Bracketology (Week of March 1st)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#2      
Deleted member 186590
Iowa passed us in NET - it seems to overreact to a big win on the road, it’s like a sugar high in a candy store for NET.

no doubt the OSU win was impressive but Iowa being ahead of us on the year does not make much sense- they are still behind us in almost every major stat

The good news is if we win either of the next two we lock in a 1 seed IMO, lose both and we’re likely a 2 seed at worst
 
#3      
Piotyr
Henson71 said:
Iowa passed us in NET - it seems to overreact to a big win on the road, it’s like a sugar high in a candy store for NET.

no doubt the OSU win was impressive but Iowa being ahead of us on the year does not make much sense- they are still behind us in almost every major stat

The good news is if we win either of the next two we lock in a 1 seed IMO, lose both and we’re likely a 2 seed at worst
Click to expand...
No, it's factoring in efficiency margins at some level, which is why it looks closer and closer to KenPom ratings the later it gets.

I suspect Illinois will show up in a majority of Bracket predictions as a 1 seed for today, though it doesn't mean a whole lot until 2 weeks from now.

Even if Illinois loses out (say, loss @Michigan, @OSU, then in the BTT to Maryland), they're still a 2 seed at worst at this point.

As far as the 4th 1 seed goes, if the B1G teams keep beating each other up, somebody like Alabama could slip in, perhaps if they run the table from here, but other than that it's looking like 2 B1G 1 seeds and 2 B1G 2 seeds.
 
#4      
Central IL Illini
I just feel like we are destined to end up in Gonzaga's bracket even if we are the top 2 seed. I know it shouldn't factor but since we already played Baylor, I think we get jammed into the Zags bracket.
 
#5      
the juiceman cometh
Henson71 said:
Iowa passed us in NET - it seems to overreact to a big win on the road, it’s like a sugar high in a candy store for NET.

no doubt the OSU win was impressive but Iowa being ahead of us on the year does not make much sense- they are still behind us in almost every major stat

The good news is if we win either of the next two we lock in a 1 seed IMO, lose both and we’re likely a 2 seed at worst
Click to expand...
Iowa's been ahead of us on KenPom for a while. They do well in efficiency metrics.
 
#6      
lstewart53x3
Henson71 said:
Iowa passed us in NET - it seems to overreact to a big win on the road, it’s like a sugar high in a candy store for NET.

no doubt the OSU win was impressive but Iowa being ahead of us on the year does not make much sense- they are still behind us in almost every major stat

The good news is if we win either of the next two we lock in a 1 seed IMO, lose both and we’re likely a 2 seed at worst
Click to expand...

Keep in mind:

The committee will not use NET to directly seed teams based on their NET ranking. The committee uses NET to see who you’ve beat and who you’ve lost to.
 
#7      
Calvin
lstewart53x3 said:
The committee uses NET to see who you’ve beat and who you’ve lost to.
Click to expand...

I think this gets lost in most discussions. NET gets you in the ballpark, but it doesn't get you to your row or your seat. And teams are often so close in the NET formula, that you don't realize their actual resumes are much farther apart or flipped.

I think a good example of this is Houston. They're #4 in NET, but I'd be shocked if they were a #1 seed. 2-1 in Quad one, with wins over 15-8 Texas Tech (14 NET), and I believe a road win at SMU (55), not far from home. They look great using NET, but their actual resume is not strong at all. I'd be surprised if they got a 2 seed.

Something I find intriguing is Michigan passing Baylor, and whether that results in Michigan having a shot at taking a side of the bracket. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be on a side with Gonzaga and Baylor.
 
#8      
CubsIlliniFan
Calvin said:
I think this gets lost in most discussions. NET gets you in the ballpark, but it doesn't get you to your row or your seat. And teams are often so close in the NET formula, that you don't realize their actual resumes are much farther apart or flipped.

I think a good example of this is Houston. They're #4 in NET, but I'd be shocked if they were a #1 seed. 2-1 in Quad one, with wins over 15-8 Texas Tech (14 NET), and I believe a road win at SMU (55), not far from home. They look great using NET, but their actual resume is not strong at all. I'd be surprised if they got a 2 seed.

