Bracketology

Shockey19 · Mar 8, 2022

MDchicago said:
A few other KenPom data points to add to the mix:

NCAA Champion.
- The NCAA tournament champion has been one of KenPom's top 3 teams in adjusted efficiency margin in 16 of the 19 tournaments held since 2002, and the season leader in adjEM has won 10 of the 19 tournaments.
- The top 3 teams in adjEM this season (to date) are Gonzaga (32.65), Arizona (27.45) and Kentucky (27.32). (AdjEM is the difference between a team’s offensive and defensive efficiency, and represents the number of points the team would be expected to outscore the average D-I team over 100 possessions).
- The average NCAA champion since 2002 had an adjEM of 30.45.
- Every champion since 2002 has had an adjEM above 28.2 except for 3 outliers (2014 UConn (22.13); 2003 Syracuse (23.38); and 2011 UConn (23.93).
- Fortuitous timing helps: Of the 21 years of date KenPom has published since 2002, 11 years had a single team in the field with an adjEM >32, 6 years had no teams with a 32 rating or better, and 4 years had more than one great team with a rating over 32.0 (including, sadly, 2005). The best years for a potential darkhorse champion (including all 3 of the outliers noted above) are years with no teams above 32 or a single team above 32 that is upset in the tournament.

Lowest Rated Final Four Team
- The average adjEM of the lowest rated Final 4 team each year since 2002 is 21.96, and in 15 of 19 years the adjEM of the lowest Final Four team was above 20.1. (The four outliers were 2010 VCU (13.49); 2018 Loyola (16.39); 2006 George Mason (18.16); and 2016 Syracuse (18.57).

Illini adjEM season to date is 19.91.

I did a similar data analysis of kenpom a few weeks ago. While AdjEM is a great metric for determining champions and finalists, I’d imagine the numbers you’re using are the end of season metrics, which include massive swings from the NCAA tourney itself, given the elite competition you face and the incredible performances you need to have to win.

Looking at champions and their pre-tourney (solely regular season) AdjEM tells a much different story. Only 3 out of 19 times has the pre-tourney AdjEM leader won March Madness (2008 Kansas, 2012 Kentucky, 2019 Virginia), and 10 of 19 champions have been a top 3 pre-tourney AdjEM team. 2 teams have been sub-20 in AdjEM: 2003 Syracuse at 19.96 and 2014 UConn at 19.12.

In case anyone’s interested, the average final AdjEM for a tournament winner is about 30.45, compared to 28.20 pre-tourney, a jump of 2.25.

Not saying AdjEM isn’t a great tool for predicting champions, it absolutely is, but there’s missing context behind these numbers.

Illini_05 · Mar 8, 2022

So in the Committee’s bracket reveal, Wisconsin was one spot below us. Since then, Illinois has 3 Q1 wins, two of them away from home, and 1 Q1 loss. Wisconsin has 1 Q1 win, and 1 Q3 loss, yet most bracket “experts” have Wisconsin on the 2 line, while Illinois is on the 4 line. Make it make sense.

SampsonRelpenk · Mar 8, 2022

Get yourself a new map said:
I think I have a digital copy of this game on an old hard drive...

If you find it pls DM me!

zuma · Mar 8, 2022

I want Loyola.

Piasa · Mar 8, 2022

Shockey19 said:
I did a similar data analysis of kenpom a few weeks ago. While AdjEM is a great metric for determining champions and finalists, I’d imagine the numbers you’re using are the end of season metrics, which include massive swings from the NCAA tourney itself, given the elite competition you face and the incredible performances you need to have to win.

Looking at champions and their pre-tourney (solely regular season) AdjEM tells a much different story. Only 3 out of 19 times has the pre-tourney AdjEM leader won March Madness (2008 Kansas, 2012 Kentucky, 2019 Virginia), and 10 of 19 champions have been a top 3 pre-tourney AdjEM team. 2 teams have been sub-20 in AdjEM: 2003 Syracuse at 19.96 and 2014 UConn at 19.12.

In case anyone’s interested, the average final AdjEM for a tournament winner is about 30.45, compared to 28.20 pre-tourney, a jump of 2.25.

