PDA

View Full Version : Discussion thread: Which is the hardest bracket?



JasonEvans
03-13-2011, 08:27 PM
Vote in the poll and then defend your arguments.

--Jason "note: this thread can also be the home for discussion of which #1 seed has the toughest route to the FFour" Evans

coldriver10
03-13-2011, 09:04 PM
East
West = Southwest
Southeast

strawbs
03-13-2011, 09:05 PM
east
west
southwest
southeast

timmy c
03-13-2011, 09:07 PM
Using my trusty basketball rankings bible (aka kenpom), I added the kenpom rankings of the top twelve teams in each region together. I avoided using the bottom four seeds because the difference between teams the 100th team and the 150th team are minimal but their contribution to the overall score is significant. In addition, the chance that any of these team will have an influence on the tournament after the first weekend is low. For the two play-in games, I averaged the two opponents score and rounded to the nearest whole number before adding their score. Just like golf, lowest score wins the toughest region award:

East: 289
Southwest: 320
Southeast: 352
West: 370

The East is the clear winner thanks to teams like Kentucky (8) as a four seed, Washington (15) seven seed, and the overall number one, Ohio St. (1).

Like it or not, friends, Duke again has the easiest road to the final four with a whopping timmy c score of 370! You can point to Tennessee (55) a nine seed, and Memphis (85) a 12 seed as the biggest offenders.
Disagree with me… Comment below and let me have it!

Utley
03-13-2011, 09:16 PM
Using my trusty basketball rankings bible (aka kenpom), I added the kenpom rankings of the top twelve teams in each region together. I avoided using the bottom four seeds because the difference between teams the 100th team and the 150th team are minimal but their contribution to the overall score is significant. In addition, the chance that any of these team will have an influence on the tournament after the first weekend is low. For the two play-in games, I averaged the two opponents score and rounded to the nearest whole number before adding their score. Just like golf, lowest score wins the toughest region award:

East: 289
Southwest: 320
Southeast: 352
West: 370

The East is the clear winner thanks to teams like Kentucky (8) as a four seed, Washington (15) seven seed, and the overall number one, Ohio St. (1).

Like it or not, friends, Duke again has the easiest road to the final four with a whopping timmy c score of 370! You can point to Tennessee (55) a nine seed, and Memphis (85) a 12 seed as the biggest offenders.
Disagree with me… Comment below and let me have it!

What's the Timmy scores for the top 4 seeds across the regions. What about the top 8. They are probably a better read. Not sure that 9-16 matter all that much.

sporthenry
03-13-2011, 09:16 PM
I'll talk about the #1 roads. East is tougher b/c UNC/Cuse is a better 2/3 than SD. St/UCONN although the #1 only plays 1 of them. The 8/9 in those brackets are very similar. I'd say Tenn is better than Nova but GMU might be best of the 4. The 4 seeds are pretty even with Texas having a slight nod over UK and possiblity of Zona in California adds another wrinkle.
The SE is obviously the weakest. BYU should be a 4 and Fla. a 3. BYU should switch with UK and Fla. with UCONN. Heck, Duke should probably have a rematch with Purdue as the 4 and Texas should have their 3.
But the West is stronger than the SW. ND is better than SD St. but UCONN might be better than ND and UCONN/SD St. is a wash with ND/Purdue. Texas/Zona (in California) is stronger than Vandy/Louisville and their 8/9 game is a complete joke.

JasonEvans
03-13-2011, 09:21 PM
A nice idea, TimmyC... thanks for doing that.

The problem is once you get down to the #10-#12 seeds, you get a lot of variation in how tough those teams are. Getting the #7 vs. #80 team in KenPom is not that big a deal, but carries as much weight as a region getting the #1 team versus getting the #11 team. See my point?

Plus, those lower seeded teams don't really have much of an impact on a region. Sure, the occasional #12 or #13 will rise up and surprise everyone, but how often do teams seeded below about #6 make the Elite Eight? Not often at all.

I would be interested in seeing your same data but only looking at the top 4-6 seeds... or perhaps looking at all the way down to the top 8 seeds. But taking it all the way down to #12 just allows for too much variance in teams that are not significant players in the region.

Know what I mean?

-Jason "again, good research -- I gave you pitchfork points for doing this" Evans

sporthenry
03-13-2011, 09:26 PM
kenpom is great and all but it is incomplete like any stat. Who would you rather play? Tenn or UNLV? UNLV is 22 on Kenpom compared to Tenn at 55. Personally, I'd rather face UNLV. Their compute numbers are great as they are an very efficient team but consistency from an 8 seed won't get you much. 8 seeds that can beat a # 1 seed (Tenn beating Pitt) are a lot scarier than a mid-major team where you know what you are getting from them.
And a lot of mid majors wins come before X-mas when a lot of power conference teams are figuring things out especially with their freshman. (Texas losing to USC, UNC losing to Ill. and Minn., Purdue losing to Richmond) Those games have a great influence on numbers but it is obvious that neither of these teams are the same with the development of their freshmen.

TheRob8801
03-13-2011, 09:26 PM
Disagree with me… Comment below and let me have it!

Well, there's a lot left out of your method, IMO.

