Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
#151      
Look on the bright side. What really surprised me the most this season are Michigan and N.C.'s demise. Goes to show that anything can happen. N.C. had all of the preseason polls wrapped with most all of their team back and guys coming through the portal to bolster their chances. For once baby blue nation has to be frustrated.
I don't think any person in the universe would have predicted Northwestern's best player would go to North Carolina (which retained everyone else on their team last year, heck even if they didn't go to the NC Game, but an 8 seed returning their whole team minus one guy who is replaced by a player with Nance's stats would be a projected very very good team), and Northwestern would be the one safely in the tournament and UNC safely out. Just goes to show how unpredictable and how it's all a bit of a crapshoot.

Caleb Love's hot month really did distract everybody from the fact that at this core he's just a chucker that shoots his teams out of games.
 
#152      
Look on the bright side. What really surprised me the most this season are Michigan and N.C.'s demise. Goes to show that anything can happen. N.C. had all of the preseason polls wrapped with most all of their team back and guys coming through the portal to bolster their chances. For once baby blue nation has to be frustrated.

The AP poll was their demise. Definitely were not a #1 seed type team IMO but missing the tournament with that roster in the ACC is horrendous.
 
#154      
Should note that of teams on the 10/11/First Four Out bracket matrix line yesterday, USC, Providence, North Carolina State, Pittsburgh, Nevada, Oklahoma State, Michigan and North Carolina all lost and thus can no longer improve their resumes. So that was very good. Arizona State was the only projected "First Four Out" team that won, which was over USC (who came into yesterday a projected 10). Clemson and Oregon both might move up closer to the cut line, but should still be firmly on the "Out" side as things stand but can improve today with games against Virginia and UCLA.

None of yesterday's 10/11/First Four Out picked up particularly resume boosting wins, Penn State over yours truly being the best win amongst that group. Moving it up to the Projected 9's, Auburn and West Virginia lost, Arkansas won (over Auburn) and Memphis plays their AAC Quarterfinal game today.

It was overall a pretty good day yesterday as far as getting "help" goes. This is a pretty weak field cut line this year, imo. It seems the 300 something "non-tournament teams" are closer to the 36 "at large" teams this year than they have been in a lot of prior years.
To be honest, I'd rather be an 11 than a 8/9. First game will be against a 6 which is gonna be as tough as an 8 anyway. Second game is against a 3 and not a 1.
 
#155      

danielb927

Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
TL;DR
To whatever extent you believe in a system like KenPom, here's a range of scenarios:

- Wildest dreams: 6/11 game vs. Pitt in a pod with K State
- Realistic, good draw: 7/10 game vs. NC State in a pod with Baylor
- Realistic, bad draw: 8/9 game vs. Arkansas in a pod with Alabama
- Nightmare: 8/9 game vs. West Virginia in a pod with Houston

Others have made a good point that we seem to do better, relative to a team's overall strength, against teams that are "defense-focused". UCLA is 2nd in KenPom defense but 22nd in offense. Texas is 11th in defense but 18th in offense.

You can almost completely ignore how many points we score to know whether we won or not. Here's a breakdown by points allowed in regulation:
- 69 or fewer - 17-0 (1 OT)
- 70 exactly - 2-1 (1 OT).
- 71 or more - 0-11.

By contrast, here's the same breakdown by points scored in regulation:
- 69 or fewer - 6-7 (1 OT)
- 70 exactly - 1-0 (1 OT).
- 71 or more - 13-5

Now I'm sure some of that is luck, and I wouldn't assume it's entirely predictive - I'm sure we could win 80-75 or lose 60-65 next weekend. But I think it does emphasize the point that we go as our defense goes.

Based on that idea, here's another breakdown of our potential opponents. I'm now assuming we'll be a 9 or 10 seed, so "over" and "under" seeded are relative to a 7 or 8 seed and a 1 or 2 seed. If we fall to an 11 and draw TCU as a 6, they'd be kind of over-seeded as a 6, but under-seeded to where we feel we are now.

Here's the first round. The bad news, is, I don't see a lot of potential matchups that are criminally over-seeded as a 7 or 8. The good news is, only a couple of those are offense-heavy teams like Penn State.

