Bracketology and Team Resumes

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

Committee making it easy for the Zags.   Iowa-2 seed (they already beat by double digits)

3 seed- Kansas (already beat Kansas by double digits 

4 seed-Virginia (already beat by 100).  Lol cake walk 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

Wichita St is in this tournament because the Ivy League decided not to play this year 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

13 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Wichita St is in this tournament because the Ivy League decided not to play this year 

My mistake drake was the last team in the field 

[LIHoosier 26,205]

6 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

My mistake drake was the last team in the field 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

Three things really strike me:
• Drake was seeded *below* Oregon State and Georgetown. Huh?
• OK State FIVE spots behind West Virginia. 
• VCU seeded ahead of St. Bonaventure. What? Bonnies won 2 of 3  head to head and both A10 titles.

borzello 

This shows again Sunday results really have no effect on the bracket.  No chance vcu should of been ahead of the Bonnies 

[LIHoosier 26,205]

The NIT 

Left Side: 1 Colorado St vs 4 Buffalo, 2 Davidson vs 3 NC State...1 Memphis vs 4 Dayton, 2 Boise St vs 3 SMU

Right Side: 1 St Louis vs 4 Mississippi St, 2 Richmond vs 3 Toledo...1 Ole Miss vs 4 Louisiana Tech, 2 St Mary's vs 3 W Kentucky

I suppose Uof6 declined the NIT but stayed on NCAA standby. 

[RaceToTheTop 25,835]

28 minutes ago, LIHoosier said:

The NIT 

Left Side: 1 Colorado St vs 4 Buffalo, 2 Davidson vs 3 NC State...1 Memphis vs 4 Dayton, 2 Boise St vs 3 SMU

Right Side: 1 St Louis vs 4 Mississippi St, 2 Richmond vs 3 Toledo...1 Ole Miss vs 4 Louisiana Tech, 2 St Mary's vs 3 W Kentucky

I suppose Uof6 declined the NIT but stayed on NCAA standby. 

Maybe a sign that Uof6 might have an unfavorable NCAA report coming their way and Mack wants out?

[goldie wilson 0]

1 hour ago, Uspshoosier said:

Three things really strike me:
• Drake was seeded *below* Oregon State and Georgetown. Huh?
• OK State FIVE spots behind West Virginia. 
• VCU seeded ahead of St. Bonaventure. What? Bonnies won 2 of 3  head to head and both A10 titles.

borzello 

This shows again Sunday results really have no effect on the bracket.  No chance vcu should of been ahead of the Bonnies 

VCU is a 10 seed, St. Bona is a 9 seed.

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

3 minutes ago, goldie wilson said:

VCU is a 10 seed, St. Bona is a 9 seed.

Yeah but in the committees true seed line it has vcu ahead of St Bona which is odd 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

9 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Yeah but in the committees true seed line it has vcu ahead of St Bona which is odd 

Basically they switched Maryland and St Bonaventure seed for the bracket.  Not sure why yet going to have to dig a little and see  what the purpose was doing that 

[RaceToTheTop 25,835]

Excellent selections by USPS.

Here are the final results of his model and my adjusted NET models (for the teams the NCAA seeded in the top 46):

At large picks:  USPS missed one (had Louisville in , Wichita State out), I missed one (had Louisville in, Utah State out)

Exact seeding correct:  USPS had an amazing 28, I had 14.

Seeds  one spot from actual:  USPS 8, I had 21.  So USPS with 36 out of 46 correct or within 1 spot, I had 35.

USPS missed 9 teams by 2 or more spots (1 team incorrectly out), I missed 10.

On average, for the 45 teams we each picked correctly, USPS was off by 0.6 seed;  I was off by 1.2.

How did USPS do compared to the guy making the big bucks for this?

Joe Lunardi missed one team being in (the same one USPS had -- he had Louisville in, Utah State out);  Lundardi was correct on 27 seeds;  Lunardi had 15 teams that he was one seed off.  USPS beat him by one in correct seeds, but Lunardi had a great year in terms of being right or close -- 42 of 46 correct or within one spot.  On average, Lunardi was off by 0.5 seeds -- just an eyelash better than USPS's 0.6.

