stupid as it is, but at the same time we have to take some blame for that. We let bad teams hang around all year. Anyway if we had been better by "93 points" in those 4 games, our KP would have increased from #87 to around #56

Q4 Impact vs Syracuse = +93 points

Q3 - (MSU margin of 104 points over 6 games (6-0), Syracuse was 56 over 9 (8-1)). MSU's margin of 17 points in all Q3 games, I'd imagine is very strong compared to many teams. These games you tend not to be able to control the narrative as much. I actually don't mind rewarding these games compared to Q4 games. If Syracuse had done as wll

If Syracuse had done as well as Michigan St in Q3 games, they win by 159 points instead of 53 points.

Q3 Impact vs Syracuse = +103 points (adjusted to 9 games)

Q2 - (MSU Margin of 47 points (6-5), Syracuse margin 16 points (4-4). Both teams overall did well in the margin game in Q2. We had the Oregon game that really helped us.

Q2 Impact vs Syracuse = + 18 points (adjusted to 8 games)

Q1 - ( MSU Margin of negative 34 points (3-8) Syracuse margin of negative 136 points (3-7)
We all know the story here. Michigan St also benefits from the 24 point win over Baylor.

Q1 Impact vs Syracuse = +105 points (adjusted over 10 games)

Yeah, but do you have any hard data to show why MSU has a better NET?

BTW, jncuse you are awesome with this stuff. Thanks for posting.

 

[jncuse]

How much tougher is the bubble this year vs 2023?

Here are the two teams that had "bad" losses, but quite a bit of good on their resume. Compare the good of Texas A&M vs Clemson, and also how much less bad they have.

Texas A&M 2024 vs Clemson 2023

Q1: 7-7 vs 4-4
Top Half Q1 Victories - 3 vs 0
Q1+Q2: 13-10 vs 7-6
Q3: 2-4 vs 7-2
Q4: 5-0 vs 9-3

 

[OttoinGrotto]

So NET really needs an overhaul. The overuse of continuous mathematics in a system of discrete mathematics (winning and losing) really exposes significant flaws to the NET algorithm.

This is exceptionally well stated.

 

[Bulldog04]

I’d like to see someone make an objective argument as to why Mich State deserves to be in.

That’s been my number 1 team I’ve complained about all year. I’m so sick of everyone acting like Big 10 everything is the hardest conference and blah blah. Enough with that. They stink

 

[jncuse]

Yeah, but do you have any hard data to show why MSU has a better NET?

BTW, jncuse you are awesome with this stuff. Thanks for posting.

I though that was the hard data in my post #32.

Basically trying to equate schedules and guadrants, Michigan St was a ridiculous 309 points better than us margin wise (not the 229 I posted above, that was an adding error).

Yes they played a bit harder schedule than us, but in the end they are a 19-14 team vs us being a 19-12 team (D1 games). So W/L you can argue they are probably a bit better than us because of schedule. But not #25 vs #89... or even a team that is #50 or #60.

 

[UpstateSM]

I use the matrix as a starting point throughout the year to help follow things -- I don't have the desire to dig thoughout the year as much as I used to. For the past few weeks though I think the Matrix has been overrating certain NET "Darlings". Once it gets to the mid 30's then it goes back to more of a pure W/L analysis for the matrix. Never had so many bubble teams with NET's in the 20's or the low 30's. I kept bolding them thinking they may be overrated.

Which gets to the item I bolded above. I think we will disagree on these two teams, which is fine. I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt to Indiana St. But this is just not the year for them to get it. I just have to commit to my picks shortly. I have been higher on A&M than the matrix for the last 10 days or so, and I grouped Indiana St as one of the "empty-ish" resumes (Colorado, Nova, New Mexico, Indiana st) even though I would give Indiana St benefit of doubt. 2 of those teams took care of business which really hurt Indiana St.

I sort of view Indiana St as a "NETtish" resume as well with not much else there -- 1-4 in Q1 games. 5-5 in Q1+Q2, with one really bad loss.. Its not terrible by any means Last year I would have no problem putting in Indiana St... against an NC St, a Clemson they clearly would be better. And with one or two bubble busters this year instead of 5, probably the same.

