2023 Pre-NCAA Tourney Discussion and Bubble Watch

[jncuse]

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

Unfortunately, I see that as a pretty good value bet.

 

[jncuse]

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.

#1. Its not a perfect system. But its better than before as they do try to bring in the inherent additional difficulty of road games vs home games which is the major benefit of the new Quadrant system to me.

It also certainly does not favour smaller conferences over power conferences. That notion is absurd.
It favours the conferences that do really, really well in OOC. Whether the connectivity issue skews things to much in favour of those who did really well B12, SEC, Big 10 vs the other power conferences could be an issue. Someone raised the issue of more OOC games later in the year. I think that would certainly help.

Yes the MWC is getting some more love than normal, but OOC they are not far behind the ACC and P12 the past few years -- pretty close to equal in fact. And they are far ahead of every other conference in terms of OOC. So its not crazy to see that they get treated a bit worse than the ACC and P12, but far better than other mid majors.

#2/ I'll address the bolded . Our fate is tied into what each does in the same manner. Its just that Duke plays 20 games against teams we play against, and Clemson plays 20 games against teams we play against... etc. Colgate will play zero or only one game against somebody we play against, so their performance after they play us in OOC (or in conference) doesn't matter much.

Maybe in numbers it will make more sense:
Syracuse like every ACC team plays 11 OOC and 20 in conference. Those 31 teams have 31 opponents.
Out of 961 games

ACC 410 (43%) (400 in conference + some OOC teams playing ACC as well)
All other Conferences (57%)... and that 57% is split to various degrees 31 different ways.

That 43% become by far the biggest part of the pie, so its very important that those ACC teams do well in OOC.

The ACC doing poorly OOC means you have weaker opponents metric wise once conference play starts, and then the connectivity of opponents will just make the impact better or worse, depending on where you rank amongst the P6 conferences.

Yes, the ACC schedule is not totally balanced, so some teams will be a little less impacted by it than others.

#3) I wouldn't be surprised if Q1A or Q1 "Top Half" was not one of the key submetrics. Its not a featured one like Q1, Q2, Q2, Q3. Its identified on Warren Nolan's Team Sheets, and those Team Sheets are meant to mimic what the committee looks at.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

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

I looked it up; it was 2003-2004. They were 25-3 after losing in their conference tourney. They crashed out of the NIT in round 1.

 

[jncuse]

Going to finish a seed list after the A10 title game and will post it here so everyone can make fun of me

The problem with these lists is that you are not always wrong - sometimes the committee just acts a little tad different than normal.

I'm going to try something together quickly before 6:00 with matchups, and following bracket rules. Let's see if I can get there in time.

A few things I will do:
- I will lock in Penn St at least 1 or 2 lines above where they are on the Bracket Matrix -- just in case they win they don't want them underseeded. And they had to make the call now.

 

[jncuse]

I looked it up; it was 2003-2004. They were 25-3 after losing in their conference tourney. They crashed out of the NIT in round 1.

Yep, they were in the Big West - they then moved to the WAC just as it was falling apart.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

Yep, they were in the Big West - they then moved to the WAC just as it was falling apart.

Also, yikes, I can't believe how long ago it was. I felt like it was around 2011 or so.

 

[jncuse]

Actually the #2 and #3 ranking on the #1 seed line matters a lot now that I look at things more closely.

Alabama's closest regional is Louisville
Kansas and Houston's closest regional is Kansas City

So if they put Houston #2 and Kansas #3, Kansas has to play the regional in Las Vegas instead.

So in conclusion, I would be stunned if Kansas is not #2. It's pretty close, and in a tie-breaker $ talks.

 

[MSOrange]

 

[HRE Otto IV]

#1. Its not a perfect system. But its better than before as they do try to bring in the inherent additional difficulty of road games vs home games which is the major benefit of the new Quadrant system to me.

It also certainly does not favour smaller conferences over power conferences. That notion is absurd.
It favours the conferences that do really, really well in OOC. Whether the connectivity issue skews things to much in favour of those who did really well B12, SEC, Big 10 vs the other power conferences could be an issue. Someone raised the issue of more OOC games later in the year. I think that would certainly help.

