NCAA Mock Tourney Selection 2012

[SouthSideRyan]

UMass/St. Bonnie has to be an elimination game.

[bukie]

Just for information, here were the scores of the top 8 from last night's ranking (1.0 is a perfect score):

 

Indiana        0.925
Marquette      0.838
Baylor         0.838
Michigan       0.813
Georgetown     0.800
Wisconsin      0.763
Wichita State  0.700
Temple (A-10)  0.488

 

Marquette was put higher than Baylor on the S-Curve because 3 of 5 voters preferred Marquette.

Edited March 9, 2012 by bukie

[UMFan83]

I don't necessarily think a single game result should cause an 8-spot slide in the S-Curve, myself. I still like Indiana's overall resume more than Wisconsin, and Georgetown is safely in the top 15 regardless.

 

EDIT: Ok, I'll swap Wisconsin and Georgetown on the S-Curve...bracket is the same. :P

 

Indiana is 9 and Wisconsin is 14, which is a 5 spot drop. You don't think Wisconsin could jump 3 spots by beating a top 15 team or Indiana drop 2 spots? I guess the former is much more likely than the later, and at the end of the day its still just 1 game. I just imagined IU and Wisconsin pretty close together in terms of resumes so I figured if Wisconsin one they would be seeded higher, but of course I have to go by the established S-curve, not my own seedings.

Plus Marquette lost, and Georgetown lost, and Michigan hasn't even played yet (and could end up with a worse loss by the end of the night). If Michigan wins, I have no problem swapping Michigan in the bracket with Indiana, and some minor shifting around on the S-Curve. I think the gap between #15 and #16 is big enough to where the top 15 as is in the bracket are safe as protected seeds. If Wisconsin keeps winning, then I think it's safe to discuss them getting bumped up a whole seed line (at the expense of either Indiana or Michigan, since the rules try to avoid conference opponents playing earlier than the elite 8 when there are fewer than 8 teams in the bracket).

 

So, the way I see it, the top 8 are safe in the 1 and 2 seeds right now. The 9-15 teams are safe, but there's room for some jostling between the teams, mostly among the very similar Big Ten teams (as Marquette, Georgetown and Wichita State are done, and Baylor is going to be in their spot by default anyway no matter where they are on the S-Curve to preserve conference separation).

 

Fair enough, that makes sense. This is my first time really looking this closely into NCAA seeding, so I'm probably being too reactive to one single game instead of adding that one game to a team's collective resume.

[Andy]

UMass/St. Bonnie has to be an elimination game.

I don't think either's getting in as an at-large.

[bukie]

UMass/St. Bonnie has to be an elimination game.

I don't think either's getting in as an at-large.

On the bright side, among nearly identical resumes for UMass/St Bonnie/St Louis/Xavier/Dayton/La Salle, one of those teams is getting the auto bid, and doesn't need an at-large selection.

[Andy]

UMass/St. Bonnie has to be an elimination game.

I don't think either's getting in as an at-large.

On the bright side, among nearly identical resumes for UMass/St Bonnie/St Louis/Xavier/Dayton/La Salle, one of those teams is getting the auto bid, and doesn't need an at-large selection.

St. Louis is pretty much a unanimous 'in' right now (Bracket Project puts them as a 9 seed). The others are pretty much up for grabs though. I think Xavier or Dayton could maybe play their way into an at-large with some help.

[SouthSideRyan]

UMass/St. Bonnie has to be an elimination game.

I don't think either's getting in as an at-large.

 

Probably not, but the loser can be shot into the sun.

[SouthSideRyan]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

[bukie]

One last thing to keep in mind also is that we're not doing this as an exercise to see how we can bring our bracket more in line with Lunardi/Bracket Project/whatever. Screw em. We can compare our bracket to theirs when it's done. There have been many instances over the past 8 years where our bracket has done significantly better than average (almost every year, I think), so if anything, they should be looking at our progress to see where they screwed up.

[bukie]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

And half their roster was suspended during the middle of the year. Does that count like injuries, or do we not give them the benefit of the doubt for causing fights in a game?

