Re: College Basketball 2008-2009

[bukie]

Adjusted efficiency margin difference between first-round matchups:

 

East       8 Oklahoma State 0.892   9 Tennessee          0.892      0

 

That Tennessee/OK St game is going to be really tough.

 

Of course, the winner will just get demolished by Pitt anyway . . .

Yeah, it looks like the best 3 games of the first round will be Ok State-Tennessee, LSU-Butler, and FSU-Wisconsin, at least if everyone plays up to their normal efficiency.

[Exile on Waveland]

Adjusted efficiency margin difference between first-round matchups:

 

Basically, the higher the diff margin, the greater the difference in efficiency between the 2 teams. A negative number suggests the lower seed is actually more efficient than the higher seed.

 

What does it all mean?

- Don't expect a 1 or 2 seed to fall, but especially Connecticut.

- Kansas definitely has the toughest 3 seed game, and it's in a location closer to the 14 seed to boot.

- As maligned as Wisconsin and Arizona have been for making the field over more deserving teams (SD State actually was even more efficient than Arizona), they both have favorable matchups. Heck, Wisconsin was more efficient than their opponent, and they're 7 seeds apart.

- Ohio State got the weakest 9 seed, and gets to play in Dayton. If they lose, it'd be a pretty good upset even though it's an 8-9 game.

 

First, thank you. Second, it's funny, this was a tournament I didn't think I had a great read on (working leaves me with less time to watch basketball then previously). Still, a lot of my initial reactions are confirmed by these stats. Meaning, I think Wisconsin, Arizona, USC, Maryland, VCU, and even Cleveland State and North Dakota State are possible upsets. Obviously some would be extremely minor ones.

[Guest]

I'll do a few bracket contests this year, but I have no good basis for my picks. I didn't see a single minute of UConn, Pitt, Louisville or all of the Pac 10. I pretty much watched B10 games exclusively this year

 

You really didn't miss much.

[Guest]

First run through, I came up with Michigan State over UNC, with UConn and Nova rounding out the final 4. I also had Cleveland State, Temple, and Cal as upset 2nd weekend teams.

 

I want to pick Villanova to go deep but I think the UCLA game is about as much of a toss-up as you can have in a 3-6.

 

I can't talk myself into picking anything but 1's and 2's. And I hate taking the chalk.

 

And I am strongly considering VCU over UCLA. :oops: I don't think UCLA has a chance against Nova in Philadelphia, especially with Collison playing injured.

 

I picked VCU over your guys. Sorry.

 

I hate picking games where it seems like everyone is picking the upset. Something about that game reeks.

 

If you're picking the upset, don't look at Ken Pomeroy or Sagarin.

[bukie]

I'd feel a lot better about picking UCLA to reach the S16 if they weren't playing Villanova in Philly.

[Guest]

I'd feel a lot better about picking UCLA to reach the S16 if they weren't playing Villanova in Philly.

 

Yeah, they seem to match up well. But I just can't see this incarnation of UCLA getting past that home crowd (if UCLA beats VCU). I'm just happy the VCU game is at 6:50 pm EST, that'd be ridiculous if the game was at like 9:30 am PST after they were shipped 2700 miles away.

[snoodmonger]

[/code]

 

Basically, the higher the diff margin, the greater the difference in efficiency between the 2 teams. A negative number suggests the lower seed is actually more efficient than the higher seed.

 

- Kansas definitely has the toughest 3 seed game, and it's in a location closer to the 14 seed to boot.

 

We kinda got jobbed with that opponent and placement. It pisses me off. Not only are they closer to the location than us, but half their team is from MN. Nice protected seed.

[Exile on Waveland]

[/code]

 

Basically, the higher the diff margin, the greater the difference in efficiency between the 2 teams. A negative number suggests the lower seed is actually more efficient than the higher seed.

 

- Kansas definitely has the toughest 3 seed game, and it's in a location closer to the 14 seed to boot.

 

We kinda got jobbed with that opponent and placement. It pisses me off. Not only are they closer to the location than us, but half their team is from MN. Nice protected seed.

 

Agreed. That's unfair. Maybe not as unfair as overall No. 1 seed Louisville potentially playing eight-seed Ohio State in Dayton (though Louisville travels very well and is only about 150 miles away).

[Butterscup1679666578]

[/code]

 

Basically, the higher the diff margin, the greater the difference in efficiency between the 2 teams. A negative number suggests the lower seed is actually more efficient than the higher seed.

 

- Kansas definitely has the toughest 3 seed game, and it's in a location closer to the 14 seed to boot.

 

We kinda got jobbed with that opponent and placement. It pisses me off. Not only are they closer to the location than us, but half their team is from MN. Nice protected seed.

 

I don't see any problems here.

[SpongeWorthy]

It would be so Arizona-ish for them to be hyped up as the likely 12 seed upsetting the 5 seed and then just get blown out of the arena.

[cubbinalltheway]

It would be so Arizona-ish for them to be hyped up as the likely 12 seed upsetting the 5 seed and then just get blown out of the arena.

the red eye picked them. and honestly, i wouldn't be surprised if arizona did win. surely the players are reading/seeing everyone say that they don't belong. there's gotta be some motivation there. plus utah isn't the greatest team in the world.