Not saying AdjEM isn’t a great tool for predicting champions, it absolutely is, but there’s missing context behind these numbers.

What is the Gonzaga AdjeM before tonights St. Marys's game? My eye test says they should not be the no. 1 seed. There are some human factors that will never be measured by stats, kenpom, sagarin, their freakin' formulas, no matter how many bean counters would like it. They can't pick up desire, recovery time both physical and mental, toughness if you will, willingness to sacrifice for the team, and many other human biological factors. Under dogs win a significant amount of times in college basketball.

jumpingjack · Mar 8, 2022

zuma said:
I want Loyola.

Only if we beat them by 30. I can't take a close game against them at my age.

727ill · Mar 8, 2022

Illini_05 said:
So in the Committee’s bracket reveal, Wisconsin was one spot below us. Since then, Illinois has 3 Q1 wins, two of them away from home, and 1 Q1 loss. Wisconsin has 1 Q1 win, and 1 Q3 loss, yet most bracket “experts” have Wisconsin on the 2 line, while Illinois is on the 4 line. Make it make sense.

Because bracket experts are not equal to Commiteee? Some "experts" have Rutgers in the Last-Four-In game which we all know is absolutely ludicrous given their resume.

RabidDawgClassic · Mar 8, 2022

LouHenson said:
I think this is pretty much a true statement with one exception. Let’s say we were to play Wisconsin/Purdue in the championship of the BTT they could have a 2 seed saved for the winner and a 3 seed saved for the loser. The Net and all the metrics have all three teams close, so we could be in a situation I laid out above.

They could… but they won’t. That’s not how the committee does business.

aaeismacgychel · Mar 9, 2022

My gut feeling is that the committee that "never fabricates matchups for storylines" *cough cough* already has us as the 3 seed in 2 seed Kentucky's bracket or the 4 seed in Kentucky's 1 seed bracket. Just too many offseason storylines regarding assistant coaches and a battle of the 2 most dominant bigs in the country in Kofi vs. Oscar that will make it too attractive to pass up as a possible Sweet 16 matchup. If we do get there though, it would be a hoot as it would project to occur in the Midwest Regional where Kentucky would have to face us in our home away from home in the United Center... They do owe us a "home game" in the tourney. Game ends with Frazier hitting a coldblooded 3 to put us ahead by 2 with under 20s to go and Kofi blocks Oscar at the buzzer as the UC crowd blows the roof off the joint.

Illini in Italy · Mar 9, 2022

aaeismacgychel said:
My gut feeling is that the committee that "never fabricates matchups for storylines" *cough cough* already has us as the 3 seed in 2 seed Kentucky's bracket or the 4 seed in Kentucky's 1 seed bracket. Just too many offseason storylines regarding assistant coaches and a battle of the 2 most dominant bigs in the country in Kofi vs. Oscar that will make it too attractive to pass up as a possible Sweet 16 matchup. If we do get there though, it would be a hoot as it would project to occur in the Midwest Regional where Kentucky would have to face us in our home away from home in the United Center... They do owe us a "home game" in the tourney. Game ends with Frazier hitting a coldblooded 3 to put us ahead by 2 with under 20s to go and Kofi blocks Oscar at the buzzer as the UC crowd blows the roof off the joint.

Waiter, I’ll have a double helping of whatever he’s smoking!

LouHenson · Mar 9, 2022

RabidDawgClassic said:
They could… but they won’t. That’s not how the committee does business.

Well they have done that in the past and have said they have, so I would assume this is still possible? I have never been in the room with them, so I can only go by what the committee chair says after the seeds are set? Have you inside information that they don’t do business this way with regard to the BTT title game? I agree with you they pretty much ignore the BTT title game, but it has moved a team up or down 1 spot based on the result. The real question this year would be something like if Illinois has done enough to pass say Purdue if they were to beat them in that last game. This year the answer is probably no, so your statement will be correct. Had we beaten Purdue one time and then played them and won in the BTT I do believe the winner would get the higher seed. The movement has to be minimal as the tournament pretty much has to be set before the BTT even tips. Just what I have seen from watching this ever since we have had a BTT title game.