But over Texas A&M - no. They do have those 4 bad losses, but they are not like Clemson 2023 bad either. (its crazy when you look at Clemson last year vs Texas A&M this year, and they are in similar positions enterting Selection Sunday -- I'll make an additional post for that)

It's just so much "good" for Texas A&M it outweighs the bad.
7 Q1 wins -- including wins over Tennessee and Iowa St.
13-10 in Q1+Q2.

If you ignored Q3 games, this is a resume of maybe a 4 seed. Of course you can't ignore those games, and they should be on the bubble. But compared to others

Let's also remember that Texas A&M got arguably a big screw job in 2022. I'm not sure if that is in the back of minds of anybody.

The closer we get to 6pm the more I think A&M will be in and maybe avoid Dayton. I am also getting more confident in Colorado being in. As excited as I could be for the Selection Show without a team dancing.

 

[jncuse]

That’s been my number 1 team I’ve complained about all year. I’m so sick of everyone acting like Big 10 everything is the hardest conference and blah blah. Enough with that. They stink

It's more margin issues than Big 10 bias. Look at Indiana. They went 10-10 in the Big 10 as well, have no real bad losses, and their NET was around 100.

Big 10 did better than ACC in OOC play -- not as much as prior 2 years, but still better.

 

[Cuse181]

The closer we get to 6pm the more I think A&M will be in and maybe avoid Dayton. I am also getting more confident in Colorado being in. As excited as I could be for the Selection Show without a team dancing.

Hard to believe they’re in contention at all with a team average of 28% from 3 and sub 40% FGs. Their highs are just high enough and their lows are abysmal

 

[jncuse]

The closer we get to 6pm the more I think A&M will be in and maybe avoid Dayton. I am also getting more confident in Colorado being in. As excited as I could be for the Selection Show without a team dancing.

I was thinking Florida Atlantic might be on the outs yesterday, given they have 2 Q4 losses, and Temple was damn close to being a 3rd (Temple just gets over the Q4 barrier)

But after digging down, how you can you not let in a team that went 4-1 against the P6 in OOC -- including wins over Arizona, Texas A&M, and solid enough wins over Butler and Virginia Tech.

 

[UpstateSM]

 

[jncuse]

Hard to believe they’re in contention at all with a team average of 28% from 3 and sun 40% FGs. Their highs are just high enough and their lows are abysmal

Am I reading this right - Texas A&M is shooting 28% from 3. What a crazy stat in 2024.

 

[jncuse]

Wow. Crazy. It's so tight, that it could have changed the fate of both teams.

 

[UpstateSM]

I was thinking Florida Atlantic might be on the outs yesterday, given they have 2 Q4 losses, and Temple was damn close to being a 3rd (Temple just gets over the Q4 barrier)

But after digging down, how you can you not let in a team that went 4-1 against the P6 in OOC -- including wins over Arizona, Texas A&M, and solid enough wins over Butler and Virginia Tech.

I am biased for financial reasons when it comes to FAU but I agree. But I have always believed that you need to reward non-P6 programs when they are able to schedule P6 games and win them in the noncon.

 

[jncuse]

I am biased for financial reasons when it comes to FAU but I agree. But I have always believed that you need to reward non-P6 programs when they are able to schedule P6 games and win them in the noncon.

Florida Atlantic took advantage of the rub from their Final Four to get some good games. And on them.
Not always that easy for those team to get those games.

 

[Oakland]

I keep seeing scoring margin mentioned, but here is a quote from the NCAA.com dated Feb 24, 2024:
"With the changes announced in May 2020, the NET will no longer use winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage and scoring margin. What am I missing?

Do preseason ranking affect the end of season NET rankings?

 

[007]

I though that was the hard data in my post #32.

It absolutely was! I was agreeing with you - it was just my poor attempt at humor b/c you were responding to people who were just expressing seat of their pants opinions. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[jncuse]

A reminder for anybody actually doing the bracket.

Don't forget to put BYU in the Thursday/Saturday games. One of the classic NCAA tournament screw ups of all time when they put a BYU in Friday/Sunday games. They then had to fix their problem, by putting a play in game as a "14 seed"