Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
#201      

BananaShampoo

B
Captain 'Paign
Phoenix, AZ
BananaShampoo
TriCityBurbs said:
Have to remember how weak the bubble has been in the last 4-5 years. We already have 4 (5 if Winthrop keeps winning) top 100 wins and 4 of those teams could finish the year in the top 50. Our worst loss is against RPI 104, and because of how strong the bottom of the big ten is this year (Rutgers could still finish in the top 100 RPI) we don't have another opportunity at a really bad loss. In other words, we have already played 7-8 top 100 teams, and could end the year with 23-26 games against the top 100. Even if we finish 9-9 in conference that's probably 12-13 top 100 wins,and 8-9 vs the top 50. Add in our very strong NonCon SOS, overall SOS and a top 50 RPI...I still think we can make the tourney with just 20 wins total.
Click to expand...

Good points. Luckily our B1G schedule favors us, also. The committee does use Last 10 Games as a factor in their determinations. It just so happens our last 10 games (minus the BTT potentially) happen to be the softest part of our schedule.
 
#202      

WesterveltVictoryCigar

WesterveltVictoryCigar
WesterveltVictoryCigar
TriCityBurbs said:
We already have 4 (5 if Winthrop keeps winning) top 100 wins
Click to expand...

Assume you meant BYU here?

BananaShampoo said:
Good points. Luckily our B1G schedule favors us, also. The committee does use Last 10 Games as a factor in their determinations. It just so happens our last 10 games (minus the BTT potentially) happen to be the softest part of our schedule.
Click to expand...

No, they don't use the last 10 for this very reason, teams don't control their schedules in conference play, so it's not fair.
 
#203      

kuhl84

K
Orlando, FL
kuhl84
BananaShampoo said:
There was an article a few years back that showed that it was a criteria in the selection process that the committee used. Wish I could locate it. That said, I tried to find it again and couldn't find anything about it, so you might be right. I can see reasons to use it and reasons not to, though. Reason to use it is it might help a team that gets hot later in the season and thus might be a more successful tourney team. Reason not to would be what you mentioned.
Click to expand...

They used to use it, not any more like WVC stated. Not sure what year it changed, but its been a few years.
 
#208      

jrichisamazing

J
jrichisamazing
Unfortunately BYU lost @St. Mary's tonight. BYU is just outside the top 100 and the only way they will get back in is by beating St. Mary's or Gonzaga, if I'm not mistaken.

But I'm pretty sure these RPI cutoffs are ambiguous for the most part, as they should be. There obviously isn't much difference between beating a team with an RPI of 105 vs 95. The committee will use the cutoffs (top 100, top 50) initially to seperate teams because it makes it much easier. But if we are on the bubble then of course they will look much closer at our resume.
 
#211      

UofIChE06

U
Pittsburgh
UofIChE06
MA Illini said:
They also predict us to end up at 76 (one of the most overrated teams currently) and for us end up 16-14. It says is uses the Sagarin Predictor rating to estimate the rest of the season.
Click to expand...

16-14 is worse than most other predictive models. I think it is safe to say the fanbase would be none too pleased to end there.
 
#213      

TriCityBurbs

T
TriCityBurbs
Moved down one spot from a 9 to a 10 seed in Palm's CBS bracket. Got a long way to go, but feels good that according to most, we are on the right track as of now.
 
#214      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
Feel dumb asking this for a variety of reasons, but whose mock bracket (Palm, Lunardi, etc.) has been the most accurate historically? I don't mean BS things like, "Lunardi always gets 97% of the teams right! (without counting for how wrong his seeds might be), I'd rather have people's subjective opinions.

Thanks. :D
 
#215      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Feel dumb asking this for a variety of reasons, but whose mock bracket (Palm, Lunardi, etc.) has been the most accurate historically? I don't mean BS things like, "Lunardi always gets 97% of the teams right! (without counting for how wrong his seeds might be), I'd rather have people's subjective opinions.

Thanks. :D
Click to expand...

The truth is, everyone is almost always pretty close, and no one is ever 100% on any consistent basis.
 
#216      

ChiefIllini

C
ChiefIllini
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Feel dumb asking this for a variety of reasons, but whose mock bracket (Palm, Lunardi, etc.) has been the most accurate historically? I don't mean BS things like, "Lunardi always gets 97% of the teams right! (without counting for how wrong his seeds might be), I'd rather have people's subjective opinions.

Thanks. :D
Click to expand...

