Bubble Watch - Week of February 25th to March 3rd

[jncuse]

I think this result is good for us as well. Xavier has lost 5 in a row and are now 18-12. They may be OK or they may need to win one more. But it's worth following until they get it. At Depaul may not be a gimme for them.

 

[Chris02M]

i think wichita sneaks in but there top 25,50 and top 100 numbers are lacking. Illinois state is probably going to need to auto bid and middle tennessee for me could get an at large.

 

[Chris02M]

View attachment 90368

I think this result is good for us as well. Xavier has lost 5 in a row and are now 18-12. They may be OK or they may need to win one more. But it's worth following until they get it. At Depaul may not be a gimme for them.

agreed on xavier completely

 

[jncuse]

i think wichita sneaks in but there top 25,50 and top 100 numbers are lacking. Illinois state is probably going to need to auto bid and middle tennessee for me could get an at large.

The reason I like Wichita St is the analytical numbers (KP, Sag, BPI). They are all around #15. Since the committee is publicly stating they are looking at those now it means they have a lot of faith in those numbers. The numbers for Wichita St are so high compared to others that it locks them in. Just my view. We will see if my theory makes any sense when the seeds come out.

In terms of traditional metrics I agree that they could go either way.

 

[jncuse]

I still see Houston as potential sleeper pick by the committee. I would have liked to see them lose. A decent road win for them.

But they can't go 0-4 against Cincy and SMU. If they beat Cincy on the road this week (23% chance) they suddenly become a real concern. To me that is one of the bullets we need to dodge this week.

 

[bpo57]

ASU came from six down with :30 to play to defeat USC. They also had ten threes in the first half but still trailed by a point at halftime. USC finishes with home games against the two Washington teams so they're still in good shape to get an at-large.

 

[orangenirvana]

View attachment 90368

I think this result is good for us as well. Xavier has lost 5 in a row and are now 18-12. They may be OK or they may need to win one more. But it's worth following until they get it. At Depaul may not be a gimme for them.

That drops Xavier to 1-7 vs. Top 25. Just three wins against the Top 50. They have good ratings (31 average) which might save them.

 

[jncuse]

Overall today was OK. Our loss was expected. We had a few teams above us slide (Xavier, USC). But in general the bubble below us strengthened themselves a bit, or at least avoided pitfalls, by winning road games (Illinois, Middle Tennessee, Houston). But then again none of them made a major move.

 

[jncuse]

ASU came from six down with :30 to play to defeat USC. They also had ten threes in the first half but still trailed by a point at halftime. USC finishes with home games against the two Washington teams so they're still in good shape to get an at-large.

I think they are in good shape as well, but they can don't do anything stupid either.

 

[jncuse]

That drops Xavier to 1-7 vs. Top 25. Just three wins against the Top 50. They have good ratings (31 average) which might save them.

They have good ratings and a good non conference SOS. I am hoping those ratings fall to the 40's with 3 straight losses. It's a long shot, but at this point they probably more worth following than Michigan St.

 

[orangenirvana]

USC finishes with home games against the two Washington teams so they're still in good shape to get an at-large.

Why?

 

[bpo57]

I think they are in good shape as well, but they can don't do anything stupid either.

Agreed. If they lose at home to either of those two then they deserve their fate.

 

[bpo57]

Why?

Cuz I said so.

 

[Briancuse]

Why?

For some reason everyone loves them, Palm has them as a 6 seed, I don't get it.

 

[bpo57]

They have good ratings and a good non conference SOS. I am hoping those ratings fall to the 40's with 3 straight losses. It's a long shot, but at this point they probably more worth following than Michigan St.

I may be mistaken but I remember you saying that you liked kenpom's work. How have you found him to be as a predictor of NCAA tournament success (not necessarily selection or seedings) ? I ask because I look at his current rankings and begin scratching my head to where it starts to bleed.

#4 WVA
#9 UVA
#10 Wichita State
#13 UCLA
#17 Oregon
#22 Arizona

The beauty of the tourney is that it gets decided on the court. But I look at those six rankings above and figure that wouldn't pass the Ray Charles eye test. The three below are far superior to the three above.

 

[jncuse]

MONDAY GAMES -- NONE

There are a few quality games tomorrow but nothing that remotely impacts the bubble.

 

[jncuse]

I may be mistaken but I remember you saying that you liked kenpom's work. How have you found him to be as a predictor of NCAA tournament success (not necessarily selection or seedings) ? I ask because I look at his current rankings and begin scratching my head to where it starts to bleed.

#4 WVA
#9 UVA
#10 Wichita State
#13 UCLA
#17 Oregon
#22 Arizona

The beauty of the tourney is that it gets decided on the court. But I look at those six rankings above and figure that wouldn't pass the Ray Charles eye test. The three below are far superior to the three above.

