Tourney Selection Show Discussion

[tptcuse]

Discuss

There was a selection show?

 

[atlanticuse]

If Clemson and NC St had been closer in terms of resume. the head to head would have been more relevant I think.

Clemson though had 4 bad losses on the year (including 2 Q4 losses) - which is a lot for a bubble team.
NC St did not have any bad losses.

That is what created the gap between the two teams such that NC St could conceivably absorb those 2 head to head losses and still get in over them.

The NC State bad losses are their alumni.

 

[OrangeDW]

Kinda wild that Memphis isn’t a “P5”, because their b-ball program is far more like the good P5 programs than it’s like those other programs they’re being grouped with in that tweet.

 

[bpo57]

BRUTAL draw for Duke.

Not sure what makes it brutal. Oral Roberts is probably a better than average 12 seed but if Dook can't beat ORU then there isn't much to say. Tennessee is the 4 seed and they've been a train wreck lately. They'd have trouble scoring 70 in the layup line and now they're without their PG and best player. Purdue to me is hands-down the weakest 1 seed. They go life and death with RU and PSU. That league is very mediocre.

 

[djcon57]

Not sure what makes it brutal. Oral Roberts is probably a better than average 12 seed but if Dook can't beat ORU then there isn't much to say. Tennessee is the 4 seed and they've been a train wreck lately. They'd have trouble scoring 70 in the layup line and now they're without their PG and best player. Purdue to me is hands-down the weakest 1 seed. They go life and death with RU and PSU. That league is very mediocre.

Compared to other 4 and 5s, imo, they have worst draw. They are a young team. Playing experience right out of the gate isn’t great

 

[Cuse181]

Who could forget league losses on the road...

League loss to one of the worst teams in the country… seems like some here are very much overselling Louisville. They only won 4 games…

 

[bpo57]

Compared to other 4 and 5s, imo, they have worst draw. They are a young team. Playing experience right out of the gate isn’t great

I agree that the inexperience could catch up with them. We've also seen many times where a team looks great winning their conference tournament and then comes out flat as a pancake in the NCAAT. I'm not buying into Duke as a powerhouse - just not impressed with either TENN or Purdue. I think both are notably weaker than their comparable seeds.

 

[jncuse]

Compared to other 4 and 5s, imo, they have worst draw. They are a young team. Playing experience right out of the gate isn’t great

They may have a tougher draw in round 1 and 2.
But they have the easier draw in the regional. Purdue and Marquette are probably the weakest #1 and #2 seeds.

 

[jncuse]

This one though is somewhat inevitable.
The 12 line is all your best mid-majors - VCU, Oral Roberts, Charleston, Drake.
None of them really earned their way up to #11 status.

San Diego St and St Mary's were fairly given 5 seeds, so it was inevitable those matchups would happen.

The only egregious once if the 8/9 matchup.

 

[FireballPhil]

Does Texas play an aggressive and effective man to man? Anyone know?

Take Colgate if your betting.Texas is a flaky team. They have the ability but a good shooting team like Colgate can easily pull it off.

 

[FireballPhil]

Colgate had their perfect matchup last season in Wisconsin and still lost by 7. Texas is going to blow their doors off. I’ll be rooting for them but it ain’t happening.

you couldn't be more wrong. This Texas team is okay but nothing special. They have won multiple games they should have lost. Texas may very well win, but they sure are notgoing to blow Colgate's doors off unless all the shooters go cold.

 

[Day2]

League loss to one of the worst teams in the country… seems like some here are very much overselling Louisville. They only won 4 games…

They’re not a good team by any means. The point is that anything can happen in conference play. You play each other 1-3 times a year, every year. Virginia only beat Louisville by three on the road. Should we all pick them to lose to Furman since Louisville is so bad?

We’ve watched the ACC all year. We know Clemson is better than NC St. Even Keatts knows Clemson is better than NC St. The Pack were rewarded for beating the teams they were supposed to. That’s it. Based on their losses, Clemson has a lower floor, sure. Based on their wins, they also have a higher ceiling.

 

[FireballPhil]

Wait, you are trying to say the NET is not accurately depicting Louisville as a Q4 team?
They are arguably the worst P5 team in the last 10 years.

You can't sugar coat that loss by saying its a road conference game. Louisville was terrible.

I don't think he is saying that. I think he is saying the base rankings of the net are flawed. After all there is no info on how it is determined at the start of the year who the "good" schools will be.Because of that it is highly possible schools start the year in the wrong quadrant. This will slowly correct itself during the year but not enough for there to be true value in the net to draw any definitive conclusion. It is a useful metric but has its flaws.

 

[longtimefan]

So you would want somebody to go watch ACC/B12/B10/BE teams play conference matchups against each other in January or February, to determine how good the ACC is compared to those other conferences.

Totally ignore the observable data that shows one is way better than the other, and go with some dude making subjective views.

Big 12 was 107-22 OOC
ACC was 107-52 OOC.
That's 30 more losses with the same number of wins.

In OOC, Big 12 had 16 Q1 Wins, 30 Q1+Q2 wins, 2 bad losses
In OOC, ACC despite having 5 more teams had 7 Q1 Wins, 21 Q1+Q2 wins, and 18 bad losses.
As noted elsewhere take out Louisville and Florida St it is still 11 bad losses.

I'd rather a system that gives conferences a chance to prove who is the best on the floor, and rewards W's and L's, rather than flying some chump go watch different conference games in February and state "my eyes think these teams / leagues are nearly equal".

The solution for the ACC is simple. it's not the system - its to ******* play better.

One problem I have with the current system--

OOC games played between mid-Nov and mid-Dec lock in the numbers (and the narrative) for the entire season. Teams get better, or worse, during the course of the season, but those changes are not reflected in the NET.

