Week of 2/16 Bracketology
- Status
I’ve watched both this year… Florida is a better team than Kansas.
I’m not sure they’d stick 2seed IL and 3seed NEB in the same bracket.
I honestly wouldn’t mind Gonzaga as a 3seed.
We have a term 'bracketology'. It's an old term but it means basically the process of building a tournament bracket. Its a pretty accurate term but its an old fashioned sound but bracketology is fun. It sort of says 'a bag with different things in it', it went through the roof but it was something I talked about a lot, everyone knows, the word bracketology. Its a beautiful word, very descriptive word.
I specifically said that might not be the best example but since it was specifically mentioned, Gonzaga has had other players also miss time. Ike, their leading scorer, missed 4 games. Fogle missed 5 games. So now you're up to 22 missed games (plus any Huff misses in the conference tournament) vs. 13.
Secondly, people on THIS board are up in arms over Gonzaga's performance over the past 6 weeks and that they shouldn't be in consideration for a 2 or 3 seed.
Illinois is already in consideration for a 1/2 seed so how much higher are we supposed to go? Again, the committee only dropped Cincinnati 1-seed line when they lost a 1st team All-American for the season. We're not talking multiple seed lines for injuries so we're about as high as we can get.
Here's an updated Bubble Watch based on Torvik's T-Ranketology:
Locks (greater than 99% chance) (30):
B1G (7): Michigan, Illinois, Purdue, Nebraska, Michigan State, Iowa, Wisconsin
ACC (6): Duke, Virginia, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Clemson
Big 12 (6): Arizona, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Texas Tech, BYU
SEC (5): Florida, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas
Big East (3): UConn, St. John's, Villanova
WCC (1): Gonzaga
MWC (1): Utah State
A10 (1): Saint Louis
Should be in (70-98% chance) (9):
SEC (4): Kentucky, Texas, Texas A&M, Georgia
ACC (3): Miami FL, SMU, UCF
B1G (1): Indiana
WCC (1): Saint Mary's
On the bubble (10-69% chance) (12 teams for ~6 spots):
B1G (3): UCLA, Ohio State, USC
SEC (2): Auburn, Missouri
MWC (2): New Mexico, San Diego State
ACC (2): Virginia Tech, California
WCC (1): Santa Clara
Big 12 (1): TCU
A10 (1): VCU
In reality, 30+ of the at large spots are easy to predict on Selection Sunday, sometimes as many as 34-35, with just a couple in the air. Here, even with about 3 weeks left, there's really only 6 spots up for grabs barring disastrous results in the "Should be in" category. Locks are locks, only way some of them could possibly be in trouble is if they lose out in total, and even then most of them would still safely be in the field (for example, if Illinois loses out, Torvik predicts they'll slot into the 12th spot in the bracket, or the last 3 seed).
Locks (greater than 99% chance) (30):
B1G (7): Michigan, Illinois, Purdue, Nebraska, Michigan State, Iowa, Wisconsin
ACC (6): Duke, Virginia, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Clemson
Big 12 (6): Arizona, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Texas Tech, BYU
SEC (5): Florida, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas
Big East (3): UConn, St. John's, Villanova
WCC (1): Gonzaga
MWC (1): Utah State
A10 (1): Saint Louis
Should be in (70-98% chance) (9):
SEC (4): Kentucky, Texas, Texas A&M, Georgia
ACC (3): Miami FL, SMU, UCF
B1G (1): Indiana
WCC (1): Saint Mary's
On the bubble (10-69% chance) (12 teams for ~6 spots):
B1G (3): UCLA, Ohio State, USC
SEC (2): Auburn, Missouri
MWC (2): New Mexico, San Diego State
ACC (2): Virginia Tech, California
WCC (1): Santa Clara
Big 12 (1): TCU
A10 (1): VCU
In reality, 30+ of the at large spots are easy to predict on Selection Sunday, sometimes as many as 34-35, with just a couple in the air. Here, even with about 3 weeks left, there's really only 6 spots up for grabs barring disastrous results in the "Should be in" category. Locks are locks, only way some of them could possibly be in trouble is if they lose out in total, and even then most of them would still safely be in the field (for example, if Illinois loses out, Torvik predicts they'll slot into the 12th spot in the bracket, or the last 3 seed).