Tournament teams are mostly made up of championship teams, whether it be regular season or tournament. If you break down which teams are in which bracket by championships won you get this:

East:
Big Ten (Season & Tourney)
ACC (Season)
Pac-12 (Season)
SEC (Tourney)
Atlantic 10 (Season)
Missouri Valley (Tourney)
Northeast (Season & Tourney)
Colonial (Season)
Ivy (Tourney)

Southwest:
Big XII Champ (Season & Tourney)
American East Champ (Tourney)
Ohio Valley Champ (Tourney)
Metro Atlantic Champ (Tourney)
Mid American Champ (Tourney)
Atlantic 10 (Tourney)

Southeast:
Big East (Season)
Horizon (Season & Tourney)
Colonial (Tourney)
WAC (Season & Tourney)
Atlantic Sun (Season & Tourney)
WCC (Season & Tourney)
MWC (Season)
Big West (Tourney)
SEC (Season)

West:
ACC (Tourney)
MEAC (Tourney)
Pac-10 (Season)
C-USA (Tourney)
Summit League (Season & Tourney)
Big East (Tourney)
Patriot League (Season & Tourney)
Big Sky (Season & Tourney)
MWC (Tourney)

Also, if you take a look at current AP ranking by bracket you get this:

East:
1 - 6 - 11 - 15 - 18 - 20
avg. 11.8

Southwest:
2 - 4 - 9 - 14 - 22
avg 10.2

Southeast:
3 - 8 - 12 - 13 - 17 - 19 - 23
avg. 13.6

West:
5 - 7 - 10 - 16 - 21 - 24 - 25
avg. 15.4

Now, within this breakdown you separate the "big conferences" from the rest and appoint values.

East:
4 BCS (3 Season, 2 Tourney)
5 Non-BCS (3 Season, 3 Tourney)

Southwest:
1 BCS (1 Season, 1 Tourney)
5 Non-BCS (5 Tourney)

Southeast:
2 BCS (2 Season)
7 Non-BCS (5 Season, 6 Tourney)

West:
3 BCS (1 Season, 2 Tourney)
6 Non-BCS (4 Season, 6 Tourney)

5pts for a Non-BCS Championship
10pts for a BCS Championship
1.0 weight for Season Championship
1.5 weight for Tourney Championship

Championship Points
West: 105
East: 97.5
Southeast: 90
Southwest: 62.5

Each bracket then divided by average AP rank.

Difficulty Rating
East: 8.3
West: 6.8
Southeast: 6.6
Southwest: 6.1

I might do a variable rating using KenPom rankings rather than AP the next time they are updated.

sporthenry
03-13-2011, 09:38 PM
East:
1 - 6 - 11 - 15 - 18 - 20
avg. 11.8

Southwest:
2 - 4 - 9 - 14 - 22
avg 10.2

Southeast:
3 - 8 - 12 - 13 - 17 - 19 - 23
avg. 13.6

West:
5 - 7 - 10 - 16 - 21 - 24 - 25
avg. 15.4



The average AP doesn't really do justice. Perhaps the top 4's AP ranking? B/c brackets that have their 5-8 seeds in the top 25 are hurt while other brackets whose 5-8 seeds aren't in the top 25 seem to be helped.

OZZIE4DUKE
03-13-2011, 09:42 PM
carolina is toast!

El_Diablo
03-13-2011, 09:48 PM
I would say the West is the most top-heavy, especially with Texas as a #4 (kenpom's #4 team in the country!), a potential matchup with SDSU in Anaheim (a virtual home game for them), and one of the nation's hottest teams (UConn). Arizona also looks like a tough #5, and they would be playing relatively close to home if they advance to the Sweet Sixteen.

But top-to-bottom, I gotta say the East is a little stronger overall. U-Dub (#7) is talented and capable of going on a tear, and the Syracuse (#3) zone could stifle either or both of UNC and OSU if the outside shots aren't falling. Of course, Barnes could also drop 30 per game while Zeller and Henson dominate inside, so UNC is capable of emerging here as well. And Kentucky is a pretty strong #4 (although not nearly as tough as Texas) and their record is a little deceiving: of their 8 losses, they lost 6 by a total of 13 points, and they were all on the opponents' home court (including @UNC, @UF, @Vandy). They also beat U-Dub and dismantled Notre Dame and Louisville, and they seem to be clicking right now...I would not want to face them in the Sweet Sixteen if I were OSU. Otherwise, all the CBS announcers all seemed to be in love with Xavier (#6), but I don't know much about them. #5 WVU is good, but I could also see Clemson upsetting them as a #12 seed that has been playing pretty well recently (giving us a tough time in Cameron and going to OT with UNC).

timmy c
03-13-2011, 09:49 PM
What's the Timmy scores for the top 4 seeds across the regions. What about the top 8. They are probably a better read. Not sure that 9-16 matter all that much.


A nice idea, TimmyC... thanks for doing that.

The problem is once you get down to the #10-#12 seeds, you get a lot of variation in how tough those teams are. Getting the #7 vs. #80 team in KenPom is not that big a deal, but carries as much weight as a region getting the #1 team versus getting the #11 team. See my point?

Plus, those lower seeded teams don't really have much of an impact on a region. Sure, the occasional #12 or #13 will rise up and surprise everyone, but how often do teams seeded below about #6 make the Elite Eight? Not often at all.

I would be interested in seeing your same data but only looking at the top 4-6 seeds... or perhaps looking at all the way down to the top 8 seeds. But taking it all the way down to #12 just allows for too much variance in teams that are not significant players in the region.

Know what I mean?

-Jason "again, good research -- I gave you pitchfork points for doing this" Evans

I considered looking at only the top 6 seeds initially, but I felt that others would spend much of their energy focusing on the teams that had a legitimate chance of playing in Houston. Instead I chose to get a very rudimentary picture of the overall strength of each region.

