Pregame: Illinois vs UConn, Saturday, April 4th, 5:09pm CT, TBS

Status
Not open for further replies.
#527      
Kramerica Industries
1774914252476.png
 
#531      
FightinIllini30
My (quite large) family is coming from Kansas and Missouri to the final four to find a local bar for a watch party. Unless…. Anyone has 11 extra tickets??
 
#533      
Peteronthespot
We’re playing on house money based on how I thought this year would go in mid Feb. We played tight to start Iowa. We do that again we lose. We don’t do that we win. Season already a massive success.
 
#535      
wc_illini
AirTran said:
(1) Quantitatively speaking, Kenpom has a slightly negative correlation to outcome. Taking points in Kenpom spread is a 59.3% winner after 5% vig. That is 7 years of data covering over 20,000 NCAA games.
Click to expand...
I'll highly contest that any strategy like this could be profitable after the vig. You're not just saying that KenPom is bad, but that the betting line is systematically incorrectly swayed by KenPom/metrics across enough games that betting the other way is correct >52% of the time. See https://www.thepredictiontracker.com/bbresults.php (and 2025, don't have a link to 2024, 2023, 2022, and 2021). All the computer rankings in that comparison over several years are within 48-52% (except Torvik at 52.8% one year) against the spread, so no strategy of betting with/against any of these models would be profitable after a 5% vig. KenPom isn't included, but I'm not willing to accept that they're significantly worse than every single other model without proof, so share your source/data, or we'll have to agree to disagree.

If you're just trying to argue that KenPom is less accurate than the spread, then of course it is (especially early in the season and games affected by injuries). But it isn't helpful at predicting anything against the spread.

AirTran said:
Odds against exactly 17 wins: Roughly 14,563 to 1.Odds against 17 or 18 wins: Roughly 13,797 to 1.
Click to expand...
You appear to be wrong and right at the same time...

You're wrong in that they did not go 17-1 in 18 coin flips. They were given a 6-7% chance to win it all in 2023 and 20-22% in 2024 (elevated above Torvik's odds of 15%, so betting markets started accounting for something extra). Combined, that's 1.2-1.5%. But in 2023, the best teams they faced were #9, #10, and #11 in Torvik (3 and 5-seeds; while seeding is pretty inaccurate, it gives a perspective on their actual vs likely path). In 2024, other than Purdue (#3, 1-seed), the best they faced were #13 & #14 (3 and 4-seeds). So with those paths their odds would have been much higher, though I don't have time to figure out what. It's still very impressive, but probably more like 20 to 1 than 13,797 to 1. In 2025, they beat Oklahoma as a ~70% favorite and lost to Florida with a ~20% chance to win. So he didn't work any magic there.

But I've also read that they went 17-1 against the spread in those games, so in that regard your calculations are right. Yet what matters isn't how Hurley did vs betting markets in 2023 or 2024, but whether this year's betting markets are meaningful. FWIW, that one loss against the spread was Furman this year, and altogether this year, they're averaging 1.75 points better than the spread, which I'm willing to guess is much less than in 2023 or 2024, so either betting markets have adjusted, or UConn's NCAAT magic has regressed compared to 2023/24.

AirTran said:
If we beat them on Saturday, we will have accomplished something.
Click to expand...
Well now we agree
 
#537      
wc_illini
AirTran said:
Understood where you are coming from but mathematically speaking, that is not correct.

The construct of the tournament has changed slightly in 50 years but all probability starts with a coin flip unless there is something statistically significant over time that has a back - test. As the Kenpom data shows, its not possible to with any certaintly whatsoever to predict the outcome of a game.

What you are missing (and trust me alot of very smart people have had to think about this long and hard) is that the coin flip - is more accurate than Kenpom. If you want something with 75% correlation (in terms of predicting outcome) - look to FGA%, Rebounding and FTs made on a season long basis (time series data over the past 25 years). But even those numbers don't get you to 85% correlation.