DeonThomas · Mar 9, 2022

Illini_05 said:
So in the Committee’s bracket reveal, Wisconsin was one spot below us. Since then, Illinois has 3 Q1 wins, two of them away from home, and 1 Q1 loss. Wisconsin has 1 Q1 win, and 1 Q3 loss, yet most bracket “experts” have Wisconsin on the 2 line, while Illinois is on the 4 line. Make it make sense.

Excellent comment. Our 4-1 record since that "reveal" is huge, particularly with 3 more Q1 wins!!! We are getting very close to a #2 seed.

DeonThomas · Mar 9, 2022

eas23 said:
Illinois is now the highest #4 seed in the bracket matrix after today's updates. Texas Tech is the team we need to pay attention to.

http://bracketmatrix.com/

TT agree. And also Purdue.

If we win both titles, Purdue is not going to be seeded ahead of us.

Oldskoolkoach · Mar 9, 2022

Havent read the article, but wow, throw some shade just in the caption much ESPN.

jrichisamazing · Mar 9, 2022

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

This guy made an excellent write up on tournament trends using adjusted efficiency numbers.

WyattEarp · Mar 9, 2022

Oldskoolkoach said:
Havent read the article, but wow, throw some shade just in the caption much ESPN.
View attachment 16089

The 12 year-old in me wants to toilet paper- roll this guy’s house…sounds like I’d have
a lot of help from 349 other fan bases.

Point-Illinois · Mar 9, 2022

Oldskoolkoach said:
Havent read the article, but wow, throw some shade just in the caption much ESPN.
View attachment 16089

Not sure if he picked Purdue or Wisky, but Yahoo definitely thinks both those teams are primed for an early exit.

4 Teams Ripe for Upset

HensonHall71 · Mar 9, 2022

Shockey19 said:
I did a similar data analysis of kenpom a few weeks ago. While AdjEM is a great metric for determining champions and finalists, I’d imagine the numbers you’re using are the end of season metrics, which include massive swings from the NCAA tourney itself, given the elite competition you face and the incredible performances you need to have to win.

Looking at champions and their pre-tourney (solely regular season) AdjEM tells a much different story. Only 3 out of 19 times has the pre-tourney AdjEM leader won March Madness (2008 Kansas, 2012 Kentucky, 2019 Virginia), and 10 of 19 champions have been a top 3 pre-tourney AdjEM team. 2 teams have been sub-20 in AdjEM: 2003 Syracuse at 19.96 and 2014 UConn at 19.12.

In case anyone’s interested, the average final AdjEM for a tournament winner is about 30.45, compared to 28.20 pre-tourney, a jump of 2.25.

Not saying AdjEM isn’t a great tool for predicting champions, it absolutely is, but there’s missing context behind these numbers.

That is a very helpful clarification - I can see how adding 6 games that were wins several against top teams would skew the post tourny results and is a bit of a self fulfilling analysis. It would certainly make gambling on the tournament winner a lot easier if the top AdjEM won over 50% of the time!

I'm sure throwing out the Cincinnati game when Curbelo wasn't right and the Maryland game without Kofi probably improves our AdjEM over 20, but every team has some games like that during the regular season, so you can't just adjust one team.

My key takeaway is we need to play a lot better than what we've played during the regular season to be a legitimate contender for a title

BMoreIllini · Mar 9, 2022

jrichisamazing said:
Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

This guy made an excellent write up on tournament trends using adjusted efficiency numbers.

He has a Michigan flair though, so take it with a grain of salt... Just kidding, looks like a really good writeup with a lot of great analysis.

MDchicago · Mar 9, 2022

HensonHall71 said:
That is a very helpful clarification - I can see how adding 6 games that were wins several against top teams would skew the post tourny results and is a bit of a self fulfilling analysis. It would certainly make gambling on the tournament winner a lot easier if the top AdjEM won over 50% of the time!

I'm sure throwing out the Cincinnati game when Curbelo wasn't right and the Maryland game without Kofi probably improves our AdjEM over 20, but every team has some games like that during the regular season, so you can't just adjust one team.

