Week of 3/3 Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
#101      
The Dying Illini
illini0440 said:
We are on the 6/7 line. Win Friday and 2 in the BTT think that gets us to a 5/6. Win out and we are probably a 4 seed. I think at worst we are a 7 seed.
Click to expand...
This is assuming we beat Purdue. If we lost to Purdue we have to win at least 2 if not the whole BTT to stay away from the 8/9.

I agree with you that we are likely a 7 seed as it currenty stands. We beat Purdue and feel like were locked at a 7 minimum.
 
#103      
Birdus
WolfpackIllini said:
Lunardi posts his bracketology updates Tues and Fri
In today's update, he has us up to a 7:
www.espn.com

Men's Bracketology: How the projected NCAA tournament field is taking shape

The selection show is almost here! Here's the latest look at what we're expecting when it starts.
www.espn.com
Click to expand...
Much rather play Iowa State or someone similar than Auburn in the round of 32. That would be a pretty good draw at making the sweet 16 again. Of course if we kept winning and moved up to a 5 or 6 I would be ok with that too. Still, I would rather be in a region where neither Duke nor Auburn resided.
 
#104      
Illini2010-11
The Dying Illini said:
This is assuming we beat Purdue. If we lost to Purdue we have to win at least 2 if not the whole BTT to stay away from the 8/9.

I agree with you that we are likely a 7 seed as it currenty stands. We beat Purdue and feel like were locked at a 7 minimum.
Click to expand...
This is not accurate at all. The Illini likely only need one more victory to ensure staying out of the 8/9 game (picking up the high-end Q1 win in Ann Arbor was huge).

If the Illini lose to Purdue (it is still Quad 1 game) but make it to Sunday in the BTT, the Illini are probably in the 5/6 seed range, given there would be at least 2-3 more Quad 1 wins.

I would argue that the Illini have better than coin flip odds to be a 7 seed, even if they lose out. Any 2 wins likely gets you in discussion of a 6 seed.
 
#105      
Iloveorangekoolaid
pweo said:
I believe they've relaxed some of their rematch prohibitions. In any case, keeping the top SEC seeds away from each other isn't going to be possible - I doubt they'll worry about 1 out of conference rematch.
Click to expand...
They have. It’s just a “guideline” now to try to avoid. With these mega conferences now, it gets harder and harder to build a bracket
 
#106      
ejam21
The Dying Illini said:
This is assuming we beat Purdue. If we lost to Purdue we have to win at least 2 if not the whole BTT to stay away from the 8/9.

I agree with you that we are likely a 7 seed as it currenty stands. We beat Purdue and feel like were locked at a 7 minimum.
Click to expand...
I think we are already better than an 8 seed regardless given our SOS

Currently we have: 7 quad 1 wins, 6 quad 2 wins, 1 bad (q3) loss


Last years 8 seeds (as of selection sunday)
Nebraska: 4 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
Florida Atlantic:2 quad 1 wins, 8 quad wins, 3 bad losses (1 quad 3 and 2 quad 4s, ouch)
Utah state: 4 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
mississippi state: 4 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins 1 bad loss (Q4)

So we have 3-5 quad 1 wins on every 8 seed from last year as of now......and more quad 2 wins than all but one of them (and that one with more quad 2s has a third of the quad 1 wins and 3X the bad losses)

I think our resume is easily better than the 8 line as of last years tourney...and ppl are saying this year's field/bubble is worse.

