PDA

View Full Version : #1 Seed Predictions



Duke95
03-08-2014, 06:43 PM
Mine are:

Florida, Wichita State, Arizona, and Virginia

First to lose: Wichita State
Last to lose: Florida in the finals to Duke

superdave
03-08-2014, 06:49 PM
#1 Seeds: Florida, Arizona, Wichita State, TBD

Final Four: Florida, Arizona, Louisville, TBD

Sleeper: Cincinatti

I reserve the right to watch the ACCT for the rest. No idea how the top four ACC teams will finish the season. Too up and down. All four have bad losses that are concerning.

gurufrisbee
03-08-2014, 08:05 PM
Locked in: Wichita St, Florida
Very likely: Arizona, Duke or Virginia if they win out
Longer shots if its not from those four: Kansas if they win the Big 12 tourney, Michigan or Wisconsin if they win out
Very long shot if lots of upsets: Villanova or Creighton if they win out

NashvilleDevil
03-08-2014, 08:49 PM
Locked in: Wichita St, Florida
Very likely: Arizona, Duke or Virginia if they win out
Longer shots if its not from those four: Kansas if they win the Big 12 tourney, Michigan or Wisconsin if they win out
Very long shot if lots of upsets: Villanova or Creighton if they win out

For some reason Villanova is getting a lot of mention as a 1 seed. I think they've got a better shot than Duke does.

tommy
03-08-2014, 09:01 PM
For some reason Villanova is getting a lot of mention as a 1 seed. I think they've got a better shot than Duke does.

I'd take being a 2 in their region.

CDu
03-08-2014, 11:50 PM
#1 Seeds: Florida, Arizona, Wichita State, TBD

Final Four: Florida, Arizona, Louisville, TBD

Sleeper: Cincinatti

I reserve the right to watch the ACCT for the rest. No idea how the top four ACC teams will finish the season. Too up and down. All four have bad losses that are concerning.

I can tell you who won't be winning the ACC: UNC. I think this comes down to UVa and Duke.

CDu
03-08-2014, 11:51 PM
For some reason Villanova is getting a lot of mention as a 1 seed. I think they've got a better shot than Duke does.

Yeah I can't understand it because they have beaten no one. But they are somehow in the mix.

pfrduke
03-08-2014, 11:56 PM
Yeah I can't understand it because they have beaten no one. But they are somehow in the mix.

Well, except Kansas.

CDu
03-09-2014, 12:08 AM
Well, except Kansas.

Well true. Of course they then got blown out by Syracuse and Creighton twice.

Wander
03-09-2014, 12:52 AM
Villanova is ranked 4 in RPI, 4 in sagarin, 6 in kenpom, 6 in the human polls, and 6 in BPI. They have an excellent win away from home, a bunch of good wins away from home, won a good conference by multiple games, have a good strength of schedule, and have no losses to unranked teams. That's not the profile of a 1 seed lock, but how is that not the profile of a team legitimately in contention?

Olympic Fan
03-09-2014, 01:55 AM
Villanova is ranked 4 in RPI, 4 in sagarin, 6 in kenpom, 6 in the human polls, and 6 in BPI. They have an excellent win away from home, a bunch of good wins away from home, won a good conference by multiple games, have a good strength of schedule, and have no losses to unranked teams. That's not the profile of a 1 seed lock, but how is that not the profile of a team legitimately in contention?

They beat Kansas and Iowa in the Battle for Atlantis back in November ... since they, their schedule has not been that impressive -- they have only played three top 25 RPI teams since (at Syracuse and two games with Creighton) and were blown out of all three.

I think they COULD be a No. 1 seed -- if they win the Big East Tournament. But if they lose to Creighton a third time in the title game, it's hard to see them as a No. 1.

Of course, you can say that about a lot of teams ... would Arizona or Kansas be in the mix with a tourney loss?

gurufrisbee
03-09-2014, 05:49 AM
For some reason Villanova is getting a lot of mention as a 1 seed. I think they've got a better shot than Duke does.

If Nova wins whats left of the Big Least and Duke wins the ACC, Duke gets the #1 seed over them with no problem.

dukelifer
03-09-2014, 09:17 AM
I'd take being a 2 in their region.

Lunardi has Duke a 2 in the West against Zona. Don't like that.

NashvilleDevil
03-09-2014, 09:31 AM
Lunardi has Duke a 2 in the West against Zona. Don't like that.

Then Duke probably ends up somewhere else.

Duke95
03-09-2014, 11:01 AM
Right now, we have solidified a 2 seed. If we lose early in the ACC tournament, we drop to a 3. If we win it, we have an outside claim at the last #1, though, frankly, we don't deserve it with 7 losses.
I think our most likely seed at this point is a 2. I'd welcome a 2 in Arizona's region, which is where I think we will end up. The NCAA loves a potential rematch like that.

Troublemaker
03-09-2014, 11:32 AM
Right now, we have solidified a 2 seed. If we lose early in the ACC tournament, we drop to a 3. If we win it, we have an outside claim at the last #1, though, frankly, we don't deserve it with 7 losses.
I think our most likely seed at this point is a 2. I'd welcome a 2 in Arizona's region, which is where I think we will end up. The NCAA loves a potential rematch like that.

Duke could only end up out West if we're exactly the 4th-ranked #2 seed. (That is, exactly 8th on the overall bracket rankings).

Duvall
03-09-2014, 12:14 PM
Duke could only end up out West if we're exactly the 4th-ranked #2 seed. (That is, exactly 8th on the overall bracket rankings).

That is attributing a degree of rationality to the Selection Committee not previously shown.

gurufrisbee
03-09-2014, 01:06 PM
#2 with Arizona is not a bad spot. They aren't nearly the same team we lost to in NY. Ashley meant a lot of them. And the Pac 12 is still really weak. I wouldn't feel bad about being in a region with Arizona, Wichita State, or Florida. None of them have played a good team in months.

Atlanta Duke
03-09-2014, 01:10 PM
Longer shots if its not from those four: Kansas if they win the Big 12 tourney, Michigan or Wisconsin if they win out

Committee is going to have to figure out what to do with this information

Embiid will fly to California to see a back specialist on Monday morning.

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/09/kansas-center-joel-embiid-to-see-a-back-specialist-on-monday/related/

I suppose Kansas could get underseeded, but I see them as a #2 even with Embiid perhaps sitting this week - that is one team I would not want Duke to have to play any sooner than the regional championship (ideally Duke stays out of the Florida and Kansas regions, although a Parker v. Wiggins rematch would be epic)

My four #1 seeds - Florida, Wichita State, Villanova, and Arizona

TexHawk
03-09-2014, 02:25 PM
Committee is going to have to figure out what to do with this information

Embiid will fly to California to see a back specialist on Monday morning.

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/09/kansas-center-joel-embiid-to-see-a-back-specialist-on-monday/related/


Word around the campfire is that he's been cleared by the KU medical staff, and there is no risk of further injury if he plays. Embiid (and/or his family) want a 2nd opinion on that, given that he's likely the #1 pick in the NBA draft if he wants to be. Nothing wrong with that, imo. Millions of dollars could be at stake.

Personally, I would like him back for the Big12 tournament, but he doesn't need to play 3 games in 3 days (if we win, of course). With the long week off for the NCAA tournament, and no back-to-backs, he should be fine there.

FerryFor50
03-09-2014, 02:28 PM
UVA likely misses out on a #1 seed with the loss to Maryland...

Unless they manage to win the ACC tourny.

Wander
03-09-2014, 02:36 PM
They beat Kansas and Iowa in the Battle for Atlantis back in November ... since they, their schedule has not been that impressive -- they have only played three top 25 RPI teams since (at Syracuse and two games with Creighton) and were blown out of all three.

I think they COULD be a No. 1 seed -- if they win the Big East Tournament. But if they lose to Creighton a third time in the title game, it's hard to see them as a No. 1.

Of course, you can say that about a lot of teams ... would Arizona or Kansas be in the mix with a tourney loss?

Villanova's overall schedule has been really good. I don't think it matters that their best win was in November for seeding purposes. As you say, they lost 3 of their 4 toughest games, but they also never lost to the Wakes, BCs, or Marylands of the world. They'll get a 1 if they win the BE.

Arizona is not just in the mix - they're a lock for a 1 seed. Even if they lose in the first round of their conference tournament.

WVDUKEFAN
03-09-2014, 02:56 PM
What is keeping us from a No. 1 seed is our lack of wins on the road. I dont think a No. 1 seed is out of the question if we win the ACC tourney outright. The only "true" No. 1 seed I see right now is Florida. I can't agree with Witchita State or Villinova. Regardless of where we are seeded, I think we have an excellent chance to win the tournament. We are peaking at the right time.

TexHawk
03-09-2014, 03:07 PM
What is keeping us from a No. 1 seed is our lack of wins on the road. I dont think a No. 1 seed is out of the question if we win the ACC tourney outright. The only "true" No. 1 seed I see right now is Florida. I can't agree with Witchita State or Villinova. Regardless of where we are seeded, I think we have an excellent chance to win the tournament. We are peaking at the right time.

Man, I love message boards. 3 days ago some on here had already written your team off as likely to lose in the 1st weekend, after a loss to #121 RPI Wake. My team (Kansas), looked unbeatable in a 30 point home win the same night, and many here had effectively given up their pursuit of a #1 seed to them/us.

Fast forward to yesterday, you guys get a great win over a good UNC team at home. Kansas loses by 6 on the road to a bubble team, without the Big12 DPOY and likely #1 pick in the NBA Draft, and we are now "fatally flawed" (as someone else put it).

Sorry for the painting with the wide brush there. Trust me, KU fan boards are 1000 times worse.

Kedsy
03-09-2014, 03:11 PM
Man, I love message boards. 3 days ago some on here had already written your team off as likely to lose in the 1st weekend, after a loss to #121 RPI Wake. My team (Kansas), looked unbeatable in a 30 point home win the same night, and many here had effectively given up their pursuit of a #1 seed to them/us.

Fast forward to yesterday, you guys get a great win over a good UNC team at home. Kansas loses by 6 on the road to a bubble team, without the Big12 DPOY and likely #1 pick in the NBA Draft, and we are now "fatally flawed" (as someone else put it).

Sorry for the painting with the wide brush there. Trust me, KU fan boards are 1000 times worse.

You didn't get the memo? You're exactly as good (or bad) as your last game. Sometimes your last half. Maybe just the last five minutes.

Kedsy
03-09-2014, 03:18 PM
Arizona is not just in the mix - they're a lock for a 1 seed. Even if they lose in the first round of their conference tournament.

Why? If Arizona loses in the first round of the P12 tourney, that'll mean they have two losses in a row including one to either the #77 or #97 RPI teams. They'd be 7-4 since Ashley got hurt. Considering their full season of work, I could see them still being in consideration for a #1 seed, but (especially since the Committee does take injuries into account) why a lock?

tommy
03-09-2014, 03:37 PM
Why? If Arizona loses in the first round of the P12 tourney, that'll mean they have two losses in a row including one to either the #77 or #97 RPI teams. They'd be 7-4 since Ashley got hurt. Considering their full season of work, I could see them still being in consideration for a #1 seed, but (especially since the Committee does take injuries into account) why a lock?

Well, even after yesterday's loss, they're still #1 in the RPI, and they've played the 7th toughest schedule in the land. If Wisconsin wins out and Arizona loses in the Pac-12 tourney, I could see Wisconsin ahead of them, but Villanova? I don't think they've played the schedule to justify it. And I know they're not supposed to consider these things, and maybe they wouldn't, but I think the committee might hesitate before making two of the four #1 seeds teams that many folks perceive (and, by the numbers, actually have) played significantly weaker schedules than the other top contenders.

tommy
03-09-2014, 03:41 PM
Right now, we have solidified a 2 seed. If we lose early in the ACC tournament, we drop to a 3. If we win it, we have an outside claim at the last #1, though, frankly, we don't deserve it with 7 losses.
I think our most likely seed at this point is a 2. I'd welcome a 2 in Arizona's region, which is where I think we will end up. The NCAA loves a potential rematch like that.

I was there in Anaheim a few years ago when Arizona blew us out. I know, Derrick Williams had the game of his life, their other guys shot lights out, blah blah blah. I can tell you that Arizona had a HUGE contingent of fans in the arena and it was very loud and rowdy, all in their favor. It was a major, major source of energy for them in that game. Made for an absolute road game for us, and while I'd selfishly love the chance to see us play live in the tournament again, I think it would be a very tough environment again, and one that would significantly reduce our chances of winning the game.

hurleyfor3
03-09-2014, 03:45 PM
You didn't get the memo? You're exactly as good (or bad) as your last game. Sometimes your last half. Maybe just the last five minutes.

Pretty sure no team in history has made the Final Four in the same year it gave up a 17-0 scoring run to Wake. Unc got routed at Wake in '93 but I don't think the Deacs ever dropped 17 straight.

Wander
03-09-2014, 03:45 PM
Why? If Arizona loses in the first round of the P12 tourney, that'll mean they have two losses in a row including one to either the #77 or #97 RPI teams. They'd be 7-4 since Ashley got hurt. Considering their full season of work, I could see them still being in consideration for a #1 seed, but (especially since the Committee does take injuries into account) why a lock?

I refer you to this: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/nitty, most tellingly the record against RPI top 25. Note the Oregon loss isn't counted there yet. But even adding that, Arizona has the best overall resume right now - better than Florida's. This is supported by kenpom/sagarin/BPI, which all have Arizona as the best team. I don't think a loss can drop Arizona from the overall #1 to out of the #1 seeds completely, especially with the context of Duke, Virginia, Syracuse, and Kansas all losing games in the last week.

I probably shouldn't have said a lock, as if Wisconsin, Villanova, and Kansas all win their conference tournaments, then I guess Arizona could get knocked down with a bad loss due to an injury-related rationale. Maybe. But I'd say there's a 90%+ chance that Arizona, Florida, and Wichita get three of the 1 seeds.

tommy
03-09-2014, 03:48 PM
I refer you to this: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/nitty, most tellingly the record against RPI top 25. Note the Oregon loss isn't counted there yet. But even adding that, Arizona has the best overall resume right now - better than Florida's. This is supported by kenpom/sagarin/BPI, which all have Arizona as the best team. I don't think a loss can drop Arizona from the overall #1 to out of the #1 seeds completely, especially with the context of Duke, Virginia, Syracuse, and Kansas all losing games in the last week.

I probably shouldn't have said a lock, as if Wisconsin, Villanova, and Kansas all win their conference tournaments, then I guess Arizona could get knocked down with a bad loss due to an injury-related rationale. Maybe. But I'd say there's a 90%+ chance that Arizona, Florida, and Wichita get three of the 1 seeds.

I agree with you. And I'd say there's a 100% chance that Florida and Wichita get two of the #1's.

slower
03-09-2014, 04:27 PM
We are peaking at the right time.

This...not. It was one game. Let's revisit this after the ACCT.

Olympic Fan
03-09-2014, 04:42 PM
Well, even after yesterday's loss, they're still #1 in the RPI, and they've played the 7th toughest schedule in the land. If Wisconsin wins out and Arizona loses in the Pac-12 tourney, I could see Wisconsin ahead of them, but Villanova? I don't think they've played the schedule to justify it. And I know they're not supposed to consider these things, and maybe they wouldn't, but I think the committee might hesitate before making two of the four #1 seeds teams that many folks perceive (and, by the numbers, actually have) played significantly weaker schedules than the other top contenders.

And I remind you that a year ago, Duke was the No. 1 RPI team with the No. 1 SOS in the country ... but Duke lost late games on the road against Virginia and Maryland, then lost in our first game of the ACC Tournament -- and not only got a No. 2 seed, but got seeded against the toughest No. 1 in the bracket.

I think Arizona is in better shape this year, but only because there just aren't as many contenders for No. 1 out there. Certainly if they get a win or two in the Pac 12 tourney they are a 1 -- and they may get it anyway, since there just isn't anybody else ... Duke? Kansas? Michigan State? The teams we think are best just keep losing.

Florida is the only team that looks and feels like a real No. 1. I know Wichita will get a No. 1, but I'd love to be bracketed with them. I wouldn't mind being in the bracket with Villanova if they get a one.

throatybeard
03-09-2014, 04:45 PM
I want no part of the West. We've never done very well out there.

vick
03-09-2014, 04:50 PM
You didn't get the memo? You're exactly as good (or bad) as your last game. Sometimes your last half. Maybe just the last five minutes.

Don't forget to factor out all the things you've done well in the game in your analysis.

IBleedBlue
03-09-2014, 05:10 PM
If Duke gets a #2 seed, I would not want it to be either in Florida's bracket or Wichita State's bracket. Florida is rolling over teams with their senior laden team. At this time, they are the best team in the country. But again, NCAA tournament is a one and done. So, they could get bounced on a bad day. Losing to wichita state will be fodder for all the critics and UNC fans.
I would like Duke to be either Arizona's bracket or the remaining first seed's bracket OR get a #1 seed itself.

Kedsy
03-09-2014, 05:14 PM
Well, even after yesterday's loss, they're still #1 in the RPI, and they've played the 7th toughest schedule in the land. If Wisconsin wins out and Arizona loses in the Pac-12 tourney, I could see Wisconsin ahead of them, but Villanova? I don't think they've played the schedule to justify it. And I know they're not supposed to consider these things, and maybe they wouldn't, but I think the committee might hesitate before making two of the four #1 seeds teams that many folks perceive (and, by the numbers, actually have) played significantly weaker schedules than the other top contenders.

Well, the original statement was even if Arizona loses in the first round of the Pac 12 tournament they'd be a lock, and that's what I was questioning. That's different from just losing in the tournament, that would mean an embarrassing upset to possibly the team ranked RPI #97. Arizona already has two losses to teams in the 40 to 60 range, would its resume still be best if it added a loss to a team ranked around 100? Especially with the injury issue?

