Bracketology and Team Resumes

[AH1971 1,186]

12 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

What's funny is that IU won two  games this week that were quad one wins, but by the end of the season they may not be quad one wins because those teams lost to IU.  Wisky is currently at 22 and Maryland was at 70 entering today.  If Wisky drops to 26+ and Maryland to 76+, neither are quad one wins.

Not that it matters in the grand scheme of things, but Wisconsin would have to fall below 30 for IU's win to be bumped to Q2. 

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

@Loaded Chicken Sandwich-- do you have your weekly top 25?

[IUHoosierJoe 970]

15 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

@Loaded Chicken Sandwich-- do you have your weekly top 25?

He put it in the college bball thread yesterday 

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

@Uspshoosier thoughts on Richmond's chances?  Most bracketologists don't like their resume, but 1-3-1 Sports (the highest rated service that has participated the last five seasons on the bracket project) has them not only in but not even in the bye games.  I have them on the next four out line.

Also wanted to throw out that if we were in the days of RPI as opposed to NET and POM, Michigan State is solidly out of the tournament.  In NET, Michigan State is 22;  RPI has them at 60.  Quad records:

• NET Q1 4-8, Q2 4-4, Q3 5-0, Q4 4-0
• RPI Q1 2-7, Q2 2-3, Q3 9-2, Q4 4-0

That's not to say that NET isn't better than RPI (it is), just interesting to me that there is such a difference in the two metrics.

[Uspshoosier 44,553]

7 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

@Uspshoosier thoughts on Richmond's chances?  Most bracketologists don't like their resume, but 1-3-1 Sports (the highest rated service that has participated the last five seasons on the bracket project) has them not only in but not even in the bye games.  I have them on the next four out line.

Also wanted to throw out that if we were in the days of RPI as opposed to NET and POM, Michigan State is solidly out of the tournament.  In NET, Michigan State is 22;  RPI has them at 60.  Quad records:

• NET Q1 4-8, Q2 4-4, Q3 5-0, Q4 4-0
• RPI Q1 2-7, Q2 2-3, Q3 9-2, Q4 4-0

That's not to say that NET isn't better than RPI (it is), just interesting to me that there is such a difference in the two metrics.

No where close for me. Has to be a misprint or they are in right now because the are leading the A-10 so they are in as A-10 auto bid for them right now 

[IU_FanClub 1,643]

Would winning the next 5 and then losing in the big ten title game be enough to give us a shot at 21-14?

[Hoosierfan1901 5,822]

18 minutes ago, IU_FanClub said:

Would winning the next 5 and then losing in the big ten title game be enough to give us a shot at 21-14?

No, would need to win the BTT

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

5 minutes ago, Hoosierfan1901 said:

No, would need to win the BTT

Yeah, the committee has shown in the past that they look very little at conference tournament games -- particularly games after Thursday.  Two years ago everyone assumed that IU locked up a tournament bid when they beat Michigan in the BTT;  they followed that up on Friday by beating Illinois and then took Iowa to the wire on Saturday.....then the NCAA committee had them as one of the last two teams in.  Sucks in my opinion that the committee doesn't seem to give the conference tournaments much weight.

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

On 3/5/2024 at 8:32 PM, Uspshoosier said:

No where close for me. Has to be a misprint or they are in right now because the are leading the A-10 so they are in as A-10 auto bid for them right now 

1-3-1 has them as an 11 seed and the play in games as 11 seeds as well, so it could be they have them in as an auto seed.  It looks like they have Indiana State and Richmond as the last two 11 seeds, so they are probably saying they are in as auto seeds but not in as at large.

[lillurk 3,710]

29 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Yeah, the committee has shown in the past that they look very little at conference tournament games -- particularly games after Thursday.  Two years ago everyone assumed that IU locked up a tournament bid when they beat Michigan in the BTT;  they followed that up on Friday by beating Illinois and then took Iowa to the wire on Saturday.....then the NCAA committee had them as one of the last two teams in.  Sucks in my opinion that the committee doesn't seem to give the conference tournaments much weight.

It’s because they’re bad at their job. I don’t think it’s EASY, exactly, but they are simply not particularly well-qualified to do it and act like it’s much harder than it has to be

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

Personally, I'd like to see the conference tournaments end on Saturday and then the selection show be on Sunday.....or even see some of the conferences that are going to be one bid leagues hold their conference tournaments the week the P5 teams are playing their tournament and have their championship games on Sunday since it wouldn't effect seeding.  Part of the issue is how close the conference tournaments are ending to the selections being made.  They are starting at the beginning of the P5 conference tournaments but because of the moving parts in which they are trying to avoid conference teams meeting up early, there are tons of moving parts come Saturday and Sunday.  The Friday games, though, I don't understand not really counting much.

[Uspshoosier 44,553]

10 hours ago, IU_FanClub said:

Would winning the next 5 and then losing in the big ten title game be enough to give us a shot at 21-14?