Let's look at the 7s

Florida: 6 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (Q3)
WSU: 6 quad 1 wins, 3 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (q3)
Dayton: 3 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
Texas: 5 quad 1 wins, 3 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (q3)

I think we are better than the 7s of last year as well.......more quad 1 and 2 wins than all of them, and all but one had a quad 3 loss like us


I got time, lets look at the 6s haha

BYU: 6 quad 1s, 5 quad 2s.....no bad losses
Clemson: 5 quad 1s, 5 quad 2s, 1 bad loss (q3)
Texas tech: 6 quad 1, 4 quad 2, no bad losses
South Carolina: 6 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, 2 bad losses (Q3)

Think you can argue us against these as well as it stands now

Also....last years 3 seed team had 7 quad 1 wins, 6 quad 2 wins and 1 quad 3 loss LOL...not saying that means we are on par in general, but this angst about more losses this year is partially driven by an easier schedule last year. We had THIRTEEN quad 3/4 games last year vs 7 this year...last years team couldve easily had 10-11 losses with this years schedule
 
Last edited:
#107      
lstewart53x3
ejam21 said:
I think we are already better than an 8 seed regardless given our SOS

Currently we have: 7 quad 1 wins, 6 quad 2 wins, 1 bad (q3) loss


Last years 8 seeds (as of selection sunday)
Nebraska: 4 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
Florida Atlantic:2 quad 1 wins, 8 quad wins, 3 bad losses (1 quad 3 and 2 quad 4s, ouch)
Utah state: 4 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
mississippi state: 4 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins 1 bad loss (Q4)

So we have 3-5 quad 1 wins on every 8 seed from last year as of now......and more quad 2 wins than all but one of them (and that one with more quad 2s has a third of the quad 1 wins and 3X the bad losses)

I think our resume is easily better than the 8 line as of last years tourney...and ppl are saying this year's field/bubble is worse.

Let's look at the 7s

Florida: 6 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (Q3)
WSU: 6 quad 1 wins, 3 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (q3)
Dayton: 3 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
Texas: 5 quad 1 wins, 3 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (q3)

I think we are better than the 7s of last year as well.......more quad 1 and 2 wins than all of them, and all but one had a quad 3 loss like us


I got time, lets look at the 6s haha

BYU: 6 quad 1s, 5 quad 2s.....no bad losses
Clemson: 5 quad 1s, 5 quad 2s, 1 bad loss (q3)
Texas tech: 6 quad 1, 4 quad 2, no bad losses
South Carolina: 6 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, 2 bad losses (Q3)

Think you can argue us against these as well as it stands now
Click to expand...
Thanks for your research. Though, probably a more accurate way to do it is to go to the bracket matrix and compare our resume to the projected 8/7/6 seeds for this year. I’d do it myself but I’m a bit short on time today.
 
#108      
WolfpackIllini
Illini2010-11 said:
This is not accurate at all. The Illini likely only need one more victory to ensure staying out of the 8/9 game (picking up the high-end Q1 win in Ann Arbor was huge).

If the Illini lose to Purdue (it is still Quad 1 game) but make it to Sunday in the BTT, the Illini are probably in the 5/6 seed range, given there would be at least 2-3 more Quad 1 wins.

I would argue that the Illini have better than coin flip odds to be a 7 seed, even if they lose out. Any 2 wins likely gets you in discussion of a 6 seed.
Click to expand...
Not an expert or even close, but clarifying/amplifying your first point...
the win in Ann Arbor was by 20 points, on the road, against a ranked team on a roll, and raised our NET from 22 to 16.
Let that sink in.
This is very late in the season when it is hard to move NET all that much. And we got 6 points out of 1 single game!
So, whatever is maybe 2 notches higher than huge, that's what that win was.

The remaining issue would seem to be voters' perception of our team.
Was the early season a fluke, and we reverted to the mean when our freshmen showed their youth, with the UM win a random outlier?
Or, were we really good, and the injuries and illnesses really the culprit, and now we are "back"?
Voters (AP, bracket guys, etc) have to figure in the "fool me once" adage, right?
So we aren't going to get their benefit of the doubt unless/until we CRUSH PURDUE.

Friday is going to be AWESOME!
I-L-L !!
 
