2023 Pre-NCAA Tourney Discussion and Bubble Watch

[MSOrange]

 

[MSOrange]

 

[MSOrange]

 

[MSOrange]

 

[MSOrange]

 

[HRE Otto IV]

It's obvious every year that you think the tournament should be the Power 5 invitational and you disregard any metrics that discourage that viewpoint. Should the non-Power 5 schools have a smaller margin or error - sure. But it shouldn't be perfection.

If metrics are biased they are useless. Look at Utah State’s schedule and explain why they are even considered.

I am all for metrics that aren’t biased.

And preventing under .500 teams is anti P5.

 

[jncuse]

The system meaning the metrics. The NET is garbage. The Qs are garbage. They favor the small conferences and where you play not who you play. You shouldn’t be able to game a metric.

Look at Utah St. who have they beaten? Their OOC was weak, they played no one. They have bad losses, worse than Pitt’s. They went 13-5 in the MWC which isn’t as good as 14-6 in the ACC. They very well could have zero Ws against NCAAT teams and only play 3 games, losing them all. At best they will be 2-4.

Any P5 team that wins more than 2/3 their conference games and plays a decent OOC schedule IMO should be in. So 14-6 in 20 game or 13-5 in 18 game leagues. That isn’t mediocre.

I would also like to see under .500 in conference not taken. But that is a little more debatable.

Imagine stating a system that will give 4 of 36 at large bids to non P6 conferences favours them. Wow. This is not a Utah St or Florida Atlantic issue. Never has been,

Its quite simple the system does not discriminate against P6 conferences, and they differentiate the bids amongst those conferences based on how P6 conferences do OOC.
1) The B12. SEC, and B10 did well this year they dominate the # of seeds and top seed lines. (23 or 24 of the 38 P6 bids)
2) The ACC and the P12 do crap in OOC and they get punished. Big East does just OK (they get 14 of 38 P6 bids)

There is a reason every year by the end of December, I am able to predict the structure of the NCAA tournament - in terms of which conference dominates bids, top seeds lines and who will get punished. It's because I understand the system will give almost all the # of bids to P6 conferences (which they deserve for the most part) and I understand how they will be split because of what conferences will get the Q1, Q2, (Net or RPI in the past) boost.

The one thing that is always constant though in my predictions is that there will not be many bids for the smaller conferences. Because that is not how the system works -- it is a system that favours number of Q1 and Q2 wins.

It can be claimed perhaps that it rewards the top performing P6 OOC conferences too much, and punishes the lower performing ones too much,

You are trying to equate Pitt's P6 record of 16-11 with all other P6 teams, but there is a massive difference in schedule strength. P6 schedule strength is far from homogenous.

The ACC did not earn the right to claim they were anywhere near equal footing with anybody other than the P12. The gap between them and the top 3 is huge,


If Pitt misses the tournament
- Its not because the system favours the little guy. Its not because of Utah St they are missing the tournament.
- Its because the system punishes he big conferences that sucks the most before the end of December. They can look at how the ACC did before end of December.

I presented all the data above - the ACC was not even close in quality wins, bad losses, Conferecne RPI and Conference NET, OOC win % -- even if you exclude the two worst teams Louisville and Florida St they are still behind a fair bit in some metrics, although that does close the gap a fair amount.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Imagine stating a system that will give 4 of 36 at large bids to non P6 conferences is rigged and favours them. Wow.

Its quite simple the system does not discriminate against P6 conferences, and they differentiate the bids amongst those conferences based on how conferences do OOC.
1) The B12. SEC, and B10 did well this year they dominate the # of seeds and top seed lines. (23 or 24 of the 38 P6 bids)
2) The ACC and the P12 do crap in OOC and they get punished. Big East does just OK (they get 14 of 38 P6 bids)

This is the way the system has worked for years. You are trying to equate Pitt's P6 record of 16-11 with all other P6 teams, but there is a massive difference in schedule strength. P6 schedule strength is far from homogenous.

The ACC did not earn the right to claim they were anywhere near equal footing with anybody other than the P12. The gap between them and the top 3 is huge,


If Pitt misses the tournament
- Its not because the system favours the little guy. Its not because of Utah St they are missing the tournament.
- Its because the system punishes the big conferences that sucks the most before the end of December. They can look at how the ACC did before end of December.

I presented all the data above - the ACC was not even close in quality wins, bad losses, Conferecne RPI and Conference NEt -- even if you exclude the two worst teams.