My key takeaway is we need to play a lot better than what we've played during the regular season to be a legitimate contender for a title

It definitely adds to the mix and I find both useful. Full season data helps define the bar champions typically have reached and the pre-tournament data set gives additional insight on potentially realistic starting points. Overall theme remains the same, eventual champions typically have an elite adjEM ranking (16 of last 19 champions were in the top 6 of adjEM ratings based on pre-tournament data, which moves up to top 3 using the full season data), and significant outliers in 3 of 19 years. In the outlier years, it sometimes is as important to be lucky as good. E.g., 2011 UConn, a 3 seed who went 9-9 in the Big East, playing lower seeded teams in the Elite 8 (5 seed), Final 4 (4 seed) and title game (8 seed).

Sidenote: Found it interesting that the 2019 Virginia team actually decreased their adjEM by 1.44 points (relative to their pre-tournament ranking) on their way to the championship. They played 16/9/12/3/5/3 seeds along the way and the last four games were all close.

BBlock24 · Mar 9, 2022

Fox Sports has Wisky as a 2 and the Illini as a 4.

the national · Mar 9, 2022

21ChampaignSt said:
They will be the odds on favorites, yes. But I will always discount Gonzaga in the tournament until I see them win one. Which they will eventually.
Is this a logical take? No. Which is why I feel comfortable posting it here.

They seem to have gaps in their game that get exposed on the NCAA tourney. They’ve had some excellent teams that had no business losing but did. I think of the Izzo model, figure out your weaknesses early and fix it. The Zags always seem polished and never struggle….until they do and it usually costs them IMO.

MDchicago · Mar 9, 2022

the national said:
They seem to have gaps in their game that get exposed on the NCAA tourney. They’ve had some excellent teams that had no business losing but did. I think of the Izzo model, figure out your weaknesses early and fix it. The Zags always seem polished and never struggle….until they do and it usually costs them IMO.

Yep, while Gonzaga has made an effort to beef up their SOS, much of it is front loaded in the first part of their non-conference schedule, which seems like a long time ago come March.

This season they haven't played a Quad 1 or Quad 2 game since December 19 that wasn't against Santa Clara, St. Mary's, San Francisco or BYU, and fully half of their wins (13 of 26) to date are from Quad 4 games (average score 92.1 to 59.6). Link

While their record and rankings may be less gaudy, IMO they would benefit in tournament readiness by playing in a tougher league.

Piotyr · Mar 9, 2022

MDchicago said:
Yep, while Gonzaga has made an effort to beef up their SOS, much of it is front loaded in the first part of their non-conference schedule, which seems like a long time ago come March.

This season they haven't played a Quad 1 or Quad 2 game since December 19 that wasn't against Santa Clara, St. Mary's, San Francisco or BYU, and fully half of their wins (13 of 26) to date are from Quad 4 games (average score 92.1 to 59.6). Link

While their record and rankings may be less gaudy, IMO they would benefit in tournament readiness by playing in a tougher league.

No team has played a non-conference Quad 1 or Quad 2 since December. That's a bit of a silly argument against Gonzaga's schedule.

I feel like this argument crops up in every thread, with Gonzaga being clearly the best team statistically and guaranteed of the #1 overall seed, yet people continue to argue they need to move themselves to a stronger conference.

For what, exactly? To satisfy your personal biases? Their current situation limits them to...getting the #1 overall seed and appearing in 2 NCAA championships in the last 10 years. They are in no way hurting themselves.

the juiceman cometh · Mar 9, 2022

Piotyr said:
No team has played a non-conference Quad 1 or Quad 2 since December. That's a bit of a silly argument against Gonzaga's schedule.

I feel like this argument crops up in every thread, with Gonzaga being clearly the best team statistically and guaranteed of the #1 overall seed, yet people continue to argue they need to move themselves to a stronger conference.

For what, exactly? To satisfy your personal biases? Their current situation limits them to...getting the #1 overall seed and appearing in 2 NCAA championships in the last 10 years. They are in no way hurting themselves.

People also immediately assume Gonzaga's conference schedule is 100% cupcakes. The WCC has 3 teams in the NET top 30. That's the same number as the Big East and 2 more than the ACC (just 1!!!).