Also, I've said this many times, and I know the committee supposedly does do this, but I don't understand it: why should we treat schedule strength as if it's something different from the RPI? It's already in there -- schedule comprises 75% of the RPI. True, the straight SOS component is "only" 50% of the RPI, but that just makes it worse, because the SOS component simply looks at the win/loss record of the teams you've played.

To illustrate the significance of my latter point, consider the following two schedules:

Team A plays the following ten teams (ranks are Pomeroy):

#12 Tennessee
#17 Iowa
#19 Oklahoma State
#35 Florida State
#38 St. Johns
#42 Stanford
#44 Xavier
#46 Maryland
#49 Georgetown
#50 Nebraska

Team B plays the following ten teams:

#271 Chattanooga
#263 Portland State
#259 Radford
#248 Incarnate Word
#242 Coastal Carolina
#227 Northern Colorado
#219 VMI
#218 Winthrop
#209 Hampton
#200 Utah Valley State

So Team A plays ten top 50 teams, including three teams in the top 20. Team B plays ten sub-200 teams, including three teams sub-250.

If you get past the part where these teams only played 10 teams and the rest of the country played 30, the RPI formula would rank these two teams as having played the third and fourth best schedules in the land, both better than Arizona's. As you might guess, since I hand-picked the opponents, Team B would have a slightly better SOS than Team A (at least according to the RPI).

In fact, my hypothetical Team B would not only have a better SOS than Arizona, it would also have a better SOS than every team in the country except Kansas and Wisconsin. Probably be undefeated, too, which would almost certainly give them one of the top four RPIs. Should we make 'em a #1 seed?

Wander
03-09-2014, 05:21 PM
Arizona already has two losses to teams in the 40 to 60 range, would its resume still be best if it added a loss to a team ranked around 100?


No, but it would still be one of the four best.



In fact, my hypothetical Team B would not only have a better SOS than Arizona, it would also have a better SOS than every team in the country except Kansas and Wisconsin. Probably be undefeated, too, which would almost certainly give them one of the top four RPIs. Should we make 'em a #1 seed?

I completely agree with your point about the flaws in the RPI and the "double counting" of SOS. But I don't understand the relevance to Arizona - they have a very strong strength of schedule by other measures (and are the #1 team in the advanced metrics, not just RPI).

Kedsy
03-09-2014, 05:33 PM
No, but it would still be one of the four best.

Possibly, but a lock? If they lose to Utah or Washington in the first round, I wouldn't be confident about their seed until I saw what everyone else did.

And I know you stepped back from the "lock" statement, which is why my last post quoted tommy's post and not yours. I don't disagree with you that no matter what, Arizona has a pretty good shot at a #1.


I completely agree with your point about the flaws in the RPI and the "double counting" of SOS. But I don't understand the relevance to Arizona - they have a very strong strength of schedule by other measures (and are the #1 team in the advanced metrics, not just RPI).

It doesn't have anything to do with Arizona. I was addressing tommy's apparent separation of RPI and SOS and using that to make a broader observation.

Atlanta Duke
03-09-2014, 05:38 PM
If Duke gets a #2 seed, I would not want it to be either in Florida's bracket or Wichita State's bracket. Florida is rolling over teams with their senior laden team. At this time, they are the best team in the country.

Reading the proposed brackets is a great way to torment yourself this time of the year

The current USA Today bracket has Duke as a #3 seed in the South with Florida as the #1 and Kansas as the 2 seed

That works as a worst case scenario for me

Wander
03-09-2014, 06:09 PM
Possibly, but a lock? If they lose to Utah or Washington in the first round, I wouldn't be confident about their seed until I saw what everyone else did.

And I know you stepped back from the "lock" statement, which is why my last post quoted tommy's post and not yours. I don't disagree with you that no matter what, Arizona has a pretty good shot at a #1.

It doesn't have anything to do with Arizona. I was addressing tommy's apparent separation of RPI and SOS and using that to make a broader observation.

Gotcha, sounds good.



The current USA Today bracket has Duke as a #3 seed in the South with Florida as the #1 and Kansas as the 2 seed

That works as a worst case scenario for me


Yeah. I'm still not completely on board the Florida train, but having to face Kansas as soon as the Sweet 16 is probably the worst realistic scenario I could come up with.

Duke95
03-09-2014, 06:18 PM
I would love a Duke-Kansas rematch. Love it.

I think the likelihood that the selection committee puts us in the same bracket as Arizona or Kansas is very high.

-jk
03-09-2014, 07:21 PM
I would love a Duke-Kansas rematch. Love it.

I think the likelihood that the selection committee puts us in the same bracket as Arizona or Kansas is very high.

We've been top 10 forever. There're story lines galore. Selection committee doesn't have to try with us. The rest of them, though... (A priori, it'll be someone! Alwaws (or so to speak).

-jk

UrinalCake
03-09-2014, 07:35 PM
I think the likelihood that the selection committee puts us in the same bracket as Arizona or Kansas is very high.

I'd say it's about 50%

tommy
03-09-2014, 08:20 PM
Possibly, but a lock? If they lose to Utah or Washington in the first round, I wouldn't be confident about their seed until I saw what everyone else did.

And I know you stepped back from the "lock" statement, which is why my last post quoted tommy's post and not yours. I don't disagree with you that no matter what, Arizona has a pretty good shot at a #1.



It doesn't have anything to do with Arizona. I was addressing tommy's apparent separation of RPI and SOS and using that to make a broader observation.

Oh, I know, and think I've stated, that SOS is a component of RPI. I should've been more clear in my post -- but I just think that the media, and probably to a lesser extent the committee, probably is either unaware of that fact, or doesn't consider it so much. They seem to speak of the two measures independently, so it makes me feel the "double counting" does occur, to an extent, in the committee room.

tommy
03-09-2014, 08:23 PM
I think Arizona is in better shape this year, but only because there just aren't as many contenders for No. 1 out there. Certainly if they get a win or two in the Pac 12 tourney they are a 1 -- and they may get it anyway, since there just isn't anybody else ... Duke? Kansas? Michigan State? The teams we think are best just keep losing.

I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.

Duke95
03-09-2014, 08:30 PM
I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.

After watching the MSU-Kentucky game at the beginning of the year, I would have NEVER thought we'd be talking about both of them potentially being out of the Top 25 at this point. Never.

And I could see the selection committee putting either in Duke's bracket.

Olympic Fan
03-09-2014, 08:32 PM
I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.

Oh, I agree -- absolutely. But Michigan State IS in the conversation (I think for the reasons you cite). Saturday on GameDay, Bilas, Digger and Rose all talked about Michigan State as a potential Final Four team.

I think they are a tough and talented team. And because of past NCAA success, they are going to be a confident team. I think the real story in this tournament will be the power teams that are seeded very low. Would you like to be a No. 2 seed playing Oklahoma State or Kentucky in the second round (well, the round of 32 ... I know that's technically the third round). I could see Michigan State as a 5 seed. If you were a No. 4 seed, wouldn't you hate to see them in your bracket? Or what if you are a one and draw Oklahoma State as an No. 8 seed?

As for the RPI/SOS issue -- you guys are right that SOS is a big factor in RPI. But over the past few years a MAJOR issue for the committee (separate from RPI) is non-conference strength of schedule -- the dreaded "who you choose to play". Of course, this only applies to schools from a power conference -- never to the Gonzagas of VCUs of the world.

So don't treat RPI and SOS as separate factors ... but do consider NCSOS as a different metric.

brevity
03-09-2014, 08:43 PM
After watching the MSU-Kentucky game at the beginning of the year, I would have NEVER thought we'd be talking about both of them potentially being out of the Top 25 at this point. Never.

And I could see the selection committee putting either in Duke's bracket.

Why not both?

SOUTH REGION

1) Florida
2) Kansas
3) Duke
4) Louisville
5) Michigan State
6) Kentucky
7) New Mexico
8) VCU

The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region. The only unlikely part of this scenario right now is putting Kentucky in the same region as Florida.

Kedsy
03-09-2014, 08:55 PM
So don't treat RPI and SOS as separate factors ... but do consider NCSOS as a different metric.

But if you're measuring NCSOS by the RPI method, it's still susceptible to gaming the system as I outlined in my earlier post. Coach K has been doing this for years -- scheduling the best teams from the worst conferences. Like Vermont, though that almost backfired, or Davidson this season. Playing these teams helps our RPI NCSOS, even though it would seem we had little chance of actually losing to them. In fact, other than Florida Atlantic and Alabama (which we didn't actually choose to schedule), I think every non-conference team we played this season has a winning record. That's why our RPI NCSOS is 20th in the country while Pomeroy thinks it's 87th.

In other words, the committee may rely on the RPI's NCSOS, but it's still pretty much a bogus measure.

devildeac
03-09-2014, 09:17 PM
Why not both?

SOUTH REGION

1) Florida
2) Kansas
3) Duke
4) Louisville
5) Michigan State
6) Kentucky
7) New Mexico
8) VCU

The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region. The only unlikely part of this scenario right now is putting Kentucky in the same region as Florida.

Maybe substitute Hah-vahd or Vermont for New Mexico (if either would fit that seed) and you've got the "ideal" gauntlet that we've discussed upthread or on another thread.;)

Atlanta Duke
03-09-2014, 09:22 PM
Why not both?

SOUTH REGION

1) Florida
2) Kansas
3) Duke
4) Louisville
5) Michigan State
6) Kentucky
7) New Mexico
8) VCU

The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region. The only unlikely part of this scenario right now is putting Kentucky in the same region as Florida.

If that bracket shows up on my screen next Sunday I will be drinking heavily by 7 pm EDT (while listening to Digger say Duke caught an unfair break by being seeded over Louisville)

Wander
03-09-2014, 09:23 PM
The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region.

I always like to remember 2005 when this conversation comes up. North Carolina, the eventual national champion and clearly an elite team, had the defending national champion UConn as its 2 seed, the preseason #1 team Kansas as its 3 seed, and a very talented Florida team as its 4 seed. IIRC people were seriously calling it the most stacked region of all time.

Then Kansas, Florida, and UConn all lost before the Sweet 16. I guess my point is: Kentucky, Michigan State, and so on really are going to deserve the seeds they're projected to get. They're capable of pulling upsets of course, but if the seeding is done reasonably accurately, the regions are automatically roughly balanced, even if that balance doesn't match up with preseason rankings or talent level. After all, that's the point of seeding.

CDu
03-09-2014, 09:23 PM
Maybe substitute Hah-vahd or Vermont for New Mexico (if either would fit that seed) and you've got the "ideal" gauntlet that we've discussed upthread or on another thread.;)

Vermont lost in their tourney, so they are not an option.

sporthenry
03-09-2014, 09:27 PM
So with Wisconsin losing, that means Duke, UVA, Kansas and Wisconsin all lost this weekend. I think Florida, Arizona, and Wichita State have #1 seeds locked up. Maybe U of A needs to win 1 game in the P12 tourney.

That leaves 1 1-seed up for grabs. Bracket Matrix has 'Nova as the last one. If Duke wins the ACCT, they'll beat 2 guys ahead of them. Also, Kansas and Michigan are probably in the discussion.

NYBri
03-09-2014, 10:20 PM
UVA likely misses out on a #1 seed with the loss to Maryland...

Unless they manage to win the ACC tourny.

If Duke UVA or 'cuse wins the acct, then they will be in line for a 1 seed.

sporthenry
03-09-2014, 10:33 PM
If Duke UVA or 'cuse wins the acct, then they will be in line for a 1 seed.

Ahead of who?

tbyers11
03-09-2014, 10:49 PM
I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.


Oh, I agree -- absolutely. But Michigan State IS in the conversation (I think for the reasons you cite). Saturday on GameDay, Bilas, Digger and Rose all talked about Michigan State as a potential Final Four team.

I think they are a tough and talented team. And because of past NCAA success, they are going to be a confident team.

I side with Tommy on the Michigan St issue. I don't think they are THAT good even at full strength. There are few to no dominant teams this year so any 5 seed on up has a legit chance at the Final Four, but I wouldn't rate Mich St in the top half of those 20 or so teams. As to past NCAA success making them a confident team I don't buy that either. Mich St has a first round loss and 2 Sweet 16 losses the last three years. Izzo has a great history of making the FF with very good but not great teams but none of these players do.

Troublemaker
03-09-2014, 10:51 PM
So with Wisconsin losing, that means Duke, UVA, Kansas and Wisconsin all lost this weekend. I think Florida, Arizona, and Wichita State have #1 seeds locked up. Maybe U of A needs to win 1 game in the P12 tourney.

That leaves 1 1-seed up for grabs. Bracket Matrix has 'Nova as the last one. If Duke wins the ACCT, they'll beat 2 guys ahead of them. Also, Kansas and Michigan are probably in the discussion.

At this point, I'm rooting for Villanova to keep winning and get the last 1 seed to keep them off the 2 seed line. That gives Duke more paths to MSG since 'Nova's geo-preference would also be New York.

Of course, mostly, I just want Duke to win the ACC. Do that and let the chips fall where they may.

FerryFor50
03-09-2014, 10:54 PM
I side with Tommy on the Michigan St issue. I don't think they are THAT good even at full strength. There are few to no dominant teams this year so any 5 seed on up has a legit chance at the Final Four, but I wouldn't rate Mich St in the top half of those 20 or so teams. As to past NCAA success making them a confident team I don't buy that either. Mich St has a first round loss and 2 Sweet 16 losses the last three years. Izzo has a great history of making the FF with very good but not great teams but none of these players do.

Maybe not that good... But definitely have the toughness to win the war of attrition that is the NCAA tourny...

ice-9
03-10-2014, 02:08 AM
My understanding is that Duke is out of contention for a 1-seed. We have 7 losses which is the most ever for a 1-seed (Michigan State a few years back), but we also have two bad losses in Notre Dame and Wake Forest. The chance we get a 1-seed even if we win out is small.

Don't most brackets have us as a 3-seed? Meaning our upside is getting to a 2-seed.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-10-2014, 08:31 AM
At this point, I'm rooting for Villanova to keep winning and get the last 1 seed to keep them off the 2 seed line. That gives Duke more paths to MSG since 'Nova's geo-preference would also be New York.

Of course, mostly, I just want Duke to win the ACC. Do that and let the chips fall where they may.

Yes, my preference for Duke is to be in the East Regional too, regardless of being seeded 1,2, or 3. To make that happen, we need to win the ACCT. I think that will ensure preference over Syracuse and VA.

My 2nd choice would be the MW region with Wichita State as the #1 seed.

And as soon as the brackets drop on Sunday evening, the first top 8 seed upset I'm writing down is whoever plays 'Nova in the round of 32. Not impressed with them.

My #1 predictions for Sunday are:

South - Florida
MW - Wichita State
West - AZ
East - Villanova

superdave
03-10-2014, 08:53 AM
Yes, my preference for Duke is to be in the East Regional too, regardless of being seeded 1,2, or 3. To make that happen, we need to win the ACCT. I think that will ensure preference over Syracuse and VA.

My 2nd choice would be the MW region with Wichita State as the #1 seed.

And as soon as the brackets drop on Sunday evening, the first top 8 seed upset I'm writing down is whoever plays 'Nova in the round of 32. Not impressed with them.

My #1 predictions for Sunday are:

South - Florida
MW - Wichita State
West - AZ
East - Villanova

If Virginia wins the ACCT, they should be a #1 seed - way more so that Nova. If Duke wins the ACCT by beating Syracuse and Virginia, they could get to a 1-seed with help. This season, no one is helping themselves down the stretch.

It's way premature to put Villanova in that spot. They may wind up with a 1, but there's a lot of basketball to be played this week.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-10-2014, 09:33 AM
If Virginia wins the ACCT, they should be a #1 seed - way more so that Nova. If Duke wins the ACCT by beating Syracuse and Virginia, they could get to a 1-seed with help. This season, no one is helping themselves down the stretch.

It's way premature to put Villanova in that spot. They may wind up with a 1, but there's a lot of basketball to be played this week.

You're right there is A LOT of basketball left to be played, and the way the top 10 keeps losing(with the exception of WSU and Fla), I don't think any of the seed lines have been set with the exception of Fla and WSU on the top line.

In a way, this is a worst case scenario for the Committee because they have proven to be somewhat unreliable in what criteria they use to award seeding to teams. With the lines blurred between a team like Villanova(not that impressive but few losses) and a team like MSU(several losses, but dealing with injuries and tough conference schedule), the seeding could be far different than what the "experts" and many of us are predicting.

But, the thread is titled "#1 Seed Predictions" so I was just giving my prediction on what I thought might happen.

BTW, I also agree that if VA wins the reg. season and the ACCT, they should be a #1 seed over Villanova, but if the Cavs fail to get a 1, it wouldn't be the first time an ACC 2x champion hasn't been given a 1 seed(Miami 2013).

Troublemaker
03-10-2014, 11:07 AM
Bracket Matrix (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/) with a morning update today.

Right now, their overall bracket rankings look like this:

1. Arizona
2. Florida (I think in real life, they would be 1. Arizona being ahead is an alphabetical thing).
3. Wichita St
4. Villanova
---------------
5. Kansas
6. Wisconsin
7. Michigan
8. Virginia
--------------
9. Syracuse
10. Duke
11. Creighton
12. Iowa St

So, if we're hoping for MSG, the easy way for it to happen:
1. Duke wins the ACC to move ahead of UVA and Cuse.
2. Villanova wins the Big East tournament to take the final 1 seed.
3. One of Kansas, Wisconsin, or Michigan needs to suffer a semifinals or earlier loss in their conference tourney so Duke can move ahead.

Let's say #1 and #2 happen and for #3, it's Michigan that bows out early. Then Kansas will get the South region, Wisconsin will get the MidWest region, and Duke should get the East region as a #2 seed to Villanova's #1.

InSpades
03-10-2014, 11:19 AM
Yes, my preference for Duke is to be in the East Regional too, regardless of being seeded 1,2, or 3. To make that happen, we need to win the ACCT. I think that will ensure preference over Syracuse and VA.

