Lunardi

[Upstate]

He's been a big SU supporter all season. Why the drop to #2 overall after a road win? What? If we had cruised by 10 I have a feeling he keeps as #1 overall. The perception is that UK is rolling everyone while SU wins close and ugly, which I think psychologically devalues us a little vs. UK.

Which is bogus, because UK has been taken down to the wire in most of their recent games, too.

 

[Knicks411]

I think Kentucky may get the nod if both teams win out (which probably won't happen anyway, but bear with me) because A) they have been rolling people for the most part in their league (they have a better efficiency margin than we do in conf, though yes the conf is worse) and B) they are considered the more talented team, which is probably right anyway.

I think back to 07, Florida didn't have the best resume of all the #1 seeds, but they were given the #1 overall seed anyway, because I think the committee felt they were the best team. (And yes, they were defending national champs who brought back the same 5 as well). The comparison is far from perfect, but I could definitely see the committee getting in the room and looking at us and UK, with what will likely be similar resumes, and saying one team has 3 or 4 lottery picks, so of course they will be the #1 overall seed.

And as others have noted, it isn't like this is going to matter.

 

[shizzah]

Lunardi is a numbers guy who tries to think like a selection committee member would. He also knows the selection committee members are like the pollsters who see UK as the superior team. Until today though, the numbers made SU the clear overall #1 seed. That changed today with Top 25 wins. As a result, I suspect he knows the selection committee members are likely to grab that one number and run with it.

Cheers,
Neil

This is correct but I think it actually happened a couple days ago. I can't remember when it was but I saw him on ESPN or on a video online somewhere say (paraphrasing) "I'm moving Kentucky to the #1 overall seed. Not necessarily because I think they deserve it over Syracuse but because I think that is where the committee has them at this point."

 

[Cuse Action]

F UK Kentucky

Really brilliant!

 

[reedny]

I have no problem with that.

I wouldn't either if he had a rational explanation (guessing where the committee is doesn't qualify).

The only recent events are: Ky has lackluster home win over Vandy; and SU scores title-winning road win over a conference rival. SU's RPI is also unchanged at #1. http://www.teamrankings.com/ncb/rpi/

 

[Whitey23]

I love that Lunardi lists HIS st. joes team as a " Last 4 in" team.

 

[pfister1]

I wouldn't either if he had a rational explanation (guessing where the committee is doesn't qualify).

The only recent events are: Ky has lackluster home win over Vandy; and SU scores title-winning road win over a conference rival. SU's RPI is also unchanged at #1. http://www.teamrankings.com/ncb/rpi/

Actually this is the perfect explanation. Afterall it is what he is trying to do. In the end it doesn't matter what he thinks and the brackets he puts together have no impact on what the committee does, he is just trying to tell us what he thinks the committee would do if the season were to end today.

 

[SWC75]

Lunardi doesn't make picks based on reasonable criteria.

When I first flashed by your post I thought it said "discernable".

 

[SWC75]

Keep in mind that in the last 46 years the two topped ranked teams in the polls have met in the final once. They've met in the semi-finals 8 times. The committee sometimes likes to switch things around.

 

[MiniCuse]

When I first flashed by your post I thought it said "discernable".

It probably should have.

 

[arbitragegls]

Lunardi is a 'Cuse fan and still believes we are the #1 seed. However, his niche is to mimic the NCAA committee and to forecast what they will do.... and believes with KY #1 in polls they will go that way...not a big deal...he is doing his job and held out for 'Cuse as long as he could...but the Eye Test and Polls will sway the committee as he says. Of course, KY could lose again and if 'Cuse doesnt we are #1 overall...but for sure we get a #1 seed.

 

[reedny]

Actually this is the perfect explanation. Afterall it is what he is trying to do. In the end it doesn't matter what he thinks and the brackets he puts together have no impact on what the committee does, he is just trying to tell us what he thinks the committee would do if the season were to end today.

Well this is partly true, partly false. No one's claiming the committee is bound by Lunardi's brackets. Clearly, it will reach its own conclusions.

And I agree that the brackets attempt to "predict" what the committee will do. However, the brackets have never been based on Lunardi's feelings (as far as I know). They're based on an algorithm. This is confirmed by Lunardi's website (on ESPN college hoops), which states that his computations are derived from 'TeamRankings' numbers (see below).

My question is, what has changed in the numbers? Last week, we were an overall #1 seed. Over the weekend, Ky struggled against a relatively weak team at home and SU took the BE title at a hostile road venue. Based on this, I don't understand how Lunardi can retract his number 1 overall pick "projection" because he suddenly "has a feeling" the committee might go with Kentucky. What happened to his "algorithm"? And how, if at all, have his numbers changed?

Lunardi may be right, but if the change in his projection of the overall seed is a 'feeling', then he's not sticking with the promised "objective" formula.

Here's what his bracketology sub-site says:

NCAA Tournament Bracket Predictions Based On Joe Lunardi's Bracketology

The predictions below are based on objective mathematical algorithms developed by TeamRankings.com. If the NCAA tournament began today with the teams, seedings, and regional brackets specified in Joe Lunardi's projections, here is how teams' odds to advance to key rounds of the tournament compare.

(emphasis added)

 

[Cusefan95]

Keep in mind that in the last 46 years the two topped ranked teams in the polls have met in the final once. They've met in the semi-finals 8 times. The committee sometimes likes to switch things around.

When did they start seeding the top #1seeds and setting it up so the top 2 wouldn't play each other until the finals? That's a fairly recent change, I remember as a kid we would know right now that the East winner would play the Midwest winner (as a hypothetical example) in the final four. I think they started seeding the #1 seeds sometime after 1996.

