Feb 26 - Feb 29 Tracking the Bubble + Games

[jdubs30]

jncuse I think that S.Carolina/LSU game is meaningless

Pretty much nail in the coffin, IMO. Or beat Clemson and get to at least ACC Championship game. But there are quite a few optimists on here who will disagree.

I'd argue that is incorrect. I agree if lose to BC we have to Beat Clemson. But if we do that and win 2 ACCT 2 games we're probably. Beat Clemson and win 1 ACCT game and we're in a better spot than today.

"Beat Clemson and get to at least the ACC Championship game" - do we realize if we beat Clemson and lose in the ACC semi finals we'll have 22 wins? You don't think that's enough? In your scenario we'd finish with 23 wins, beat Clemson, the 7 seed, the 2 seed and the 3 seed. We'd be a be a 5 seed in the tournament.

The problem most people have is they look at us in a vacuum. I'm glad jn does what he does because it should show people that there are 15 other teams in our exact positions. Reading some of the stuff on here you'd think every single at-large team has the resume of a 1 seed. Plenty of resumes have massive defiencies.

If you don't think losing in the ACC semi finals is enough (22 wins - beat the 15 seed, 7 seed, 2 seed, lose to the 3 seed) then I'm not really sure what to say

 

[jncuse]

If we lose to BC we're 100% done unless we win the ACC tourney yes ?

No

 

[SoBeCuse]

jncuse I think that S.Carolina/LSU game is meaningless



I'd argue that is incorrect. I agree if lose to BC we have to Beat Clemson. But if we do that and win 2 ACCT 2 games we're probably. Beat Clemson and win 1 ACCT game and we're in a better spot than today.

"Beat Clemson and get to at least the ACC Championship game" - do we realize if we beat Clemson and lose in the ACC semi finals we'll have 22 wins? You don't think that's enough? In your scenario we'd finish with 23 wins, beat Clemson, the 7 seed, the 2 seed and the 3 seed. We'd be a be a 5 seed in the tournament.

The problem most people have is they look at us in a vacuum. I'm glad jn does what he does because it should show people that there are 15 other teams in our exact positions. Reading some of the stuff on here you'd think every single at-large team has the resume of a 1 seed. Plenty of resumes have massive defiencies.

If you don't think losing in the ACC semi finals is enough (22 wins - beat the 15 seed, 7 seed, 2 seed, lose to the 3 seed) then I'm not really sure what to say

Look, I just think in my scenario we still won’t have enough quality wins unless we get to ACCT title game to ACTUALLY FEEL SAFE. There ARE going to be teams left out with 20+ wins. The 20 wins standard is bunk. This year especially when there are so many losses piling up everywhere and so much mediocre play. They must fill up the field somehow and there will be lots of teams IN with 9 conference wins and lots of teams OUT with 9 conference wins. It is who you beat. Like you said, many teams have massive deficiencies. I hope I’m wrong. I’m also expecting UL to lose the last two devaluing that win. The line for IN/OUT is so razor thin for so many of these bubble teams. No point in speculating too much. This is changing day by day.

 

[bpo57]

It's good to know that St. Bonaventure's win against us won't matter anymore because it will be almost three months before Selection Sunday.

Ok forget the timing. You always talk about total body of work yet you're placing an inordinate amount of emphasis on two games. As I asked above, how many games would ASU have to lose before it disqualified them from the tourney? If they lose to Cal and Stanford then drop their first round tourney game - would that be enough to send them to the NIT?

 

[Newhouser]

I'm not sure how winning only one game in the ACC Tourrney helps us much at all - beating another bottom feeder whether we are 9-9 or 8-10 doesn't move the needle.

 

[bpo57]

OOC games are more important than conference games. In 1998 Florida State went 6-11 in the ACC (6-10 regular season, 0-1 in the ACCT), finished tied for 6th in a 9-school ACC, and got a bid. They went 0-6 vs the top 3 teams in the ACC and 1-9 vs the top 5.

They got a bid because they beat UConn, Zona, and Florida OOC even though they lost to Kansas and South Florida. Games in November and December mean a lot for teams and conferences.

The major difference is that ASU is not losing to powerhouse teams as they've compiled this 7-9 record in the PAC-12 like Clemson was losing to ACC teams back in 1998.

 

[bpo57]

actually that loss doesn't count because it was so close

To the guy that still sweats every SBU game thinking it has an impact on SU. There are 5-7 teams between SU and SBU. At this point SBU is in and their results have no impact on whether SU gets in or not. You'd be better served to focus on those bubble teams that are actually losing games left and right.

