Week of 3/2 Games Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#276      
If these 3 things happen, we’re pretty much a lock for the 2seed:

— Wisconsin beats Purdue (knocks them out of our part of the bracket, gives them another loss)

— Illinois wins AT LEAST the Friday game in the BTT

— Iowa State loses the Thursday game in the B12 tournament. As of today, they are most likely to face Kansas:

View attachment 48036

If that scenario plays out, you’ll only have a MAX of 3 teams as realistic threats to be on the 2 line (aside from us): Michigan State, Florida, Houston.
One note on the 1st: I guess you could essentially ignore it because If Purdue beats Wisconsin AND we beat Purdue in the BTT… it’s the same thing as we give Purdue a loss, pick up another win, etc.

Basically, we have to win the Friday game.

it’s just my intuition (whether right or wrong) that Purdue is a MORE LIKELY team to beat us than Wiscy.
 
Last edited:
#278      
Ian Jackson almost out of the rotation now.

Wild

We tried to spend a bunch of money over the summer on a lot of guys that didn’t really pan out… but then I got to looking at the transfer rankings from last year and seems like most of the top 25-30 or so transfers have had pretty poor seasons, injured all year, or just contributors on bad teams. I see Andrej in those rankings and he’s had a better year than more than half of the players ranked ahead of him.

 
#279      
We tried to spend a bunch of money over the summer on a lot of guys that didn’t really pan out… but then I got to looking at the transfer rankings from last year and seems like most of the top 25-30 or so transfers have had pretty poor seasons, injured all year, or just contributors on bad teams. I see Andrej in those rankings and he’s had a better year than more than half of the players ranked ahead of him.


I think everyone in the top 10 besides Yaxel has probably “underperformed” to expectations. That is a wild find
 
#287      
Miami (OH) goes to OT

The announcer said all the major teams refused to play Miami because they want to pad their metrics by playing cupcakes. If that were true (it shouldn't be, since those metrics are adjusted for opponent quality, and this isn't football, where a single loss early in the year can kill your season), then Miami should have been able to pad their own metrics playing cupcakes. But they haven't.

He was saying all this to argue that the committee should ignore their strength of schedule since they tried to do better. But the point of all the ranking systems is to compare teams with different schedules, so I don't see the need to bring in subjective judgment either way. The rankings are what they are. The only question is whether the committee should favor resume rankings or efficiency rankings. I think most of us prefer the latter this year (I do every year).
 
#288      
I think resume rating should be used for tournament selection and efficiency for seeding.
 
#289      
I think resume rating should be used for tournament selection and efficiency for seeding.
I don't have a problem with that as long as it's consistent. Just don't give a team special treatment because you think they were turned down by tough opponents. Judge them by how they did against whoever they played.
 
#293      
I don't have a problem with that as long as it's consistent. Just don't give a team special treatment because you think they were turned down by tough opponents. Judge them by how they did against whoever they played.
Miami OH's WAB is 30th, well above the fold. They should get in the tournament.

Miami OH's KP is 90th and BT is 88th. They should be a 12 seed.

However, if the committee wants to set up a Miami-Miami showdown in an 8-9 or 7-10 slot, I will allow it.
 
#300      
Miami OH's WAB is 30th, well above the fold. They should get in the tournament.

Miami OH's KP is 90th and BT is 88th. They should be a 12 seed.

However, if the committee wants to set up a Miami-Miami showdown in an 8-9 or 7-10 slot, I will allow it.
Indiana is the opposite, but not as extreme: ~52 by resume, ~34 by efficiency. Cincy is similar, but a bit worse in both. So I guess they should both be out. I don't care as much about selection, since we're talking about teams that are so unlikely to go far, and the autobids already get a lot of bad teams in.

But seeding really needs to be by efficiency rankings (or some equivalent for predicted performance). No more low-seeded Loyolas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back