Under-seeded (bad)Reasonable seedOver-seeded (good)
Offense-Dominant (bad?)West Virginia (17th, 16 O / 52 D)
Kentucky (22nd, 14 O / 66 D)
FAU (27th, 30 O / 39 D)
BalancedTexas A&M (25th, 32 O / 37 D)
Memphis (32nd, 40 O / 41 D)
USC (36th, 43 O / 45 D)
Defense-Dominant (good?)Creighton (12th, 24 O / 14 D)
Arkansas (19th, 44 O / 18 D)
TCU (24th, 50 O / 23 D)
Duke (26th, 48 O / 28 D)
Boise St. (28th, 66 O / 17 D)
Auburn (30th, 53 O / 29 D)

For the 2nd round, I put Houston as "under-seeded" because they're a cut above everyone else, per the metrics. Purdue is fairly balanced; otherwise, there are 4 offense-dominant teams and 4 defense-dominant teams near the top.

Under-seeded (bad)Reasonable seedOver-seeded (good)
Offense-Dominant (bad?)Gonzaga (7th, 1 O / 74 D)Arizona (10th, 4 O / 55 D)
Marquette (13th, 8 O / 62 D)
Baylor (14th, 2 O / 101 D)
BalancedHouston (1st, 5 O / 5 D)Purdue (6th, 11 O / 24 D)
Defense-Dominant (good?)UCLA (2nd, 22 O / 2 D)
Alabama (3rd, 20 O / 4 D)
Kansas (8th, 27 O / 8 D)
K State (23rd, 56 O / 20 D)

So based on this, I still think some ok matchups would be:
- 9 seed in Des Moines with Duke/Kansas. (If you like storylines, that gives you a potential Duke-KU second round plus the Grandison angle in the first game...)
- Same as above but Boise St. or Auburn sneaks up to the 8
- Dropping all the way to an 11 with TCU (6) and K State (3)?
 
Last edited:
#156      
We'd rather play a good defense/bad offense (think Rutgers) than a good offense/bad defense (think Penn State). Our defense isn't quite good enough to just shut down the good offenses, and since we don't really have a point guard, we don't take advantage against bad defenses. We muck around pretty well in the defensive intense games creating long stretches where the other team doesn't get a field goal and then get some offensive rebounds and such on the other end.
 
#157      

danielb927

Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
I just looked and didn't realize Mizzou is in that exact same category. They are 9th in adjusted offense in KenPom, 195th in adjusted defense.

6 of our 12 losses have come to teams with top-15 offenses (Iowa, Purdue, Miznoz, and PSU 3x). Northwestern and Virginia are our only losses to teams with better a better defense than their offense.
 
#158      
Illinois should hope to match up with a team with a bad offense. Of the teams in the 7/8 range that have one, I’m looking at Auburn. I think that’s a game Illinois can win
 
#161      
Others have made a good point that we seem to do better, relative to a team's overall strength, against teams that are "defense-focused". UCLA is 2nd in KenPom defense but 22nd in offense. Texas is 11th in defense but 18th in offense.

You can almost completely ignore how many points we score to know whether we won or not. Here's a breakdown by points allowed in regulation:
- 69 or fewer - 17-0 (1 OT)
- 70 exactly - 2-1 (1 OT).
- 71 or more - 0-11.

By contrast, here's the same breakdown by points scored in regulation:
- 69 or fewer - 6-7 (1 OT)
- 70 exactly - 1-0 (1 OT).
- 71 or more - 13-5

Now I'm sure some of that is luck, and I wouldn't assume it's entirely predictive - I'm sure we could win 80-75 or lose 60-65 next weekend. But I think it does emphasize the point that we go as our defense goes.

Based on that idea, here's another breakdown of our potential opponents. I'm now assuming we'll be a 9 or 10 seed, so "over" and "under" seeded are relative to a 7 or 8 seed and a 1 or 2 seed. If we fall to an 11 and draw TCU as a 6, they'd be kind of over-seeded as a 6, but under-seeded to where we feel we are now.

Here's the first round. The bad news, is, I don't see a lot of potential matchups that are criminally over-seeded as a 7 or 8. The good news is, only a couple of those are offense-heavy teams like Penn State.