 

[jncuse]

Ok forget the timing. You always talk about total body of work yet you're placing an inordinate amount of emphasis on two games. As I asked above, how many games would ASU have to lose before it disqualified them from the tourney? If they lose to Cal and Stanford then drop their first round tourney game - would that be enough to send them to the NIT?

They are an average seed of 8.98. I start putting teams on the bubble watch when their average seed is 9.00 (just for tracking). So for all intents and purposes, they are on the bubble per consensus but the high end of it. That means you are usually consecutive losses from being really close to the line... that being said California would be such a bad loss that if they lost Thursday? to them, quite a few people would knock them out "as of now".

Even beating Cal, then losing to Stanford and first round of Pac 10, they would be right on that line.

 

[jncuse]

Pretty much nail in the coffin, IMO. Or beat Clemson and get to at least ACC Championship game. But there are quite a few optimists on here who will disagree.

I will disagree.

Pretty much done i equate with near zero chance. If we beat Clemson and the first 2 ACC Games, I would have to think we are at least around 50% (and it could go higher or lower as things play out this week)

 

[jncuse]

jncuse I think that S.Carolina/LSU game is meaningless

Just following the procedure I have set up (using teams that have a few votes on the matrix) to not really show bias in who I am tracking. They are well out as of now. If they win 4 in a row though, they will start putting pressure on that line.

 

[jncuse]

Look, I just think in my scenario we still won’t have enough quality wins unless we get to ACCT title game to ACTUALLY FEEL SAFE. There ARE going to be teams left out with 20+ wins. The 20 wins standard is bunk. This year especially when there are so many losses piling up everywhere and so much mediocre play. They must fill up the field somehow and there will be lots of teams IN with 9 conference wins and lots of teams OUT with 9 conference wins. It is who you beat. Like you said, many teams have massive deficiencies. I hope I’m wrong. I’m also expecting UL to lose the last two devaluing that win. The line for IN/OUT is so razor thin for so many of these bubble teams. No point in speculating too much. This is changing day by day.

What 20 win standard?

 

[jncuse]

To the guy that still sweats every SBU game thinking it has an impact on SU. There are 5-7 teams between SU and SBU. At this point SBU is in and their results have no impact on whether SU gets in or not. You'd be better served to focus on those bubble teams that are actually losing games left and right.

5-7 teams is a very small gap. One teams wins a quality game, the other loses a quad 3 game, and they are all square.

If St. Bonaventure lost last night and at St Louis they would be in trouble. Last night was a quad 3 loss. It's easy to say we shouldn't be following them after the fact that they won.

Remember that the committee has not been historically kind to the A-10 in recent times... just ask St. Bonaventure

 

[SoBeCuse]

What 20 win standard?

It’s just a perception out there I feel. A mythical feeling of comfort regarding one’s verdict/fate. This year there are going to be many 20 win teams out of the field. Most ever, IMO.

 

[jncuse]

I'm not sure how winning only one game in the ACC Tourrney helps us much at all - beating another bottom feeder whether we are 9-9 or 8-10 doesn't move the needle.

No one is claiming that a win against Pitt is moving the needle. But you must win to avoid a bad loss. That is where it comes into play. I call these games pure nuisance games, because they can't help you, but they can certainly hurt you.

The idea is that 9-9 might be enough to get in by itself (it depends on the movement around us), but losing that first game would take it away from you.

At 8-10, that Pitt/GTech win does nothing for us, except that it puts us into position to win a quality game in round 2.

 

[bpo57]

They are an average seed of 8.98. I start putting teams on the bubble watch when their average seed is 9.00 (just for tracking). So for all intents and purposes, they are on the bubble per consensus but the high end of it. That means you are usually consecutive losses from being really close to the line... that being said California would be such a bad loss that if they lost Thursday? to them, quite a few people would knock them out "as of now".

Even beating Cal, then losing to Stanford and first round of Pac 10, they would be right on that line.

Thx for answering my question. Makes sense.

 

[jncuse]

It’s just a perception out there I feel. A mythical feeling of comfort regarding one’s verdict/fate. This year there are going to be many 20 win teams out of the field. Most ever, IMO.

OK, its never been one I have relied on. I

For example earlier this year, I stated 9-9 as a likely lock (which just happens to be 20 games), because that would get us an RPI in the low to mid 30's... which is still the case. An RPI that low has probably never been denied in the ACC, and I figured that if we win that many our quality wins have to at least be in touch with the bubble, even if a tad lower. I was wrong on the back end, and did not adequately account for the SEC and B12 multiplier effect as their margin in Conference RPI at December 31, was probably going to have more impact than I anticipated.