Yes the MWC is getting some more love than normal, but OOC they are not far behind the ACC and P12 the past few years -- pretty close to equal in fact. And they are far ahead of every other conference in terms of OOC. So its not crazy to see that they get treated a bit worse than the ACC and P12, but far better than other mid majors.

#2/ I'll address the bolded . Our fate is tied into what each does in the same manner. Its just that Duke plays 20 games against teams we play against, and Clemson plays 20 games against teams we play against... etc. Colgate will play zero or only one game against somebody we play against, so their performance after they play us in OOC (or in conference) doesn't matter much.

Maybe in numbers it will make more sense:
Syracuse like every ACC team plays 11 OOC and 20 in conference. Those 31 teams have 31 opponents.
Out of 961 games

ACC 410 (43%) (400 in conference + some OOC teams playing ACC as well)
All other Conferences (57%)... and that 57% is split to various degrees 31 different ways.

That 43% become by far the biggest part of the pie, so its very important that those ACC teams do well in OOC.

The ACC doing poorly OOC means you have weaker opponents metric wise once conference play starts, and then the connectivity of opponents will just make the impact better or worse, depending on where you rank amongst the P6 conferences.

Yes, the ACC schedule is not totally balanced, so some teams will be a little less impacted by it than others.

#3) I wouldn't be surprised if Q1A or Q1 "Top Half" was not one of the key submetrics. Its not a featured one like Q1, Q2, Q2, Q3. Its identified on Warren Nolan's Team Sheets, and those Team Sheets are meant to mimic what the committee looks at.

Why are there so many small conference teams with high NET rankings when they play no one OOC? It is absurd that playing North Texas on the road gets you a Q1 W but playing Miami at home is a Q2.

FAU, Utah St, Boise St, Nevada, Oral Roberts, North Texas, Liberty are all Top 50 but they have nothing on their schedule to show for it.

Hofstra IMO has a more impressive resume than most small conference teams when you look at their schedule yet they are 86th. It makes no sense.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[bpo57]

A few years ago I bet Donna never thought her Selection Sunday duties would be taking her to Hamilton, NY.

 

[MSOrange]

 

[jncuse]

	LOUISVILLE
	Birmingham
1​	Alabama
16​	Howard / Texas Southern
8​	Iowa
9​	Memphis
	Albany
4​	Indiana
13​	Yale
5​	Iowa St
12​	Oral Roberts
	Denver
2​	Texas
15​	Montana st
7​	Penn St
10​	USC
	Columbus
3​	Xavier
14​	Grand Canyon
6​	Northwestern
11​	Utah St / Oklahoma St,,,,,

 

[jncuse]

	KANSAS CITY
	Des Moines
1​	Kansas
16​	Tex A&M - CC
8​	Creighton
9​	Auburn
	Albany
4​	Uconn
13​	Iona
5​	TCU
12​	Drake
	Sacramento
2​	UCLA
15​	UNC Asheville
7​	St Mary's
10​	Boise St
	Orlando
3​	Kansas St
14​	Kennesaw St
6​	Miami
11​	Miss St

 

[jncuse]

	LAS VEGAS
	Birmingham
1​	Houston
16​	Northern Kentucky
8​	Maryland
9​	Arkansas
	Greensboro
4​	Tennessee
13​	Kent St
5​	Virginia
12​	Charleston
	Denver
2​	Arizona
15​	Vermont
7​	Michigan St
10​	Providence
	Sacramento
3​	Gonzaga
14​	UC Santa Barbara
6​	San Diego St
11​	Arizona St

 

[jncuse]

	NEW YORK
	Columbus
1​	Purdue
16​	FDU / SE Missouri St
8​	West Virginia
9​	Florida Atlantic
	Greensboro
4​	Duke
13​	Furman
5​	Texas A&M
12​	VCU
	Des Moines
2​	Marquette
15​	Colgate
7​	Missouri
10​	Illinois
	Orlando
3​	Baylor
14​	Louisiana
6​	Kentucky
11​	Rutgers / NC ST

 

[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.

Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[orange7]

Watching all these bids and not even see our name (two years in a row) is extremely depressing. It’s really bugging me.