Those reports were made early, before things got locked in. The media committee specifically had a conversation that Purdue should be moved over Florida, and the vote was unanimous.
Rule of thumb: never take a Jeff Goodman tweet at face value. In his rush to get something to the public he jumped the gun on the results.
My understanding is that some media members tweeted out lists and rankings at different points of the discussion (stupid to do since this was a mock selection process and there was no need to be "first" in getting information out for engagement).
So teams were moved around here and there at various points. Someone posted the final bracket so I'd go with whatever they were on there as final.
I honestly don't mean to be rude, but I am inclined to throw out this entire guy's analysis when he says Illinois has the 13th best offense to enter the NCAA tournament since 2002.
I didn't consider the other games missed by Ike so error on my part. Fogle is not a starter (14 mins per game) so if there's arguments about what is to be considered and what isn't, then I honestly wouldn't include the availability of Fogle in any decision I would make.
So what matters and what doesn't and where do they draw a line? I think 13 games missed by starters is significant, but again I'm just wondering how it works. As you said, Gonzaga is questionable itself talking about a 2 seed without even worrying about injuries to players.
Hopefully the consideration for player injuries and availability would just be something that is relevant to a specific team and those competing for a seed with said team. Houston has had zero injuries to starters, Iowa St has only had 3 games missed by starters, Purdue 2 games missed by starters, Michigan St has no injuries to starters, Florida zero injuries to starters, Nebraska 2 games missed by starters, etc etc.
If the task is to consider if Illinois should get a 2 seed, why would they care about Gonzaga's injuries since they're middling between a 3 and a 4 right now and not in competition with Illinois for seeding?
Just spit balling and is fun to think about.
Illinicpa14
- Chicago
I meant more I think giving us 1 more “win” because Boswell was out for the Wisconsin loss for example isn’t going to end up being the reason we were a 1 or a 2.
We also lost a pivotal game to Michigan St in which he did not play. Lost a 4 point game vs Alabama without Tomi
3 very pivotal games as far as tournament resume
Anyhow, its just something we have no control over and also very little knowledge of how they actually handle/consider these things
Wonder if we’re victims of our own success on that. “Well you won at Purdue and Nebraska without Kylan, so why can’t you beat MSU and Wisconsin (wisky is different imo, that game absolutely should be given further context).
Also a minor thing, we technically did have Tomi against Bama. He was just a shell of himself in 15 minutes though.
If it were up to me, I wish the ncaa would just not consider the injury stuff. It’ll never be equitable when you try to apply injury context to every game. Oddly enough, if Texas tech falls off here, are we more hurt by the toppin injury than the mid season Kylan one in the eyes of seeding? Or does a team who beats tech without Toppin get the same love?
Just causes headaches lol
Last edited:
That's an interesting thought
Also, I didn't even think about the Texas Tech win as being part of this
Bottom line, if injuries are considered, it should help Illinois a whole lot more than it hurts us considering the teams surrounding us have been healthy all season in comparison to us
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
I feel like the committee has in the past been pretty candid that they try to only factor that it when it's a major night-and-day difference of losing a star player and being a totally different team, and mostly for the purpose of being fair to OTHER teams rather than the team itself.
One 3 seed gets matchup with a great 2 seed firing on all cylinders and another gets matched up with a hollow shell missing their best player? That's a better draw than a 1 seed gets, how is that fair?
Or a team has a 5 seed's resume because of early injuries but is playing like a 2 seed when fully healthy. Giving them the 5 seed means you're handing an unlucky 4 seed the draw a 7 seed would get, just at random. That's not fair.
It would be a mistake and waste of time to litigate every sore knee for a rotation player into the dust, and they don't. It's just making sure they don't hand out totally unfair, unbalanced brackets to other teams based on your own resume not reflecting the actual team you're bringing to the dance.
EvanMiya's ranking system is an interesting one to consider here. My understanding is that it rates players (or at least lineups, and then attempts to allocate that rating to individuals within each lineup).
