Still at least eight teams behind us | Syracusefan.com

Still at least eight teams behind us

sabach said:
in Lunardi's latest.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Expand...

Lunardi talks out both sides of his mouth.

If he has SU as a 9 seed and above the last 4 in and last four with byes, that would appear pretty solidly in. So, losing to another projected NCAA 9 seed in your conference tournament wouldn't really be a "bad" loss (I realize that would be the third loss to Pitt). I'd like to ask him why he has SU solidly in as a 9, but at the same time saying that the SU vs. Pitt ACC Tourney game is essentially a play in game? And, has a relatively solid projected 9 seed ever been bounced that far after one additional loss from their conference tourney? As an SU fan, I hate Pitt as much as the next guy, but it's not like Pitt is BC or a team equivalent to them.
 
orangecuse said:
Lunardi talks out both sides of his mouth.

If he has SU as a 9 seed and above the last 4 in and last four with byes, that would appear pretty solidly in. So, losing to another projected NCAA 9 seed in your conference tournament wouldn't really be a "bad" loss (I realize that would be the third loss to Pitt). I'd like to ask him why he has SU solidly in as a 9, but at the same time saying that the SU vs. Pitt ACC Tourney game is essentially a play in game? And, has a relatively solid projected 9 seed ever been bounced that far after one additional loss from their conference tourney? As an SU fan, I hate Pitt as much as the next guy, but it's not like Pitt is BC or a team equivalent to them.
Expand...

It probably has to do with the seeding rules as far as you can't play conference members before a certain point in the tournament and the other various seeding rules that you need to account for. So we may very well be in the last four with byes and still a 9 seed. Just throwing it out there but that's my theory.
 
MSOrange said:
It probably has to do with the seeding rules as far as you can't play conference members before a certain point in the tournament and the other various seeding rules that you need to account for. So we may very well be in the last four with byes and still a 9 seed. Just throwing it out there but that's my theory.
Expand...

What about 2010-2011 when we played Marquette in R2? Or am I wrong here
 
orangecuse said:
Lunardi talks out both sides of his mouth.

If he has SU as a 9 seed and above the last 4 in and last four with byes, that would appear pretty solidly in. So, losing to another projected NCAA 9 seed in your conference tournament wouldn't really be a "bad" loss (I realize that would be the third loss to Pitt). I'd like to ask him why he has SU solidly in as a 9, but at the same time saying that the SU vs. Pitt ACC Tourney game is essentially a play in game? And, has a relatively solid projected 9 seed ever been bounced that far after one additional loss from their conference tourney? As an SU fan, I hate Pitt as much as the next guy, but it's not like Pitt is BC or a team equivalent to them.
Expand...
Is there proof that Lunardi said that after fully evaluating the field?

My guess is he said that off the cuff / in jest during an interview sometime Saturday afternoon but then likely realized after his latest bracketology that that would not be the case.
 
RPI vs. BPI - Is one better than the other as far as what has historically matched the committee's field inclusion and seeding decisions?
 
Call me the opposite of a biased fan. But I just dont see it. I look at other resumes and they are really close to ours.

I saw 1 tweet from an ohio state fan asking if OSU won @mich st (they lost) would that get them in? And the response was "not even close"... well that win would have been significantly better than @duke and they have also beaten UK and Iowa and would have had a better record than us. I just dont see how we are that much higher than OSU.

If we make the tourney, we will prob be the worst RPI ranked team to get in as an at large (by a mile)

Makes me sick, but I would not be surprised to see up on the wrong side of the bubble. Even beating Pitt doesnt guarantee it in my book. I really hope I'm wrong, and I'm not "expert" but neither is Lunardi so what the hell?
 
The NCAA tournament committee does not spend a lot of time looking at Lunardi's picks of who is in or out or for that matter of who plays who. The RPI is the committee's poll and they consider SOS. SU has an RPI of 60, teams with an RPI of 60 go to the NIT, you can count on your hand the few teams that a team has have gotten into the tournament over the years with that poor of an RPI. Even a win against Pitt may not get a bid, 2 wins would. They are not going to bump a team with an RPI in the 20's or 30's for Syracuse, maybe one in the 40's? Also the committee puts much greater weight on a teams regular season than the year end tournaments. Syracuse's last half dozen games have not been pretty.
 
Cusetime said:
The NCAA tournament committee does not spend a lot of time looking at Lunardi's picks of who is in or out or for that matter of who plays who. The RPI is the committee's poll and they consider SOS. SU has an RPI of 60, teams with an RPI of 60 go to the NIT, you can count on your hand the few teams that a team has have gotten into the tournament over the years with that poor of an RPI. Even a win against Pitt may not get a bid, 2 wins would. They are not going to bump a team with an RPI in the 20's or 30's for Syracuse, maybe one in the 40's? Also the committee puts much greater weight on a teams regular season than the year end tournaments. Syracuse's last half dozen games have not been pretty.
Expand...
Debbie-Downer.png
 
CusefanATL said:
Call me the opposite of a biased fan. But I just dont see it. I look at other resumes and they are really close to ours.