That's a big part of why the top two teams used to meet in the semifinals - and it's not an issue anymore. While it could have happened in the past, there is zero chance that UK and Syracuse will meet in the semifinals this year.

 

[Knicks411]

My question is, what has changed in the numbers? Last week, we were an overall #1 seed. Over the weekend, Ky struggled against a relatively weak team at home and SU took the BE title at a hostile road venue. Based on this, I don't understand how Lunardi can retract his number 1 overall pick "projection" because he suddenly "has a feeling" the committee might go with Kentucky. What happened to his "algorithm"? And how, if at all, have his numbers changed?

I don't think he uses only an algorithim. He may have some kind of stat to sort the teams (I'm sure he does) but I don't think its quite as simple as just however they lineup in that one stat. (Though at the top it should be easier, since you don't need to worry about bracketing.

Also, I think you are shortchanging Vandy a bit; they are a better team than UConn, for instance. (Though the game wasn't as tough, since UConn was at home).

I believe Lunardi said he thinks SU should be the top 1, but he thinks the committee will go with UK.

I just read your link, I think you may be misinterpreting it? I don't think that is his stat; it is just saying, based on this ranking system, and using the field Lunardi projects, this is what they are projecting to happen.

Edit: Also, I went to the team rankings site, and I think it has Kentucky as #1 in it's ranking system, fwiw.

 

[moqui]

as of this moment, he has SU as the third team, behind Kentucky and Michigan State

as others have noted, it doesn't matter at all, but I wanted to toss a little red meat to the mob and see what happens

 

[Marsh01]

as of this moment, he has SU as the third team, behind Kentucky and Michigan State

as others have noted, it doesn't matter at all, but I wanted to toss a little red meat to the mob and see what happens

you bastardo...

 

[Knicks411]

Definitely doesn't matter, but I don't think that is right. His S-Curve goes UK, SU, KU, MSU.

 

[moqui]

Definitely doesn't matter, but I don't think that is right. His S-Curve goes UK, SU, KU, MSU.

I couldn't find his updated S Curve, but this is his current Nitty Gritty report

 

[reedny]

I don't think he uses only an algorithim. He may have some kind of stat to sort the teams (I'm sure he does) but I don't think its quite as simple as just however they lineup in that one stat. (Though at the top it should be easier, since you don't need to worry about bracketing.

Also, I think you are shortchanging Vandy a bit; they are a better team than UConn, for instance. (Though the game wasn't as tough, since UConn was at home).

I believe Lunardi said he thinks SU should be the top 1, but he thinks the committee will go with UK.

I just read your link, I think you may be misinterpreting it? I don't think that is his stat; it is just saying, based on this ranking system, and using the field Lunardi projects, this is what they are projecting to happen.

Edit: Also, I went to the team rankings site, and I think it has Kentucky as #1 in it's ranking system, fwiw.

Interesting point abut teamrankings.

Comparing Vandy (at home) to Uconn on the road is a judgment call. But I think I'm on solid footing -- UConn has a lot of size and at least 2 (projected) lottery pics. Beating them in Storrs was not an easy out. If Ky were given the choice between Vandy (a team they'd already beaten on the road recently) and UConn in Storrs, I'm pretty sure they'd play at home.

As far as me misinterpreting Lunardi's site -- not sure where you're coming from. I'm just using Lunardi's words. He says, straight up, that his predictions are based on an algorithm and represent an "objective" assessment of a team's "odds" of NCAA seeds. Those are his terms, not mine. There's nothing in there about a gut feeling.

So, again, my question is, what changed over the weekend according to his "objective" formula?

 

[Marsh01]

I couldn't find his updated S Curve, but this is his current Nitty Gritty report

Region pairings

SOUTH/Kentucky vs. WEST/Michigan State (1 vs. 4)
EAST/Syracuse vs. MIDWEST/Kansas (2 vs. 3)

 

[CorduroyG]

I dont care what the #s say, beating uconn in gampel is a better win than vandy at home, i dont even think its debateable.

 

[Marsh01]

I dont care what the #s say, beating uconn in gampel is a better win than vandy at home, i dont even think its debateable.

Well their benches ARE under the basket so...

 

[Garbs]

Interesting point abut teamrankings.

Comparing Vandy (at home) to Uconn on the road is a judgment call. But I think I'm on solid footing -- UConn has a lot of size and at least (projected) lottery pics, and beating them in Storrs was not an easy out. If Ky were given the choice between Vandy (a team they'd already beaten on the road recently) and UConn in Storrs, I'm pretty sure they'd play at home.

As far as me misinterpreting Lunardi's site -- not sure where you're coming from. I'm just using Lunardi's words. He says, straight up, that his predictions are based on an algorithm and represent an "objective" assessment of a team's "odds" of NCAA seeds. Those are his terms, not mine. There's nothing in there about a gut feeling.

So, again, my question is, what changed over the weekend according to his "objective" formula?

I think he means that the algorithm computes the odds, not the actual bracket and seedings

 

[Knicks411]

As far as me misinterpreting Lunardi's site -- not sure where you're coming from. I'm just using Lunardi's words. He says, straight up, that his predictions are based on an algorithm and represent an "objective" assessment of a team's "odds" of NCAA seeds. Those are his terms, not mine. There's nothing in there about a gut feeling.

Where does he say that? (Not trying to be a dick, legitimately curious). As far as I can tell, the alogorithim from team rankings has nothing to do with him; ESPN is just providing the results of that based on the field Lunardi puts together.

Moqui, link is here

http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-col...s-move-ahead-syracuse-orange-no-1-overall-cbb

 

[reedny]

I think he means that the algorithm computes the odds, not the actual bracket and seedings

Ok, but no matter how it's calculated, I'm left with the same question, which is, other than the Vandy/Uconn games, what has changed "objectively" from last week to this one?