 

[bpo57]

I will disagree.

Pretty much done i equate with near zero chance. If we beat Clemson and the first 2 ACC Games, I would have to think we are at least around 50% (and it could go higher or lower as things play out this week)

Trying to understand something here. SU is 0-6 versus the top 25. Lack of q.1 wins has been a knock placed on other bubble teams. How does that not affect SU?

 

[Briancuse]

OOC games are more important than conference games. In 1998 Florida State went 6-11 in the ACC (6-10 regular season, 0-1 in the ACCT), finished tied for 6th in a 9-school ACC, and got a bid. They went 0-6 vs the top 3 teams in the ACC and 1-9 vs the top 5.

They got a bid because they beat UConn, Zona, and Florida OOC even though they lost to Kansas and South Florida. Games in November and December mean a lot for teams and conferences.

Yup 2016 Atlantis got us in the tourney that and winning at Cameron.

 

[bpo57]

5-7 teams is a very small gap. One teams wins a quality game, the other loses a quad 3 game, and they are all square.

If St. Bonaventure lost last night and at St Louis they would be in trouble. Last night was a quad 3 loss. It's easy to say we shouldn't be following them after the fact that they won.

Remember that the committee has not been historically kind to the A-10 in recent times... just ask St. Bonaventure

Well we disagree but they sure as hell are in now.

 

[jncuse]

Trying to understand something here. SU is 0-6 versus the top 25. Lack of q.1 wins has been a knock placed on other bubble teams. How does that not affect SU?

It does impact SU. As noted in a post above, when I set the target for Syracuse early in January I called 9-9 a lock. It would result in a low to mid 30 RPI at the time. I figured we would have enough quality to be on the radar.

This is the biggest hurdle for Syracuse. But there are a few other teams that are on the same boat, and if we can get 2 more q1 wins it puts us in range. There will need to be a few teams with a poor quality win profile that get in.

This is the odd scenario we could have, and it is driven by quality wins:
2016 - Syracuse highest RPI for a team to get an at-large.
2018 - Syracuse lowest RPI from the ACC not to get an at-large

 

[bpo57]

And every year it's the exact same thing with jncuse. He has a condescending attitude that somehow he knows everything about the brackets and anybody who disagrees with him is an uneducated fool. Easily one of the most sensitive posters I've ever encountered. It's an opinion board for God's sake. Don't be such a baby. Complains about me shooting the messenger then creates a new post to complain about me. For the record, he also spends way too much time buried in the data and knows very little about the teams involved.

 

[bpo57]

OK, its never been one I have relied on. I

For example earlier this year, I stated 9-9 as a likely lock (which just happens to be 20 games), because that would get us an RPI in the low to mid 30's... which is still the case. An RPI that low has probably never been denied in the ACC, and I figured that if we win that many our quality wins have to at least be in touch with the bubble, even if a tad lower. I was wrong on the back end, and did not adequately account for the SEC and B12 multiplier effect as their margin in Conference RPI at December 31, was probably going to have more impact than I anticipated.

You really think SU will have an RPI in the low 30s if they win tonight and Saturday? No way.

 

[jncuse]

Well we disagree but they sure as hell are in now.

My threshold for lock is quite high. They are as near a lock for me, without making them a lock. Basically can you lose every game from here on out and get in? With A-10 teams, some of them are so bad that 2 bad losses in a row is a big knock.

It is very unlikely that they lose to St. Louis and the first round of the A-10, but if they did they may be a little nervous. Without knowing the A-10 bracket, they may play a Pitt level team in that first A-10 game.

 

[jncuse]

You really think SU will have an RPI in the low 30s if they win tonight and Saturday? No way.

This thing's pretty accurate short and long-term. It may come off one or two spots based on other moving parts.

This is from RPIForecast

 

[bpo57]

My threshold for lock is quite high. They are as near a lock for me, without making them a lock. Basically can you lose every game from here on out and get in? With A-10 teams, some of them are so bad that 2 bad losses in a row is a big knock.

It is very unlikely that they lose to St. Louis and the first round of the A-10, but if they did they may be a little nervous. Without knowing the A-10 bracket, they may play a Pitt level team in that first A-10 game.

Fair enough. I guess I'd put it on par with your no chance assessment of Loyola. Lock too strong a word just like no chance was in that case.