I saw 1 tweet from an ohio state fan asking if OSU won @mich st (they lost) would that get them in? And the response was "not even close"... well that win would have been significantly better than @duke and they have also beaten UK and Iowa and would have had a better record than us. I just dont see how we are that much higher than OSU.

If we make the tourney, we will prob be the worst RPI ranked team to get in as an at large (by a mile)

Makes me sick, but I would not be surprised to see up on the wrong side of the bubble. Even beating Pitt doesnt guarantee it in my book. I really hope I'm wrong, and I'm not "expert" but neither is Lunardi so what the hell?
Expand...
I'm skeptical of SU's chances as well but to address your example - Ohio State has an RPI of 77 and BPI of 63. That ain't good.
 
CusefanATL said:
Call me the opposite of a biased fan. But I just dont see it. I look at other resumes and they are really close to ours.

I saw 1 tweet from an ohio state fan asking if OSU won @mich st (they lost) would that get them in? And the response was "not even close"... well that win would have been significantly better than @duke and they have also beaten UK and Iowa and would have had a better record than us. I just dont see how we are that much higher than OSU.

If we make the tourney, we will prob be the worst RPI ranked team to get in as an at large (by a mile)

Makes me sick, but I would not be surprised to see up on the wrong side of the bubble. Even beating Pitt doesnt guarantee it in my book. I really hope I'm wrong, and I'm not "expert" but neither is Lunardi so what the hell?
Expand...

I doubt this; we're 58 right now, so if we win against Pitt we probably move up a few spots to 55? Sound reasonable? The following are all teams on the bubble, or maybe in, with their current RPI

Wichita State (Currently a 7 for Lunardi) -51
Pitt (currently a 9)- 52
Tulsa (second team out) -54
UConn (last 4 in) -55
Temple (11 seed)- 57
Gonzaga (last team out)- 65
Michigan (last 4 out) -70

Some of these teams will make it.
 
orangenirvana said:
RPI vs. BPI - Is one better than the other as far as what has historically matched the committee's field inclusion and seeding decisions?
Expand...
BPI, like KenPom and the other "nitty gritty" analytics tools, are supposedly not utilized per se by the committee... it is pretty widely acknowledged, though, that they at least peak at those tools in certain situations. I personally think the committee uses BPI, KenPom, etc a lot more than they let on
 
Knicks411 said:
I doubt this; we're 58 right now, so if we win against Pitt we probably move up a few spots to 55? Sound reasonable? The following are all teams on the bubble, or maybe in, with their current RPI

Wichita State (Currently a 7 for Lunardi) -51
Pitt (currently a 9)- 52
Tulsa (second team out) -54
UConn (last 4 in) -55
Temple (11 seed)- 57
Gonzaga (last team out)- 65
Michigan (last 4 out) -70

Some of these teams will make it.
Expand...

Wichita State is a 7?! I've seen almost every "expert" say they are out. Mike Decourcey and Lunardi seem to be the 2 that going for riches with WSU.
 
pearl31 said:
BPI, like KenPom and the other "nitty gritty" analytics tools, are supposedly not utilized per se by the committee... it is pretty widely acknowledged, though, that they at least peak at those tools in certain situations. I personally think the committee uses BPI, KenPom, etc a lot more than they let on
Expand...

I think they even said they use Ken Pom now?

CusefanATL said:
Wichita State is a 7?! I've seen almost every "expert" say they are out. Mike Decourcey and Lunardi seem to be the 2 that going for riches with WSU.
Expand...

Yeah I don't buy Wichita as a 7, I just usually default to Lunardi for whatever reason. But they're definitely in the conversation.
 
Cusetime said:
The NCAA tournament committee does not spend a lot of time looking at Lunardi's picks of who is in or out or for that matter of who plays who. The RPI is the committee's poll and they consider SOS. SU has an RPI of 60, teams with an RPI of 60 go to the NIT, you can count on your hand the few teams that a team has have gotten into the tournament over the years with that poor of an RPI. Even a win against Pitt may not get a bid, 2 wins would. They are not going to bump a team with an RPI in the 20's or 30's for Syracuse, maybe one in the 40's? Also the committee puts much greater weight on a teams regular season than the year end tournaments. Syracuse's last half dozen games have not been pretty.
Expand...
1) The bubble line is very low this year. 68 teams make the tournament. The bracket has to be filled out. A number of questionable teams will make it - including some with a "non-traditional" RPI.
2) There is a very informative thread on RPI #s and how it translates to tourney bids, started by OrlandoCuse I believe, from last week you ought to read.
3) The committee puts the same weight on all games played from November to now.
3) There is no factoring of "last 10" or "last 12" anymore. That ended several years ago.
 
pearl31 said:
BPI, like KenPom and the other "nitty gritty" analytics tools, are supposedly not utilized per se by the committee... it is pretty widely acknowledged, though, that they at least peak at those tools in certain situations. I personally think the committee uses BPI, KenPom, etc a lot more than they let on
Expand...
There really should be one single rating system that the committee uses for this and is open to the public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Basketball
Replies
7
Views
796
Oakland
Oakland

Forum statistics

Threads
170,420
Messages
4,890,619
Members
5,996
Latest member
meierscreek

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
13
Guests online
943
Total visitors
956
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom