SU's Record in the NCAA Tournament - Broken Down

[SWC75]

certainly the argument could be made that that carrying a team with an overall avg. seed of 3.7 into the tourney 37 times and emerging with just 4 final fours and one championship is not exactly stellar.

It's the top seeds that project into the final four. The 4 seeds are supposed to lose in the Sweet 16, where we often do.

 

[orange2win]

Sorry. Been gone a few days

Again, when you are usually a high seed, you have VERY few chances to pull an upset(by how you define it). On the other hand, you have a lot more chances to be "upset" because you're playing a lot more games against teams that are lower seeds.

I have no idea why you decided on those parameters but any system that doesn't have the 1996 win over Kansas as a "big win" needs to be rethought and revamped.

You lose me with your point.

Specifically, SU was seeded #5 thru #8 in 83, 85, 92, 95, 98, 99, 01, 04, 06 (that's 31% of their appearances - not very few). You would have to calculate it individually to get the precise number, but it gave them potentially somewhere from 27 to 54 chances to pull off an upset Big Win. They have zero Big Wins. But they have 8 Bad Loses over the same period. Those are the numbers.

 

[orange2win]

I know this would take a lot of work, but I would be curious to the average seed of other historically great coaches like K, Izzo, Roy, Pitino etc, and see their related #'s

I do not have a full analysis for the other teams, but I do have their average seeding and the results are interesting.
The list below gives two numbers. First, their number of appearances in the tournament over the JB era and second, their associated average seeding.

SU - 29 - 3.7
Duke - 32 - 2.2
UNC - 31 - 2.5
UK - 30 - 3.3
UConn - 19 - 3.6
Kansas - 31 - 2.8

Also, SWC75: Excellent data!!

 

[OrangeDW]

Sorry. Been gone a few days



You lose me with your point.

Specifically, SU was seeded #5 thru #8 in 83, 85, 92, 95, 98, 99, 01, 04, 06 (that's 31% of their appearances - not very few). You would have to calculate it individually to get the precise number, but it gave them potentially somewhere from 27 to 54 chances to pull off an upset Big Win. They have zero Big Wins. But they have 8 Bad Loses over the same period. Those are the numbers.

I will simplify...your definition of a "big win" is dumb. That's my biggest issue here.

Trying to tell me the national fricken championship wasn't a big win?

Try to tell me the '96 win over Kansas's NBA team wasn't an upset and a big win.

Your cut off at "4 seeds above" is capricious and arbitrary.

31% is not a big number! when compared to 69%. They've had MANY more opportunities to be the victim of a big upset than to pull off a big upset (by 4+ seeds!).

 

[orange2win]

I will simplify...your definition of a "big win" is dumb. That's my biggest issue here.

Trying to tell me the national fricken championship wasn't a big win?

Try to tell me the '96 win over Kansas's NBA team wasn't an upset and a big win.

Your cut off at "4 seeds above" is capricious and arbitrary.

31% is not a big number! when compared to 69%. They've had MANY more opportunities to be the victim of a big upset than to pull off a big upset (by 4+ seeds!).

Not trying to tell you anything. I'm presenting clearly defined data. You interpret it as you see fit. Most people can relate to beating a team 4 seeds above and losing to a team 4 seeds below - sorry you cannot.

Every win is big, especially against tough completion. The 96 win against Kansas was big for all SU fans, but statistically speaking we were a #4 seed and we beat a #2 seed. Sorry, but not much to crow about there.

All the other teams I mentioned above have an average seeding better than SU and by your reckoning should have an even worse upset record. Agree? Can you please calculate their performance since 1977 in support of your point. We would all welcome seeing that data.

 

[OrangeDW]

Not trying to tell you anything. I'm presenting clearly defined data. You interpret it as you see fit. Most people can relate to beating a team 4 seeds above and losing to a team 4 seeds below - sorry you cannot.

Every win is big, especially against tough completion. The 96 win against Kansas was big for all SU fans, but statistically speaking we were a #4 seed and we beat a #2 seed. Sorry, but not much to crow about there.

All the other teams I mentioned above have an average seeding better than SU and by your reckoning should have an even worse upset record. Agree? Can you please calculate their performance since 1977 in support of your point. We would all welcome seeing that data.

1. No, when it's something that 70% of our teams didn't even have the opportunity to accomplish even if they had won the national championship...it makes zero sense to use a stat like that. Simply listing our record vs. higher seeds, even seeds, and lower seeds would make much more sense IMO.

2. No, I can't. I don't care to spend time looking up something that I don't see as having much of a point.

 

[SWC75]

1. No, when it's something that 70% of our teams didn't even have the opportunity to accomplish even if they had won the national championship...it makes zero sense to use a stat like that. Simply listing our record vs. higher seeds, even seeds, and lower seeds would make much more sense IMO.

2. No, I can't. I don't care to spend time looking up something that I don't see as having much of a point.

If a light heavyweight loses to a middleweight, he can make up for it by beating a heavyweight. But how does he make up for a loss to a welterweight?