#109      
ejam21
lstewart53x3 said:
Thanks for your research. Though, probably a more accurate way to do it is to go to the bracket matrix and compare our resume to the projected 8/7/6 seeds for this year. I’d do it myself but I’m a bit short on time today.
Click to expand...
Yeah my logic was bracket matrix might be less reliable than the actual tourney igven some of these bracketologists suck LOL, and the fact that im comparing to FULL resumes puts us at an initial disadvantage to allow for some fluctuation (since we likley have 1-2 more quad 1/2 opportunities left)
 
#110      
IlliniFan42
I think some bracketologists get too cute with their analytics because they need the system to appear complex to keep their jobs. Look at NET and the quad win/loss and you should be pretty good at predicting, and those are telling me this team is 7-seed at worst.
 
#111      
Rez
I know you shouldn't focus on one individual bracket but I was looking at the bracket matrix and came across CBS Jerry Palm's bracket. In his latest one he has Kansas as a 6 seed and Illinois an 8 seed.

Illinois is 7-10 in Quad 1 games while Kansas is 5-9.

Illinois is 6-0 in Quad 2 games while Kansas is 4-2.

Now Illinois has a quad 3 loss but is that really all the difference is in his eyes? More than overall quad 1/2 record? Illinois also has a higher SOS and they have the same record. Am I being crazy? Is Jerry Palm just known to be bad at his job? Just curious what you all think.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
 
#112      
Second place is 1st loser
Rez said:
I know you shouldn't focus on one individual bracket but I was looking at the bracket matrix and came across CBS Jerry Palm's bracket. In his latest one he has Kansas as a 6 seed and Illinois an 8 seed.

Illinois is 7-10 in Quad 1 games while Kansas is 5-9.

Illinois is 6-0 in Quad 2 games while Kansas is 4-2.

Now Illinois has a quad 3 loss but is that really all the difference is in his eyes? More than overall quad 1/2 record? Illinois also has a higher SOS and they have the same record. Am I being crazy? Is Jerry Palm just known to be bad at his job? Just curious what you all think.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Click to expand...
Look at Illinois's Q1 wins and look at theirs. Our best win is Michigan.

Equally as important, look at some of our Q2 losses. Not good. Not good at all.

Then, of course, losing by 40 on national TV to a team they played as well speaks for itself.
 
#113      
ejam21
Second place is 1st loser said:
Look at Illinois's Q1 wins and look at theirs. Our best win is Michigan.

Equally as important, look at some of our Q2 losses. Not good. Not good at all.

Then, of course, losing by 40 on national TV to a team they played as well speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
we have two wins better than michigan in terms of NET (i undrstand maybe you are putting some sauce on it being a road game)

We dont have any q2 losses

quad 1 wins

Their wins: 2, 9, 12, 40, 69
Ours; 12,13,25,26, 31,,47, 54

They have us on highest quality of wins for sure. Big feather in their cap with duke

on quad 2 losses, we have none and htey lost to 48 and 82

We have that one quad 3 loss though (76)

10 of KUs 19 wins are Quad 3/4
6 of ours are

I could see htem having a better seed but its closer than you make it sound IMHO

Yeah, losing by 40 hurts...but when they look at our teamsheet theyl see:

a Q1 20 point win at #25
a q1 32 pt win at #31
a q1 25 pt win at #54

I'd hope those 3 q1 blowouts make up for receiving one blowout
 
Last edited:
#114      
Rez
Second place is 1st loser said:
Look at Illinois's Q1 wins and look at theirs. Our best win is Michigan.

Equally as important, look at some of our Q2 losses. Not good. Not good at all.

Then, of course, losing by 40 on national TV to a team they played as well speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

What Quad 2 losses? I see 0.
 
#115      
Rez
ejam21 said:
we have two wins better than michigan in terms of NET (i undrstand maybe you are putting some sauce on it being a road game)

We dont have any q2 losses

quad 1 wins

Their wins: 2, 9, 12, 40, 69
Ours; 12,13,25,26, 31,,47, 54

They have us on highest quality of wins for sure. Big feather in their cap with duke

on quad 2 losses, we have none and htey lost to 48 and 82

We have that one quad 3 loss though (76)

10 of KUs 19 wins are Quad 3/4
6 of ours are

I could see htem having a better seed but its closer than you make it sound IMHO
Click to expand...