Something I find intriguing is Michigan passing Baylor, and whether that results in Michigan having a shot at taking a side of the bracket. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be on a side with Gonzaga and Baylor.
Click to expand...
All the bracket experts have had Houston as a 3 as recently as Friday. Their SOS will hurt them. I expect the B1G to get 2 1’s, 2 2’s and a possible 4 in Purdue. Not sure of they can get to a 3 seed but if they get to the BTT final, that might change things.
 
#10      
Ryankovarik
I’m still confused what NET even does... just the seeding metric they use in their bracketology instead of AP polls? Is it NET + resume comparison (quad 1/2 etc.) + follow bracket rules to determine the final form?
 
#11      
danielb927
Ryankovarik said:
I’m still confused what NET even does... just the seeding metric they use in their bracketology instead of AP polls? Is it NET + resume comparison (quad 1/2 etc.) + follow bracket rules to determine the final form?
Click to expand...

My understanding is they only use NET to create the Quad 1/2/3/4 breakdown when comparing resumes. A team's own NET doesn't influence their seeding in any way and I don't believe there are any NET-related bracket rules.
 
#12      
illiniapolis
Central IL Illini said:
I just feel like we are destined to end up in Gonzaga's bracket even if we are the top 2 seed. I know it shouldn't factor but since we already played Baylor, I think we get jammed into the Zags bracket.
Click to expand...
As long as we don't end up as the worst 2 seed that shouldn't happen.
 
#13      
Deleted member 186590
lstewart53x3 said:
Keep in mind:

The committee will not use NET to directly seed teams based on their NET ranking. The committee uses NET to see who you’ve beat and who you’ve lost to.
Click to expand...
you are correct - it's certainly not a direct seeding metric, but in reality the seeding is done just by vote of the committee members, so we really don't know what is in their head when they vote the rank order of the seedings individually - we would certainly hope we would be seeded ahead of Iowa based on Q1 wins, head to head and a host of other considerations right now, but stranger things have happened when the committee gets together - they aren't always making the A/B comparison and getting it right.

I just think Iowa is a curious case - they literally lost every big game they've head, lost to Gonzaga, OSU at home, IL, Michigan (by 22), even got swept by IU and lost to Minn - then they get one "impressive win" against OSU on the road and they are #4 in NET! My point is NET, like any metric is imperfect, and in this case is overreacting to one very good win against a top 10 team on the road by a wide margin - so it checks all of the NET boxes that NET loves, huge efficiency spread in the win, against a good team (in NET), on the road.

It's a completely moot point, we haven't really beaten anyone we shouldn't have either yet - but we're about to be pretty big underdogs in these next two at Michigan and OSU, so that will be the determining factor in our seeding, no doubt.
 
#14      
danielb927
illiniapolis said:
As long as we don't end up as the worst 2 seed that shouldn't happen.
Click to expand...

Not true. If there are two 1-seeds from the B1G, we'd have to be placed in one of the other regions (i.e., Gonzaga's or Baylor's), even as the best 2 seed. This is because the top 4 teams from any conference have to go in different regions (as long as they're all 4 seeds or higher).

Example: the 1-seeds (in order) are Gonzaga, Baylor, Michigan, tOSU. We're the best 2 seed, but can't go with tOSU or Michigan, so we have to be paired with either the 2nd-best or best 1-seed (Gonzaga or Baylor). Central IL is suggesting the committee might avoid the rematch with Baylor, but they shouldn't, I don't think.
 
#15      
Illini_1979
Central IL Illini said:
I just feel like we are destined to end up in Gonzaga's bracket even if we are the top 2 seed. I know it shouldn't factor but since we already played Baylor, I think we get jammed into the Zags bracket.
Click to expand...
Welp, we have to beat them eventually to win this thing but I suppose it would be more fun to do so in the FF.
 
#16      
Calvin
Ryankovarik said:
I’m still confused what NET even does... just the seeding metric they use in their bracketology instead of AP polls? Is it NET + resume comparison (quad 1/2 etc.) + follow bracket rules to determine the final form?
Click to expand...