My 2nd choice would be the MW region with Wichita State as the #1 seed.

And as soon as the brackets drop on Sunday evening, the first top 8 seed upset I'm writing down is whoever plays 'Nova in the round of 32. Not impressed with them.

My #1 predictions for Sunday are:

South - Florida
MW - Wichita State
West - AZ
East - Villanova

Villanova is a weak #1 if they get it. They are 1-3 vs. top 25 RPI teams right now. Of course that means their only losses are to top 25 RPI teams (which is great) but only having 1 top 25 win all year is tough.

Wichita St. is 3-0 vs. the RPI top 50. As a comparison... Kansas has played 19 top 50 RPI teams.

These are some of the weakest #1 seeds ever I would say. Not 1 of them played in a top 3 conference (and perhaps that's why they are still considered #1 seeds).

Atlanta Duke
03-10-2014, 11:48 AM
Let's say #1 and #2 happen and for #3, it's Michigan that bows out early. Then Kansas will get the South region, Wisconsin will get the MidWest region, and Duke should get the East region as a #2 seed to Villanova's #1.

Lunardi agrees this morning on Villanova #1 and Duke #2 in the East. Fills out the top of the East Bracket with Iowa State at #3 and Louisville at #4.

He also has Kansas at #2, but in the Midwest with #1 Wichita State (I can see the committee wanting that matchup). Finishes up with #1 Arizona together with #2 Wisconsin in the West plus #1 Florida and #2 Michigan in the South.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

I like that scenario a lot better than USA Today's bracket, which still has Duke at #3 in the South with Florida #1 and Kansas #2

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2014/03/09/usa-today-sports-ncaa-tournament-bracketology/6228743/

CDu
03-10-2014, 11:57 AM
Villanova is a weak #1 if they get it. They are 1-3 vs. top 25 RPI teams right now. Of course that means their only losses are to top 25 RPI teams (which is great) but only having 1 top 25 win all year is tough.

Wichita St. is 3-0 vs. the RPI top 50. As a comparison... Kansas has played 19 top 50 RPI teams.

These are some of the weakest #1 seeds ever I would say. Not 1 of them played in a top 3 conference (and perhaps that's why they are still considered #1 seeds).

Yeah, I really don't feel that Villanova has earned a top seed. They'll probably get one, but I don't think they deserve it.

As you said, they are just 1-3 against the RPI top-25. They are just 5-3 against the top-50. And those 3 losses were blowout losses.

Basically, they've fattened up their schedule by beating a bunch of 51-150 teams (13-0 against that group). But compare their resume to the following teams:

Wisconsin: #3 SOS, #6 RPI, 25-6, 5-2 vs RPI top-25, 8-4 vs top 50, 15-5 vs top-100, and 21-6 vs top-150
Kansas: #3 RPI, #1 SOS, 23-8, 6-3 vs top-25, 12-7 vs top-50, 16-8 vs top-100, 20-8 vs top-150
Duke: #7 RPI, #8 SOS, 24-7, 5-4 vs top-25, 6-4 vs top-50, 10-5 vs top-100, 17-7 vs top-100

Basically, it is just crazy to me that Villanova will get a #1 seed despite getting blown out by 3 of the 4 top-25 teams they have played. They're getting that seed simply because they happened to beat a bunch of teams that aren't going to make the tournament. Meanwhile Duke, Kansas, and Wisconsin (heck, even Syracuse) all have substantially better resumes against tournament-caliber teams. They are getting penalized for having one or two slip-ups against weak teams, whereas Villanova is not getting penalized for avoiding good teams and looking bad against most of few good teams they've faced.

Basically, I either want Villanova to win the "Big East" and get the East #1 with us as their #2, or I want them to lose the Big East tournament and fall to a #2 or #3 like they probably deserve.

Black Mambo
03-10-2014, 12:15 PM
Wisconsin: #3 SOS, #6 RPI, 25-6, 5-2 vs RPI top-25, 8-4 vs top 50, 15-5 vs top-100, and 21-6 vs top-150
Kansas: #3 RPI, #1 SOS, 23-8, 6-3 vs top-25, 12-7 vs top-50, 16-8 vs top-100, 20-8 vs top-150
Duke: #7 RPI, #8 SOS, 24-7, 5-4 vs top-25, 6-4 vs top-50, 10-5 vs top-100, 17-7 vs top-100



Unfortunately, assuming all 3 win out, it's also hard to [objectively] argue that Duke should get the last 1 seed based upon that 3 way comparison.

TexHawk
03-10-2014, 12:19 PM
He also has Kansas at #2, but in the Midwest with #1 Wichita State (I can see the committee wanting that matchup).

The problem with this prediction is that it actively goes against the committee's rules on geography. KU's preferred region by distance is the South, as Memphis is closer to Lawrence. (The South would be WSU's preferred region too, for the same reason, but Florida is ahead of them right now.) The only way KU would get to Indy is if a non-Florida team near Memphis gets in ahead of KU, which probably means both Duke AND UVA would need to pass them. One of those two would get the East #2 (or #1), then the other would get the South #2. I suppose that's not out of the realm of possibility, if KU loses to OSU on Thursday, and Duke/UVA advance to the ACC finals. But then you've got to worry about Wisconsin/Michigan for Indy too, since that is their preferred region.

Or WSU passes Florida for the overall #1, sending them to Memphis too. Then it makes sense.

I love/hate this time of year.

freshmanjs
03-10-2014, 12:20 PM
The problem with this prediction is that it actively goes against the committee's rules on geography. KU's preferred region by distance is the South, as Memphis is closer to Lawrence. (The South would be WSU's preferred region too, for the same reason, but Florida is ahead of them right now.) The only way KU would get to Indy is if a non-Florida team near Memphis gets in ahead of KU, which probably means both Duke AND UVA would need to pass them. One of those two would get the East #2 (or #1), then the other would get the South #2. I suppose that's not out of the realm of possibility, if KU loses to OSU on Thursday, and Duke/UVA advance to the ACC finals. But then you've got to worry about Wisconsin/Michigan for Indy too, since that is their preferred region.

Or WSU passes Florida for the overall #1, sending them to Memphis too. Then it makes sense.

I love/hate this time of year.

indy is closer for duke than memphis

CDu
03-10-2014, 12:58 PM
Unfortunately, assuming all 3 win out, it's also hard to [objectively] argue that Duke should get the last 1 seed based upon that 3 way comparison.

Oh I agree. Our #1 seed ship has probably sailed, unless some really crazy stuff happens this weekend. I was just using the consensus #2 seeds as a point of reference for where Villanova should be.

Kedsy
03-10-2014, 02:17 PM
9. Syracuse
10. Duke

I know it doesn't really matter, but how could Duke possibly be behind Syracuse? They have fewer losses than we do, but we are ahead of them in every other conceivable measure, including both human polls and computer rankings. (We even have fewer bad losses since mid-February.)

flyingdutchdevil
03-10-2014, 02:23 PM
Oh I agree. Our #1 seed ship has probably sailed, unless some really crazy stuff happens this weekend. I was just using the consensus #2 seeds as a point of reference for where Villanova should be.

Duke has 7 losses. Kansas has 8 losses.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the last time a 1 seed had more than 7 losses? The closest I could find was Mich St in 2012. They had 7 losses. And that's the only team in the last 10 years who was a 1-seed with more than 6 losses.

Because of this, I think the ship has certainly sailed for Kansas, despite a strong RPI and SOS. It's tough to justify 8 losses and still get a 1 seed. Duke, IMO, has a tiny chance of getting a 1-seed, even if 'Nova, Wisconsin, and Louisville all lose early in their tourneys and Duke wins it outright.

My 1-seeds: FL, WSU, UA, and Nova. Why Nova? Cus I think they have the easiest path to be tourney winners, even if McBuckets stands in their way.

CDu
03-10-2014, 02:37 PM
I know it doesn't really matter, but how could Duke possibly be behind Syracuse? They have fewer losses than we do, but we are ahead of them in every other conceivable measure, including both human polls and computer rankings. (We even have fewer bad losses since mid-February.)

It seems to be entirely based on both teams' resumes against the top-level competition. Syracuse is 7-2 against the top-50 compared to our 6-4. Syracuse is also 19-3 against the top-150 compared to our 17-7.

So it comes down to what the committee values most in determining the top-12 seeds: success against tournament teams, or overall success.

CDu
03-10-2014, 02:40 PM
Duke has 7 losses. Kansas has 8 losses.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the last time a 1 seed had more than 7 losses? The closest I could find was Mich St in 2012. They had 7 losses. And that's the only team in the last 10 years who was a 1-seed with more than 6 losses.

Because of this, I think the ship has certainly sailed for Kansas, despite a strong RPI and SOS. It's tough to justify 8 losses and still get a 1 seed. Duke, IMO, has a tiny chance of getting a 1-seed, even if 'Nova, Wisconsin, and Louisville all lose early in their tourneys and Duke wins it outright.

My 1-seeds: FL, WSU, UA, and Nova. Why Nova? Cus I think they have the easiest path to be tourney winners, even if McBuckets stands in their way.

I don't think it really matters in this case whether a team has been a #1 seed with as many as 8 losses. It just matters whether that 8-loss team has a better resume than the other options this year.

Frankly, I think that Kansas has the best resume of the teams not named Wichita St, Arizona, or Florida. Their schedule was just ridiculously tough, with only 7 games against teams outside the RPI top-100 (and just 3 against teams outside the top-150).

But if Villanova stumbles in the Big East tourney and Wisconsin and UVa stub their toes as well while Kansas goes on to win the Big 12 tourney, I think you'd be hard-pressed not to give them the last #1 seed.

TexHawk
03-10-2014, 02:43 PM
Duke has 7 losses. Kansas has 8 losses.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the last time a 1 seed had more than 7 losses? The closest I could find was Mich St in 2012. They had 7 losses. And that's the only team in the last 10 years who was a 1-seed with more than 6 losses.

Because of this, I think the ship has certainly sailed for Kansas, despite a strong RPI and SOS. It's tough to justify 8 losses and still get a 1 seed. Duke, IMO, has a tiny chance of getting a 1-seed, even if 'Nova, Wisconsin, and Louisville all lose early in their tourneys and Duke wins it outright.


Yes, it is technically true that no 8 loss team has received a #1 seed. But it would be interesting to see if any 8-loss teams were ever really close to one. KU played a really tough non-con (toughest in at least 5 years, according to KP), and then won the top rated RPI conference by two games. One of those 8 losses was without our 1st or 2nd best player (depending on how you value big men defense and rebounding). KU has a head-to-head win over one of their competitors (Duke), and a loss to another (Nova). Last year the committee chair was quoted as saying they decided Indiana deserved a #1 seed first (though not overall #1), even though they lost in their conference quarterfinals, because they won the committee-deemed "best" conference outright.

Another way of looking at it... I don't think the selection committee has a guidebook that says "7 losses, they're ok... 8 losses? GTFO!" That's why they look at SOS adjusted numbers, as much as possible. If the other statistical measures are even, sure, it may be a deciding factor, but that's it (imo).

flyingdutchdevil
03-10-2014, 02:48 PM
I don't think it really matters in this case whether a team has been a #1 seed with as many as 8 losses. It just matters whether that 8-loss team has a better resume than the other options this year.

Frankly, I think that Kansas has the best resume of the teams not named Wichita St, Arizona, or Florida. Their schedule was just ridiculously tough, with only 7 games against teams outside the RPI top-100 (and just 3 against teams outside the top-150).

But if Villanova stumbles in the Big East tourney and Wisconsin and UVa stub their toes as well while Kansas goes on to win the Big 12 tourney, I think you'd be hard-pressed not to give them the last #1 seed.

I don't disagree that Kansas has had the hardest schedule nor that they aren't deserving of a 1-seed. But deserving of a 1-seed and getting a 1-seed are two separate arguments. Gonzaga got a 1-seed last year, but were they really that deserving? WSU is both deserving of a 1-seed and will get a 1-seed, but they are more like a 3- or 4-seed talent than a 1-seed talent.

I think that big 8 number in the loss column will absolutely prevent Kansas from getting a 1-seed, even if they are deserving based on SOS and record against top RPI talent.

I think the only way that Kansas gets a 1 seed is ff every team in the 10 ten drops an early game in their respective conference tournies. However, I just don't see either Wisconsin, 'Nova, Louisville, or UVa not making at least the semi-finals, if not finals, or their conferences. If that happens, I see virtually no chance that Kansas becomes a 1-seed.

Atlanta Duke
03-10-2014, 02:55 PM
It seems to be entirely based on both teams' resumes against the top-level competition. Syracuse is 7-2 against the top-50 compared to our 6-4. Syracuse is also 19-3 against the top-150 compared to our 17-7.

So it comes down to what the committee values most in determining the top-12 seeds: success against tournament teams, or overall success.

Also could be the issue of Syracuse being a different team when Grant is able to play

SI.com has Syracuse as a #2 in the East while Duke is #3 in the Midwest today. Villanova is holding on to the shakiest #1 seed for SI, along with the consensus of Florida, Arizona, and Wichita State as 1 seeds.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20140310/villanova-florida-wichita-state-arizona-bracket-watch-selection-sunday/

I guess that could change if Duke gets to the ACC championship, which would mean Duke beats Syracuse this Saturday or Syracuse loses on Friday. In that case the winner of a UVA-Duke matchup if it happens could get a #2 in the East.

TexHawk
03-10-2014, 03:30 PM
I think the only way that Kansas gets a 1 seed is ff every team in the 10 ten drops an early game in their respective conference tournies. However, I just don't see either Wisconsin, 'Nova, Louisville, or UVa not making at least the semi-finals, if not finals, or their conferences. If that happens, I see virtually no chance that Kansas becomes a 1-seed.

Louisville is probably the opposite example. They are likely a very good team that is playing like a #1 seed, but their horrific SOS and other numbers will keep them off the #1 line. Some have them as low as a 5 or 6, there are only a handful on bracket matrix (http://bracketmatrix.com/) that have them as high as a two.

I admit to being perplexed on some of this, because 7 days ago everybody on this board + Joey Donuts + Palm (I think) had KU as the likely fourth #1. In the 7 days since then... KU lost to WVU without Joel Embiid. Wisconsin lost to Big Red. Duke lost to Wake. Syracuse lost (at home) to Georgia Tech. UVA lost to Maryland. Michigan State lost to OSU. Arizona lost to Oregon. Unless there is a flashing "OMG 8 losses, we should just shoot them!" sign in the committee room in Indy this weekend, I don't see how anybody has anything locked in at this point. Outside of Florida and WSU, of course.

To be clear, I don't think KU deserves a #1. I only want a healthy team a week from today. I would take a low 2 or high 3 if you guaranteed that Embiid has no back trouble the rest of the year. If that requires us losing to OSU again this week, I will take it.

jv001
03-10-2014, 04:26 PM
Louisville is probably the opposite example. They are likely a very good team that is playing like a #1 seed, but their horrific SOS and other numbers will keep them off the #1 line. Some have them as low as a 5 or 6, there are only a handful on bracket matrix (http://bracketmatrix.com/) that have them as high as a two.

I admit to being perplexed on some of this, because 7 days ago everybody on this board + Joey Donuts + Palm (I think) had KU as the likely fourth #1. In the 7 days since then... KU lost to WVU without Joel Embiid. Wisconsin lost to Big Red. Duke lost to Wake. Syracuse lost (at home) to Georgia Tech. UVA lost to Maryland. Michigan State lost to OSU. Arizona lost to Oregon. Unless there is a flashing "OMG 8 losses, we should just shoot them!" sign in the committee room in Indy this weekend, I don't see how anybody has anything locked in at this point. Outside of Florida and WSU, of course.

To be clear, I don't think KU deserves a #1. I only want a healthy team a week from today. I would take a low 2 or high 3 if you guaranteed that Embiid has no back trouble the rest of the year. If that requires us losing to OSU again this week, I will take it.

The bolded points are right on. 1) I want Duke healthy 2) I want Duke playing good basketball even if they lose in the ACCT. 3) I don't want Duke in a bracket that has a terrific pressing team(like Louisville). I don't think our guards can handle a great press. GoDuke!

Duvall
03-10-2014, 09:23 PM
Embiid out for the Big 12 Tournament, longshot for the first weekend of the NCAAs. (http://www.kuathletics.com/news/2014/3/10/MBB_0310142122.aspx)

Kansas hopes to have him back for the later rounds if possible. Oof.

brevity
03-10-2014, 09:27 PM
Embiid out for the Big 12 Tournament, longshot for the first weekend of the NCAAs. (http://www.kuathletics.com/news/2014/3/10/MBB_0310142122.aspx)

Kansas hopes to have him back for the later rounds if possible. Oof.

That's all the Selection Committee needed to hear. 2 seed. Win or lose this week, doesn't matter.

hurleyfor3
03-10-2014, 09:51 PM
I really like the bracketmatrix site, especially the analysis page (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html). If I'm reading it right, the collective intelligence of the Internet does better than ANY single site, save one. And the one that has outperformed the collective has a shorter history (five years vs. eight) so will almost certainly revert to the mean.

Lunardi in particular is right on the average. Nothing about his pretend bracket stands out statistically except that espn pays him for it. Think about this the next time you take any stock in his bracket, or anyone else's.

Atlanta Duke
03-10-2014, 10:36 PM
Embiid out for the Big 12 Tournament, longshot for the first weekend of the NCAAs. (http://www.kuathletics.com/news/2014/3/10/MBB_0310142122.aspx)

Kansas hopes to have him back for the later rounds if possible. Oof.

Like a 2001 Duke team that had a lot of talent waiting for Carlos Boozer to return for the second week of the tournament?

sagegrouse
03-11-2014, 03:17 PM
I really like the bracketmatrix site, especially the analysis page (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html). If I'm reading it right, the collective intelligence of the Internet does better than ANY single site, save one. And the one that has outperformed the collective has a shorter history (five years vs. eight) so will almost certainly revert to the mean.