I think it would be important to note when you're looking at their bracket. If it was in late November, other than the 1-5ish seeds I bet theres a ton of incorrect picks. Probably even now. I'd like to see a breakdown of how right people were at various points along the season. Like right now I doubt theres more than one or two brackets that will get 90%+ right. I think a good time to start taking brackets seriously is probably mid February, but towards the end of January is probably good enough most years. Things will surely clear up ina couple of weeks.
 
#217      

UofIChE06

U
Pittsburgh
UofIChE06
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Feel dumb asking this for a variety of reasons, but whose mock bracket (Palm, Lunardi, etc.) has been the most accurate historically? I don't mean BS things like, "Lunardi always gets 97% of the teams right! (without counting for how wrong his seeds might be), I'd rather have people's subjective opinions.

Thanks. :D
Click to expand...

Most will reference the matrix because it aggregates all of the pundits and therefore has the law of large numbers going for it.

http://bracketmatrix.com/
 
#218      

WesterveltVictoryCigar

WesterveltVictoryCigar
WesterveltVictoryCigar
Second and Chalmers said:
The truth is, everyone is almost always pretty close, and no one is ever 100% on any consistent basis.
Click to expand...

True. Because there are 32 auto bids and it's about picking the ALBs (and trying to guess seeds). A good chunk of those ALBs will be very obvious, so then it's just about who gets 7 of the final 8 right instead of only getting 4 right.

UofIChE06 said:
Most will reference the matrix because it aggregates all of the pundits and therefore has the law of large numbers going for it.

http://bracketmatrix.com/
Click to expand...

And the matrix ranks all the bracketologists, so you can see who does best, but even that shows there's no real clear winners.
 
#219      

Illini1221

I
Peru,IL
Illini1221
Lunardi posted his seed list on twitter and Illinois is one of the next four out. Michigan currently last four in.
 
#220      

Second and Chalmers

S
Second and Chalmers
WesterveltVictoryCigar said:
True. Because there are 32 auto bids and it's about picking the ALBs (and trying to guess seeds). A good chunk of those ALBs will be very obvious, so then it's just about who gets 7 of the final 8 right instead of only getting 4 right.
Click to expand...

And it's not as if these are scientists driving at some iron-clad formula.

The bracket matrix exactly simulates what the selection committee is, just a bunch of dudes looking at the resumes and voting. They don't know more about basketball than armchair bracketologists. In fact in many cases they might well know a good deal less.

It's not an exact science. That's part of what makes it fun.
 
#222      

FeelYourPaign

FeelYourPaign
So Cal
FeelYourPaign
Lunardi wants us to move around, so that he can change his picks every day and add clicks. His stuff is meaningless right now.
 
#223      

basementcheetos

B
basementcheetos
Lunardi has us as the last team in according to his latest projection. I had an epiphany last night while watching the game and wanted to share. Having followed Illinois basketball the last twenty years, and believing that I understand how our sports fortunes/luck tends to play out I firmly believe that the following scenario will play out this season. We are destined for a "first four" game, we will sit exactly on the bubble all year and just slide in. It is just such an Illinois thing to do. Then, in that play-in game, we will come out of the gate playing absolutely terrible, and our opponent will make every shot they take for the first 10 minutes. We will go down big, miss bunnies, and get in foul trouble. Then, when it is almost too late to matter, we will start defending and making shots and will furiously rally to get it close, then run out of gas as our opponent makes all their free throws when we foul and chase and will lose by 10. Think the Western Kentucky game in 2008. No analytical basis for this belief, I just feel that this is Illinois basketball.
 
#225      

ShellbackMB

S
ShellbackMB
basementcheetos said:
Lunardi has us as the last team in according to his latest projection. I had an epiphany last night while watching the game and wanted to share. Having followed Illinois basketball the last twenty years, and believing that I understand how our sports fortunes/luck tends to play out I firmly believe that the following scenario will play out this season. We are destined for a "first four" game, we will sit exactly on the bubble all year and just slide in. It is just such an Illinois thing to do. Then, in that play-in game, we will come out of the gate playing absolutely terrible, and our opponent will make every shot they take for the first 10 minutes. We will go down big, miss bunnies, and get in foul trouble. Then, when it is almost too late to matter, we will start defending and making shots and will furiously rally to get it close, then run out of gas as our opponent makes all their free throws when we foul and chase and will lose by 10. Think the Western Kentucky game in 2008. No analytical basis for this belief, I just feel that this is Illinois basketball.
Click to expand...


As embarrassing as it may sound............I'll take it! Sums up the last decade in one sentence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.