Also why should the system punish teams that are 8-10 in one P6 conference over one that is 11-9 in an other when the schedule strength can be vastly difference

Utah State did not challenge themselves outside of conf. They beat no one. Give me a reason they deserve an NT one seed let alone an NCAAT bid?

 

[JustPherU]

We need late season out of conference games/ challenges. Teams that played each other first week of season are far different in March.

 

[PoppyHart]

If their primary argument is the eye test... good luck.

 

[MSOrange]

 

[Orangemen]

The metrics are not perfect, so it’s very reasonable to poke holes in them. Also, it does come down to a debate about mediocre teams, so you can say what does it matter.

But at the end of the day, getting a bid matters, even for mediocre teams, so the metrics should be scrutinized.

What I don’t get is what does OOC even mean anymore. We play Colgate once every year, we play Duke once most years. Somehow our fate is tied to what Duke does in OOC games but not Colgate. Why? That makes no sense. Conferences are made up and barely exist anymore, at least in the way they used to when everyone played double round robin.

And the quadrants… How does winning at the number 75 team count the same as winning at the number one team? Those two accomplishments are not the same. jncuse includes quad 1A wins. A made up metric (as far as I know) that should absolutely be a real metric.

 

[bpo57]

I would dispute that "best victory in the nation at Purdue" statement. TCU beat KU by 23 at the Phog.

 

[jncuse]

If their primary argument is the eye test... good luck.

Person also ignores that they have 2 Q4 losses (and 2 Q3 ones to boot as well)

They deserve to be on the bubble discussion.. They are not far off, but you have to consider the losses as well.
23 wins and 14 ACC wins is not worth that much in this year's ACC.

 

[jncuse]

We need late season out of conference games/ challenges. Teams that played each other first week of season are far different in March.

For the sake of college basketball it would be much more entertaining if the P6 conferences set aside one week in the middle of January and one week in the middle of February to play each other OOC.

It could also change the metrics throughout the season.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I would even say Hofstra deserves it more than Utah St. they played a rough OOC and won their regular season.

 

[kirbivore]

Duke looks good. Scheyer has that team rolling…

Jealous we continue to be bad and we couldn’t win big both past and present come tourney time….

Put a flier on them to win it all at 29-1

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

I'd love to see Pitino knock out Hurley, or even just Hurley's facial expression if he sees the announcement that he's lined up against Slick.

 

[jncuse]

Utah State did not challenge themselves outside of conf. They beat no one. Give me a reason they deserve an NT one seed let alone an NCAAT bid?

I have to go for a walk now, otherwise no chance I am getting it done today. I will give you a response It will probably be after the teams are selected because I want to focus on other things today.

I am more of a Utah St will certainly get in guy, rather than a Utah St absolutely deserves to get in guy,
But they will be getting in - likely in the play in area.

They deserve to be a bubble team - in or out. I'll make the case later for them being at the bubble level at least later tonight. My view won't change whether they get in or not.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

I have to go for a walk now, otherwise no chance I am getting it done today. I will give you a response It will probably be after the teams are selected because I want to focus on other things today.

I am more of a Utah St will certainly get in guy, rather than a Utah St absolutely deserves to get in guy,
But they will be getting in - likely in the play in area.

They deserve to be a bubble team - in or out. I'll make the case later for them being at the bubble level at least later tonight. My view won't change whether they get in or not.

I remember awhile back when they had a ridiculously gaudy record playing in some trash league, and didn't make it. Like 28-2 or something. Too lazy to look it up.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[jncuse]

I remember awhile back when they had a ridiculously gaudy record playing in some trash league, and didn't make it. Like 28-2 or something. Too lazy to look it up.

Based on my browsing of their history page on college basketball reference, You are probably thinking of their 2011 team that got jobbed in terms of seeding. They were given a #12 seed.

The 2011 Utah St was in the WAC and they were 29-3.
They were #19 in the final poll. They were #22 in KenPom.
And yet they were given a #12 seed -- they then beat the #5 seed.
It was really quite unfair to that #5 seed.


Until 2013, they played in the WAC which was a pure garbage conference - basically it was Utah St, New Mexico St and 8 random teams all over the country that were typically new to Q1. They went to the MWC which was a much better conference - not sure why New Mexico st hung around -- and after this year they are not getting invited out of the WAC anytime soon.

The 2011

 

[jncuse]

I think I am going to give Alabama the #1 overall seed. Still very close amongst the top 3.

Going to go
Alabama
Kansas / Houston
Purdue

No real difference between #2 and #3, so won't bother thinking about it,