The committee needs a starting point, and NET is designed to do that. They could use the AP poll, Kenpom, or something else, but they came up with NET, which replaced earlier versions of the RPI. It has several components, but in the end, it's just a way to start off discussions. They go through MANY iterations of the so-called "S curve", attempting to refine it with each pass, and getting teams ranked from top to bottom.

Committee members in past seasons have said that once they get a feel for each team's resume, they don't lean on NET/RPI anymore. So in the example of Houston, NET starts them off as the #4, but most likely they're moved down in an early iteration. My understanding is that they spend a large chunk of time resolving certain issues. So they'll spend a lot of time, for example, comparing bubble teams, to try and make sure they get the right teams in the dance.

The point here, is that it's a starting point. Once they get into the details, it's not really used. A lot of computer algorithms have essentially the same problem --in order to compare something iteratively, they have to make a starting assumption.
 
#17      
danielb927
Calvin said:
The point here, is that it's a starting point. Once they get into the details, it's not really used. A lot of computer algorithms have essentially the same problem --in order to compare something iteratively, they have to make a starting assumption.
Click to expand...

People, too ;) even though we don't usually realize it.
 
#18      
illiniapolis
danielb927 said:
Not true. If there are two 1-seeds from the B1G, we'd have to be placed in one of the other regions (i.e., Gonzaga's or Baylor's), even as the best 2 seed. This is because the top 4 teams from any conference have to go in different regions (as long as they're all 4 seeds or higher).

Example: the 1-seeds (in order) are Gonzaga, Baylor, Michigan, tOSU. We're the best 2 seed, but can't go with tOSU or Michigan, so we have to be paired with either the 2nd-best or best 1-seed (Gonzaga or Baylor). Central IL is suggesting the committee might avoid the rematch with Baylor, but they shouldn't, I don't think.
Click to expand...
That would require a lot of things to happen, including a big ten team passing us for a 1 seed (maybe Iowa) and us losing enough to fall to a low 2 seed and the committee arbitrarily deciding to put us in the bracket with Gonzaga even though at that point by all logic we'd be in Baylor's, I don't think they care about rematches in the E8 outside of conferences.

That's pretty far from "destined" which is what I was saying.
 
#21      
danielb927
illiniapolis said:
That would require a lot of things to happen, including a big ten team passing us for a 1 seed (maybe Iowa) and us losing enough to fall to a low 2 seed and the committee arbitrarily deciding to put us in the bracket with Gonzaga even though at that point by all logic we'd be in Baylor's, I don't think they care about rematches in the E8 outside of conferences.

That's pretty far from "destined" which is what I was saying.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I guess I read a "couldn't" into your "shouldn't". My point was only that something like Zags-UM-Baylor-OSU-Iowa-IL (or Iowa-<anyone>-IL) isn't that unreasonable for the top of the S-curve, and in that case, we wouldn't be the worst 2 seed but would still get paired with Gonzaga. But you have a good point that getting passed by other B1G teams will probably mean we've lost one or more games and would be more likely to fall to the bottom of the 2 line.
 
#22      
Central IL Illini
danielb927 said:
Fair enough, I guess I read a "couldn't" into your "shouldn't". My point was only that something like Zags-UM-Baylor-OSU-Iowa-IL (or Iowa-<anyone>-IL) isn't that unreasonable for the top of the S-curve, and in that case, we wouldn't be the worst 2 seed but would still get paired with Gonzaga. But you have a good point that getting passed by other B1G teams will probably mean we've lost one or more games and would be more likely to fall to the bottom of the 2 line.
Click to expand...
This is more my point. That if we are close enough with Iowa/Ohio State that its a coin flip, which it isn't that far from now, the committee might avoid the Illinois-Baylor and Iowa-Gonzaga rematches. All they'd have to do to save face would be to say they had Iowa/Ohio State rated slightly higher which a lot of metrics do.
 
#25      
illiniapolis
I think this week could be more consequential for us than it seems on the surface. Ayo is probably out for at least one of our two, likely both. If we hang in and have 2 close games against top 10 opponents on the road without him, I think we get some serious respect. If we get a win I think a 1 seed is very likely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back