No their metrics are too bad and they wouldn’t have enough quality wins against other tourney teams.   Now it might get interesting if they beat Wisconsin,  Illinois,  and Purdue in the tourney before losing in the finals but their metrics are terrible.   They just won a road game at a top 76 team at the time and only moved up 6 spots to NET 95.  That number needs to at least be in the 70s to even have a shot.   The home losses are what took them out of consideration.   A road record of 4-6 isn’t bad for a bubble team however losing 5 at home was killer. 

[str8baller 4,845]

58 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

No their metrics are too bad and they wouldn’t have enough quality wins against other tourney teams.   Now it might get interesting if they beat Wisconsin,  Illinois,  and Purdue in the tourney before losing in the finals but their metrics are terrible.   They just won a road game at a top 76 team at the time and only moved up 6 spots to NET 95.  That number needs to at least be in the 70s to even have a shot.   The home losses are what took them out of consideration.   A road record of 4-6 isn’t bad for a bubble team however losing 5 at home was killer. 

Any chance Woody has the same type of friends on the committee that he does on the BoT? 

[Uspshoosier 44,553]

10 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Any chance Woody has the same type of friends on the committee that he does on the BoT? 

Chris Reynolds is committee chair 

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

Strange:  if IU beats Michigan state, the Hoosiers would be 4-8 in quad 1 games and 5-4 in quad 2.  The Spartans would be 4-8 and 5-5….you the difference in net would be about 70 spots.

[Uspshoosier 44,553]

30 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Strange:  if IU beats Michigan state, the Hoosiers would be 4-8 in quad 1 games and 5-4 in quad 2.  The Spartans would be 4-8 and 5-5….you the difference in net would be about 70 spots.

For the average person yeah probably strange just looking at numbers and seeing that big a difference between the 2 teams however for you or me or someone that dives deeper not strange at all with the big gap.   Q4 games played I’m guessing the margin of victory for Sparty vs IU was way bigger.    Sparty has more quality wins within the Q1 and Q2 area that IU doesn’t have.    IU only has 1 win against a tourney quality team and that was at home 

[HoosierHoopster 6,310]

8 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

For the average person yeah probably strange just looking at numbers and seeing that big a difference between the 2 teams however for you or me or someone that dives deeper not strange at all with the big gap.   Q4 games played I’m guessing the margin of victory for Sparty vs IU was way bigger.    Sparty has more quality wins within the Q1 and Q2 area that IU doesn’t have.    IU only has 1 win against a tourney quality team and that was at home 

For the average person like me (:)), can you further explain the "more quality wins within the Q1 and Q2 area" point? I read RaceToTheTop (I can't wait until you change your name again @RaceToTheTop -- the whole Race 2-big front-court thing...) post to say that IU has the same number of Q1 wins (4-8) and same number of Q2 wins (5). I'm sure I'm missing something, thx in adv --

[hoosiersoxfan 209]

51 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Strange:  if IU beats Michigan state, the Hoosiers would be 4-8 in quad 1 games and 5-4 in quad 2.  The Spartans would be 4-8 and 5-5….you the difference in net would be about 70 spots.

If I am understanding correctly, I think getting blow out so many times is hurting the NET a lot.  Most of IU's losses have been by large margins.

[Uspshoosier 44,553]

6 minutes ago, HoosierHoopster said:

For the average person like me (:)), can you further explain the "more quality wins within the Q1 and Q2 area" point? I read RaceToTheTop (I can't wait until you change your name again @RaceToTheTop -- the whole Race 2-big front-court thing...) post to say that IU has the same number of Q1 wins (4-8) and same number of Q2 wins (5). I'm sure I'm missing something, thx in adv --

Not all wins within each Quad are created equal.   Winning @Purdue is a Q1 win however winning @St Bonaventure is also a Q1 win.    Those wins are both Q1 wins however the Purdue win would be viewed as a way more powerful win for a team.   IU has some  wins that are Q1 wins however besides the Wisky win non are against tournament quality teams.   Sparty won a neutral court win over Baylor which is a projected 3 seed as of today so that Q1 win would hold more weight with the committee then the Q1 win IU had winning at Maryland 

[RaceToTheTop 24,301]

1 hour ago, Uspshoosier said:

Not all wins within each Quad are created equal.   Winning @Purdue is a Q1 win however winning @St Bonaventure is also a Q1 win.    Those wins are both Q1 wins however the Purdue win would be viewed as a way more powerful win for a team.   IU has some  wins that are Q1 wins however besides the Wisky win non are against tournament quality teams.   Sparty won a neutral court win over Baylor which is a projected 3 seed as of today so that Q1 win would hold more weight with the committee then the Q1 win IU had winning at Maryland 

I agree.  I just think that the selections which used to be completely non efficiency based have swung too far in the other direction.  It’s not just the value of the quad wins that has IU 70 spots behind Michigan state — the greater effect is the efficiency ratings.

Take, for instance, IU and NC State’s resumes.  Same record.  IU’s quad breakdown is much better.  IU’s SOS is better.  But NC State is rated higher.  Just my personal preference — if a team has as good or better of a record as another AND played a tougher schedule, it’s a no brainer which team I would pick over the other.  I know the ncaa committee doesn’t do it that way.  Just stating that I LOVE efficiency stats but I’m in favor of rewarding teams more on actual wins in losses to a greater degree and less on metrics thsn the NCAA currently does.