Under-seeded (bad)Reasonable seedOver-seeded (good)
Offense-Dominant (bad?)West Virginia (17th, 16 O / 52 D)
Kentucky (22nd, 14 O / 66 D)
FAU (27th, 30 O / 39 D)
BalancedTexas A&M (25th, 32 O / 37 D)
Memphis (32nd, 40 O / 41 D)
USC (36th, 43 O / 45 D)
Defense-Dominant (good?)Creighton (12th, 24 O / 14 D)
Arkansas (19th, 44 O / 18 D)
TCU (24th, 50 O / 23 D)
Duke (26th, 48 O / 28 D)
Boise St. (28th, 66 O / 17 D)
Auburn (30th, 53 O / 29 D)

For the 2nd round, I put Houston as "under-seeded" because they're a cut above everyone else, per the metrics. Purdue is fairly balanced; otherwise, there are 4 offense-dominant teams and 4 defense-dominant teams near the top.

Under-seeded (bad)Reasonable seedOver-seeded (good)
Offense-Dominant (bad?)Gonzaga (7th, 1 O / 74 D)Arizona (10th, 4 O / 55 D)
Marquette (13th, 8 O / 62 D)
Baylor (14th, 2 O / 101 D)
BalancedHouston (1st, 5 O / 5 D)Purdue (6th, 11 O / 24 D)
Defense-Dominant (good?)UCLA (2nd, 22 O / 2 D)
Alabama (3rd, 20 O / 4 D)
Kansas (8th, 27 O / 8 D)
K State (23rd, 56 O / 20 D)

So based on this, I still think some ok matchups would be:
- 9 seed in Des Moines with Duke/Kansas. (If you like storylines, that gives you a potential Duke-KU second round plus the Grandison angle in the first game...)
- Same as above but Boise St. or Auburn sneaks up to the 8
- Dropping all the way to an 11 with TCU (6) and K State (3)?

Great analysis, as always, Daniel! This is exactly what I've been thinking but I had no idea our record backed it up so clearly.

I would be pretty happy dropping to 11 and meeting a 6 seed like Duke, TCU, or Iowa St instead of going up against a good offensive 7 or 8 seed. Not only that, but the 3 seed has a much better chance of getting upset in the first round.
 
#162      
In racing it's called sandbagging. Do just enough to make the feature and then due to inverse starting order (to allow slower cars a chance) get a better starting position. Has to be done carefully but it works sometimes.
 
#163      

Illini2010-11

Sugar Grove
Rooting interests for today's games:

Purdue vs. Rutgers, so Rutgers does not overtake us in seed
Florida Atlantic vs. Middle Tennessee, avoid a CUSA bid thief situation, although an FAU loss would likely knock them below Illinois
Houston vs. East Carolina, avoid an AAC bid thief situation
Alabama vs. Mississippi State, so Miss St. does not overtake us in seed
Michigan State vs. Ohio State, avoid a Big Ten bid thief situation
Tennessee vs. Missouri, probably irrelevant as Missouri is likely already higher, marginally pull for Tennessee
Northwestern vs. Penn State, so Penn State does not overtake us in seed
Memphis vs. UCF, to avoid an AAC bid thief situation, but a Memphis loss COULD move them below us
UCLA vs. Oregon, to avoid a Pac-12 bid thief situation
Kentucky vs. Vanderbilt, to avoid an SEC bid thief situation
Virginia vs. Clemson, to avoid an ACC bid thief situation
San Diego State vs. San Jose State, to avoid a Mountain West bid thief situation
Arizona vs. Arizona State, to avoid ASU overtaking us in seed
Utah State vs. Boise State is a bubble battle to watch so it's fairly neutral, Boise State is likely closer to safe right now, so maybe root for them to bring harm to Utah State, but if Boise State loses they will likely be below Illinois as well.
Very well thought out and detailed. Since we are safely in the tourney, I am not worried about bid thieves or seeding that much. I would only be worrying if we were projected around last 4 byes, which we are not. As a result, my rooting interest will be solely on bets.

I honestly do not think it would be that bad to have a couple teams jump us in seeding. A 10 or 11 seed would be quite ok with me. The difference between seeds 6-9 this year are not that noticeable. I think avoiding a possible 1 seed in R32 may be better in the long run, but with this team, who really knows.
 