Let's win on Saturday.
Click to expand...
So wrong. As I posted a few minutes ago, computer rankings have predicted NCAA basketball game winners around 70-72% of the time, similar to betting markets. If you're talking about against the spread, then it's close to 50% (and not far enough away in either direction to overcome the vig)
 
#538      
GatorMcKlusky
I hear you and clearly understand your perspective:

(1) Quantitatively speaking, Kenpom has a slightly negative correlation to outcome. Taking points in Kenpom spread is a 59.3% winner after 5% vig. That is 7 years of data covering over 20,000 NCAA games. and 1-1 in underdog situations has no statistical value.

(2) How UCONN played against St. John's has no more relevance to how we played against Michigan at home. UCONN isn't playing St. John's on Saturday and we aren't playing Michigan on Saturday. Moreover you are mixing metaphores. You either want to use how a team plays and what their statistical average in quantified statistical areas (FG%, Rebounds, etc) or you can do the "eye test." But the two (stats or ranking and eye test) don't mix.

(3) I wasn't making any comparisons of this team to 2024. In fact, I was stating the exact opposite. The entire Illini staff learned from playing in the elite 8. When you look at the team on the floor on Saturday it is a direct reflection to changes made in terms of personel and approach to game management which resulted from the UCONN loss two years ago.

(4) I am professionally what is known as a "quant" and have been for over 44 years let me leave you with this:

Exact Calculation:
Each NCAA tournament game has 2 possible outcomes: win or loss. Over 18 games, there are 2¹⁸ = 262,144 possible win/loss sequences.
  • Number of sequences with exactly 17 wins (and 1 loss): There are 18 such sequences (you can lose any one of the 18 games).
  • Number of sequences with 18 wins (perfect): 1 sequence.
Probability of exactly 17 wins: 18 / 262,144 ≈ 0.006866% (or about 1 in 14,563).
Probability of 17 or 18 wins: 19 / 262,144 ≈ 0.007248% (or about 1 in 13,797).
Odds against exactly 17 wins: Roughly 14,563 to 1.Odds against 17 or 18 wins: Roughly 13,797 to 1.

Only 2 other teams in the history of NCAA basketball has ever been able to do what UCONN has done in the past 4 years. It took UCLA 5 years to do it. In the 1960's the path to the NCAA tournament was more difficult and virtually all of the teams in the tourney were nationally ranked. Duke's 1990 - 1993 (4 seasons) teams won 18 of 20 and two national titles. Florida won back to back titles but 13 tourney wins in 4 years.

Please do not get me wrong, I am a 60 year Illni fan and have traveled from the corners of the world to watch them play. But to question UCONN's proficency isn't (mathematically speaking) intellectually honest. If we beat them on Saturday, we will have accomplished something.
Click to expand...
One thing I've learned from over 44 years on Wall Street - markets are not modelable. The tails are too fat. Wonder if that applies to sports as well.
 
#539      
PepeSilvia
Fighter of the Nightman said:
I'll just cheer when the other Illini fans seem to be cheering, as if I am reacting to a speech from some general in ancient times but I'm about 3 hills away and can't hear anything he's saying. :ROFLMAO:

FWIW, this is the current Ticketmaster map for Saturday.

View attachment 49099

I would assume the later game teams would get the seats behind each bench, just like in the Sweet Sixteen setup? If so, I am guessing Illinois is in that 136-139 and up part, given those tickets are all but gone. Looking back at some older pictures of the 2005 Final Four (shoutout, LaPayne Photography in Champaign ... really wish they still put out work!!), I am guessing the crowd split will be similar to this photo, where Illinois and Louisville filled both levels of their sections, MSU and UNC did not and the "unassigned" areas were a solid majority orange. Keep us as Illinois, swap Michigan for Louisville, Arizona for UNC and UConn for MSU, but probably with fewer fans than they had. The bigger photo is here, but this is a slimmed down version:

SP_CBB_017_LG.jpg


P.S. Your eye sort of plays a trick on you and makes it seem like there aren't that many more Illini fans than any other fan base, especially with how impressively Louisville traveled and that they are closer in the panorama. However, when you (A) consider that not every single Illini fan there was in orange and (B) start to scan the upper deck closely, you realize just what a crowd advantage we had. It was even more pronounced for the title game, when Illini fans scooped up 90%+ of the tickets held by Louisville and MSU fans:

(Link)
SP_CBB_018_L_LG.jpg


Same optical illusion here, as your eye trains on the couple sections that are solid orange and then sees the Carolina blue sort of "sparkle" throughout the rest of the stadium, but when you look at any one area, you realize that cumulatively we had like 75%+ of the crowd! Excited to paint Indy orange!!
Click to expand...
Lucas Oil does have the big board and a ton of tvs, so it's kind of a strange watch where you're almost splitting your attention between the court and one of the scoreboards in view.
 