Fair enough. If anything it looks like both should be the same seed at 7 instead of one 6 and the other at 8. I guess if you look at it as being the best 8 seed and the other being the worst 6 seed it's closer than the 2 seed line difference would seem.
 
#116      
WolfpackIllini
Rez said:
I know you shouldn't focus on one individual bracket but I was looking at the bracket matrix and came across CBS Jerry Palm's bracket. In his latest one he has Kansas as a 6 seed and Illinois an 8 seed.

Illinois is 7-10 in Quad 1 games while Kansas is 5-9.

Illinois is 6-0 in Quad 2 games while Kansas is 4-2.

Now Illinois has a quad 3 loss but is that really all the difference is in his eyes? More than overall quad 1/2 record? Illinois also has a higher SOS and they have the same record. Am I being crazy? Is Jerry Palm just known to be bad at his job? Just curious what you all think.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Click to expand...
imo Jerry Palm blew it wrt Illini in his latest bracket.

He had us in the same slot vs same opponent (NM) last week, before the UM game.

PS: I am going to see NM play at UNR tonight - should be a good one! Go Wolf Pack!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rez
#117      
Oldskoolkoach
Kensucky 19-10, projected 3 seed, 10th in the SEC. Have had some good wins, and some bad losses. Not sure there is much difference in the two of us, honestly. Yet, we are looking at 6 - 8 seed. Couple bounces this way, or that, or ability to stop a full court layup, inbound a ball, etc.
 
#118      
ejam21
lstewart53x3 said:
Thanks for your research. Though, probably a more accurate way to do it is to go to the bracket matrix and compare our resume to the projected 8/7/6 seeds for this year. I’d do it myself but I’m a bit short on time today.
Click to expand...

Ok, taking a stab at that here using this years 8/7/6

Illinois: 7-10 quad 1, 6-0 quad 2, 1 bad loss (q3)

8 seeds
BYU: 4-7 quad 1,6-1 quad 2, no bad losses
Gonzaga: 3-6 quad 1 wins, 5-2 quad 2 also noticed that 15 of their 23 wins are quad 3 and 4.......with 11 of them being quad 4
UCONN: 4-5 quad 1, 6-3 quad 2, 1 bad (q3) loss

7 seeds
Memphis: 6-2 quad 1, 5-1 quad 2, 2 bad losses (q3)
Ole miss: 5-9 quad 1, 6-0 quad 2, no bad losses
UCLA: 7-8 Quad 1, 6-0 quad 2, 1 bad loss (q3)
kansas: 5-9 Q1, 4-2 quad 2, no bad losses

6 seeds:
Miss st: 7-8 quad 1, 5-1 quad 2
Louisville: 4-4 quad 1, 7-2 quad 2
St marys: 4-2 quad 1, 6-2 quad 2
Oregon:8-6 quad 1, 5-2 quad 2

Thoughts?......i feel like we are easily ahead of all the 8s....could make arguments against most of the 7s, arent far off of the 6s
 
#120      
DeonThomas
ejam21 said:
I think we are already better than an 8 seed regardless given our SOS

Currently we have: 7 quad 1 wins, 6 quad 2 wins, 1 bad (q3) loss


Last years 8 seeds (as of selection sunday)
Nebraska: 4 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
Florida Atlantic:2 quad 1 wins, 8 quad wins, 3 bad losses (1 quad 3 and 2 quad 4s, ouch)
Utah state: 4 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
mississippi state: 4 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins 1 bad loss (Q4)

So we have 3-5 quad 1 wins on every 8 seed from last year as of now......and more quad 2 wins than all but one of them (and that one with more quad 2s has a third of the quad 1 wins and 3X the bad losses)

I think our resume is easily better than the 8 line as of last years tourney...and ppl are saying this year's field/bubble is worse.