#165      

danielb927

Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
Very well thought out and detailed. Since we are safely in the tourney, I am not worried about bid thieves or seeding that much. I would only be worrying if we were projected around last 4 byes, which we are not. As a result, my rooting interest will be solely on bets.

I honestly do not think it would be that bad to have a couple teams jump us in seeding. A 10 or 11 seed would be quite ok with me. The difference between seeds 6-9 this year are not that noticeable. I think avoiding a possible 1 seed in R32 may be better in the long run, but with this team, who really knows.

I generally agree, although Arizona and Baylor will likely be 2 seeds and both look like terrible matchups for us (top-5 offenses).
 
#167      
Nance transferred from Northwestern to chase a national title. The Wildcats will be in the NCAA tournament. North Carolina will not.
matt damon apples GIF
 
#168      

chrisRunner7

Spokane, WA
Jerry Palm has us as a #10 seed playing #7 Creighton in his latest update, with the winner playing Texas. I could live with that. Could have also played #7 Kentucky in the battle of underachieving teams.


Edit: Lunardi is screwing us, though. Giving us a #9 seed against Arkansas with the winner playing Houston. Feels so weird to be rooting for a lower seed, lol.

 
#169      

danielb927

Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
Jerry Palm has us as a #10 seed playing #7 Creighton in his latest update, with the winner playing Texas. I could live with that. Could have also played #7 Kentucky in the battle of underachieving teams.


Could be worse, but Creighton is #13 in the NET and T-Rank, #12 in KenPom, so they are really really good for a 7-seed.
 
#170      
Could be worse, but Creighton is #13 in the NET and T-Rank, #12 in KenPom, so they are really really good for a 7-seed.
And they are playing well now after a lull middle of the season. Really strong starting 5, not much bench
 
#171      
I think they lose R1 no matter what seed. Hope I am wrong, though.

I guess if this team didn't beat UCLA and Texas, I wouldn't be as negative as I have been, because the potential is there.

I also feel BU lost the team a little by catering to MM, allowing TS and Freshman Epps dictate to him by refusing to go into games.
 
#172      
I think they lose R1 no matter what seed. Hope I am wrong, though.

I guess if this team didn't beat UCLA and Texas, I wouldn't be as negative as I have been, because the potential is there.

I also feel BU lost the team a little by catering to MM, allowing TS and Freshman Epps dictate to him by refusing to go into games.

People underestimate the loss of culture that occurs when you lose Trent, Damonte, Grandison, Kofi.

That's why keeping these freshman and sophomores in the program is so important. The best teams in country (UCLA, Houston, Alabama, Kansas etc) all have old guards that are program guys and they supplement with a transfer here and there. You just cannot be a top team brining in mercenaries and hoping everything gels. I'm not sure there is a guy in the locker room commands the attention in the room.
 
#174      
While I don't disagree with all the analytics, I am not sure I can stomach a Bruce Pearl loss to end this season.
Ugh, what a nightmare finish to lose in the FIRST Round this time and to Bruce Pearl. Honestly, seeing our guys fail to execute and make the same mistakes last night deflated my enthusiasm for hoping we "get hot" in March. :( I did not notice ANY uptick in enthusiasm or intensity when those guys walked out onto the court and saw orange in every single section of what was supposed to be a "neutral" arena; it was completely inconsequential, it seemed. Compare that to the '05 guys talking about how they would have never made the Final Four if it weren't for the fans in Rosemont. We "can" beat anyone (and can obviously lose to anyone), but the casual nature of our play from game to game leaves little room for enthusiasm from the fans. Just my take.
 
#175      
People underestimate the loss of culture that occurs when you lose Trent, Damonte, Grandison, Kofi.

That's why keeping these freshman and sophomores in the program is so important. The best teams in country (UCLA, Houston, Alabama, Kansas etc) all have old guards that are program guys and they supplement with a transfer here and there. You just cannot be a top team brining in mercenaries and hoping everything gels. I'm not sure there is a guy in the locker room commands the attention in the room.
Great points. I'd say losing Miller and then Podz were big losses, upon reflection.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.