[bukie]

Almost none of the experts are picking Wisconsin over FSU as their 5-12 upsets, and yet that is the most statistically probable upset (unless you dock Illinois a whole bunch for being without Frazier...but they beat Michigan without him and Michigan is a whole lot better than Western Kentucky).

[cubbinalltheway]

Almost none of the experts are picking Wisconsin over FSU as their 5-12 upsets, and yet that is the most statistically probable upset (unless you dock Illinois a whole bunch for being without Frazier...but they beat Michigan without him and Michigan is a whole lot better than Western Kentucky).

how did the "most statistically probable" outcomes turn out last year?

[bukie]

Almost none of the experts are picking Wisconsin over FSU as their 5-12 upsets, and yet that is the most statistically probable upset (unless you dock Illinois a whole bunch for being without Frazier...but they beat Michigan without him and Michigan is a whole lot better than Western Kentucky).

how did the "most statistically probable" outcomes turn out last year?

Pretty darned good, considering the four 1 seeds made the Final Four.

 

EDIT: Putting it another way, since efficiency started being tracked (2004), there's only been one other 5-12 matchup where the 12 was statistically favored. In 2006, a hugely overseeded Syracuse (fresh off a 4-wins-in-4-days conference championship) was a statistical underdog to 12-seed Texas A&M. A&M won 66-58. Boeheim blamed "tired legs", but really they were grossly overseeded for their production. Similar situation here except with Wisconsin being very underseeded for their production (30th in efficiency, which is the equivalent of a high 8 seed, not a low 12 seed), and Florida State being on a roll of late after a largely unimpressive non-conference season.

Edited March 16, 2009 by bukie

[cubbinalltheway]

Almost none of the experts are picking Wisconsin over FSU as their 5-12 upsets, and yet that is the most statistically probable upset (unless you dock Illinois a whole bunch for being without Frazier...but they beat Michigan without him and Michigan is a whole lot better than Western Kentucky).

how did the "most statistically probable" outcomes turn out last year?

Pretty darned good, considering the four 1 seeds made the Final Four.

sorry, i was talking about when going with the most likely upsets amongst 5-12's or 6-11's. do you happen to know?

[bukie]

Almost none of the experts are picking Wisconsin over FSU as their 5-12 upsets, and yet that is the most statistically probable upset (unless you dock Illinois a whole bunch for being without Frazier...but they beat Michigan without him and Michigan is a whole lot better than Western Kentucky).

how did the "most statistically probable" outcomes turn out last year?

Pretty darned good, considering the four 1 seeds made the Final Four.

sorry, i was talking about when going with the most likely upsets amongst 5-12's or 6-11's. do you happen to know?

Last year's 5-12 matchups:

 

5 seed          12 seed          Diff   Result
Notre Dame      George Mason     0.18   W 68 - 50
Michigan St.    Temple          0.109   W 72 - 61
Drake           Western Ky      0.073   L 99 - 101
Clemson         Villanova       0.066   L 69 - 75

 

Last year's 6-11 matchups:

6 seed          11 seed          Diff   Result
Marquette       Kentucky        0.093   W 74 - 66
Purdue          Baylor          0.046   W 90 - 79
Oklahoma        St. Joseph's    0.019   W 72 - 64
USC             Kansas St.     -0.017   L 67 - 80

[bukie]

As far back as I can go, there's only been one case of a first round underdog (11 seed or higher) being a statistical favorite that lost: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/playbyplay?gameId=274000004 :( Edited March 16, 2009 by bukie

[ISUCubsFan]

Announcer parings from this article:

 

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2009-03-15-cbs-selection-show_N.htm

 

CBS announcer assignments (by game site): Nantz/Kellogg (Greensboro, N.C.), Verne Lundquist/Bill Raftery (Dayton, Ohio), Dick Enberg/Jay Bilas/Carter Blackburn (Philadelphia), Kevin Harlan/Dan Bonner (Portland, Ore.), Ian Eagle/Jim Spanarkel (Miami), Gus Johnson/Len Elmore (Minneapolis), Tim Brando/Mike Gminski (Kansas City, Mo.), Bob Wenzel/Craig Bolerjack (Boise).

[bukie]

At least Nantz is doing early round games, even though it's the UNC and Duke pods. It's progress.

[snoodmonger]

bukie, how accurate is pomeroy's win percentage predictor?

[Andy]

At least Nantz is doing early round games, even though it's the UNC and Duke pods. It's progress.

I'm pretty sure he always does.

[bukie]

bukie, how accurate is pomeroy's win percentage predictor?

Generally it's very good. Of course, even a team given a 80% chance of winning will lose on occasion. Difficult to get hard numbers on accuracy without spending hours doing calculations, since it's not really posted anywhere.

[radarluv1]

could someone recap mich state's injury situation this season? are they healthy now?

[bukie]

could someone recap mich state's injury situation this season? are they healthy now?

Goran Suton was out for the early part of the schedule, including the UNC and Maryland losses. Raymar Morgan was out during the middle of the Big Ten season, which included the PSU and Northwestern losses. They are allegedly healthy now.

[Terp]

I feel like I'm the only insane person picking Stephen F. Austin over Syracuse. I just don't trust Syracuse for some reason.