So our results without Kylan affect our other lineups, but not Kylan. If we perform as expected (somewhat worse) with those inferior lineups, then all our player ratings remain unchanged, and our "full-strength" team rating is unaffected. The model can also show the rating of a team's injury-affected roster, so if a player will be out for the tournament, the model can estimate the strength of the team without that player.
This isn't perfect because a team is not the sum of its parts, especially when entire position groups are depleted - missing Kylan and Andrej led to matchup problems and fatigue for everyone else - but at least it's something, and much more than the selection committee could possibly wrap their minds around.
I didn't mean to imply Gonzaga's injuries impact Illinois. However, I do think Gonzaga would be in contention for a 2 seed if Huff hadn't gone down. If Gonzaga is sitting at 27-1, with better metrics (they're 9th on KP as it is), I think they'd be in the discussion for top 8 on the s-curve.
Discounting Fogle is reasonable, but he is their 5th leading scorer and has played 23 minutes or more 4 of their last 5 games. Tomi is our 5th leading scorer. If we lost Big Z for 3 games, that would impact us quite a bit and he plays 17 mpg. You can draw the line at starters, but 6th men can have enough of an impact to influence game outcomes too.
UConn has missed 13 games from guys averaging over 25 mpg (1 from Ball, 5 from Reed, 7 from Mullins). Louisville had Brown miss 7 games. Kansas has the Peterson situation. Alabama has been ravaged by injuries. Arkansas has had a number of players miss time, including Knox who just had his meniscus fixed.
I guess my main point is that there are injuries most places and if you start taking into account 2-3 missed games, where does it end? Do you discount the wins for teams who beat them when those players were out? There's just too much information to sift through and that's why I think the committee only has time to focus on the bigger picture and the bigger injuries. I could certainly be wrong though.
Basic things to keep in mind for Illinois:
- Right now, Michigan is the unanimous #1 overall seed. In order to pass them, Illini will have to beat them in Champaign and probably again in the BTT, there is a sizeable gap right now between them and everyone else.
- Even if Illinois loses out, they'll probably still have a top 4 B1G resume, so they won't get put in the same region as Michigan.
- Thus, Illinois is not going to the Chicago region unless they somehow pass Michigan.
- Illinois is in line to go to the St. Louis pod as long as they finish no worse than 2nd among a group including them, Iowa State, Purdue, Kansas, Nebraska. In my opinion, they're on the top of that heap right now. Having wins on the home floor of two of those teams and a better conference record than them will do a lot of heavy lifting, and the chances both Iowa State and Kansas win out are extremely low (both still play at Arizona, Kansas plays Houston yet, Iowa State plays at BYU and Texas Tech). So those odds are sitting pretty barring complete collapse.
- There are effectively 8 teams right now playing at a level above everyone else: Michigan, Duke, Arizona, Illinois, Iowa State, Houston, Purdue and Florida. If you're Illinois, you are quietly hoping to get in a bracket with no more than one of those teams (and as a top 4 B1G team, that takes Michigan and Purdue off the table already). Worst case scenario would be catching Florida or Iowa State/Houston as a 3 with UConn getting a reputation 1 or 2 in a different bracket. Best case scenario is sneaking a 1 seed in an off bracket (South) with UConn as the 2.
- Right now, Michigan is the unanimous #1 overall seed. In order to pass them, Illini will have to beat them in Champaign and probably again in the BTT, there is a sizeable gap right now between them and everyone else.
- Even if Illinois loses out, they'll probably still have a top 4 B1G resume, so they won't get put in the same region as Michigan.
- Thus, Illinois is not going to the Chicago region unless they somehow pass Michigan.
- Illinois is in line to go to the St. Louis pod as long as they finish no worse than 2nd among a group including them, Iowa State, Purdue, Kansas, Nebraska. In my opinion, they're on the top of that heap right now. Having wins on the home floor of two of those teams and a better conference record than them will do a lot of heavy lifting, and the chances both Iowa State and Kansas win out are extremely low (both still play at Arizona, Kansas plays Houston yet, Iowa State plays at BYU and Texas Tech). So those odds are sitting pretty barring complete collapse.