Lunardi in particular is right on the average. Nothing about his pretend bracket stands out statistically except that espn pays him for it. Think about this the next time you take any stock in his bracket, or anyone else's.

Ye, Gods! There are 96 bracket predictions cited on bracketmatrix.com. Step right up, sports fans, you could be #97. What a waste of human effort!

The four schools from the "no-competition zone" have apparent locks on #1 seeds, according to the cognoscenti: Zona, Florida, Wichita State and Villanova. Which would mean that the survivors of the Big 12, Big Ten and ACC would are likely to be two seeds: Kansas/Iowa State, Wisconsin/Michigan, and Duke/Virginia/Syracuse.

I think this is hogwash. The four conferences of the prospective #1 seeds are PAC-12, SEC, Missouri Valley and Big East. The only other teams from these conferences as #6 seeds or better are Creighton (Big East) at #3 and UCLA at #6. No one from the SEC or Missouri Valley. Gee, I wonder why these four have such good records? I think that the Big 12, Big Ten and ACC winners will be just as deserving.

CDu
03-11-2014, 03:48 PM
Ye, Gods! There are 96 bracket predictions cited on bracketmatrix.com. Step right up, sports fans, you could be #97. What a waste of human effort!

The four schools from the "no-competition zone" have apparent locks on #1 seeds, according to the cognoscenti: Zona, Florida, Wichita State and Villanova. Which would mean that the survivors of the Big 12, Big Ten and ACC would are likely to be two seeds: Kansas/Iowa State, Wisconsin/Michigan, and Duke/Virginia/Syracuse.

I think this is hogwash. The four conferences of the prospective #1 seeds are PAC-12, SEC, Missouri Valley and Big East. The only other teams from these conferences as #6 seeds or better are Creighton (Big East) at #3 and UCLA at #6. No one from the SEC or Missouri Valley. Gee, I wonder why these four have such good records? I think that the Big 12, Big Ten and ACC winners will be just as deserving.

I agree with half of that. And I don't mean to badmouth those schools. Certainly Arizona handled their non-conference schedule quite well (though the injury to Ashley definitely changes them), and Florida beat Kansas at home and lost a close game @Wisconsin (no shame there). But Wichita State avoided playing anyone in their non-conference schedule, and Villanova got absolutely smoked by 3 of the 4 top-25 teams they faced.

I won't hold those teams' conference schedules against them; that's just the reality of the situation that they're stuck with. But at least Arizona and Florida went out and played top-10 teams and did a decent job against them.

Wander
03-11-2014, 03:57 PM
I agree with half of that. And I don't mean to badmouth those schools. Certainly Arizona handled their non-conference schedule quite well (though the injury to Ashley definitely changes them), and Florida beat Kansas at home and lost a close game @Wisconsin (no shame there). But Wichita State avoided playing anyone in their non-conference schedule, and Villanova got absolutely smoked by 3 of the 4 top-25 teams they faced.

I won't hold those teams' conference schedules against them; that's just the reality of the situation that they're stuck with. But at least Arizona and Florida went out and played top-10 teams and did a decent job against them.

I remain mystified by the Villanova talk here. Why are you praising Florida's big non-conference results against Kansas and Wisconsin (win at home, loss on the road), but not Villanova's big non-conference results against Kansas and Syracuse (win on neutral, loss on the road)? Florida does have a better profile than Villanova, but the way you're phrasing it here seems inconsistent and unfair to nova.

By the way, both RPI and kenpom have the Big East as better than the ACC, for whatever it's worth.

Duvall
03-11-2014, 04:02 PM
I remain mystified by the Villanova talk here. Why are you praising Florida's big non-conference results against Kansas and Wisconsin (win at home, loss on the road), but not Villanova's big non-conference results against Kansas and Syracuse (win on neutral, loss on the road)? Florida does have a better profile than Villanova, but the way you're phrasing it here seems inconsistent and unfair to nova.

Still, doesn't Villanova's record against quality competition come down to beating Kansas in a ballroom in November and getting embarrassed everywhere else? Not just losing, but getting rolled.

Wander
03-11-2014, 04:12 PM
Still, doesn't Villanova's record against quality competition come down to beating Kansas in a ballroom in November and getting embarrassed everywhere else? Not just losing, but getting rolled.

I don't think you're necessarily wrong, I would just assert that:

1) People generally put too much relative emphasis on results against top 10 teams
2) People generally put not enough emphasis on losses
3) All that matters is where Villanova stacks up relative to other teams in this particular season, not an idea for how a 1 seed should generally look, and given the losses by other teams to Wake Forest and BC and the like, they deserve to be seriously contending for the last 1 seed

CDu
03-11-2014, 04:12 PM
I remain mystified by the Villanova talk here. Why are you praising Florida's big non-conference results against Kansas and Wisconsin (win at home, loss on the road), but not Villanova's big non-conference results against Kansas and Syracuse (win on neutral, loss on the road)? Florida does have a better profile than Villanova, but the way you're phrasing it here seems inconsistent and unfair to nova.

By the way, both RPI and kenpom have the Big East as better than the ACC, for whatever it's worth.

It's a combination of things:
- Praising Arizona for what they did against the good teams on their schedule
- Tolerating UF for splitting the two really tough games on their schedule (and playing both of them close)
- Bashing Villanova for getting killed by Syracuse and Creighton (twice)
- Bashing Wichita State for not playing anybody

I probably didn't word it very well on the first post. Hopefully this explains it better.

sagegrouse
03-11-2014, 05:16 PM
By the way, both RPI and kenpom have the Big East as better than the ACC, for whatever it's worth.

Aha! My favorite topic! There have been no meaningful inter-conference games since early January. Therefore, any average rankings of the conferences must be based on suspect results in November and December -- suspect because there have been significant changes in the performance of teams. Three words: University of Virginia -- now one of the best teams in the nation, but their awful performance early pulled down the rankings of all the ACC teams. Similarly, UNC had bad losses (offset to some degree by good wins). Even BC is not as bad as their OOC performance.

To say that the Big East is better than the ACC has to recognize the weaknesses of the conference rankings.

Wander
03-11-2014, 05:34 PM
Aha! My favorite topic! There have been no meaningful inter-conference games since early January. Therefore, any average rankings of the conferences must be based on suspect results in November and December -- suspect because there have been significant changes in the performance of teams. Three words: University of Virginia -- now one of the best teams in the nation, but their awful performance early pulled down the rankings of all the ACC teams. Similarly, UNC had bad losses (offset to some degree by good wins). Even BC is not as bad as their OOC performance.


It's a fair point, but I noticed you only mentioned ACC schools as examples of teams that have improved. I assume you did this because, like me, you follow the ACC a little bit closer than other conferences, so you're more knowledgeable about the ACC teams that have improved over the course of the season. But there are probably Big East teams that have done the same. The rankings aren't perfect, but they give us a good overview since we can't follow all 351 D1 teams.

In the specific case of Villanova, kenpom has them as the the 10th hardest schedule in the country, ahead of Arizona, Florida, Wichita State, Louisville, Virginia, and many other good teams. Kenpom could certainly be off here. But they're probably not, you know, 100 spots off. At least I don't think so. Even if Villanova is 28-3 against the 50th hardest schedule in the country, that still strikes me as a really, really good team that could be a 1 seed.

TexHawk
03-11-2014, 05:44 PM
It's a fair point, but I noticed you only mentioned ACC schools as examples of teams that have improved. I assume you did this because, like me, you follow the ACC a little bit closer than other conferences, so you're more knowledgeable about the ACC teams that have improved over the course of the season. But there are probably Big East teams that have done the same. The rankings aren't perfect, but they give us a good overview since we can't follow all 351 D1 teams.

In the specific case of Villanova, kenpom has them as the the 10th hardest schedule in the country, ahead of Arizona, Florida, Wichita State, Louisville, Virginia, and many other good teams. Kenpom could certainly be off here. But they're probably not, you know, 100 spots off. At least I don't think so. Even if Villanova is 28-3 against the 50th hardest schedule in the country, that still strikes me as a really, really good team that could be a 1 seed.

Agreed. I certainly don't think conference rankings are a fantastic measure, but they are better than nothing. Does anyone think Arizona waltzes in and beats Michigan sans-Ashley tomorrow? Michigan is a whole lot better today then they were then. But that Arizona noncon win DOES mean something more than zero, but how much is debatable.

-jk
03-11-2014, 05:54 PM
Aha! My favorite topic! There have been no meaningful inter-conference games since early January. Therefore, any average rankings of the conferences must be based on suspect results in November and December -- suspect because there have been significant changes in the performance of teams. Three words: University of Virginia -- now one of the best teams in the nation, but their awful performance early pulled down the rankings of all the ACC teams. Similarly, UNC had bad losses (offset to some degree by good wins). Even BC is not as bad as their OOC performance.

To say that the Big East is better than the ACC has to recognize the weaknesses of the conference rankings.

I seem to recall you suggesting the NCAA should have a week in early Feb for nothing but out-of-conference games; everyone gets a couple. I think it's a fabulous idea. We need to get Jay Bilas on board.

-jk

tommy
03-11-2014, 06:16 PM
I seem to recall you suggesting the NCAA should have a week in early Feb for nothing but out-of-conference games; everyone gets a couple. I think it's a fabulous idea. We need to get Jay Bilas on board.

-jk

I love the intent, but unfortunately I think the result would be Syracuse scheduling a few more games against SUNY-Buffalo and Quinniepac.

sagegrouse
03-11-2014, 06:42 PM
I seem to recall you suggesting the NCAA should have a week in early Feb for nothing but out-of-conference games; everyone gets a couple. I think it's a fabulous idea. We need to get Jay Bilas on board.

-jk

Yes, I had a real diatribe on the topic a couple of years ago. But wasn't it you that suggested it just last week?

sage
'Ah, yes -- it was. Read here (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?33266-In-this-thread-we-pretend-Joe-Lunardi-s-opinion-matters&p=710741#post710741)'

-jk
03-11-2014, 06:45 PM
Yes, I had a real diatribe on the topic a couple of years ago. But wasn't it you that suggested it just last week?

sage

Trying to keep it alive.

-jk

ice-9
03-11-2014, 07:19 PM
2) People generally put not enough emphasis on losses

Huh? The entire poll system is predicated on which preseason teams have the fewest losses.

No, if anything, people place too much emphasis on losses.

Troublemaker
03-11-2014, 10:04 PM
I didn't see a great place to put this, so I'll use this thread.

Add the Tennessee Volunteers to the list of possible underseeded teams. I mean, something has really gotten into them lately.

In their past 3 games, they've won by these scores:

76-38 over Vanderbilt
82-54 over Auburn
72-45 over Missouri

None of those teams are good, but still, what utter beatdowns Tennessee has been handing out lately to conference opponents.

On the strength of those wins, the Volunteers have climbed to #13 in Kenpom. What's interesting is Bracket Matrix has them listed as a 12 seed right now, with several brackets not even including them in the field yet. They're a bubble team as of today, but with one more blowout win, they'll probably lock up a bid. And if they move up a couple more spots in kenpom in the process, it's quite possible they accomplish the rare feat of being a tournament team with a seed that is numerically greater than its kenpom rank, e.g. 11 seed > #10 kenpom.

Watch out for the Volunteers. They could win the SEC tournament the way they've been playing. If Duke's going to be a 2 seed, I hope Tennessee doesn't rise to become a 7 or 10 seed.

Kedsy
03-11-2014, 10:26 PM
And if they move up a couple more spots in kenpom in the process, it's quite possible they accomplish the rare feat of being a tournament team with a seed that is numerically greater than its kenpom rank, e.g. 11 seed > #10 kenpom.

Like Pitt last year (Pom #7*; seed = 8). Others lowish seeds in recent years that came close include: 2012 Memphis (Pom #9; seed = 8); 2011 Utah State (Pom #16; seed = 12); 2010 BYU (Pom #7; seed = 7); 2009 West Virginia (Pom #8; seed = 6). So for the last five years, this sort of thing has happened once a tournament (assuming I haven't missed any). [* - All Pomeroy numbers in this paragraph are pre-tournament numbers.]

One interesting thing about these grossly underseeded teams is four of the five lost in the first round, and the fifth team (BYU) won their first game in double OT against a lower seeded team then lost in the round of 32.

Troublemaker
03-11-2014, 10:41 PM
Like Pitt last year (Pom #7*; seed = 8). Others lowish seeds in recent years that came close include: 2012 Memphis (Pom #9; seed = 8); 2011 Utah State (Pom #16; seed = 12); 2010 BYU (Pom #7; seed = 7); 2009 West Virginia (Pom #8; seed = 6). So for the last five years, this sort of thing has happened once a tournament (assuming I haven't missed any). [* - All Pomeroy numbers in this paragraph are pre-tournament numbers.]

One interesting thing about these grossly underseeded teams is four of the five lost in the first round, and the fifth team (BYU) won their first game in double OT against a lower seeded team then lost in the round of 32.

Dang, great job pulling out those examples so quickly! And your second paragraph is indeed very intereresting. Nonetheless, I'm going to hope UTK loses its first SEC tourney game so they'll be NIT bound and grossly underseeded there.

Wander
03-11-2014, 11:06 PM
Like Pitt last year (Pom #7*; seed = 8). Others lowish seeds in recent years that came close include: 2012 Memphis (Pom #9; seed = 8); 2011 Utah State (Pom #16; seed = 12); 2010 BYU (Pom #7; seed = 7); 2009 West Virginia (Pom #8; seed = 6). So for the last five years, this sort of thing has happened once a tournament (assuming I haven't missed any). [* - All Pomeroy numbers in this paragraph are pre-tournament numbers.]

One interesting thing about these grossly underseeded teams is four of the five lost in the first round, and the fifth team (BYU) won their first game in double OT against a lower seeded team then lost in the round of 32.

Yeah, I think the simple explanation is just that kenpom has vastly overrated Tennessee. Note that they have an extremely low "luck" ranking. I think the reason is largely due to one game, which looks pretty flukey in retrospect - Tennessee jumped 20 spots from destroying Virginia (actually, it was just 20 spots at the time, probably effectively more as Virginia got better and better). But if you subtract the 20 spots from that one game - which, I know, is a pretty lame and not particularly rigorous thing to do - they're at #33, which sounds a lot more accurate based on their resume.

El_Diablo
03-13-2014, 02:29 PM
And Seton Hall takes down Villanova! Already a borderline case, this likely takes them out of contention for a #1 seed.

Udaman
03-13-2014, 02:54 PM
Stick a fork in Villanova. There is NO WAY they deserve a #1 seed (and it won't happen).

Also, if you want some advice for your brackets - don't pick Nova to win it all. In fact, don't pick them for the Final Four. In the history of the NCAA tournament, no team that lost in the quarterfinals of its conference tournament has ever won the NCAA tournament, and only once has a team made it to the Final Four (that was UConn in 2009, and that was a crazy 6 OT thriller of a game to Syracuse that they lost). Fact is, losing in the first round of your tournament a) makes you doubt yourself, b) makes the pundits talk you down and state your weaknesses and c) makes you opponents feel like they can beat you.

Incidentally, this rule has applied to Duke on several occasions (including last year, when we actually went pretty far for a first round tournament loser, all the way to the Regional Finals).

LBF
03-13-2014, 03:01 PM
And Seton Hall takes down Villanova! Already a borderline case, this likely takes them out of contention for a #1 seed.

Not according to BONardi

nmduke2001
03-13-2014, 03:07 PM
Stick a fork in Villanova. There is NO WAY they deserve a #1 seed (and it won't happen).

Also, if you want some advice for your brackets - don't pick Nova to win it all. In fact, don't pick them for the Final Four. In the history of the NCAA tournament, no team that lost in the quarterfinals of its conference tournament has ever won the NCAA tournament, and only once has a team made it to the Final Four (that was UConn in 2009, and that was a crazy 6 OT thriller of a game to Syracuse that they lost). Fact is, losing in the first round of your tournament a) makes you doubt yourself, b) makes the pundits talk you down and state your weaknesses and c) makes you opponents feel like they can beat you.

Incidentally, this rule has applied to Duke on several occasions (including last year, when we actually went pretty far for a first round tournament loser, all the way to the Regional Finals).

Sort of a bummer. I was hoping we'd be the 2 seed in Nova's side of the bracket. I don't think we will get a 1 seed and that was the next best, in my opinion.

El_Diablo
03-13-2014, 03:09 PM
Not according to BONardi

Yeah, saw that. I guess he is waiting for one of Wisconsin, Syracuse, Kansas, Duke, UVA, or Michigan to win a couple more games before slotting that team into the #1 seed. But I seriously doubt he will keep Villanova there through Sunday (nor should he).

sporthenry
03-13-2014, 03:20 PM
Fact is, losing in the first round of your tournament a) makes you doubt yourself, b) makes the pundits talk you down and state your weaknesses and c) makes you opponents feel like they can beat you.


I'm not sure I agree with all of this. I doubt they listen to the pundits and if they do, they probably have much bigger issues than just losing in the conference tournament. Also, not quite sure how it makes people feel they can beat you anymore than losing any other game. Syracuse just lost to BC, Duke to Wake. I'd imagine that is as condemning as losing a first round game with respect to opponents belief in beating you. When you get to the S16/E8 and beyond, almost all teams believe they can win. Losing in your 1st conference game probably means three things. You aren't that good, you are playing poorly at the wrong time, or you just got unlucky.

However, I also imagine as the ACCT expands, much like with the BE tournament, you'll see very good teams lose in the first round and see more of the F4 teams come from teams who lose just b/c you'll have Louisville/Duke first round games, at least for one team.


Sort of a bummer. I was hoping we'd be the 2 seed in Nova's side of the bracket. I don't think we will get a 1 seed and that was the next best, in my opinion.

I think Duke matches up terribly with Nova. Nova isn't a top 4 team but I'd much rather Duke face almost anyone other than Nova.

CDu
03-13-2014, 03:24 PM
I think Duke matches up terribly with Nova. Nova isn't a top 4 team but I'd much rather Duke face almost anyone other than Nova.