#544      
NASchamp
Will be tuning into this one from London. The only thing keeping me from going to Indy to watch in person 🫠

Anyone know of Illini alumni groups or good sports pubs to watch the game from? Gonna be a late one!!
 
#547      
Illini2010-11
AirTran said:
Understood where you are coming from but mathematically speaking, that is not correct.

The construct of the tournament has changed slightly in 50 years but all probability starts with a coin flip unless there is something statistically significant over time that has a back - test. As the Kenpom data shows, its not possible to with any certaintly whatsoever to predict the outcome of a game.

What you are missing (and trust me alot of very smart people have had to think about this long and hard) is that the coin flip - is more accurate than Kenpom. If you want something with 75% correlation (in terms of predicting outcome) - look to FGA%, Rebounding and FTs made on a season long basis (time series data over the past 25 years). But even those numbers don't get you to 85% correlation.

Let's win on Saturday.
Click to expand...
The only way that this logic makes mathematical sense is that you assume all teams rosters are balanced and of equal strength year in and out. It is laughable to assume that the 16 seed has the same chance of winning the national championship as a 1 seed, which is essentially what you are arguing. The hard data states otherwise. Likewise, you are suggesting that the UCONN super team of 2023-2024 only had a .5^6 or 1.6% chance of winning the championship. You are the only person I have ever heard make this argument.

Of course, there is no computer model that will prove to ever be overly accurate. However, to state as a matter of fact that one individual game as a coin flip will be more accurate than advanced metrics is something that no data scientist will ever agree to.

However, you are correct about Saturday. It will be a near virtual coin flip.
 
Last edited:
#548      
casemeau
College basketball is unique because a trip to the Final Four is a total championship. These Illini are beloved and get to hang a banner and be remembered fondly forever. But it's different than other sports because the championship joy doesn't dissipate quickly. It lasts longer than a World Series championship or a Super Bowl championship because we get a whole week to revel in the joy and then we still get to go play for ANOTHER weekend and possibly ANOTHER championship.

I-L-L.
 
#549      
Curbelo Fanboy
My philosophy has always been to root for the worse team.

UNC vs VCU = VCU

IOWA vs FLA = Iowa

IOWA vs NEB = Iowa

DUKE vs UCONN = UCONN

So, my answer is whoever’s the worse team and/or gives us the better chance of winning (even if by the slightest of extents).
Click to expand...
Same here. When Illini are in the mix I always always root for the worse seeded team. Iowa is a perfect example. Florida may well have played their worst game of the year against iowa.

If we played against Florida like we did Iowa we most likely lose. To win the tourney it takes talent and a lot of luck. Luck to play your bad games against teams you can beat on a bit of an off night. And the luck to maybe catch a better team on their off night.

The lesser seeded team allows you to maybe win a game with a b effort instead of having play an A game.
 
#550      
hoopsfan47
Offense earned us a 3 seed.

View attachment 49105

Defense earned us a Final Four.

View attachment 49106

If we get both going forward? We could be hanging a championship banner next week.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of a comment made by a high school coach who, after scouting a future opponent who had just won a game by scoring 123 points, made this comment: "My team couldn't score 123 pts. if I locked them in the gym alone all night doing a layup drill".

Sometimes it is not your defense that is the deterrent for holding down the other team as much as their have no skill at making any shots....or the basket gnomes are pissed off at them.

Fortunately, the Illini have 8 guys who can score in a myriad of ways.
If our big three are not getting buckets, we have another big three....and another.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back