- There are effectively 8 teams right now playing at a level above everyone else: Michigan, Duke, Arizona, Illinois, Iowa State, Houston, Purdue and Florida. If you're Illinois, you are quietly hoping to get in a bracket with no more than one of those teams (and as a top 4 B1G team, that takes Michigan and Purdue off the table already). Worst case scenario would be catching Florida or Iowa State/Houston as a 3 with UConn getting a reputation 1 or 2 in a different bracket. Best case scenario is sneaking a 1 seed in an off bracket (South) with UConn as the 2.
Illini2010-11
- Sugar Grove
Handle business down the stretch, and the losses due to injury will become less of an impact for the committee when comparing us to certain peers. Huge opportunities these next two games @UCLA and against Michigan. Win both of those (and avoid the loss to Oregon and @MD), and we are a virtual lock for at least a 2-seed, bordering on 1-seed territory regardless of what happens in the B1G Tourney.
My only comment is that Iowa State got extremely lucky with their schedule. They get BYU and Texas Tech after the injuries to Saunders and Toppin. I assume Peat will be back for Arizona by the time that game is played.
If Iowa State loses to Arizona and we lose to Michigan and conference tournament performance is similar enough, I'm very interested to see what the committee does. I wonder how much they'll value the TT and BYU wins.
EDIT: We'll find out some with the Top 16 reveal this weekend.
I generally agree but I think if Wisconsin stays a Quad 2 loss, and a team like Iowa State doesn't have any Q2 losses, it should be noted by the committee that we had 2 starters out and lost by 2 in OT. It does seem like our singular Q2 loss is holding us below them as of now.
As much as Florida gets heralded as being better than their resume, I still have some reservation with them. They shoot 29% from 3 as a team and only 70% from the line. Their starting guards shoot 18% and 27% from 3 and they have a starting forward shooting 13% on a not insignificant number of attempts (46).
Houston is kind of the same way in that they lack outside shooting (Uzan is below average from deep, Tugler a non-shooter). They have backup guards/wings that also can't shoot (Harwell 27% on 81 attempts, McCarty 28% on 56 attempts, Walker 26% on 34 attempts). Flemings and Sharp are both deadeye 3 point shooters, both at 38%, but that's only 2 guys.
What happens when those teams run into longer teams that can contest a lot of layups and shorter shots and also always have a guy waiting near the rim because they don't have 5 guys that can shoot?
LaTulip pointed out the other day that none of the top teams this season truly can play 5 out. Michigan has non-shooters, Duke has non-shooters, Arizona, UConn, Houston, Iowa St, Purdue, Florida, Kansas, etcetera all have non-shooters that play a ton.
Houston is kind of the same way in that they lack outside shooting (Uzan is below average from deep, Tugler a non-shooter). They have backup guards/wings that also can't shoot (Harwell 27% on 81 attempts, McCarty 28% on 56 attempts, Walker 26% on 34 attempts). Flemings and Sharp are both deadeye 3 point shooters, both at 38%, but that's only 2 guys.
What happens when those teams run into longer teams that can contest a lot of layups and shorter shots and also always have a guy waiting near the rim because they don't have 5 guys that can shoot?
LaTulip pointed out the other day that none of the top teams this season truly can play 5 out. Michigan has non-shooters, Duke has non-shooters, Arizona, UConn, Houston, Iowa St, Purdue, Florida, Kansas, etcetera all have non-shooters that play a ton.
Florida is clearly the best team in the SEC at this point and has been on a tear since the end of December (like Illinois). No team is perfect, but there are more great teams than typical in this year (8, like I said, as per efficiency ratings), so not playing 4 of them in a 6 game tournament is a nice hope to have.
That's the crux of all of this is where do they draw a line as far as considering injuries and player availability? I'd say yeah, 2-3 games is not worth much, but teams that have multiple players missing pivotal games, its difficult to deny that affected them in some way.
If anything, what @EmeraldCityIllini said makes the most sense... just don't consider it at all. NBA teams don't get better seeds because they had injuries to deal with (and I realize that is not the same thing as they have a very black & white system for seeding compared to college).
- Status