But because you’ve asked nicely, here are the top 6 seeds only.
West: 79
East: 91
Southwest: 95
Southeast: 108

dukelifer
03-13-2011, 09:53 PM
I considered looking at only the top 6 seeds initially, but I felt that others would spend much of their energy focusing on the teams that had a legitimate chance of playing in Houston. Instead I chose to get a very rudimentary picture of the overall strength of each region.

But because you’ve asked nicely, here are the top 6 seeds only.
West: 79
East: 91
Southwest: 95
Southeast: 108

So Duke is now in the hardest region. Odd how that happened.

Greg_Newton
03-13-2011, 09:53 PM
Duke's bracket seems brutal at first, but may not be as bad as it seems. My reasoning:

1. Having the strongest #3 seed doesn't matter whatsoever; if we play them, it will be where we're supposed to play the #2 seed anyway.

2. Texas in the sweet 16 is a little scary, but they're 4-4 in their last 8. I'm not sure if I'd rather have surging Louisville or UK, which is who top 2 overall seeds KU and OSU have; there's just a lot of parity in the top 4 seeds this year.

3. Tennessee in the second round also makes me a little nervous, but while they're very athletic, they're also a whopping 4-7 in their last 11, including home losses to Alabama, Georgia, and Miss St.

I just can't get over Pitt's bracket. Their 2-seed hasn't been a top 10 team all year and just got blown out by a 4-seed, their 3-seed has been awful since losing their center and just got blown out by a 2-seed, and their 4-seed just lost 36-33 to a 10-seed and isn't the same team away from home anyway.

timmy c
03-13-2011, 09:59 PM
So Duke is now in the hardest region. Odd how that happened.

i don't think it's fair to say that Duke's region is is now the hardest. You could however say that the West region is Dolly Parton-esque. :D

ice-9
03-13-2011, 10:02 PM
After a quick glance, I'd put it the following way...

1 - Southwest
2 - East
3 - West
4 - Southeast

The Southeast is by far the easiest bracket. You have a Florida team that did well over the season but isn't very talented for a 2 seed. A 3 seed in BYU that just isn't the same without Davies and is susceptible to a bad Jimmer shooting night. 4 seed Wisconsin is a good team but their real strength is at home. 5 seed K-State is a team who underperformed, then made a surge, then lost to NIT team Colorado (three times!); obviously vulnerable. 6 seed St John's is missing one if it's key players to injury. Overall, a surprisingly weak region.

Our region, the West, is OK. We are lucky to have SDSU as our 2 seed; the only other 2 seed I'd rather have is Florida but at least it isn't Notre Dame. UCONN got the 3 on the basis of their strong BE tournament run; this is a dangerous team but like BYU relies on Kemba to have a good game. The winner of SDSU-UCONN would make a worthy Elite Eight match-up. Texas as 4 seed is what sticks out like a sore thumb, a major red flag that everyone is going to circle as "an upset special" in the Sweet 16. This is a team that was ranked #1 before in the regular season and is ranked #4 on KenPom! By far the strongest 4 seed in the tournament, and probably more deserving of a 3 (in place of BYU). All that said, Arizona has a chance of knocking Texas out as the 5 seed. Texas is what makes the West difficult.

The Southwest and East are about even, though I give the edge to the Southwest. Obviously the 1 seeds are the strongest in the tournament, but the 2 and 3 seeds are slightly stronger in the Southwest. UNC is run by a freshman point guard, and those are susceptible to an upset. Contrast that to Notre Dame, a team rich with experience. I'd rather have UNC in my bracket. Purdue has a slightly higher KenPom rating than Syracuse, so in the absence of further information I'll say I'd rather have Syracuse. Similar to UNC, Kentucky may have a lot of talent but much of it is young; they could easily be upset. Louisville on the other hand feels more solid and had a great BE tournament. Both 4s feel strong. The 5s are a wash and while the 6 seed Georgetown looks scary, realize the Hoyas are a different team without Chris Wright.

My final four picks as of right now: OSU, ND, Duke, Pitt.

dukelifer
03-13-2011, 10:06 PM
i don't think it's fair to say that Duke's region is is now the hardest. You could however say that the West region is Dolly Parton-esque. :D

Well that may be true- but it seems like there is better chance that Duke's region will go as expected to the higher seeds suggesting that after the first weekend- the west will be tougher.

Reddevil
03-13-2011, 10:08 PM
I just like that if the chalk holds, unc would have to go against the 'Cuse zone.

As for Duke, well wouldn't we all like a piece of uconn?!

Chris4UNC
03-13-2011, 10:27 PM
Duke's bracket seems brutal at first, but may not be as bad as it seems. My reasoning:

1. Having the strongest #3 seed doesn't matter whatsoever; if we play them, it will be where we're supposed to play the #2 seed anyway.

2. Texas in the sweet 16 is a little scary, but they're 4-4 in their last 8. I'm not sure if I'd rather have surging Louisville or UK, which is who top 2 overall seeds KU and OSU have; there's just a lot of parity in the top 4 seeds this year.

3. Tennessee in the second round also makes me a little nervous, but while they're very athletic, they're also a whopping 4-7 in their last 11, including home losses to Alabama, Georgia, and Miss St.

I just can't get over Pitt's bracket. Their 2-seed hasn't been a top 10 team all year and just got blown out by a 4-seed, their 3-seed has been awful since losing their center and just got blown out by a 2-seed, and their 4-seed just lost 36-33 to a 10-seed and isn't the same team away from home anyway.

That bracket is nowhere near brutal. Brutal? What? Duke has no worry unless they run into UConn in the elite 8. They are certainly able to beat Duke having played better competition for most of the year and they have one heck of a player in Walker.
.

sporthenry
03-13-2011, 10:33 PM
As far as arguing the hardest route for a #1. I think the best way to look at it is the most likely opponent, meaning the 8/9, 4/5, and 2/3 teams in their bracket.

Using Kenpom and Sagarin, the SW has the hardest 8/9 teams (21/23.5) followed by the East(27/27.5) and the SE(53/42.5) and West(47.5/44.5) are about even.
The 4/5 is just about a tie (14.5/14.5 vs 14/15.5) between the East and the West with the SE following (19/18) and SW last (22/21.5).
The hardest 2/3 is the SW (9/8.5) followed by the West (11/9.5) then the East (12.5/12.5) and the SE(16/12)

So it is clear that the SE is far and away the worst.
Now I'm not a huge fan of these computer numbers (I like Kenpom b/c it breaks down the offensive and defensive numbers but I find very little use for his pythagorean theorem), but the other 3 difficulties depends upon what you put more emphasis on. A harder 8/9 matchup probably isn't as bad as a harder 4/5 which isn't as bad as a 2/3 since you are probably more likely to lose to the 2/3's.

A-Tex Devil
03-13-2011, 10:36 PM
Georgia and UAB are two of the three worst selections in the history of the 64 team field. Florida is horribly over seeded and Texas is horribly under seeded. I am just getting started. I am mobile now so can't catch up, but will tomorrow with the chatter. The election committee did a disastrous job. Colorado should sue.

sporthenry
03-13-2011, 10:42 PM
That bracket is nowhere near brutal. Brutal? What? Duke has no worry unless they run into UConn in the elite 8. They are certainly able to beat Duke having played better competition for most of the year and they have one heck of a player in Walker.
.

So Tenn. beating Pitt is nothing to worry about. Tenn losing @UCONN by 9 means litte? And sure, Tenn had a lot of SEC losses but none by more than 8 which means they were in games against Fla. and UK including an OT loss and another 1 point loss to #2 seed Fla?

Texas was almost unanimously the #1 team in the country 3 weeks ago. Texas finished a game behind KU for the Big 12 and split their season series with KU. Some will say 4-4 in their last 8 but that includes a loss to KU. The other 3 losses includes 2 away games in conference similar to ND losing @WV or Pitt losing @SJU and @Louisville (pitt was 3-3 in their last 6 and they got a 1 seed, yes it was against better competition but the Big 12 was still very good and I don't think Texas really had a bad loss in their last 4).

And most don't know what to expect out of Zona or SD St but last year's pac 10 champion made a lot of damage.

Chris4UNC
03-13-2011, 10:55 PM
Assuming all the 1's make it to the Elite 8 I see Pitt as having the path of least resistance to that end. Looking at the brackets the way I see it, wow, it is crazy. There will be nothing easy for the 1's or 2's after the first round. Not that I think there is a big chance it could happen but Tennessee for example can beat Duke. That could be a tough game. Pitt could suffer from their usual NCAA woes and lose to a capable Old Dominion team. I like the looks of the potential 2nd round games. My Heels may not even make it out of the 2nd considering they could play PAC-10 Tourny champ Washington. The PAC-10 may have been down but still a champion is a champion. For example Mountain West champion San Diego State will have a chip on their shoulder. They are going to want to prove that they deserve their high seed and that they think they should have been a 1. I don't know but I can see this being the year that a number 1 may not be in the Final Four. At the very least I see the 1's being challenged more this year than in the past.

Deslok
03-13-2011, 10:55 PM
To kind of follow up on what others have been saying, one of the ways I like to look at the regions is to simply look at all the 1 seeds and use something like Pomeroy ratings to rank them 1-4, then the same for the 2 seeds, and so on down the line. Its not perfect(won't account for things like attrition because of injuries or being kicked off of a team) but I think it gives a pretty good idea.
If I do that for seeds 1-16 I get

The east region seeds:
1 3 2 2 1 4 1 2 2 4 2 2 3 3 1 4
Which gives an average of 2.3125 overall, with an average of the top 8 being 2.
The west region seeds:
2 1 4 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 3 4 2 2 2 3
Which is exactly the same on average as the east, 2.3125 overall, 2 for the top 8.
The southeast seeds:
4 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 4 1
An overall average of 2.625, with the top 8 averaging 3.5
And the southwest seeds:
3 2 1 4 4 2 3 1 1 3 4 3 4 4 3 2
For an average of 2.75, with the top 8 averaging 2.5

Note, the top 8 seeds for the southeast region are either the worst rated at that seed line, or the 2nd worst. Their overall average is slightly rescued by having the toughest 11-14 and 16th seeds. The rest is pretty much a joke. Kansas gets an odd draw, having the easiest of both the 4 and 5 seeds, but the hardest of both the 8 and 9s.

Other anomalies... teams that were way underseeded(that have ratings roughly equal to teams seeded more than 2 slots ahead of them): Texas, Kentucky, Washington, Utah St(better rated than both UConn and Florida!), Belmont, Illinois, UNLV, Clemson, and Gonzaga.
In the way overseeded category(similarly, are rated more than 2 slots below where they are seeded): Florida, Vanderbilt, St Johns, Xavier, Texas A&M, UCLA, and Butler.

Anyway, that's some early number crunching of what I see.

throatybeard
03-13-2011, 11:01 PM
Waah waah waah. We're getting screwed.

I remember this last year. Let's go and mess up each team in front of us.

Chris4UNC
03-13-2011, 11:03 PM
Georgia and UAB are two of the three worst selections in the history of the 64 team field. Florida is horribly over seeded and Texas is horribly under seeded. I am just getting started. I am mobile now so can't catch up, but will tomorrow with the chatter. The election committee did a disastrous job. Colorado should sue.

I agree on every point. Georgia should be no more than a 13 if in at all. Colorado should be in. They beat Kansas State 3 times, played Kansas close twice and beat Texas. I realize you can't satisfy everyone all of the time and the arguments for or against this one or that one will always be present. Sometimes the selection committee, no, they always leave me confused and wondering.

Chris4UNC
03-13-2011, 11:07 PM
Waah waah waah. We're getting screwed.

I remember this last year. Let's go and mess up each team in front of us.

Now that is the spirit! I love to get into the debate about the selections but you are right.....steam ahead! But understand, I do not and will not ever pull for Duke. :p

Chris4UNC
03-13-2011, 11:16 PM
I just like that if the chalk holds, unc would have to go against the 'Cuse zone.

As for Duke, well wouldn't we all like a piece of uconn?!

....and I think Syracuse is physically stronger than the Tar Heels at every position. I see Carolina having a hard time every step of the way if they are to advance. This year's team reminds me of the 2009 national championship team when they were freshmen and sophomores, you see the talent, you see the drive (maybe not as driven), and just tons of potential all around. They just can't seem to play complete games yet. A UConn - Duke game would be great to watch. I would like to see Nolan vs. Kemba.

Chris4UNC
03-13-2011, 11:21 PM
So Tenn. beating Pitt is nothing to worry about. Tenn losing @UCONN by 9 means litte? And sure, Tenn had a lot of SEC losses but none by more than 8 which means they were in games against Fla. and UK including an OT loss and another 1 point loss to #2 seed Fla?

Texas was almost unanimously the #1 team in the country 3 weeks ago. Texas finished a game behind KU for the Big 12 and split their season series with KU. Some will say 4-4 in their last 8 but that includes a loss to KU. The other 3 losses includes 2 away games in conference similar to ND losing @WV or Pitt losing @SJU and @Louisville (pitt was 3-3 in their last 6 and they got a 1 seed, yes it was against better competition but the Big 12 was still very good and I don't think Texas really had a bad loss in their last 4).

And most don't know what to expect out of Zona or SD St but last year's pac 10 champion made a lot of damage.

I mentioned it in another post here. I don't know that Duke's bracket is brutal but it and all of them are tough in their own way. It is not going to be cake walk for any of the 1's and 2's. I really believe that every number 1 could be sitting at home watching the final four from their couches this year. That may not happen but I think it is more possible this year as any in recent years.

A-Tex Devil
03-13-2011, 11:27 PM
That Florida gets a 2 and Texas a 4 is unfathomable. I am extra angry because I have to root against Texas earlier than I wanted to but I just took a second look at the resumes and Texas is better than Florida in every conceivable way except Texas never lost to Jacksonville which apparently gets you a 2 seed. The committee was on crack this year. It's really really bad.

sporthenry
03-13-2011, 11:59 PM
I mentioned it in another post here. I don't know that Duke's bracket is brutal but it and all of them are tough in their own way. It is not going to be cake walk for any of the 1's and 2's. I really believe that every number 1 could be sitting at home watching the final four from their couches this year. That may not happen but I think it is more possible this year as any in recent years.

Who is Pitt going to lose to? I'm sure they could get upset but no team in their bracket is that scary. Pitt got the 'Duke' treatment as some like to say. (Personally, I wonder if they do the bottom right part of the bracket last and thus they end up getting a lot of the weaker seeds but who knows?).

OSU/Dukes brackets are very even as far as I'm concerned. Duke has an easier 2 seed at first glance but if SD St. isn't good they will lose to UCONN and if they are good, they will beat UCONN who just beat Syracuse, thus making SD St. a deserved 2 seed.

KU's 2nd seed is rough but their second and third round games aren't necessarily that tough.

So I'm not whining or anything, but both Duke and UNC have rough paths while Pitt has a pretty weak bracket. If they lose to Tenn., Duke obviously isn't good enough to win it all but I'm just analyzing the bracket b/c I'm a fan and finding trouble spots for Duke.

Troublemaker
03-14-2011, 12:38 AM
Kenpom has updated his rankings and has listed seeds next to team names, and Texas sticks out like a sore thumb as a 4 seed when you scan the page. That team is quite underseeded.

It'll be a tough road. SDSU is probably underestimated nationally the same way Butler was last year. Remember, Butler was 33-4 with a 25 game winning streak going into the championship game against Duke. Some analysts were predicting an easy win for Duke, but when a team like Butler wins games with that kind of regularity, they almost certainly have built up amazing chemistry and institutional excellence that makes their whole better than the sum of their parts. Well, this season SDSU is a higher-ranked Kenpom team than Butler of last season and would be an incredible 35-2 if they make it to the Elite 8. I'm definitely wary of them.

But, first things first. Hampton, then Michigan/Tennessee.

loran16
03-14-2011, 12:41 AM
Using my trusty basketball rankings bible (aka kenpom), I added the kenpom rankings of the top twelve teams in each region together. I avoided using the bottom four seeds because the difference between teams the 100th team and the 150th team are minimal but their contribution to the overall score is significant. In addition, the chance that any of these team will have an influence on the tournament after the first weekend is low. For the two play-in games, I averaged the two opponents score and rounded to the nearest whole number before adding their score. Just like golf, lowest score wins the toughest region award:

East: 289
Southwest: 320
Southeast: 352
West: 370

The East is the clear winner thanks to teams like Kentucky (8) as a four seed, Washington (15) seven seed, and the overall number one, Ohio St. (1).

Like it or not, friends, Duke again has the easiest road to the final four with a whopping timmy c score of 370! You can point to Tennessee (55) a nine seed, and Memphis (85) a 12 seed as the biggest offenders.
Disagree with me… Comment below and let me have it!

You added rankings. Which doesn't necessarily mean much.

Pomeroy listed his percentage odds for each team getting through the bracket. Duke's bracket is clearly harder than Kansas' bracket, as Pomeroy has Duke's odds of making the F4 worse than Kansas' despite Pomeroy having Duke as BETTER than KU.

Troublemaker
03-14-2011, 12:51 AM
Kenpom has updated his rankings and has listed seeds next to team names, and Texas sticks out like a sore thumb as a 4 seed when you scan the page. That team is quite underseeded.

It'll be a tough road. SDSU is probably underestimated nationally the same way Butler was last year. Remember, Butler was 33-4 with a 25 game winning streak going into the championship game against Duke. Some analysts were predicting an easy win for Duke, but when a team like Butler wins games with that kind of regularity, they almost certainly have built up amazing chemistry and institutional excellence that makes their whole better than the sum of their parts. Well, this season SDSU is a higher-ranked Kenpom team than Butler of last season and would be an incredible 35-2 if they make it to the Elite 8. I'm definitely wary of them.

But, first things first. Hampton, then Michigan/Tennessee.

It's funny, though. I've been watching a lot of ESPN the past few hours and the two teams the talking heads seem to be citing the most as being potential problems for Duke -- Arizona and UConn -- I would actually LOVE to face in lieu of Texas and SDSU.

Props to Jay Bilas though. He actually recognized the Texas threat and also heaped lots of praise on SDSU. That man, as always, knows his basketball.

Greg_Newton
03-14-2011, 12:52 AM
That Florida gets a 2 and Texas a 4 is unfathomable. I am extra angry because I have to root against Texas earlier than I wanted to but I just took a second look at the resumes and Texas is better than Florida in every conceivable way except Texas never lost to Jacksonville which apparently gets you a 2 seed. The committee was on crack this year. It's really really bad.

I don't disagree with your general point, but Texas going 4-4 in their last 8 games. You have to go back nineteen games to find Florida's last 4 losses. Recent play does have a big effect on seeding.

By the way, Kenpom doesn't take recent play into account does he? i.e. would a four losses in December be weighted the same as a team losing its last four games?

JasonEvans
03-14-2011, 01:02 AM
...or are the #4 seeds waaay better than the #2 seeds?

Texas, Wisconsin, Louisville, Kentucky vs. ND, SDSU, Fla, and UNC. Other than Wisconsin (who are a totally different team away from home), the other #4 seeds all scare me a lot more than the #2s.

--Jason "waay more NBA-level basketball talent on the #4 seeds" Evans

NYC Duke Fan
03-14-2011, 06:28 AM
That bracket is nowhere near brutal. Brutal? What? Duke has no worry unless they run into UConn in the elite 8. They are certainly able to beat Duke having played better competition for most of the year and they have one heck of a player in Walker.


.

And on the UCONN Basketball Report they are probably saying," and Duke has one heck of a player in Smith".

timmy c
03-14-2011, 06:57 AM
You added rankings. Which doesn't necessarily mean much.

Pomeroy listed his percentage odds for each team getting through the bracket. Duke's bracket is clearly harder than Kansas' bracket, as Pomeroy has Duke's odds of making the F4 worse than Kansas' despite Pomeroy having Duke as BETTER than KU.

You are correct in your astute observation - I merely added rankings. Not only does it not mean anything, it has absolutely no bearing on who will win the NCAA title. In fact, any ranking system – including kenpom’s percentages that were added after I made my original post – does not mean anything. That's why they play the games.

uh_no
03-14-2011, 07:07 AM
And on the UCONN Basketball Report they are probably saying," and Duke has one heck of a player in Smith".

And I have had the pleasure of rooting for them both this year :)

brevity
03-14-2011, 07:12 AM
I'm not a big fan of the Eye Test -- it seems like an excuse for Digger Phelps to disregard all the stats and focus instead on name recognition of a team, coach, or player. But some variation of the Eye Test might be helpful to weigh the toughness of the regions.

Namely: which team of a particular seed number is the toughest? Which is the weakest? Go from 1-8 or so, and then figure out if one of the regions tends to have more than its fair share of the teams you chose as the toughest.

For example, we can use Pomeroy numbers to list each region from toughest to weakest by numerical seed.

1: East (Ohio State, 1); West (Duke, 2); Southwest (Kansas, 3); Southeast (Pittsburgh, 5)
8: Southwest (UNLV, 22); East (George Mason, 26); West (Michigan, 40); Southeast (Butler, 54)
4: West (Texas, 4); East (Kentucky, 7); Southeast (Wisconsin, 9); Southwest (Louisville, 12)
5: East (West Virginia, 21); West (Arizona, 25); Southeast (Kansas State, 29); Southwest (Vanderbilt, 32)

3: Southwest (Purdue, 9); East (Syracuse, 11); Southeast (BYU, 13); West (Connecticut, 17)
6: West (Cincinnati, 23); Southwest (Georgetown, 31); Southeast (St. John's, 35); East (Xavier, 37)
2: West (SDSU, 6); Southwest (Notre Dame, 10); East (UNC, 14); Southeast (Florida, 19)
7: East (Washington, 15); West (Temple, 38); Southwest (Texas A&M, 45); Southeast(UCLA, 53)

Some interesting trends emerge. The East region, with the exception of Xavier and UNC, has the toughest or second toughest team by seed number. Meanwhile, the Southeast region has the weakest or second weakest team for every seed number, with no exception. The West and the Southwest are fairly close: the 1/8/4/5 subregion looks tougher in the West, while the 3/6/2/7 subregion looks tougher in the Southwest.

The numbers here seem to reinforce what most of us have been thinking, so maybe there's something to the Eye Test. And, let's face it, that's basically what we use when we fill out our brackets.

A-Tex Devil
03-14-2011, 08:29 AM
I don't disagree with your general point, but Texas going 4-4 in their last 8 games. You have to go back nineteen games to find Florida's last 4 losses. Recent play does have a big effect on seeding.

By the way, Kenpom doesn't take recent play into account does he? i.e. would a four losses in December be weighted the same as a team losing its last four games?

Fair enough. Texas ended the season about the same way, oh, that Pittsburgh did. Florida hasn't sniffed the top 8 in any measurable index all year that I am aware of. They just made the top 10 in the RPI. They are probably a 3, and maybe Texas is too.

The committee seems to glom on to one factor when misseeding a team, whether it be UCONN (who even with the Big East tourney win is overseeded considering it finished in the BOTTOM THIRD of its conference), Texas, Florida, or the quartet of Lukcy Batsards that had no business being in the tourney - VCU, Georgia, USC and UAB.

Kenpom, I believe, does have a recency bias in his calculations and weights more recent games more heavily. I could be wrong, but I would think he'd certainly include this considering how thorough he is.

Delaware
03-14-2011, 10:18 AM
A bit of a Geek method, but I have done this the past few years.

I take Kenpom, Sagarin and RPI and average them. The result is my own personal S-Curve which looks like this:

1 Ohio St (E)
2 Kansas (SW)
3 Duke (W)
4 San Diego St (W)
5 Pitt (SE)
6 Texas (W)
7 BYU (SE)
8 Kentucky (E)
9 Notre Dame (SW)
10 Purdue (SW)
11 UNC (E)
12 Wisconsin (SE)
13 Syracuse (E)
14 Louisville (SW)
15 Florida (SE)
16 Conn (W)

This year these teams happen to make up the full first 4 seed lines.

If you sum up the values for each region you get:
West = 29
East = 33
SW = 35
SE = 39

FerryFor50
03-14-2011, 10:37 AM
Fair enough. Texas ended the season about the same way, oh, that Pittsburgh did. Florida hasn't sniffed the top 8 in any measurable index all year that I am aware of. They just made the top 10 in the RPI. They are probably a 3, and maybe Texas is too.

The committee seems to glom on to one factor when misseeding a team, whether it be UCONN (who even with the Big East tourney win is overseeded considering it finished in the BOTTOM THIRD of its conference), Texas, Florida, or the quartet of Lukcy Batsards that had no business being in the tourney - VCU, Georgia, USC and UAB.

Kenpom, I believe, does have a recency bias in his calculations and weights more recent games more heavily. I could be wrong, but I would think he'd certainly include this considering how thorough he is.

Totally agree with this.

It's baffling how the seedings were formulated. Florida gets a 2 despite losing to Kentucky in the SEC final (handily, I might add) and Kentucky gets a 4?

BYU ends the season with 2 blowout losses and loses their starting center. But they get a 3?

I'd also question UNC's #2 seed... who have they beaten, really, outside of Duke and a narrow win early in the year against Kentucky? They struggled all tournament and have struggled all year against some lesser competition.

It's like the committee designed the brackets to be more upset-friendly since last year's bracket went mostly by design...

Troublemaker
03-14-2011, 11:32 AM
Using only my own subjective opinion (eye test), here are the Final Four paths for each #1 seed if no upsets occur.

KU: Illinois -----> Louisville -----> Notre Dame
Duke: Mich/Tenn -----> Texas -----> SDSU
tOSU: Vill/Mason -----> Kentucky -----> UNC
Pitt: Butler -----> Belmont -----> Florida

I have listed the 4 paths from toughest to easiest in my subjective opinion.

KU will be tested thoroughly at all 3 levels.
Duke has very tough Sweet 16 and Elite 8 opponents, so 2 levels of harshness.
tOSU has a very talented Sweet 16 opponent but a weak 2 seed, so 1 level of harshness.
Pitt seemingly just has an easy path.

I would trade Duke's bracket for tOSU's or Pitt's but not Kansas'

FerryFor50
03-14-2011, 11:34 AM
Using only my own subjective opinion (eye test), here are the Final Four paths for each #1 seed if no upsets occur.

KU: Illinois -----> Louisville -----> Notre Dame
Duke: Mich/Tenn -----> Texas -----> SDSU
tOSU: Vill/Mason -----> Kentucky -----> UNC
Pitt: Butler -----> Belmont -----> Florida

I have listed the 4 paths from toughest to easiest in my subjective opinion.

KU will be tested thoroughly at all 3 levels.
Duke has very tough Sweet 16 and Elite 8 opponents, so 2 levels of harshness.
tOSU has a very talented Sweet 16 opponent but a weak 2 seed, so 1 level of harshness.
Pitt seemingly just has an easy path.

I would trade Duke's bracket for tOSU's or Pitt's but not Kansas'

Belmont?

You know something we don't? :p

Troublemaker
03-14-2011, 11:56 AM
Belmont?

You know something we don't? :p

Haha, yeah, that subregion is going to be very interesting.

I'd probably rank the teams Belmont > Utah St > Wiscy > KSU

But they're all very close in quality and any of them could emerge from that subregion. And not one of them is as threatening to a 1 seed as Texas, UK, and Louisville would be as Sweet 16 opponents, imo. It's been said a bunch of times now but Pitt really did seem to get a break this year.

FerryFor50
03-14-2011, 11:59 AM
Haha, yeah, that subregion is going to be very interesting.

I'd probably rank the teams Belmont > Utah St > Wiscy > KSU

But they're all very close in quality and any of them could emerge from that subregion. And not one of them is as threatening to a 1 seed as Texas, UK, and Louisville are, imo.

Interesting... I guess you see Belmont as maybe this year's Butler?

I think Utah St might be a little better than Belmont. And speaking of Butler, I see them as better than Belmont, despite their slow start. I think they're finally starting to gel a bit.

CDu
03-14-2011, 01:40 PM
I think Pitt clearly got the easiest draw. They have the weakest combination of 2, 3, and 4 seeds. I'd argue they have the second weakest 2 seed (to our #2), the weakest #3 and weakest #4. Their #5 has looked tougher recently, but not tougher than the #4 seeds (the #1 seed would only play at most one of the 4/5 seeds).

Our first weekend isn't unreasonable. It won't be easy (nothing is easy in the tournament), but it's manageable. The second weekend could be very tough. I think we got the toughest of the possible #4 seeds. If we get by them, I don't think our 2/3 combination is any harder (perhaps easier) than that of KU or OSU.

But, it's just a matter of playing as well as we can each game. Coach K is great at getting his team to compartmentalize each phase of the process. And several of the guys have experience in each phase of the tournament.

ACCBBallFan
03-14-2011, 03:44 PM
I do the same thing but I use 3 factors, the other being Pomeroy all at same weight. Same top 16 in slightly different order that I will append to yours. Top 5 and bottome 2 exactly same

The one with largest swing was UK 8 vs. 11, E verybody else +/- 1 or same.


A bit of a Geek method, but I have done this the past few years.

I take Kenpom, Sagarin and RPI and average them. The result is my own personal S-Curve which looks like this:

1 Ohio St (E) -1
2 Kansas (SW) -2
3 Duke (W) -3
4 San Diego St (W) -4
5 Pitt (SE) -5
6 Texas (W) -7
7 BYU (SE) -6
8 Kentucky (E)-119 Notre Dame (SW) -8
10 Purdue (SW) -9
11 UNC (E) -10
12 Wisconsin (SE) -12
13 Syracuse (E) -14
14 Louisville (SW) -13
15 Florida (SE) -15
16 Conn (W) -16

This year these teams happen to make up the full first 4 seed lines.

If you sum up the values for each region you get:
West = 29
East = 33
SW = 35
SE = 39

DallasDevil
03-14-2011, 04:56 PM
This just came up on a chat with Joe Lunardi:

"Jorell (Hartsville,SC) [via mobile]


Today the tournament committee chair said that Wright returning for Georgetown and Singleton returning for FSU influenced their teams seeding. If Coach K would have said that Kyrie Irving would return for the tournament do you think that Duke could have possibly jumped Pitt for the third number 1 seed?

Joe Lunardi (4:06 PM)


That's a distinction without a difference, Jorell. If I'm Duke, I'm perfectly happy to open in Charlotte and play in what appears to be a softer West Region."

The West is softer than the Southeast? I almost get the feeling that the committee could have put Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Texas in our region and everyone would still complain about what an easy path we have to the Final Four.

superdave
03-15-2011, 03:47 PM
Kenpom has updated his rankings and has listed seeds next to team names, and Texas sticks out like a sore thumb as a 4 seed when you scan the page. That team is quite underseeded.

It'll be a tough road. SDSU is probably underestimated nationally the same way Butler was last year. Remember, Butler was 33-4 with a 25 game winning streak going into the championship game against Duke. Some analysts were predicting an easy win for Duke, but when a team like Butler wins games with that kind of regularity, they almost certainly have built up amazing chemistry and institutional excellence that makes their whole better than the sum of their parts. Well, this season SDSU is a higher-ranked Kenpom team than Butler of last season and would be an incredible 35-2 if they make it to the Elite 8. I'm definitely wary of them.

But, first things first. Hampton, then Michigan/Tennessee.

I could see Duke having to really play flawless ball, and make some in-game adjustments, to beat SDSU. Duke can do it though. BYU out-executed (and shot well) against them twice. But Duke would have to control the tempo and not let it turn into a track meet. Control the boards, make them play tough D.

uh_no
03-15-2011, 05:17 PM
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/talent-is-nice-but-luck-is-vital/

Take a look down at the teams with the best and worst draws...i don't exactly know where the numbers come from, but 538 is well known for their statistics work....

interesting that 2 of the 1 seeds have some of the worst draws while the other 2 have some of the best in the tournament!

also of note is that UNC is up their for one of the easiest draws