I think the idea would be that Villanova would be most likely to lose before the elite-8. So by being paired with Villanova, we'd get a greater possibility of making the Final Four without facing a top-10 team.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-13-2014, 03:43 PM
Sort of a bummer. I was hoping we'd be the 2 seed in Nova's side of the bracket. I don't think we will get a 1 seed and that was the next best, in my opinion.

Well, as a consolation, if Duke wins the ACCT, they'll possibly be in position for the #1 seed in the East with Nova as the #2 seed.

Or, at the least, I think it opens up the possibility of Duke being the #2 seed in the East(vaulting over Villanova) if we win out with the "weakest" #1 seed being also in the East(i.e. KU, UM, Wisc, or even UL?). I could see Nova getting shipped out West in that scenario.

If either UVA, 'Cuse, or Duke win the ACCT, they'll be placed in the East Region, I believe(either as a 1 or 2 seed).

Eakane
03-13-2014, 03:52 PM
The candidates:

Not Kansas because of Embild issues;
Possibly Wisconsin or Michigan if one of them wins the Big10 tourney;
The ACC winner if it's Duke Virginia or Syracuse; and
Louisville.

Amazingly, if we win, even with 7 losses, we have the best shot at being the 1.

Agreed?

NashvilleDevil
03-13-2014, 03:52 PM
I'm not sure I agree with all of this. I doubt they listen to the pundits and if they do, they probably have much bigger issues than just losing in the conference tournament. Also, not quite sure how it makes people feel they can beat you anymore than losing any other game. Syracuse just lost to BC, Duke to Wake. I'd imagine that is as condemning as losing a first round game with respect to opponents belief in beating you. When you get to the S16/E8 and beyond, almost all teams believe they can win. Losing in your 1st conference game probably means three things. You aren't that good, you are playing poorly at the wrong time, or you just got unlucky.

However, I also imagine as the ACCT expands, much like with the BE tournament, you'll see very good teams lose in the first round and see more of the F4 teams come from teams who lose just b/c you'll have Louisville/Duke first round games, at least for one team.



I think Duke matches up terribly with Nova. Nova isn't a top 4 team but I'd much rather Duke face almost anyone other than Nova.

How did Creighton blow their doors off twice? I think Duke would handle Villanova just fine in the tournament.

tommy
03-13-2014, 03:53 PM
Well, as a consolation, if Duke wins the ACCT, they'll possibly be in position for the #1 seed in the East with Nova as the #2 seed.

Or, at the least, I think it opens up the possibility of Duke being the #2 seed in the East(vaulting over Villanova) if we win out with the "weakest" #1 seed being also in the East(i.e. KU, UM, Wisc, or even UL?). I could see Nova getting shipped out West in that scenario.

If either UVA, 'Cuse, or Duke win the ACCT, they'll be placed in the East Region, I believe(either as a 1 or 2 seed).

Not sure why folks think Louisville is in the running, even potentially, for a #1 seed. They're #24 in the RPI. Getting a #1 from that RPI spot would be unprecedented, by a lot. Their schedule has been lousy -- overall 90 SOS, and the nonconference SOS is 160. Turble. Somehow they're #2 in KenPom and are rated highly in the human polls. I guess their seeding will be a good test case of an issue that was debated a couple of weeks ago on the boards: are the human polls or the RPI a better predictor of the top seeds?

Reilly
03-13-2014, 04:14 PM
Not sure why folks think Louisville is in the running, even potentially, for a #1 seed. They're #24 in the RPI. Getting a #1 from that RPI spot would be unprecedented, by a lot. Their schedule has been lousy -- overall 90 SOS, and the nonconference SOS is 160. Turble. Somehow they're #2 in KenPom and are rated highly in the human polls. I guess their seeding will be a good test case of an issue that was debated a couple of weeks ago on the boards: are the human polls or the RPI a better predictor of the top seeds?

Louisville is #1 in the SRS: http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/seasons/2014-ratings.html

If a team is #1 in the SRS, and #2 in KenPom, they must be doing something right. Just saying a team has a horrible strength of schedule doesn't tell one much by itself. Put the Oklahoma City Thunder in the Big South and let Seth Greenberg schedule their non-conference slate -- they'd have a bad SOS. But they'd deserve a #1 seed.

I don't know the ins/outs of the various ranking systems and why they shake out as they do. But if you're telling me a team is #1 in SRS, #2 in KenPom, high in the human polls ... but has a bad SOS and a bad RPI ... I trust S-R/KenPom/humans more than I trust -- or value, I guess is the word -- SOS and RPI.

sporthenry
03-13-2014, 04:19 PM
How did Creighton blow their doors off twice? I think Duke would handle Villanova just fine in the tournament.

They shot 60% from 3 in both games and hit 21 of them in the first game. If Duke can do that, then I take it back, I'm not worried about anyone. I didn't see the second game but McDermott went off and I think Wright was on record as saying he tried to take away the 3 which opened it up for McDermott.

Nova has a 93.7 DRTG but gave up 1.45 and 1.46 points per possession against Creighton. Maybe Duke has the mismatches and matches up well with Nova offensively but I think Nova would tear up Duke defensively.

CDu
03-13-2014, 04:20 PM
Louisville is #1 in the SRS: http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/seasons/2014-ratings.html

If a team is #1 in the SRS, and #2 in KenPom, they must be doing something right. Just saying a team has a horrible strength of schedule doesn't tell one much by itself. Put the Oklahoma City Thunder in the Big South and let Seth Greenberg schedule their non-conference slate -- they'd have a bad SOS. But they'd deserve a #1 seed.

I don't know the ins/outs of the various ranking systems and why they shake out as they do. But if you're telling me a team is #1 in SRS, #2 in KenPom, high in the human polls ... but has a bad SOS and a bad RPI ... I trust S-R/KenPom/humans more than I trust -- or value, I guess is the word -- SOS and RPI.

The biggest difference between RPI and Pomeroy/SRS/etc is that RPI does not care by how much the game is decided. Most (if not all) of the others in some form or fashion take into account margin of victory. Pomeroy does it implicitly through offensive and defensive efficiency per 100 possessions.

So RPI is going to hurt a good team that plays bad opponents. Yes, they should rack up tons of wins against those bad teams, but 75% of the RPI is based on what your opponents do rather than what you do. So if your schedule is awful, it's tough to make up ground.

All that being said, Louisville's profile is a LOT like Villanova's profile in that they are 1-3 against the top-25 and barely over .500 against the top-50. Basically, they've beaten up on bad teams and been just okay against good teams.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2014, 04:41 PM
The candidates:

Not Kansas because of Embild issues;
Possibly Wisconsin or Michigan if one of them wins the Big10 tourney;
The ACC winner if it's Duke Virginia or Syracuse; and
Louisville.

Amazingly, if we win, even with 7 losses, we have the best shot at being the 1.

Agreed?

If KU wins the Big 12 tournament, they will be a candidate, even without Embiid.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2014, 04:48 PM
Also, what is happening in America right now? Arizona is on top of Utah 62-27. Louisville is ahead of Rutgers 58-16, a score normally reserved for state-flagship-university-on-state-directional-school football violence.

brevity
03-13-2014, 05:45 PM
Also, what is happening in America right now? Arizona is on top of Utah 62-27. Louisville is ahead of Rutgers 58-16, a score normally reserved for state-flagship-university-on-state-directional-school football violence.

You answered your question when you brought up football. Like a big program trying to impress the college football pollsters, Louisville is auditioning for the NCAA Selection Committee. Arizona probably is too, but it's numerically and geographically unnecessary for them to do so.

Kedsy
03-13-2014, 05:53 PM
I don't know the ins/outs of the various ranking systems and why they shake out as they do. But if you're telling me a team is #1 in SRS, #2 in KenPom, high in the human polls ... but has a bad SOS and a bad RPI ... I trust S-R/KenPom/humans more than I trust -- or value, I guess is the word -- SOS and RPI.

If you're trying to guess who will be a #1 seed, then you need to value/trust the ranking system(s) that the committee values/trusts, right? I haven't heard that the committee has shifted away from using RPI so I'd expect the RPI has more predictive power than Pomeroy, SRS, or any other system.

That said, Louisville beat Rutgers 92-31 today. That'll boost their ranking in Pomeroy and almost every other computer ranking system, but it probably hurts Louisville's RPI.

Henderson
03-13-2014, 06:02 PM
If KU wins the Big 12 tournament, they will be a candidate, even without Embiid.

If Kansas wins the Big 12, and 'Cuse, Duke, or Virginia wins the ACC, things get very interesting for that last #1 seed. You could make the case for or against either the Big 12 or ACC winner. Louisville maybe, but they've got some ground to make up.

If Kansas wins the Big 12, and Duke wins the ACC, I'd almost rather let Kansas take the #1 seed and have the "consolation" of being #2 in a weaker region and/or better venue.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2014, 06:09 PM
If Kansas wins the Big 12, and 'Cuse, Duke, or Virginia wins the ACC, things get very interesting for that last #1 seed. You could make the case for or against either the Big 12 or ACC winner. Louisville maybe, but they've got some ground to make up.

If Kansas wins the Big 12, and Duke wins the ACC, I'd almost rather let Kansas take the #1 seed and have the "consolation" of being #2 in a weaker region and/or better venue.

I don't think it will work that way, though, will it? If Duke gets a #1, doesn't it pretty much have to be the East at this point? Arizona is West, Florida is South, Wichita St is Midwest. Whoever gets the last slot has nowhere to go but East, our overwhelming preference anyway. Or am I totally offbase here?

arnie
03-13-2014, 06:14 PM
Also, what is happening in America right now? Arizona is on top of Utah 62-27. Louisville is ahead of Rutgers 58-16, a score normally reserved for state-flagship-university-on-state-directional-school football violence.

As Digger just said to Rutgers, welcome to the Big Ten. Same applies to Maryland.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2014, 06:21 PM
As Digger just said to Rutgers, welcome to the Big Ten. Same applies to Maryland.

People always say Team X is going to get curbstomped in their new Conference Y. Yet Rutgers is leaving what was (prior to its sundering) consistently the most stacked basketball conference in the country. Likewise, the new ACC is likely to have at least as many topshelf teams as the B1G going forward. I doubt they'll have it much harder basketball-wise in their new environs.

Remember when everyone was giggling over how annihilated Mizzou and Texas A&M were going to get in the SEC?

tommy
03-13-2014, 06:29 PM
If Kansas wins the Big 12, and 'Cuse, Duke, or Virginia wins the ACC, things get very interesting for that last #1 seed. You could make the case for or against either the Big 12 or ACC winner. Louisville maybe, but they've got some ground to make up.

If Kansas wins the Big 12, and Duke wins the ACC, I'd almost rather let Kansas take the #1 seed and have the "consolation" of being #2 in a weaker region and/or better venue.

But there's no guarantee at all that we'd be the #2 in a weaker region. In fact, due to the primacy of geography, we very well could find ourselves as the #2 in the South, and have to face Florida. Not good.

Reilly
03-13-2014, 07:32 PM
If you're trying to guess who will be a #1 seed, then you need to value/trust the ranking system(s) that the committee values/trusts, right? I haven't heard that the committee has shifted away from using RPI so I'd expect the RPI has more predictive power than Pomeroy, SRS, or any other system.

That said, Louisville beat Rutgers 92-31 today. That'll boost their ranking in Pomeroy and almost every other computer ranking system, but it probably hurts Louisville's RPI.

I thought there have been louder public rumblings the past few years as to how the RPI is not as good a system as the others, so maybe that sort of thinking will seep into the committee room. To me, SRS and KenPom jive with certain public perceptions, maybe help set them as well.

You have the pre-tourney KenPom data, right? What were the recent #2 KenPom teams (pre-tourney; what Louisville is right now) seeded? Tommy posited that having Louisville with its 20-something RPI get a #1 seed would be unprecedented ... that may be so ... but I'm guessing it's not unprecedented for a #2 KenPom team to get a #1 seed. I'm curious as to what seeds all the #2 KenPoms got.

As for SRS, I don't have pre-tourney SRS numbers, but looking quickly just now at final SRS rankings, the team that finished #1 in the SRS overall (what Louisville is right now) have all had #1 seeds going back to 2006 and Texas -- in 2006, Texas finished #1 in the SRS but had gotten a #2 seed.

In short, the question is how can Louisville be in the conversation for a #1 seed. One answer is that that's the sort of conversation that #2 KenPom and #1 SRS teams engender. Another answer is the committee relies so heavily on RPI and SOS, L'ville should not be in the conversation. And a third answer could be L'ville won't get it b/c the committee uses warped criteria, but they should be in the conversation, so we'll include them in our conversation.

Henderson
03-13-2014, 07:53 PM
But there's no guarantee at all that we'd be the #2 in a weaker region. In fact, due to the primacy of geography, we very well could find ourselves as the #2 in the South, and have to face Florida. Not good.

At this point in the season, I'd be happy playing Florida for a chance to go to the Final Four. Wouldn't you? Ain't no gimmes anywhere you look.

vick
03-13-2014, 07:57 PM
Remember when everyone was giggling over how annihilated Mizzou and Texas A&M were going to get in the SEC?

They got faster the moment they switched conferences.

Des Esseintes
03-13-2014, 08:05 PM
They got faster the moment they switched conferences.

They got so fast, in fact, that they are now menaces to player health and safety. Just ask NCAA Surgeons General Nick Saban and Bret Bielema.

arnie
03-13-2014, 08:09 PM
People always say Team X is going to get curbstomped in their new Conference Y. Yet Rutgers is leaving what was (prior to its sundering) consistently the most stacked basketball conference in the country. Likewise, the new ACC is likely to have at least as many topshelf teams as the B1G going forward. I doubt they'll have it much harder basketball-wise in their new environs.

Remember when everyone was giggling over how annihilated Mizzou and Texas A&M were going to get in the SEC?

Maybe, but Rutgers is leaving a weaker conference and Maryland won't have VPI, WF, BC, GT anymore. With NW improving, I just don't see many bottom feeders for MD in Big Ten. They aren't competing with the big dogs in either conference.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-13-2014, 08:15 PM
I don't think it will work that way, though, will it? If Duke gets a #1, doesn't it pretty much have to be the East at this point? Arizona is West, Florida is South, Wichita St is Midwest. Whoever gets the last slot has nowhere to go but East, our overwhelming preference anyway. Or am I totally offbase here?

Yes, the weakest #1 will be in the East. Just a matter of who at this point.

And the more Duke wins this weekend, the closer they get to staying in the East.

A good place for us to be in, I think.

DU82
03-13-2014, 09:01 PM
But there's no guarantee at all that we'd be the #2 in a weaker region. In fact, due to the primacy of geography, we very well could find ourselves as the #2 in the South, and have to face Florida. Not good.

Durham is closer to NYC than Memphis, so unless UVA or Syracuse finishes ahead of us, we should wind up in NYC as a #1 or #2 seed. Or, I guess, if we're not the fourth #1 and are behind 'Nova as a #2. If we're a 2 seed, I don't see us behind 'Nova at this point.

jv001
03-14-2014, 06:57 AM
Durham is closer to NYC than Memphis, so unless UVA or Syracuse finishes ahead of us, we should wind up in NYC as a #1 or #2 seed. Or, I guess, if we're not the fourth #1 and are behind 'Nova as a #2. If we're a 2 seed, I don't see us behind 'Nova at this point.

I don't even know if this is possible, but if we were to play at the same arena as Cuse, would the Cuse fans root for Duke and the ACC or would they be like UNC fans and be a ABD fan? Beat Clemson and GoDuke!

Kedsy
03-14-2014, 09:54 AM
I thought there have been louder public rumblings the past few years as to how the RPI is not as good a system as the others, so maybe that sort of thinking will seep into the committee room. To me, SRS and KenPom jive with certain public perceptions, maybe help set them as well.

There have certainly been rumblings, and the rumblings are correct -- the RPI is a bad rating system. But that hasn't stopped the committee from relying on the RPI, so I'm not sure how relevant the rumblings are.


You have the pre-tourney KenPom data, right? What were the recent #2 KenPom teams (pre-tourney; what Louisville is right now) seeded? Tommy posited that having Louisville with its 20-something RPI get a #1 seed would be unprecedented ... that may be so ... but I'm guessing it's not unprecedented for a #2 KenPom team to get a #1 seed. I'm curious as to what seeds all the #2 KenPoms got.

2013: Pomeroy #2 Louisville (RPI#3) got a 1 seed. But Pomeroy #1 Florida (RPI#7) got a 3 seed.
2012: Pomeroy #2 Ohio State (RPI#7) got a 2 seed.
2011: Pomeroy #2 Duke (RPI#4) got a 1 seed. But Pomeroy #4 Texas (RPI#11) got a 4 seed.
2010: Pomeroy #2 Kansas (RPI#1) got a 1 seed. But Pomeroy #3 Wisconsin (RPI#21) got a 4 seed.
2009: Pomeroy #2 UNC (RPI#3) got a 1 seed. But Pomeroy #1 Memphis (RPI#7) got a 2 seed and Pomeroy #4 Gonzaga (#26) got a 4 seed.

So, while four of the last five Pomeroy #2s got 1 seeds, two of the last Pomeroy #1s got 2 or 3 seeds, meaning out of the last ten top-two teams in Pomeroy, three of those ten failed to get a 1 seed. And in the five years, three teams ranked top 5 in Pomeroy got 4 seeds. All the seeming anomalies correspond to divergences between Pomeroy's rank and the RPI.


As for SRS, I don't have pre-tourney SRS numbers, but looking quickly just now at final SRS rankings, the team that finished #1 in the SRS overall (what Louisville is right now) have all had #1 seeds going back to 2006 and Texas -- in 2006, Texas finished #1 in the SRS but had gotten a #2 seed.

This is only relevant if the teams were top in SRS but not in RPI. Otherwise, since I've never heard the committee consults the SRS rankings, it's just coincidence. In other words, the top teams in SRS might also have been the top teams in the RPI.