[UMFan83]

UMass/St. Bonnie has to be an elimination game.

 

I gotta believe St. Bonnie is already eliminated. RPI of 95, best win was over St. Joes, has 3 100+ losses and 1 200+ loss

 

Going into the conference tourney, I would think this was the A10 pecking order:

 

Temple

St. Louis

Xavier

St. Joes

Dayton

UMass

St. Bonn

 

Temple is still going to be 1st despite the loss, St. Louis is a lock (I think), Xavier is probably a lock with a win tonight and possibly out with a loss. UMass I think still has to get 2 more wins, their resume is pretty poor and their RPI is still in the 80's (higher than any at large team ever selected). St. Joe's is out unless some crazy [expletive] happens in the next 3 days. So here is my revised pecking order:

 

Temple

St. Louis

Xavier

Dayton

St. Joe's

UMass

St. Bonn

 

Although I think St. Joe's and Dayton are interchangable at the moment. Dayton has 3 more top 60 RPI wins (yes I am fudging the numbers to include #54 Xavier and #53 Mississippi), but has 2 awful +200 losses vs. 0 for St. Joe's.

 

Temple - 100%

St. Louis - 100%

Xavier - 50%, 75% with win, 100% with 2 wins

Dayton - 20%, 50% win win, 70% win 2 wins

St. Joes - 30%

UMass - 10%, 50% with win

 

Dayton basically has some life here when I thought they were just about dead as recently as yesterday.

[bukie]

Xavier in my opinion is pretty safe, if we take into account that their worst stretch of the year was when half their team was suspended. At full strength, their resume is significantly better.

[Vanilla Ice]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

[SouthSideRyan]

One last thing to keep in mind also is that we're not doing this as an exercise to see how we can bring our bracket more in line with Lunardi/Bracket Project/whatever. Screw em. We can compare our bracket to theirs when it's done. There have been many instances over the past 8 years where our bracket has done significantly better than average (almost every year, I think), so if anything, they should be looking at our progress to see where they screwed up.

 

I believe we've been better than average every season(always better than that shmuck Lunardi), and usually in the top 10 out of 60 or so that are judged.

[SouthSideRyan]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

And half their roster was suspended during the middle of the year. Does that count like injuries, or do we not give them the benefit of the doubt for causing fights in a game?

 

I don't give them a bonus for that since it was self-inflicted.

[bukie]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

St. Louis is an interesting case. Look at their schedule: their non-con SOS is made up entirely of either terrible teams from major conferences (which boosts the opponents-opponents winning % component of RPI) or good teams from terrible conferences (which boosts the opponent winning % of RPI). Add in that the Atlantic 10 was made up of about 10 decent teams, with one good and one terrible team, and their overall numbers look fantastic.

[UMFan83]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

And half their roster was suspended during the middle of the year. Does that count like injuries, or do we not give them the benefit of the doubt for causing fights in a game?

 

I don't give them a bonus for that since it was self-inflicted.

 

this

[CubColtPacer]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

St. Louis is an interesting case. Look at their schedule: their non-con SOS is made up entirely of either terrible teams from major conferences (which boosts the opponents-opponents winning % component of RPI) or good teams from terrible conferences (which boosts the opponent winning % of RPI). Add in that the Atlantic 10 was made up of about 10 decent teams, with one good and one terrible team, and their overall numbers look fantastic.

 

And then of course they do say the committee looks at metrics like the Pomeroy ratings, and it loves St. Louis (has them 12th in the country actually).

[Andy]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

I like St. Louis's resume quite a bit, and did before I knew where they were seeded by the wiseguys (my main resource for this stuff is Glockner's Bubble Watch on SI.com, which doesn't give seeds but is a good place to find any bubble team's RPI/SOS/good wins/bad losses all in one link). I can't really explain why I like it, but they only have 2 losses to teams outside of our NCAA discussion, which is fewer than just about any of the other teams they're being compared with.