[RaceToTheTop 25,835]

13 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Yeah but in the committees true seed line it has vcu ahead of St Bona which is odd 

Creighton and Villanova also 5 seeds, but Creighton actually seeded one spot ahead on the S curve.  Bracketmatrix had people really split on their projections......had them both overall as 5 seeds but the matrix had Villanova a spot ahead of Creighton.

[RaceToTheTop 25,835]

Areas of agreement that USPS and I had on our boards on seeding:

Oklahoma State should be a 3 instead of a 4 seed.

Missouri seems to be the most underseeded in our opinion....I had them as a 4, he had them as a 5, the committee put tham at 9.  LSU also underseeded -- I had them as a 6, he had them as a 5, committee saw them as an 8.

We both had Louisville making the tournament.

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

10 minutes ago, brumdog45 said:

Excellent selections by USPS.

Here are the final results of his model and my adjusted NET models (for the teams the NCAA seeded in the top 46):

At large picks:  USPS missed one (had Louisville in , Wichita State out), I missed one (had Louisville in, Utah State out)

Exact seeding correct:  USPS had an amazing 28, I had 14.

Seeds  one spot from actual:  USPS 8, I had 21.  So USPS with 36 out of 46 correct or within 1 spot, I had 35.

USPS missed 9 teams by 2 or more spots (1 team incorrectly out), I missed 10.

On average, for the 45 teams we each picked correctly, USPS was off by 0.6 seed;  I was off by 1.2.

How did USPS do compared to the guy making the big bucks for this?

Joe Lunardi missed one team being in (the same one USPS had -- he had Louisville in, Utah State out);  Lundardi was correct on 27 seeds;  Lunardi had 15 teams that he was one seed off.  USPS beat him by one in correct seeds, but Lunardi had a great year in terms of being right or close -- 42 of 46 correct or within one spot.  On average, Lunardi was off by 0.5 seeds -- just an eyelash better than USPS's 0.6.

Time to tell the wife I’m done delivering mail and moving on to bracketology full time.    Maybe when I’m retired I will have more time to dive in like all of those top guys do.   I just love doing and have fun doing it.    I’m glad I could drag some other people into this fascinating hobby.   Congrats on picking the field. Is this your first year doing that? 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

Mitch Barnhart said they focus more heavily on results-based metrics when it comes to selection and use predictive metrics more heavily when it comes to seeding.

Borzello 

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

Mitch Barnhart was asked why OK State ended up as a 4-seed -- he cited the Cowboys' two Quadrant 3 losses and comparatively weak predictive metrics as the two main reasons.

[RaceToTheTop 25,835]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

Time to tell the wife I’m done delivering mail and moving on to bracketology full time.    Maybe when I’m retired I will have more time to dive in like all of those top guys do.   I just love doing and have fun doing it.    I’m glad I could drag some other people into this fascinating hobby.   Congrats on picking the field. Is this your first year doing that? 

I had it set up last using some different numbers....but obviously with the early end to the season never got to check its accuracy.  That work is actually on the first sheet of the spreadsheet I pm'd you.  If the lowest at large team was 45th on the S curve (which is what I think it would have been this year if the Ivy league sent their champion), my bracket would have had three different teams in than you (the spreadsheet I made my S curve, your S curve, Lunardi's and the Bracket Matrix.  I would have had Wichita State, Richmond, and Arizona State in while you had NC State, UCLA, and Cincinnati.  I think last year there were a lot more teams on the bubble than this year.  FWIW, I had Indiana as 35 on the S curve and you had them 36.

[Uspshoosier 45,686]

I asked Mitch Barnhart about the Bonnies/VCU issue. He said the 1-68 seed list the NCAA sent out was mistaken in regards to VCU and St. Bonaventure. It should have had the Bonnies at 37 and VCU at 39, not VCU at 38 and the Bonnies at 39.

borzello

[RaceToTheTop 25,835]

43 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Mitch Barnhart was asked why OK State ended up as a 4-seed -- he cited the Cowboys' two Quadrant 3 losses and comparatively weak predictive metrics as the two main reasons.

Both the quad 3 losses would be to TCU.  I had TCU as a top 100 net team (96) while the NET system put them at 141.  Seems like their ranking of TCU really hurt Oklahoma St.

FWIW, Oklahoma State's ranking on my system still used TCU as a quad 3 because that is what the NCAA recorded it as.  Even with that I Oklahoma State rated above Kansas and West Virginia.