Let's look at the 7s

Florida: 6 quad 1 wins, 4 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (Q3)
WSU: 6 quad 1 wins, 3 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (q3)
Dayton: 3 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, no bad losses
Texas: 5 quad 1 wins, 3 quad 2 wins, 1 bad loss (q3)

I think we are better than the 7s of last year as well.......more quad 1 and 2 wins than all of them, and all but one had a quad 3 loss like us


I got time, lets look at the 6s haha

BYU: 6 quad 1s, 5 quad 2s.....no bad losses
Clemson: 5 quad 1s, 5 quad 2s, 1 bad loss (q3)
Texas tech: 6 quad 1, 4 quad 2, no bad losses
South Carolina: 6 quad 1 wins, 5 quad 2 wins, 2 bad losses (Q3)

Think you can argue us against these as well as it stands now

Also....last years 3 seed team had 7 quad 1 wins, 6 quad 2 wins and 1 quad 3 loss LOL...not saying that means we are on par in general, but this angst about more losses this year is partially driven by an easier schedule last year. We had THIRTEEN quad 3/4 games last year vs 7 this year...last years team couldve easily had 10-11 losses with this years schedule
Click to expand...
Really strong analysis here. Thank you EJAM. I think you're spot on.

Additionally, this further supports my earlier point about Lunardi. He does nothing in-depth like this. As such, that lack of detailed analysis serves only to foster his biases and prejudices.

Because the Tournament Committee does this type of analysis ad nauseam, we almost always end up exactly where we should be......which is consistently 1-2 slots higher than Lunardi's final prognostication.
 
#122      
Second place is 1st loser
ejam21 said:
we have two wins better than michigan in terms of NET (i undrstand maybe you are putting some sauce on it being a road game)

We dont have any q2 losses

quad 1 wins

Their wins: 2, 9, 12, 40, 69
Ours; 12,13,25,26, 31,,47, 54

They have us on highest quality of wins for sure. Big feather in their cap with duke

on quad 2 losses, we have none and htey lost to 48 and 82

We have that one quad 3 loss though (76)

10 of KUs 19 wins are Quad 3/4
6 of ours are

I could see htem having a better seed but its closer than you make it sound IMHO

Yeah, losing by 40 hurts...but when they look at our teamsheet theyl see:

a Q1 20 point win at #25
a q1 32 pt win at #31
a q1 25 pt win at #54

I'd hope those 3 q1 blowouts make up for receiving one blowout
Click to expand...
I agree 100% that it's close, but both teams have an argument. We have our warts, as do they. When you start getting into 7, 8, 9.....it's really splitting hairs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rez
#123      
TriangleIL
IlliniFaninHoosierLand said:
If you read the tweet that Dan linked, there are actually 0 probabilities that they end up with the 3 seed. 5 seed is absolute ceiling in my opinion for BTT seeding.
Click to expand...
It's almost zero possibility, but it is possible..
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250304_174254_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20250304_174254_Chrome.jpg
    444.7 KB · Views: 139
#124      
Rez
Second place is 1st loser said:
Well, one moved to quad 3, so it's a bit moot. Rutgers, USC, Northwestern(Q1 loss?) and Nebraska shouldn't have been losses. Period.

Kentucky beat Duke. We lost by 40. There's a point/counterpoint to all of it.
Click to expand...

True. Im sure they feel the same @kstate (82), @Utah (64), home WV (48)...just was curious to me maybe im picking nits.
 
#125      
PasadenaIllini
Illini2010-11 said:
This is not accurate at all. The Illini likely only need one more victory to ensure staying out of the 8/9 game (picking up the high-end Q1 win in Ann Arbor was huge).

If the Illini lose to Purdue (it is still Quad 1 game) but make it to Sunday in the BTT, the Illini are probably in the 5/6 seed range, given there would be at least 2-3 more Quad 1 wins.

I would argue that the Illini have better than coin flip odds to be a 7 seed, even if they lose out. Any 2 wins likely gets you in discussion of a 6 seed.
Click to expand...
This is not a position we want to find ourselves in. That's A LOT of games in a row close to the NCAA tournament for a team that isn't really deep. Don't get me wrong, I'd love the B1G tourney title, but if we can't win the whole thing, I'd prefer we get some needed rest prior to the NCAAs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back