[bukie]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

I like St. Louis's resume quite a bit, and did before I knew where they were seeded by the wiseguys (my main resource for this stuff is Glockner's Bubble Watch on SI.com, which doesn't give seeds but is a good place to find any bubble team's RPI/SOS/good wins/bad losses all in one link). I can't really explain why I like it, but they only have 2 losses to teams outside of our NCAA discussion, which is fewer than just about any of the other teams they're being compared with.

Their resume is a lot like Northwestern's, except their non-con schedule exploits the RPI system better.

[Vanilla Ice]

Good points about St. Louis. I definitely still have them in, but much closer to 11/12 than 9.

[bukie]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

St. Louis is an interesting case. Look at their schedule: their non-con SOS is made up entirely of either terrible teams from major conferences (which boosts the opponents-opponents winning % component of RPI) or good teams from terrible conferences (which boosts the opponent winning % of RPI). Add in that the Atlantic 10 was made up of about 10 decent teams, with one good and one terrible team, and their overall numbers look fantastic.

 

And then of course they do say the committee looks at metrics like the Pomeroy ratings, and it loves St. Louis (has them 12th in the country actually).

Pomeroy's system likes them because their average margin of victory for the season is 18 points.

[Andy]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

I like St. Louis's resume quite a bit, and did before I knew where they were seeded by the wiseguys (my main resource for this stuff is Glockner's Bubble Watch on SI.com, which doesn't give seeds but is a good place to find any bubble team's RPI/SOS/good wins/bad losses all in one link). I can't really explain why I like it, but they only have 2 losses to teams outside of our NCAA discussion, which is fewer than just about any of the other teams they're being compared with.

Their resume is a lot like Northwestern's, except their non-con schedule exploits the RPI system better.

Granted, their schedule somewhat games the system, but they pretty much clobbered the bad teams they played (which I like even though it probably doesn't matter). Both the bad losses I mentioned were by single digits on the road. I'm sure some will disagree, and that's fine - that's why we have a committee.

[bukie]

I like Xavier a lot. They have the standard A-10 conference resume, but they add wins @ Vandy, vs. Purdue, and vs. Cincy. (And a BAD loss to Hawaii

I actually kinda like Xavier's resume more than St. Louis'. I don't get how St. Louis is being considered a lock or for a 9 seed.

I like St. Louis's resume quite a bit, and did before I knew where they were seeded by the wiseguys (my main resource for this stuff is Glockner's Bubble Watch on SI.com, which doesn't give seeds but is a good place to find any bubble team's RPI/SOS/good wins/bad losses all in one link). I can't really explain why I like it, but they only have 2 losses to teams outside of our NCAA discussion, which is fewer than just about any of the other teams they're being compared with.

Their resume is a lot like Northwestern's, except their non-con schedule exploits the RPI system better.

Granted, their schedule somewhat games the system, but they pretty much clobbered the bad teams they played (which I like even though it probably doesn't matter). Both the bad losses I mentioned were by single digits on the road. I'm sure some will disagree, and that's fine - that's why we have a committee.

I understand, but if you're going to give St. Louis credit for a lack of bad losses, then Northwestern gets to be the king of that discussion, with zero losses outside the top 70 Pomeroy, and 6 losses by a bucket or in OT (I mean, they just really needed to close out ONE other game). St. Louis is a better team easily (thus the gap in Pomeroy rating, largely due to the average margin of victory), but the RPI resumes are scary close.

[Andy]

I understand, but if you're going to give St. Louis credit for a lack of bad losses, then Northwestern gets to be the king of that discussion, with zero losses outside the top 70 Pomeroy, and 6 losses by a bucket or in OT (I mean, they just really needed to close out ONE other game). St. Louis is a better team easily (thus the gap in Pomeroy rating, largely due to the average margin of victory), but the RPI resumes are scary close.

13 is a lot of losses, even if none were bad. I'm sure it's happened but I can't remember the last time an at-large got in with so many. The B1G is a very good conference this year, but if you're gonna be 8-10 in any league, you'd better have a bunch of good wins. NU only has one really good one (MSU). JMHO.