I'd like a week set aside during mid-Feb, where everyone plays 2 non-con games.

 

[longtimefan]

Maui is going to be brutal. (2) 1’s, (2) 2’s, (1) 3. (1) 4

5 teams in Maui won their league regular season title this year--Gonzaga, UCLA, Purdue, Marquette, and Kansas.

 

[Day2]

One problem I have with the current system--

OOC games played between mid-Nov and mid-Dec lock in the numbers (and the narrative) for the entire season. Teams get better, or worse, during the course of the season, but those changes are not reflected in the NET.

I'd like a week set aside during mid-Feb, where everyone plays 2 non-con games.

The Big 12/SEC Challenge effectively did that this year. Probably had a lot to do with A&M getting a 7-seed and WVU making the field comfortably.

We need more of this. Next year’s ACC/SEC Challenge should be in January or February. The Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12, and Big East should put together challenges at the same time. Bring back the Bracket Buster games for the mid-majors. Or have some midseason tournaments.

It’s not just a matter of teams getting in or not getting in. The seedings are all over the place, too.

 

[jncuse]

One problem I have with the current system--

OOC games played between mid-Nov and mid-Dec lock in the numbers (and the narrative) for the entire season. Teams get better, or worse, during the course of the season, but those changes are not reflected in the NET.

I'd like a week set aside during mid-Feb, where everyone plays 2 non-con games.

I would agree with the idea of having one OOC week in January and February. Imagine having a bunch of 8 team tourneys with one team from each conference and two from a pool of mid majors.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Proves the system is flawed. I don’t know how many Quad 1 wins Clemson had, but I’m pretty sure it was more than one. Wins should carry more weight, especially when the teams play head-to-head. We all know Clemson is the better team.

It’s not a head to head eval though . It’s multiple teams being simultaneously evaluated against each other . Let’s say Clemson deserved to get in ahead of nc state based on head to head but nc state deserves to get in vs another bubble team based on head to head and that team deserved to get in over Clemson in a head to head ??

 

[gbo]

League loss to one of the worst teams in the country… seems like some here are very much overselling Louisville. They only won 4 games…

They aren't a good team agreed but I just think it's funny that in football, every conference says that winning on the road is difficult but the same somehow doesn't apply to basketball...

Also back in 2019, Clemson was told that having only one Q1 win while having zero Q3 and Q4 losses (Net 35) wasn't enough to warrant entry into the tournament, but somehow that doesn't matter for State this year.

 

[Cuse181]

They aren't a good team agreed but I just think it's funny that in football, every conference says that winning on the road is difficult but the same somehow doesn't apply to basketball...

Also back in 2019, Clemson was told that having only one Q1 win while having zero Q3 and Q4 losses (Net 35) wasn't enough to warrant entry into the tournament, but somehow that doesn't matter for State this year.

Winning on the road is hard, winning on the road against a 4 win team is not. I don’t remember 2019s discussion but did a team with 4 Q3/4 losses get in above them?

 

[Cuse181]

They’re not a good team by any means. The point is that anything can happen in conference play. You play each other 1-3 times a year, every year. Virginia only beat Louisville by three on the road. Should we all pick them to lose to Furman since Louisville is so bad?

We’ve watched the ACC all year. We know Clemson is better than NC St. Even Keatts knows Clemson is better than NC St. The Pack were rewarded for beating the teams they were supposed to. That’s it. Based on their losses, Clemson has a lower floor, sure. Based on their wins, they also have a higher ceiling.

Anything can happen in conference play, that doesn’t excuse bad losses, that just makes them possible. This really isn’t a difficult concept if people ignore head to head (as you should because the resumes aren’t even close)

 

[gbo]

Winning on the road is hard, winning on the road against a 4 win team is not. I don’t remember 2019s discussion but did a team with 4 Q3/4 losses get in above them?

If you say so. Maybe for a storied program like Syracuse, but Louisville is still more talented than we are 4 wins or not.

I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that we got left out in 2019 and they didn't. Oklahoma State should have been in over them.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Utah St and Nevada played no one OOC. They don’t belong at all. But apparently 12-6 in the MWC is better than 14-6 in the ACC. Given the matchups I think there is a better chance of the MWC going 0-4 than getting 2 Ws combined in the tournament. Why do they get respect every year?

 

[Orangezoo]

Clemson had a net of 60. They were 4-4 in q1 and 3-2 in Q2 with two q3 losses and two q4 losses.

They did get 1 solid non conference win vs Penn St. They also have bad losses to SC, Loyola in non conference play with the Ville and BC losses to go with.

Conference wins at Pitt ( play in team) and NCSt 2x with the home win over Duke.

If they don't lose those two non conference, or win the two bad conference losses or even a mix then with their good wins and q1 record, they likely get in. 4 bad losses is just too many. Entire body of work as they have been preaching.

 

[sutomcat]

Clemson had a net of 60. They were 4-4 in q1 and 3-2 in Q2 with two q3 losses and two q4 losses.

They did get 1 solid non conference win vs Penn St. They also have bad losses to SC, Loyola in non conference play with the Ville and BC losses to go with.

Conference wins at Pitt ( play in team) and NCSt 2x with the home win over Duke.

If they don't lose those two non conference, or win the two bad conference losses or even a mix then with their good wins and q1 record, they likely get in. 4 bad losses is just too many. Entire body of work as they have been preaching.

South Carolina fans are celebrating that their football team beat Clemson and kept them from making the college football playoffs and their basketball team beat Clemson and kept them out of the NCAA tournament.

It is very Rutgerian. They are the Rutgers of the SEC.