In short, the question is how can Louisville be in the conversation for a #1 seed. One answer is that that's the sort of conversation that #2 KenPom and #1 SRS teams engender. Another answer is the committee relies so heavily on RPI and SOS, L'ville should not be in the conversation. And a third answer could be L'ville won't get it b/c the committee uses warped criteria, but they should be in the conversation, so we'll include them in our conversation.

If the conversation is who should be considered for #1 seed then I agree with you. If the conversation is who has a legitimate chance to be a #1 seed then I don't agree.

pfrduke
03-14-2014, 09:12 PM
So let's officially put a fork in Kansas as a 1 seed.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-14-2014, 09:19 PM
So let's officially put a fork in Kansas as a 1 seed.

Lunardi, Palm, and Bracketologists everywhere are devastated.

KU will have to sweat out a 2 seed now, considering their injury situation.

CDu
03-14-2014, 09:20 PM
So let's officially put a fork in Kansas as a 1 seed.

Yeah, they HAD to win the Big-12 title to overcome the Embiid uncertainty. Now they seem like a lock for Wichita State's #2 seed.

tommy
03-14-2014, 09:31 PM
It's right there for us now. Guys just gotta go grab it.

ice-9
03-14-2014, 09:34 PM
It's right there for us now. Guys just gotta go grab it.

If we win out, we will either be the 1-seed or 2-seed in the East depending on what happens in the Big 10. But at least we will get the East. Let's go get it!

sporthenry
03-14-2014, 09:41 PM
If we win out, we will either be the 1-seed or 2-seed in the East depending on what happens in the Big 10. But at least we will get the East. Let's go get it!

Agreed. In no way is it Duke's 1 seed to get but worst case is they get the "worst" 1 seed in New York. Assuming the committee doesn't think Duke is more "Southern."

BlueDevilBrowns
03-15-2014, 09:46 AM
For Duke to have a shot at the last #1 seed, pull for OSU to beat UM today and MSU to take down Wisc. That would leave just UL in our way potentially for the last #1 if we win out.

Also, UCLA winning the Pac-12 would boost our Non-Conf wins, as well. Every little bit helps, right? :cool:

As has been mentioned already, L'ville's RPI is currently 23rd with a SOS of 85(compared to Duke's 8 RPI ranking and 6th rated SOS). Gaudy record or not, to make them a top seed with that resume would be unprecedented. I think the biggest feather in their cap is they are the defending NC.

It would be just too simple for the committee to drop Louisville in the last #1 line and not have to really defend that choice much to the general public/media. Selecting Duke for the last #1 will almost assuredly lead to a firestorm of contrived controversy from the media that, I would imagine, the committee doesn't want to deal with.

I think if UL's jersey read "Memphis", no one would be seriously talking about them as top seed material.

jv001
03-15-2014, 09:50 AM
For Duke to have a shot at the last #1 seed, pull for OSU to beat UM today and MSU to take down Wisc. That would leave just UL in our way potentially for the last #1 if we win out.

Also, UCLA winning the Pac-12 would boost our Non-Conf wins, as well. Every little bit helps, right? :cool:

As has been mentioned already, L'ville's RPI is currently 23rd with a SOS of 85(compared to Duke's 8 RPI ranking and 6th rated SOS). Gaudy record or not, to make them a top seed with that resume would be unprecedented. I think the biggest feather in their cap is they are the defending NC.

It would be just too simple for the committee to drop Louisville in the last #1 line and not have to really defend that choice much to the general public/media. Selecting Duke for the last #1 will almost assuredly lead to a firestorm of contrived controversy from the media that, I would imagine, the committee doesn't want to deal with.

I think if UL's jersey read "Memphis", no one would be seriously talking about them as top seed material.

I don't care if we get a 2 seed as long as we're not in Louisville and Florida's region. They are two teams that I think would give our guards trouble. GoDuke!

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-15-2014, 09:52 AM
For Duke to have a shot at the last #1 seed, pull for OSU to beat UM today and MSU to take down Wisc. That would leave just UL in our way potentially for the last #1 if we win out.

Also, UCLA winning the Pac-12 would boost our Non-Conf wins, as well. Every little bit helps, right? :cool:

As has been mentioned already, L'ville's RPI is currently 23rd with a SOS of 85(compared to Duke's 8 RPI ranking and 6th rated SOS). Gaudy record or not, to make them a top seed with that resume would be unprecedented. I think the biggest feather in their cap is they are the defending NC.

It would be just too simple for the committee to drop Louisville in the last #1 line and not have to really defend that choice much to the general public/media. Selecting Duke for the last #1 will almost assuredly lead to a firestorm of contrived controversy from the media that, I would imagine, the committee doesn't want to deal with.

I think if UL's jersey read "Memphis", no one would be seriously talking about them as top seed material.

A lot of folks could say the same thing about Duke.

I think our chance at a #1 seed went out the window with Syracuse losing. Not sure that NCSU brings the necessary cache with a victory that we need to make the leap, regardless of a potential win over UVa.

I'm guessing that Duke is pretty well riding the 2/3 seed line right now, and I'm not too terribly concerned which we end up with. I am very interested to see what bracket we end up in, where we will play, who else is in our line of fire.

sagegrouse
03-15-2014, 10:18 AM
The Committee likes conference champions, esp. the major conferences. And now the Big East leader and the Big 12 leader have lost. Ya gotta think that, if either Duke or Virginia win the ACCs, it will be strongly considered for a #1. Same for Michigan or Wisconsin in the Big Ten. I doubt that Arizona and Florida would fall to #2 with a loss.

No way would I give a #1 to Wichita State, but I'd probably be outvoted.

BTW, I hear all this talk about the Tournament Selection Committee shaping the field or the #1 seeds to be acceptable to the public at large. I don't buy it. There are too many people on the Committee to hatch (and keep quiet) a conspiracy, and there is too much work to be done in a short amount of time. The members have a hard time just coughing out a reasonable set of picks and seeds in the time available.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
03-15-2014, 10:32 AM
The Committee likes conference champions, esp. the major conferences. And now the Big East leader and the Big 12 leader have lost. Ya gotta think that, if either Duke or Virginia win the ACCs, it will be strongly considered for a #1. Same for Michigan or Wisconsin in the Big Ten. I doubt that Arizona and Florida would fall to #2 with a loss.

No way would I give a #1 to Wichita State, but I'd probably be outvoted.

BTW, I hear all this talk about the Tournament Selection Committee shaping the field or the #1 seeds to be acceptable to the public at large. I don't buy it. There are too many people on the Committee to hatch (and keep quiet) a conspiracy, and there is too much work to be done in a short amount of time. The members have a hard time just coughing out a reasonable set of picks and seeds in the time available.

I don't disagree with you about not feeling pressured for "acceptable" picks, but I just don't think there are that many unknown factors. In this day and age, the public has access to the same metrics that the committee does (SOS, BPI, KenPom, what have you) and while the specifics of how you weight those factors and the final algorithm might be a bit different, it's hard to imagine that the final results vary that much. Probably makes a small difference on a team or two at the top lines of the bracket, and might change one team or two at the bottom, but at the end of the day 90% of the bracket will include no surprises.

That's why I just don't get the whole Joe Lunardi fascination. He's using the metrics out there, dropping them into a spreadsheet, and publishing the results. You would think the guy was performing sorcery.

duke09hms
03-15-2014, 11:16 AM
Any chance if we win out and don't get a #1 seed we could be the 2 seed in Wichita State's region?

El_Diablo
03-15-2014, 11:29 AM
Any chance if we win out and don't get a #1 seed we could be the 2 seed in Wichita State's region?

Yes.

sporthenry
03-15-2014, 11:44 AM
Yes.

How so? Technically, Duke is closer to Indianapolis than Memphis but the committee put UK in the South for regional preference so I'd have to think the MW would be Duke's 3rd location preference. They are closest to NYC and when people think of Duke, they think South not MW.

Beyond that, if Duke wins out, where do you have them on the S-curve? Winning the ACCT might give them enough for the last 1 seed. Most likely is B1G champ gets last 1 but then Duke would be first #2 and get the East. Only other team that gets ahead of Duke might be Louisville. But they wouldn't be in the East so still, Duke would get the East.

yancem
03-15-2014, 11:44 AM
As interesting as this discussion is, it's really mute unless we win out and beating Clemson by one doesn't exactly instil a lot of confidence in me. We really need to find out outside shooting touch and quick. Oh and don't forget the last time the discussion of winning out would give a one seed was only a week ago and we dropped a bad one to Wake. One game at a time for me, if we get past State today, I'll think about what winning the acc might mean.

Troublemaker
03-15-2014, 01:02 PM
It looks like, for whatever reason, Villanova is still in contention for a 1 seed. Duke does not necessarily pass them in the overall rankings with an ACC championship.

I'm rooting for Wisconsin and Michigan to lose so Nova can be the 1 seed. If both Nova and Duke are 2 seeds, we might not get MSG.

Regardless, have to win the ACC anyway, which is its own magnificent reward.

ChillinDuke
03-15-2014, 01:24 PM
It looks like, for whatever reason, Villanova is still in contention for a 1 seed. Duke does not necessarily pass them in the overall rankings with an ACC championship.

I'm rooting for Wisconsin and Michigan to lose so Nova can be the 1 seed. If both Nova and Duke are 2 seeds, we might not get MSG.

Regardless, have to win the ACC anyway, which is its own magnificent reward.

When you say "it looks like", where are you looking? Lunardi?

If they lost to Seton Hall in their tourney, and they were a shaky #1 to begin with, I have to think that the last team standing of L'Ville, Duke, Wisco, and maybe Michigan would take the final #1.

I just don't think there's room at the table for Nova. And I think the simplest, most objective way to determine the final #1 out of a pool of roughly equal teams is by choosing the conference champion of the 4 teams listed above. In the unlikely event that none of those 4 teams win their tourney, then Nova maybe backs in.

- Chillin

Troublemaker
03-15-2014, 01:34 PM
Chillin - Bracket Matrix.

I want to see a 3/15 matrix update to be sure, but I've been clicking through some of the individual brackets in the matrix, and many of them still have Nova as a 1 seed through yesterday's results.

Almost certainly, if Michigan or Wisconsin wins the Big 10, they would surpass Nova. I'm not sure the ACC champ would, though, because UVA and Duke are coming from further behind.

Louisville is not a serious threat for a 1 seed.

10 committee members holed up in Indy might have different ideas, though. But I trust the Matrix.

ChillinDuke
03-15-2014, 01:47 PM
Chillin - Bracket Matrix.

I want to see a 3/15 matrix update to be sure, but I've been clicking through some of the individual brackets in the matrix, and many of them still have Nova as a 1 seed through yesterday's results.

Almost certainly, if Michigan or Wisconsin wins the Big 10, they would surpass Nova. I'm not sure the ACC champ would, though, because UVA and Duke are coming from further behind.

Louisville is not a serious threat for a 1 seed.

10 committee members holed up in Indy might have different ideas, though. But I trust the Matrix.

Thx. Forgot about that site - just checked it.

Yeah, I dig what you're saying. I mean I guess I trust the matrix as well. But I have to admit that I'm surprised we are that far down the list. Granted, we have not played well in numerous recent games. But neither have these other teams.

- Chillin

BlueDevilBrowns
03-15-2014, 02:04 PM
Chillin - Bracket Matrix.

10 committee members holed up in Indy might have different ideas, though. But I trust the Matrix.

I wonder if The Matrix is as powerful as 24/7's Crystal Ball?

El_Diablo
03-15-2014, 02:07 PM
I think the Bracket Matrix may also be extremely "sticky" (and no, this is not a Pitino joke). For example, once Lunardi moves Villanova down to a #2 seed, a lot of these other brackets (which are made by people likely watching ESPN 16 hours per day at this point and thus listening to every talking head drone on and on and on about Lunardi's seeds) will follow suit.

Troublemaker
03-15-2014, 02:14 PM
A partial Matrix update was just posted.

You can see how Nova is mostly a 2 at this point but there are still some folks putting them as a 1.

I HOPE that an ACC Champ Duke would surpass them, but for MSG to be more secure, I'd like to see Wiscy and Michigan lose. That way, it theoretically wouldn't matter if Duke is the 1 and Nova the 2 or vice versa; both teams would be in the East.

Still, most important thing is just to become ACC Champ.

Henderson
03-15-2014, 02:33 PM
All questions will be answered, and the time is only a day away. Still some ball to be played, and I can wait 30 hours to hear all the moans about who got hosed and who benefited from some mythically corrupt and broken system.

The difference between a 2 and 3 is negligible. A #1 seed in the East Region -- priceless. If we win out, we might get it, what with Kansas, Villanova, and Syracuse all out of the running for a #1 (if Duke wins out). If we don't win out, we're in 2-3 land. #2 in the East wouldn't be so bad.

But winning the conference is the goal right now. Beat State.

El_Diablo
03-15-2014, 02:45 PM
How so? Technically, Duke is closer to Indianapolis than Memphis but the committee put UK in the South for regional preference so I'd have to think the MW would be Duke's 3rd location preference. They are closest to NYC and when people think of Duke, they think South not MW.

Beyond that, if Duke wins out, where do you have them on the S-curve? Winning the ACCT might give them enough for the last 1 seed. Most likely is B1G champ gets last 1 but then Duke would be first #2 and get the East. Only other team that gets ahead of Duke might be Louisville. But they wouldn't be in the East so still, Duke would get the East.

I am not sure why you "have" to think that. Is it possible? Sure. But it would be an exception to the geographic preference seeding process that the committee follows. Anyway, there are multiple scenarios in which Duke wins out and ends up with Wichita State. For example:

SCENARIO 1:
-Wisconsin wins out.
-Seeding = 1-Florida-South, 1-Arizona-West, 1-Wisconsin-Midwest, 1-Wichita State-East, 2-Duke-East . . . .

SCENARIO 2:
-Wisconsin wins out.
-Seeding = 1-Florida-South, 1-Arizona-West, 1-Wichita State-Midwest, 1-Wisconsin-East, 2-Villanova-East, 2-Duke-Midwest . . . .

You could also substitute Michigan for Wisconsin if Michigan wins out.

And while it's likely that we would be seeded above both Syracuse and Virginia if we win out, it's not completely guaranteed based on overall body of work to this point. Syracuse and Virginia both have fewer losses than us, and a possible Duke vs. Virginia Sunday game might not get weighed in, as the committee has said before that it does not necessarily have time to factor in all the Sunday results, and some teams have essentially been "locked in" before Sunday. For example, with #5 Duke and #6 UNC playing for the ACC title in 2011, presumably for a #1 seed according to the media, Duke won and got the #1 seed, while UNC got a #2 seed. When asked after the brackets came out how much the ACC title game factored in, a committee member said that it did not factor in at all; Duke was a #1 and UNC was a #2 regardless of the result that day. Now, I am not saying that Virginia locks it up with a win today, but if they are ahead of us by the end of the day (according to the committee), then beating them tomorrow might not matter. And with either Syracuse or Virginia ahead of us, they could bump us out of the East. Again, this is not likely because I think we would be ahead of both ACC teams, but the answer to the question--is there any chance?--is yes.

pfrduke
03-15-2014, 02:48 PM
Does anyone know if the committee asks teams their regional preferences, or do they just assume them by rough sense of regional affiliation and distance? It seems like it would make sense, if the location was supposed to be based on team convenience, if they let the teams rank the regions and subregions they prefer to be in (in the abstract, of course - it could happen before the season starts once they know what the regional locations are). But it's also an understatement to say that the NCAA sometimes does things that don't make sense.

ice-9
03-15-2014, 04:03 PM
It's pretty simple. Villanova may be ahead of Wisconsin, Michigan, UVA and Duke right now, but if any of the latter four wins their conference championship they'd move past Villanova.

Let's say Duke wins the ACC championship. Then depending on how the committee compares us to the Big 10 champion (assuming it's Wisconsin or Michigan), we're either the fourth 1-seed or the first 2-seed to be given geographic preference. In both scenarios, we'll be in the East, and personally I think we'll probably end up as the 2-seed.

Ditto for UVA if it was UVA and not Duke who wins the ACC championship.

So if we win out we will be in the East, either as a 1-seed or a 2-seed.

Saratoga2
03-15-2014, 05:58 PM
It's pretty simple. Villanova may be ahead of Wisconsin, Michigan, UVA and Duke right now, but if any of the latter four wins their conference championship they'd move past Villanova.

Let's say Duke wins the ACC championship. Then depending on how the committee compares us to the Big 10 champion (assuming it's Wisconsin or Michigan), we're either the fourth 1-seed or the first 2-seed to be given geographic preference. In both scenarios, we'll be in the East, and personally I think we'll probably end up as the 2-seed.

Ditto for UVA if it was UVA and not Duke who wins the ACC championship.

So if we win out we will be in the East, either as a 1-seed or a 2-seed.


If we handle Virginia there still is a slight chance for a #1 SEED.

ice-9
03-15-2014, 06:02 PM
If we handle Virginia there still is a slight chance for a #1 SEED.

We'd need Michigan St to win the Big 10.

But I don't think we'll get it over Michigan or Wisconsin if they win the Big 10 -- and we can point to the Wake Forest loss as the reason.

dukebluesincebirth
03-15-2014, 06:28 PM
We'd need Michigan St to win the Big 10.

But I don't think we'll get it over Michigan or Wisconsin if they win the Big 10 -- and we can point to the Wake Forest loss as the reason.

Well we just got a little closer as Wisconsin goes down to Michigan state.
This is getting interesting...wins by Sparty and Duke tomorrow and we're quite possibly #1 in the East! I'll take it.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-15-2014, 07:36 PM
For a while now many of us have been baffled by Jerry Palm's projected seeding of Duke in the NCAAT. He's consistently had Duke 1-2 seed lines lower than most other "Bracketologists".