I do like KP as a tool, but I don't get too hung up over team X is better than team Y because it is a few spots higher. And there are always a few teams that seem to consistently look better in KP -- it seems there is a flaw towards slower paced teams like Viginia and Wisconisn in the past. I look more for trends on conferences. I also like it to identify good mid majors because there is really nothing else to try to compare them. It tells us that Wichita St is a pretty good team. Are they #10 -- maybe not, but I think it gives an idea that they are a fairly good team. It also gives me a tool to try to see who is legit amongst the real mid majors -- like Middle Tennessee St, Akron or Monmouth.

But one trend I would observe based on KP is that the Pac-12 elite are overrated. I don't fully really agree with it, but I know why it is happening. Because the bottom of the Pac 12 is so bad this year,.

But I will say this the KP model tends to heavily impact spreads. So if you like the Pac-12 I think you will see some good betting opportunities on them in individual tourney games.

 

[orange79]

Palm's latest update as of Sunday night - SU is now one of the first four out.

 

[orange79]

For some reason everyone loves them, Palm has them as a 6 seed, I don't get it.

USC a 9 seed

 

[jdubs30]

Palm's latest update as of Sunday night - SU is now one of the first four out.
View attachment 90372

So a loss to Louisville on Sunday bumps us out and puts Wake and TCU in? Huh?

 

[orangenirvana]

For some reason everyone loves them, Palm has them as a 6 seed, I don't get it.

It's insane and no one can explain it. I've asked Palm on Twitter but he won't respond.

 

[Ryand877]

I'm not going to argue that we are on the bubble , but TCU lost this weekend and Syracuse beat Wake Forest. Obviously a lot more goes into it than that, I get it , but to get put out by losing to a top ten team at their place ? If we lose vs tech Saturday , okay, but this is a little confusing.

 

[orangenirvana]

I'm not going to argue that we are on the bubble , but TCU lost this weekend and Syracuse beat Wake Forest. Obviously a lot more goes into it than that, I get it , but to get put out by losing to a top ten team at their place ? If we lose vs tech Saturday , okay, but this is a little confusing.

TCU - 2-10 vs. Top 50 (0-7 vs. Top 25)
Wake Forest - 1-9 vs. Top 50 (0-8 vs. Top 25)
Rhode Island - 2-3 vs. Top 50 (2-3 vs. Top 25)
Syracuse - 6-7 vs. Top 50 (3-4 vs. Top 25)

 

[bpo57]

I do like KP as a tool, but I don't get too hung up over team X is better than team Y because it is a few spots higher. And there are always a few teams that seem to consistently look better in KP -- it seems there is a flaw towards slower paced teams like Viginia and Wisconisn in the past. I look more for trends on conferences. I also like it to identify good mid majors because there is really nothing else to try to compare them. It tells us that Wichita St is a pretty good team. Are they #10 -- maybe not, but I think it gives an idea that they are a fairly good team. It also gives me a tool to try to see who is legit amongst the real mid majors -- like Middle Tennessee St, Akron or Monmouth.

But one trend I would observe based on KP is that the Pac-12 elite are overrated. I don't fully really agree with it, but I know why it is happening. Because the bottom of the Pac 12 is so bad this year,.

But I will say this the KP model tends to heavily impact spreads. So if you like the Pac-12 I think you will see some good betting opportunities on them in individual tourney games.

I'm a big admirer of the Wichita State program and think Marshall is one of the best coaches in the country. And I agree with you they def deserve an NCAA bid. But I wonder what it is that they've done that would merit them being several slots ahead of the three PAC-12 teams. They don't have road wins at AZ or UK like UCLA. And there is no way they would be favored over any of those three PAC-12 teams on a neutral court. Same goes for WVA and UVA. That's not speculation on my part as it's borne out in the current Vegas odds to win the NC. I obviously don't believe the PAC-12 teams are overrated and in fact they're wildly underrated looking at Kenpom.

 

[jncuse]

I'm a big admirer of the Wichita State program and think Marshall is one of the best coaches in the country. And I agree with you they def deserve an NCAA bid. But I wonder what it is that they've done that would merit them being several slots ahead of the three PAC-12 teams. They don't have road wins at AZ or UK like UCLA. And there is no way they would be favored over any of those three PAC-12 teams on a neutral court. Same goes for WVA and UVA. That's not speculation on my part as it's borne out in the current Vegas odds to win the NC. I obviously don't believe the PAC-12 teams are overrated and in fact they're wildly underrated looking at Kenpom.

It's a by possession efficiency system so your games against bottom feeders can also impact things.

KP says for example that Northernn Iowa is 167 and Indiana St is 194 and Washington is 172 and Washington St is 198. And if Wichita St beats those two teams (Northern Iowa and Indiana St) by much more than UCLA does (Agaisnt Washington and Washington St), it will view Wichita St is the better team. And that has to be the reason.

It two teams are equal (say UCLA and Arizona), and UCLA wins by 2 points, our natural instinct is to shoot UCLA up the rankings. But in KP if the 2 teams are about the same, and one team barely won, it will have little impact on either team's rankings.

I think it's a good system, but at the same time it has its limitations which you need to consider, one of which is that it doesn't rank teams by Win/Loss record, and it doesn't value big games as much as we typically value big games. I get info from the system but like any system you have to know it's weaknesses and know when to take make too large assumptions off of it.