Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
#2      

Illini in Italy

Illini in Italy
Illini in Italy
Somebody To Love Remix GIF by Justin Bieber
 
#4      

IlliniMike_Aurora

IlliniMike_Aurora
Straight outta Champaign
IlliniMike_Aurora
#5      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
IlliniMike_Aurora said:
ah yes, the Generator, thanks Dan, my productivity today just took a hit.
Click to expand...
That BTT seed generator is so fun to use in the last week or two of the season, haha. It can also actually be really useful ... with the BTT in Chicago last year, the wife and I were very intent on going. However, Illinois' first game could have been at multiple different times on Thursday. It was kind of nice to be able to tentatively plan based off of using that generator and knowing that our two most likely times were in the afternoon so I would not have to take the whole day off work.
 
#6      

IlliniMike_Aurora

IlliniMike_Aurora
Straight outta Champaign
IlliniMike_Aurora
Fighter of the Nightman said:
That BTT seed generator is so fun to use in the last week or two of the season, haha. It can also actually be really useful ... with the BTT in Chicago last year, the wife and I were very intent on going. However, Illinois' first game could have been at multiple different times on Thursday. It was kind of nice to be able to tentatively plan based off of using that generator and knowing that our two most likely times were in the afternoon so I would not have to take the whole day off work.
Click to expand...
well, heres to hoping you don't have to plan a THURSDAY game this year.....
 
#8      

danielb927

danielb927
Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
danielb927
This view from Torvik's page is close to what I've been wishing for - a Quadrant breakdown that doesn't just lump all games in a quadrant together with only the minimum distinctions (split into a/b, then ordering by team's NET rank).

Red/Green = Loss/Win
Circle/Square = Non-Con/Conference

Makes for a graphical comparison of our resume with, say, Wisconsin's:

1707755479132.png
1707755514772.png
 
#9      

JFGsCoffeeMug

JFGsCoffeeMug
BU:1 Trash cans:0
Chicago
JFGsCoffeeMug
danielb927 said:
This view from Torvik's page is close to what I've been wishing for - a Quadrant breakdown that doesn't just lump all games in a quadrant together with only the minimum distinctions (split into a/b, then ordering by team's NET rank).

Red/Green = Loss/Win
Circle/Square = Non-Con/Conference

Makes for a graphical comparison of our resume with, say, Wisconsin's:

View attachment 31051 View attachment 31052
Click to expand...
How should these two images be labeled?
 
#12      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
I have been what I guess one could call an "apologist" for our high rankings this year (pretty much #10 or #14 depending on the week, lol), citing the unavoidable fact that we are compared to our peers, and our peers keep losing! So, to be fair, I also thought I would compare Quad 1 and Quad 2 wins of the field:

QUAD 1 WINS
8 Total: 2 teams ... #2 Purdue and #4 UConn
7 Total: 2 teams ... #1 Houston and #3 Arizona
6 Total: 3 teams ... #10 North Carolina, #12 Kansas and #21 Wisconsin
5 Total: 6 teams ... #11 Marquette, #13 Baylor, #17 Duke, #37 Texas A&M, #47 Nevada, #49 Baylor
4 Total: 8 teams ... #6 Tennessee, #9 Iowa State, #15 Saint Mary's, #29 Clemson, #40 Washington State, #56 Northwestern, #76 Seton Hall, #87 UNLV
3 Total: 23 teams! ... top ranked ones include #5 Alabama, #8 BYU, #14 Illinois, #16 Creighton, #18 Dayton, #19 San Diego State, #23 Michigan State

Other interesting outliers include #7 Auburn with only 2 and #24 Gonzaga with only 1.

QUAD 2 WINS
7 Total: 1 team ... #2 Purdue
6 Total: 5 teams ... #7 Auburn, #16 Creighton, #28 Utah State, #112 UCLA, #127 Arizona State
5 Total: 13 teams ... top ranked teams include #4 UConn, #5 Alabama, #6 Tennessee, #18 Dayton
4 Total: 22 teams! ... top ranked ones include #10 North Carolina, #12 Kansas, #14 Illinois, #19 San Diego State, #21 Wisconsin

So, all this is to say what we all already know ... various metrics from the NET Rankings to the more subjective AP Poll have labeled our squad - based on whatever factor(s) - as a fringe top 10, for sure top 15 team. However, our wins line up closer to being a top 25-30 team. It's very frustrating that we have let games like Marquette, Northwestern and MSU slip away, as winning any one of them has us feeling pretty darn good right now. We still have some opportunities, but we have to really be dialed in down the stretch!!
 
#13      

danielb927

danielb927
Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
danielb927
JFGsCoffeeMug said:
How should these two images be labeled?
Click to expand...

@fuggles is right on for the teams. The other thing missing is that left->right is chronological order, in case that wasn't obvious.

Wisconsin played 3 more Q1 games than us - they were all lower Q1, and they went 2-1 in those games. Then they also won @MSU where we just lost. All that translates to their 6-5 vs. our 3-5 in Q1.

The reason I like the graphical representation is that you can just get more of a "feel" for a team's consistency, their highest highs, and lowest lows, than the 4 columns of a team sheet. The information density and clarity seems better, to me.
 
Last edited:
#14      

battle

battle
battle
LvilleILL said:
5-0 the rest of the month and a top 4 seed is all but wrapped up. Then if you can win 2 of the last 3, almost guarantees a 3 seed. At minimum have to be 23-8 heading into the BTT if we want a 3 seed
Click to expand...
Still in control of our path to a 3. Improvement trajectory still headed in right direction, just impatient to be there already. I think the O and D fixes (mostly D) will be worked out in practices and games over the next 10 days. Only concern I have for our F4 aspirations is QG being healthy or getting out his funk since fall at PU. With late-Dec/early-Jan's double-double capable QG, we are unstoppable.
 
#20      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
fuggles said:
If we can't get a 3 seed, I'd rather have the 6. 4/5 seeds have been terrible for us in the past. 11 times only 2 in the S16. Let's try something new.
Click to expand...
I agree. Frankly, losing in the First Round vs. the Second Round is almost immaterial this year … for a plethora of reasons, the 2024 Illini need to be playing in a Second Weekend/Sweet Sixteen game for this program’s momentum, reputation and standing among the more casual fan. And I think we are more likely to go on a deep run as a 6 than a 5 who’s in the same region as Purdue or UConn.
 
#22      

IlliniFaninHoosierLand

IlliniFaninHoosierLand
IlliniFaninHoosierLand
Lunardi's update today has us a 4 seed in the South bracket playing in Brooklyn against UNC Wilmington. Other matchup in that part of the bracket is Creighton vs. Richmond.

For those who are curious based on previous discussions on here, Wisky's losing streak has them bumped down to a 4 seed playing in Salt Lake City. He has Iowa State as the 2nd top seed in Omaha (after Kansas). He has Auburn and Duke as the 3 seeds in Pittsburgh.
 
#23      

OnlyOrange

O
Belleville, IL
OnlyOrange
IlliniFaninHoosierLand said:
Lunardi's update today has us a 4 seed in the South bracket playing in Brooklyn against UNC Wilmington. Other matchup in that part of the bracket is Creighton vs. Richmond.

For those who are curious based on previous discussions on here, Wisky's losing streak has them bumped down to a 4 seed playing in Salt Lake City. He has Iowa State as the 2nd top seed in Omaha (after Kansas). He has Auburn and Duke as the 3 seeds in Pittsburgh.
Click to expand...
I want no part of Creighton. Kalkbrenner would do very well down low against Hawkins, and they always seem to have deep tourney runs.
 
#25      

danielb927

danielb927
Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
danielb927
Chad Fleck said:
I used to care about individual bracket predictions, then bracketmatrix.com came out.

Now I only care about the seed prediction. Seems foolhardy to actually look at placements and match-ups.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's very useful to spend time looking at any individual bracket's placement/match-up, but I do think it's interesting to look at who's "across" from us based on our seed prediction in the matrix - gives an idea of who we might end up playing, and whether they're better/worse than their seed line would indicate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.