Why? I think this blog post by Palm maybe explains his "logic":

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24486063/bracketology-battle-for-fourth-no-1-seed-heats-up

In giving his synopsis of the candidates for the last #1 seed, Palm says this about UVA and Duke:

"the ESPN-driven candidates Duke and Virginia. The Cavaliers went 16-2, but beat only three tournament teams, which says a lot about the ACC in general and their league schedule in particular."

"Duke wouldn't be getting talked about like they are if it weren't for the name on the front of their jersey. The Blue Devils, if they beat Virginia, will have seven top 50 wins, which is good, but their best road win (and their only one in the top 100) is at Pitt. They also have losses at Notre Dame and Wake Forest. No top seed has ever had two 100-plus RPI losses, and there's no reason to think Duke should be the first."

I don't know if it's because he works for a rival network, or it's his rivalry with Lunardi, but to describe UVA and Duke as "ESPN-Driven" is odd to me. I mean would his love for Wisconsin be described as "CBS-driven"?

In this entire article, he fails to use RPI ratings, National rankings, or the fact that Duke beat both UVA and Michigan head-to-head. He seems to value RPI Top 50 Wins more than anything, but then doesn't mention what each teams' RPI actually is. Could that be because Duke's RPI is very comparable to both Wisconsin and Michigan?

I think Palm has lost his grip on reality.

FerryFor50
03-15-2014, 08:04 PM
Arizona loses to UCLA in the PAC-12 final.

Do they still get a #1 seed?

Duke95
03-15-2014, 08:05 PM
Louisville is a #1 seed for sure.

Florida
Wichita State
Louisville
Arizona

I think those are pretty much set.

Louisville made the AAC tournament look like a pickup game against the little sisters of the poor.

FerryFor50
03-15-2014, 08:05 PM
We'd need Michigan St to win the Big 10.

But I don't think we'll get it over Michigan or Wisconsin if they win the Big 10 -- and we can point to the Wake Forest loss as the reason.

Why not over Michigan, considering Duke beat Michigan?

Duke95
03-15-2014, 08:16 PM
No matter what happens tomorrow, we will likely be a 2 seed. No way we get a 1 at this point. Michigan won't either.

pfrduke
03-15-2014, 08:24 PM
No matter what happens tomorrow, we will likely be a 2 seed. No way we get a 1 at this point. Michigan won't either.

I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong about Louisville, since they've looked dominant over the past two weeks. But, Louisville is currently sitting at 22 in the RPI, and for all the flaws that ranking has, I don't think a team that low has ever been a 1 seed before. This could be the first, certainly, but it would be an exceptional result.

Atlanta Duke
03-15-2014, 08:26 PM
In giving his synopsis of the candidates for the last #1 seed, Palm says this about UVA and Duke:

"the ESPN-driven candidates Duke and Virginia. The Cavaliers went 16-2, but beat only three tournament teams, which says a lot about the ACC in general and their league schedule in particular."

"Duke wouldn't be getting talked about like they are if it weren't for the name on the front of their jersey. The Blue Devils, if they beat Virginia, will have seven top 50 wins, which is good, but their best road win (and their only one in the top 100) is at Pitt. They also have losses at Notre Dame and Wake Forest. No top seed has ever had two 100-plus RPI losses, and there's no reason to think Duke should .

Consider the source - Palm wants page hits and his way to get there involves trashing Duke - few are arguing Duke is a 1 seed - let him explain why he has Duke as a 4 seed

What Rasmussen is to political polls Palm is to bracketology - read but do not rely upon what he says

NashvilleDevil
03-15-2014, 08:31 PM
Louisville is a #1 seed for sure.

Florida
Wichita State
Louisville
Arizona

I think those are pretty much set.

Louisville made the AAC tournament look like a pickup game against the little sisters of the poor.

Because it was a pickup game against the little sisters of the poor. I think they are only a one seed if Mich loses and Duke/UVA is a 40-39 slugfest.

Wander
03-15-2014, 08:37 PM
I think it goes, in order:

Michigan, if they win
Duke, if we win
Iowa State, if they win
Virginia if all three of those teams lose

If Louisville gets it, then we know that the committee has started very seriously using kenpom type metrics.

Henderson
03-15-2014, 08:40 PM
I think it goes, in order:

Michigan, if they win
Duke, if we win
Iowa State, if they win
Virginia if all three of those teams lose

If Louisville gets it, then we know that the committee has started very seriously using kenpom type metrics.

Why Michigan over Duke? Lots of metrics say otherwise if both win. AP/USA/RPI/Head to Head.

FerryFor50
03-15-2014, 08:42 PM
I think it goes, in order:

Michigan, if they win
Duke, if we win
Iowa State, if they win
Virginia if all three of those teams lose

If Louisville gets it, then we know that the committee has started very seriously using kenpom type metrics.

What about Creighton?

#7 in RPI. #6 in kenpom. Destroyed Villanova twice. Will probably win the Big East tourny.

Henderson
03-15-2014, 08:43 PM
What about Creighton?

#7 in RPI. #6 in kenpom.

Because the important number is 4?

Duke95
03-15-2014, 08:44 PM
I think it goes, in order:

Michigan, if they win
Duke, if we win
Iowa State, if they win
Virginia if all three of those teams lose

If Louisville gets it, then we know that the committee has started very seriously using kenpom type metrics.

At this point, Louisville would beat all those teams, including us.

brevity
03-15-2014, 08:46 PM
No matter what happens tomorrow, we will likely be a 2 seed. No way we get a 1 at this point. Michigan won't either.

I let your earlier comment slide about the 1 seeds being "pretty much set," but I'll interject here. Duke might drop to a 3 seed if they lose to UVA, and you seem to be dismissing that possibility.

I think we're still looking at about 11 teams that expect to get a 1 or 2 seed. The history of math suggests that only 8 teams will.

Florida
Wichita State
Arizona
Louisville
Michigan
Virginia
Duke
Kansas
Villanova
Creighton
Wisconsin

If Michigan wins the Big Ten, there's a good chance that the ACC title game loser joins Wisconsin and one of the Big East teams on the 3 line. (SDSU lost today, which puts them at either a 3 or 4. Even if Iowa State wins the Big XII, I don't think they get a 2 seed.)


At this point, Louisville would beat all those teams, including us.

How is that relevant? Setting aside any injury issues, the Selection Committee does not care about what a team will do in the tournament. All that matters is what they've done. That's the same kind of logic that prevents people from seeing that Wichita State is a 1 seed; whether they can make the Final Four is immaterial.

Troublemaker
03-15-2014, 08:51 PM
At this point, Louisville would beat all those teams, including us.

Just because you keep repeating it, doesn't make it true. Louisville is a 3 seed.

If you weren't new and/or had somebody to vouch for you, I would actually wager an insane amount with you that Louisville won't be a 1 seed.

They're a 3 seed. Deal.

Kedsy
03-15-2014, 08:51 PM
Louisville is a #1 seed for sure.

Florida
Wichita State
Louisville
Arizona

I think those are pretty much set.

Louisville made the AAC tournament look like a pickup game against the little sisters of the poor.

According to RPI conference rankings, the AAC is a worse conference than the Atlantic 10 and the SEC (and five other conferences). And even with the conference tourney wins, Louisville's RPI is #23. I'd have to think Louisville getting a #1 would be a major long shot. Certainly nowhere near the surety you think it is.

NashvilleDevil
03-15-2014, 08:55 PM
At this point, Louisville would beat all those teams, including us.

Based on what? Beating Rutgers by 60?

FerryFor50
03-15-2014, 09:00 PM
Because the important number is 4?

Really unsure what you're talking about. Which "4" is the magic number?

Louisville isn't 4. They're 22 in RPI, 2 in kenpom. 5 in AP.

Michigan isn't 4. They're 10 in RPI, 11 in kenpom. 8 in AP.

UVA is 12 in RPI, 4 in kenpom. 6 in AP.

Duke is 8 in kenpom and RPI, 7 in AP.

Iowa State is 9 in RPI, 24 in kenpom. 16 in AP.

Yet they're all in the discussion.

If you took the top 4 RPI, you'd have:

Zona
Florida
Kansas
Wichita St

So even though KU and Zona closed out their season with a couple of losses, they get a #1 just because of the RPI?

If Creighton wins again, they surely move up in RPI, kenpom and AP. As would Duke. As would L'ville.

I think Duke gets a 2 seed, but I don't think Creighton gets enough credit for their season, while Nova gets too much credit.

Wander
03-15-2014, 09:06 PM
Why Michigan over Duke? Lots of metrics say otherwise if both win. AP/USA/RPI/Head to Head.

I put Michigan over us basically on the strength of winning both the regular season outright and the conference tournament of the best conference. We'd have the same number of losses but Michigan's schedule will have been a little bit tougher. But after looking over the two resumes, you're making me doubt that. Not as clear as I originally thought, could go either way if both Duke and Michigan win.

DU82
03-15-2014, 09:07 PM
Based on what? Beating Rutgers by 60?

But I thought the Big Ten was the best conference in America?

FerryFor50
03-15-2014, 10:39 PM
Really unsure what you're talking about. Which "4" is the magic number?

Louisville isn't 4. They're 22 in RPI, 2 in kenpom. 5 in AP.

Michigan isn't 4. They're 10 in RPI, 11 in kenpom. 8 in AP.

UVA is 12 in RPI, 4 in kenpom. 6 in AP.

Duke is 8 in kenpom and RPI, 7 in AP.

Iowa State is 9 in RPI, 24 in kenpom. 16 in AP.

Yet they're all in the discussion.

If you took the top 4 RPI, you'd have:

Zona
Florida
Kansas
Wichita St

So even though KU and Zona closed out their season with a couple of losses, they get a #1 just because of the RPI?

If Creighton wins again, they surely move up in RPI, kenpom and AP. As would Duke. As would L'ville.

I think Duke gets a 2 seed, but I don't think Creighton gets enough credit for their season, while Nova gets too much credit.

Guess I jinxed Creighton. :p

jay
03-15-2014, 10:53 PM
I put Michigan over us basically on the strength of winning both the regular season outright and the conference tournament of the best conference. We'd have the same number of losses but Michigan's schedule will have been a little bit tougher. But after looking over the two resumes, you're making me doubt that. Not as clear as I originally thought, could go either way if both Duke and Michigan win.

I thought the committee had been really backing away from this line of thinking lately. As in, they're big on ignoring conferences and looking at the whole body of work.

If you look purely at body of work, Duke and Michigan are virtually similar. And then there's that pesky little fact that, oh I dunno, WE BEAT THEM.

I just don't get the sudden adoration of Michigan's resume.

ice-9
03-15-2014, 10:56 PM
Why not over Michigan, considering Duke beat Michigan?

I'm no bracketologist so this is just conjecture, but I'd point to our two bad losses in Notre Dame and Wake Forest. Especially Wake Forest. That loss really hurt us as it came late in the season.

Michigan also has two bad losses to Charlotte and Indiana, but they happened much earlier in the season. There's also the distinction of winning both the regular season and the conference championship if Michigan pulls through.

jay
03-15-2014, 11:03 PM
Michigan also has two bad losses to Charlotte and Indiana, but they happened much earlier in the season. There's also the distinction of winning both the regular season and the conference championship if Michigan pulls through.

Another thing the committee has talked about for the last several years -- wins/losses at the beginning of the season should count the same as at the end of the season. That's why they threw out the "last 10 games" metric they used to use.

So I wonder how/if that plays in.

Honestly, I think there's a good chance if Duke wins tomorrow (and ESPECIALLY if Michigan loses), a lot of people are going to be surprised to see Duke on the 1 line. Jerry Palm has Duke as a 4 seed right now. Can you imagine?

All this being said, I'm fine with a 2 seed, as long as it's in the East.

Duke95
03-15-2014, 11:12 PM
I let your earlier comment slide about the 1 seeds being "pretty much set," but I'll interject here. Duke might drop to a 3 seed if they lose to UVA, and you seem to be dismissing that possibility.

I think we're still looking at about 11 teams that expect to get a 1 or 2 seed. The history of math suggests that only 8 teams will.

Florida
Wichita State
Arizona
Louisville
Michigan
Virginia
Duke
Kansas
Villanova
Creighton
Wisconsin

If Michigan wins the Big Ten, there's a good chance that the ACC title game loser joins Wisconsin and one of the Big East teams on the 3 line. (SDSU lost today, which puts them at either a 3 or 4. Even if Iowa State wins the Big XII, I don't think they get a 2 seed.)



How is that relevant? Setting aside any injury issues, the Selection Committee does not care about what a team will do in the tournament. All that matters is what they've done. That's the same kind of logic that prevents people from seeing that Wichita State is a 1 seed; whether they can make the Final Four is immaterial.

Actually, I think you're wrong.

If the Selection Committee didn't care how teams would do, why would they be monitoring the Embiid injury to see how it impacts Kansas' seeding?
http://www.slamonline.com/online/news-rumors/other-news/2014/03/ncaa-selection-committee-monitor-joel-embiids-injury/

I'm not dismissing the chances of Duke getting a 3. It is quite possible. I'm saying that Duke is at best a 2 seed.

ice-9
03-15-2014, 11:14 PM
Another thing the committee has talked about for the last several years -- wins/losses at the beginning of the season should count the same as at the end of the season. That's why they threw out the "last 10 games" metric they used to use.

So I wonder how/if that plays in.

That's true, I'm just thinking if it's that close, they're going to look at everything including recency of losses, conference distinctions, and head-to-head results. I can see the committee putting us over Michigan, especially if we destroy UVA tomorrow and Michigan only ekes it out. We'll see.

It's a little too bad that Syracuse lost to NC State. If we faced them and beat them that would have added another top win on our resume.

gurufrisbee
03-15-2014, 11:35 PM
I think Duke looks like a good lock for a 2, with a very slim chance at getting a 1.

Wichita St and Florida are locks at 1. Arizona probably is, too, though I can't understand why. They didn't cruise undefeated through the season and they didn't win their conference tournament either - and they play in a weak conference. Clearly they aren't nearly as good without Ashley.

Louisville looks as good as anyone in the country, but their schedule was terrible - especially non-con. I think they will be pulling a 3, even if it looks like they should contend for the last 1.

Nova looked decent for it, but they didn't win their conference tournament in a fairly weak conference.

Michigan will have the best case if they beat Sparty tomorrow. And they will probably get it.

But I maintain the Virginia-Duke winner likely has the best case for the fourth 1 seed. Hopefully they can still get them both two's, which they both deserve, at least.

I kind of love the idea that the committee might give Louisville a 4 and NC a 5....and they love to set up re-matchs....

Duke95
03-15-2014, 11:38 PM
I don't get it. Louisville just absolutely crushed everyone this weekend. They're 5th in the country and look unstoppable.

And people are talking about a 3 seed?!? Seriously now. I don't like Pitino one bit, but his team looks solid.

hurleyfor3
03-15-2014, 11:38 PM
I kind of love the idea that the committee might give Louisville a 4 and NC a 5....and they love to set up re-matchs....

Even better, make Florida their 1. Oh wait, that's Lunardi. (And we're the 2. I might actually root for unc in the Sweet 16 in that scenario.)

LobstersPinchPinch
03-16-2014, 12:00 AM
I don't get it. Louisville just absolutely crushed everyone this weekend. They're 5th in the country and look unstoppable.

And people are talking about a 3 seed?!? Seriously now. I don't like Pitino one bit, but his team looks solid.

I kind of feel the same about LOU, but from what smarter people have said, how they've looked the past few games doesn't trump their overall body of work. If it did, not sure SYR would even make the tourney.

brevity
03-16-2014, 12:06 AM
No matter what happens tomorrow, we will likely be a 2 seed. No way we get a 1 at this point. Michigan won't either.


How is that relevant? Setting aside any injury issues, the Selection Committee does not care about what a team will do in the tournament. All that matters is what they've done. That's the same kind of logic that prevents people from seeing that Wichita State is a 1 seed; whether they can make the Final Four is immaterial.


Actually, I think you're wrong.

If the Selection Committee didn't care how teams would do, why would they be monitoring the Embiid injury to see how it impacts Kansas' seeding?
http://www.slamonline.com/online/news-rumors/other-news/2014/03/ncaa-selection-committee-monitor-joel-embiids-injury/

I'm not dismissing the chances of Duke getting a 3. It is quite possible. I'm saying that Duke is at best a 2 seed.

Reread the bold part and try again.

I agree that Duke is most likely a 2 seed, but you said that was Duke's fate "no matter what happens tomorrow." You may be right -- I'm on record with my belief that the Selection Committee is lazy and irresponsible -- but even I would say that you can't remove the small but distinct possibilities of rising to a 1 seed (if Duke wins and Michigan loses) or falling to a 3 seed (if Duke loses).

fan345678
03-16-2014, 12:20 AM
I can never figure out why, exactly, the Big Ten is so highly revered. They have as many national titles in the last 24 years as the Big West.

FerryFor50
03-16-2014, 12:28 AM
I don't get it. Louisville just absolutely crushed everyone this weekend. They're 5th in the country and look unstoppable.

And people are talking about a 3 seed?!? Seriously now. I don't like Pitino one bit, but his team looks solid.

Louisville didn't "crush everyone."

They beat the crap out of Rutgers (12-21), who is #170 in Kenpom and in disarray after the Mike Rice scandal.

Their next opponent, Houston (#130), took out SMU (#32) for them. So they beat the crap out of the #170 team and the #130 team.

Then, instead of having to face Cincy (#24), who they split with, UCONN (#25), who L'ville swept this season, takes out Cincy. So L'ville's only tough game came against a team they swept instead of a team that actually matched up with them better. They won by 10, which isn't a "crushing" by any means.

L'ville also didn't have to worry about Memphis, who swept L'ville because UCONN also took Memphis out.

Louisville going in to the tourny has been on a roll. But their schedule stunk. The out of conference games that were against high major opponents, they lost (UNC and Kentucky). L'ville feasted on mid and low majors out of conference.

If the season were two weeks long starting March 1, then yes, L'ville might be a 1 seed. But as it stands, they're a 2 or 3. Hopefully not in Duke's bracket.

ICP
03-16-2014, 12:32 AM
I'm sorry if this has already been covered, but is that true that if we win tomorrow but so does Michigan and we end up with the top 2 seed (i.e. 5 on the S curve) the committee will likely put us in the South playing against presumably the no.1 overall seed (Florida) supposedly to give us geographical preference among the other 2 seeds? Wouldn't we be better off playing against the weakest 1 seed, regardless of geography? As it happens, this year that could be the East region, and clearly Duke is as much as an East school (with the regionals at MSG) by virtue of demographics/alumni as a South one I would think. I would even think that as the top 2

hurleyfor3
03-16-2014, 12:35 AM
There is no S-curve. THERE IS NO S-CURVE.

Duke95
03-16-2014, 12:42 AM
Reread the bold part and try again.

I agree that Duke is most likely a 2 seed, but you said that was Duke's fate "no matter what happens tomorrow." You may be right -- I'm on record with my belief that the Selection Committee is lazy and irresponsible -- but even I would say that you can't remove the small but distinct possibilities of rising to a 1 seed (if Duke wins and Michigan loses) or falling to a 3 seed (if Duke loses).

I'm not sure why you have your panties in a twist, considering we don't seem to disagree.

ICP
03-16-2014, 12:43 AM
There is no S-curve. THERE IS NO S-CURVE.

Then why do they keep bringing that chubby guy on ESPN every hour to talk about his rankings of the 1 and 2 seeds moving teams up and down?

Duke95
03-16-2014, 12:47 AM
Louisville didn't "crush everyone."

They beat the crap out of Rutgers (12-21), who is #170 in Kenpom and in disarray after the Mike Rice scandal.

Their next opponent, Houston (#130), took out SMU (#32) for them. So they beat the crap out of the #170 team and the #130 team.

Then, instead of having to face Cincy (#24), who they split with, UCONN (#25), who L'ville swept this season, takes out Cincy. So L'ville's only tough game came against a team they swept instead of a team that actually matched up with them better. They won by 10, which isn't a "crushing" by any means.

L'ville also didn't have to worry about Memphis, who swept L'ville because UCONN also took Memphis out.

Louisville going in to the tourny has been on a roll. But their schedule stunk. The out of conference games that were against high major opponents, they lost (UNC and Kentucky). L'ville feasted on mid and low majors out of conference.

If the season were two weeks long starting March 1, then yes, L'ville might be a 1 seed. But as it stands, they're a 2 or 3. Hopefully not in Duke's bracket.

Oh, I see. They're so weak you hope they're not in Duke's bracket.
Look, we don't have a single solid road win, other than maybe Pitt. We lost to 3 crappy teams on the road. Just a couple weeks ago, we lost to Wake Forest. Let's not start getting high on our own BS. I'd rather overestimate opponents than underestimate them.

FerryFor50
03-16-2014, 12:51 AM
Oh, I see. They're so weak you hope they're not in Duke's bracket.
Look, we don't have a single solid road win, other than maybe Pitt. We lost to 3 crappy teams on the road. Just a couple weeks ago, we lost to Wake Forest. Let's not start getting high on our own BS. I'd rather overestimate opponents than underestimate them.

No I just don't like how they matchup. Would love to see Lville draw a team like Wisconsin or Mich St.

I wasn't getting "high on our own BS." I was just pointing out that crushing teams that aren't even mediocre isn't impressive.

LobstersPinchPinch
03-16-2014, 12:54 AM
I'm not sure why you have your panties in a twist, considering we don't seem to disagree.

I'm new here, so what do I know. But in what little time I've been on the boards, I've noticed that opinions are welcome, but strong opinions will be critiqued unless they're supported by facts. I thought a couple of your posts tonight were a little on the strong side, but that might just be me.

Des Esseintes
03-16-2014, 01:36 AM
I'm new here, so what do I know. But in what little time I've been on the boards, I've noticed that opinions are welcome, but strong opinions will be critiqued unless they're supported by facts. I thought a couple of your posts tonight were a little on the strong side, but that might just be me.

Word, grasshopper. And welcome to the board!

Bluedog
03-16-2014, 01:56 AM
Then why do they keep bringing that chubby guy on ESPN every hour to talk about his rankings of the 1 and 2 seeds moving teams up and down?

They sequentially rank the teams and slot them based on geographic preference in order. As the "best" two, that team gets their preferred region regardless of the ordering/location of the one seeds. So, if the top one seed is closest to NYC and the top two seed is as well, they'll both get assigned the East. They try to them even out the regions somewhat with the three and four seeds (total rank have to fall in allowable range, so a region could not get the"best" 1, 2, 3 AND 4 seeds all at once). The "top" one does NOT automatically get the worst two. Duke's geographic preference should be NYC. So, if we're the top 2, we'll get the East. If we're the last 1, we get whatever region is left.

sporthenry
03-16-2014, 02:15 AM
Louisville is good but they seem a bit overrated after this weekend. Yes, they've blown teams out but blowing out Rutgers is similar to blowing out Yale according to KenPom. Not to mention, Louisville's style of play seems to lead to more blowouts with their constant pressing. That play doesn't work against the best teams but it probably overrates their KenPom numbers.

And I'm just not sure what changed in the past week or so that now Louisville is all of a sudden the best team. Yes, they beat Rutgers by 50 but they did that a month ago. They beat Houston by 40 in early January. So these recent results aren't really surprising or indicative of some great trend and probably says more about Houston and Rutgers. So apart from that, what has Louisville done recently? 1 point win against Cincy, loss to Memphis, 12 point win against SMU and blow out of UCONN before tonight. Good results but doesn't scream best team in the country to me.

Seems like they just matched up remarkably well with all of the teams they played in the AAC tournament. And the best team they played had to beat Memphis and Cincy on back to back nights before this so fatigue might have played a factor compared to 'Ville who got to beat teams by 60 and 30 points.

Louisville is a good team. They might be slightly underseeded b/c their SOS stinks but beyond that, its more about match ups with Duke. This Duke team is seemingly fatigued every game so playing a team who presses isn't ideal. Duke doesn't turn it over but has had some question marks at the point. I don't think Louisville's press would turn Duke over a ton but would disrupt our offense. I think TT might be able to do a decent job on Smith but not the first team I'd want to play.

The other thing I hear with Louisville is that they are playing well at the right time. Well the right time is in 2-3 weeks. If we go back 3 weeks from now, Syracuseis undefeated. San Diego State has 2 losses. Cincinatti has 3 losses and St. Louis has 2 losses and is ranked top 10 nationally. Safe to say, lots of things can happen in 3 weeks.

tommy
03-16-2014, 02:54 AM
All this being said, I'm fine with a 2 seed, as long as it's in the East.

A lot of guys on the board have expressed similar sentiments, but I really disagree. Besides the historical records -- the likelihood, by the numbers, of advancing to the Final Four is far greater if you are a #1 seed than if you are a #2 -- in this year in particular, I think there's a pretty clear line that can be drawn between the top 12 teams in the country and the rest. I will be quite surprised if the top three seed lines are populated by any teams other than (in no order) Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Villanova, Duke, Syracuse, Michigan, Michigan State, Wichita State, Virginia, Louisville, and Wisconsin. Maybe Iowa State sneaks in there, but nobody else. So if you're a 2, your probable Sweet 16 opponent lies on this list -- a team like Michigan State, Louisville, Syracuse (I know, not for Duke) etc. That's really much more difficult than a Sweet 16 matchup with a possible #4 seed like San Diego State, UCLA, Cincinnati, or Creighton. Big difference.

Also, I know this may be a bit of Duke paranoia, but I really believe that if Duke and Michigan, or even Duke and Villanova, are viewed by the committee as essentially a dead heat for the last #1 seed, the other team will get it, just so the committee can avoid the "controversy" and the knee-jerk overreactions and criticism from the mouth breathers out there.

brevity
03-16-2014, 04:03 AM
I'm not sure why you have your panties in a twist, considering we don't seem to disagree.

It's an approach thing. Some of us prefer to give ourselves leeway for the possibility of being wrong. Others make bold opinions that they believe to be fact and expect everyone else to agree. Heck, some people hide behind a Facebook avatar of their children so that they can shout obscenities at complete strangers.

Duke '95, huh? I don't think I want to know.

And "panties in a twist"? Leave my predilections out of this!

mph
03-16-2014, 07:49 AM
Louisville is a #1 seed for sure.

Florida
Wichita State
Louisville
Arizona

I think those are pretty much set.

Louisville made the AAC tournament look like a pickup game against the little sisters of the poor.


No matter what happens tomorrow, we will likely be a 2 seed. No way we get a 1 at this point. Michigan won't either.


Reread the bold part and try again.

I agree that Duke is most likely a 2 seed, but you said that was Duke's fate "no matter what happens tomorrow." You may be right -- I'm on record with my belief that the Selection Committee is lazy and irresponsible -- but even I would say that you can't remove the small but distinct possibilities of rising to a 1 seed (if Duke wins and Michigan loses) or falling to a 3 seed (if Duke loses).


I'm not sure why you have your panties in a twist, considering we don't seem to disagree.

I don't see how anyone could read these posts and conclude that you and brevity agree.

cbarry
03-16-2014, 08:17 AM
Over the years, it seems to be that a majority of the time, the Selection Committee has decided it's seedings by Saturday night. The only time the Sunday games seem to matter to the Selection Committee is for teams on the bubble. I am often perplexed by the lower-than-expected seedings of teams who win their conference tourneys and higher-than-expected seedings of the losing teams. The only thing I can figure is they have already decided the seedings before Sunday. (Another argument for moving the ACC Finals to Saturday, but that's another discussion). Win-or-lose, whatever Duke is going to be seeded has been determined already. Honestly, we are probably a 2 seed (with a slight chance at a 3 seed)

slower
03-16-2014, 08:48 AM
Let's not start getting high on our own BS. I'd rather overestimate opponents than underestimate them.

It's a little late for that. A junkie is a junkie, no matter what the drug is.

Strangely, even as a "realist/Negative Nancy", I kind of have a good feeling about our game against UVA.

slower
03-16-2014, 08:52 AM
This Duke team is seemingly fatigued every game

What? Have you not been reading this board for the past few years? These are college kids - they should NEEEVER get tired. :p

(not my opinion, of course - but it seems to be the opinion of a shockingly large number of posters around here)

BlueDevilBrowns
03-16-2014, 09:09 AM
A lot of guys on the board have expressed similar sentiments, but I really disagree. Besides the historical records -- the likelihood, by the numbers, of advancing to the Final Four is far greater if you are a #1 seed than if you are a #2 -- in this year in particular, I think there's a pretty clear line that can be drawn between the top 12 teams in the country and the rest. I will be quite surprised if the top three seed lines are populated by any teams other than (in no order) Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Villanova, Duke, Syracuse, Michigan, Michigan State, Wichita State, Virginia, Louisville, and Wisconsin. Maybe Iowa State sneaks in there, but nobody else. So if you're a 2, your probable Sweet 16 opponent lies on this list -- a team like Michigan State, Louisville, Syracuse (I know, not for Duke) etc. That's really much more difficult than a Sweet 16 matchup with a possible #4 seed like San Diego State, UCLA, Cincinnati, or Creighton. Big difference.

Also, I know this may be a bit of Duke paranoia, but I really believe that if Duke and Michigan, or even Duke and Villanova, are viewed by the committee as essentially a dead heat for the last #1 seed, the other team will get it, just so the committee can avoid the "controversy" and the knee-jerk overreactions and criticism from the mouth breathers out there.

The historical record is significant, IMO. Since '86, Duke is 32-2 in the East when they are a top 3 seed. I like our odds in that region, especially with a Raleigh, MSG rout to the FF.

Unfortunately, I agree with your last point about the committee. If the average fan is aware of Duke "Hate", then surely the committee is as well. I maintain that played a role in our being given a 2 seed last year despite only losing 1 game with a fully healthy team and having the #1 RPI.

davekay1971
03-16-2014, 09:42 AM
Oh, I see. They're so weak you hope they're not in Duke's bracket.
Look, we don't have a single solid road win, other than maybe Pitt. We lost to 3 crappy teams on the road. Just a couple weeks ago, we lost to Wake Forest. Let's not start getting high on our own BS..

That's going to really bite our butts during our NCAA Tournament road games.

summerwind03
03-16-2014, 09:52 AM
Over the years, it seems to be that a majority of the time, the Selection Committee has decided it's seedings by Saturday night. The only time the Sunday games seem to matter to the Selection Committee is for teams on the bubble. I am often perplexed by the lower-than-expected seedings of teams who win their conference tourneys and higher-than-expected seedings of the losing teams. The only thing I can figure is they have already decided the seedings before Sunday. (Another argument for moving the ACC Finals to Saturday, but that's another discussion). Win-or-lose, whatever Duke is going to be seeded has been determined already. Honestly, we are probably a 2 seed (with a slight chance at a 3 seed)

Yes, I agree. The only time this might not be true is if it is easy to swap two teams, based on the outcome go a game.

BlueDevilBrowns
03-16-2014, 10:35 AM
Yes, I agree. The only time this might not be true is if it is easy to swap two teams, based on the outcome go a game.

This could be one of those situations. Today, you have 3 teams that can still possibly change their seeding: Duke, UVA, and Michigan.

Let's say the committee has their top 16 seeds plugged in already.

For illustrative purposes, it would look like this for now:

EAST
1.Michigan
2.UVA
3.Creighton
4.Iowa State

SOUTH
1.Florida
2.Duke
3.L'ville
4.Syracuse

MIDWEST
1.Wichita St
2.Kansas
3.Michigan St.
4.UCLA

WEST
1.AZ
2.Villanova
3.Wisconsin
4.Cincy

So, if UVA wins today and Michigan loses, you could flip-flop the seeding of both of them and still keep them in the same region. You could then flip-flop Duke and Wisconsin without having to do any further altering.

Another scenario would be if Duke wins and Michigan loses, you could move Duke to the #1 spot in the East with Michigan dropping to the #2 in the East. UVA would then take Duke's old spot as the #2 in the South.

Finally, if both Duke and Michigan win, you would simply flip-flop UVA and Duke, giving Duke the better region due to winning the ACCT.

So, it really wouldn't be that difficult to wait until 5:30 to see what plays out.

freshmanjs
03-16-2014, 10:40 AM
That's going to really bite our butts during our NCAA Tournament road games.

i know that's a sarcastic comment, but we've actually played quite a few (effective) ncaa tournament road games over the years, including butler in indiana and the 2011 game vs arizona out west.

davekay1971
03-16-2014, 10:51 AM
i know that's a sarcastic comment, but we've actually played quite a few (effective) ncaa tournament road games over the years, including butler in indiana and the 2011 game vs arizona out west.

Don't forget Baylor in Houston in 2010. IIRC, the 2010 team was also critiqued for their paucity of, and lack of success in, "true road games."

Duke actually plays most of their NCAAT games, even the ones played in the state of NC, in front of crowds that are predominantly cheering for our opponent. It's part the anti-Duke thing, part the rooting-for-the-underdog thing, and obviously some location quirks that have come up. Still, there seems to be a real difference between playing a conference foe on their home court, versus playing a team in a big "neutral" arena in front of a predominantly hostile crowd.

NYBri
03-16-2014, 11:28 AM
This could be one of those situations. Today, you have 3 teams that can still possibly change their seeding: Duke, UVA, and Michigan.

Let's say the committee has their top 16 seeds plugged in already.

For illustrative purposes, it would look like this for now:

EAST
1.Michigan
2.UVA
3.Creighton
4.Iowa State

SOUTH
1.Florida
2.Duke
3.L'ville
4.Syracuse

MIDWEST
1.Wichita St
2.Kansas
3.Michigan St.
4.UCLA

WEST
1.AZ
2.Villanova
3.Wisconsin
4.Cincy

So, if UVA wins today and Michigan loses, you could flip-flop the seeding of both of them and still keep them in the same region. You could then flip-flop Duke and Wisconsin without having to do any further altering.

Another scenario would be if Duke wins and Michigan loses, you could move Duke to the #1 spot in the East with Michigan dropping to the #2 in the East. UVA would then take Duke's old spot as the #2 in the South.

Finally, if both Duke and Michigan win, you would simply flip-flop UVA and Duke, giving Duke the better region due to winning the ACCT.

So, it really wouldn't be that difficult to wait until 5:30 to see what plays out.

These seeds and the changes that could result from today's action is very good. Working on this premise, I would prefer the Duke and Michigan victory outcome...but, hey, any road to the championship is going to be hard and riddled with land mines. Those mines can clear out with early round departures of the top 16, including us.

Let's win today and then on to first round. Game at a time.

Troublemaker
03-16-2014, 12:09 PM
This morning's Bracket Matrix (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/) suggests once again that Villanova is going to be a thorn in our side for MSG.

They're hanging tight at 5th in the overall rankings and are still receiving 1 seed votes.

To be assured of MSG (as a 1 or 2 seed), we need to root for Michigan State to beat Michigan today.

Regardless, need to win the ACC championship or all analysis is moot.

Being ACC Champs is its own reward.

sagegrouse
03-16-2014, 12:22 PM
This morning's Bracket Matrix (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/) suggests once again that Villanova is going to be a thorn in our side for MSG.

They're hanging tight at 5th in the overall rankings and are still receiving 1 seed votes.

To be assured of MSG (as a 1 or 2 seed), we need to root for Michigan State to beat Michigan today.

Regardless, need to win the ACC championship or all analysis is moot.

Being ACC Champs is its own reward.

Mich-Mich State is at 3:30 EDT. The Selection Show is at 6:00 PM. What the heck is the committee supposed to do with the results of that game? Or of Florida-Kentucky starting at 3PM?

blazindw
03-16-2014, 12:23 PM
Mich-Mich State is at 3:30 EDT. What the heck is the committee supposed to do with the results of that game?

They usually have 2 brackets prepared that take the results of the B1G title game into account. Whoever wins, the bracket that reflects that is usually what they go with.