PDA

View Full Version : MBB: 2019 Bracketology Thread



Troublemaker
01-02-2019, 08:50 AM
Hey, if they're going to start a 2020 Presidential Election thread on the Off-Topic board already, this doesn't seem so unreasonable.

Anyway, you guys will be pleased to know that Duke enters the New Year and ACC conference play as the overall #1 seed.

Here's Lunardi (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology), but more importantly, here's Bracket Matrix (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/), which uses the wisdom of crowds by averaging a bunch of bracketologists.

Winning the ACC regular season is its own prize of course, and a valuable one since we haven't done it in awhile. But this season, we also get to beat out UVA for the DC regional and a pretty sweet NCAAT path of Columbia, SC --> Washington, DC --> Minneapolis. (Any path that includes -apolis is pretty sweet).

JasonEvans
01-02-2019, 09:35 AM
.... the DC regional and a pretty sweet NCAAT path of Columbia, SC --> Washington, DC --> Minneapolis.

#16 seed - Coastal Carolina
#8 seed - Clemson
#4 seed - Maryland
#2 seed - Virginia Tech

-Jason "I know it won't happen, but I like messing around" Evans

duke2x
01-02-2019, 10:59 AM
But this season, we also get to beat out UVA for the DC regional and a pretty sweet NCAAT path of Columbia, SC --> Washington, DC --> Minneapolis. (Any path that includes -apolis is pretty sweet).

If the #1 overall seed gets to choose its path to the Final 4 again, Duke will probably choose Hartford over Columbia for the 1st 2 rounds. It has nothing to do with 2017. If Duke is not the #1 overall seed, then I see us in Columbia. I would agree with DC for the 2nd 2 rounds is the goal. MI, UVA, KS, TN, etc. would all be in the other brackets. The fans in DC in 2008 were the worst I've experienced in a NCAA venue, much worse than any venue in NC and SC. It's still the best option, however, over Louisville, Kansas in Kansas City, and San Jose.

I don't see Lunardi's revenge-on-Duke bracket happening. You might get 1 possible repeat in weekend 2.

Troublemaker
01-02-2019, 11:08 AM
If the #1 overall seed gets to choose its path to the Final 4 again, Duke will probably choose Hartford over Columbia for the 1st 2 rounds. It has nothing to do with 2017. If Duke is not the #1 overall seed, then I see us in Columbia.

Why would Duke prefer to travel farther? And if they do, they better get the word out to us fans. Because if Duke continues to play great this season, we fans are going to look at Columbia, DC, and Minneapolis for travel plans.

Neals384
01-02-2019, 11:14 AM
If the #1 overall seed gets to choose its path to the Final 4 again, Duke will probably choose Hartford over Columbia for the 1st 2 rounds. It has nothing to do with 2017. If Duke is not the #1 overall seed, then I see us in Columbia. I would agree with DC for the 2nd 2 rounds is the goal. MI, UVA, KS, TN, etc. would all be in the other brackets. The fans in DC in 2008 were the worst I've experienced in a NCAA venue, much worse than any venue in NC and SC. It's still the best option, however, over Louisville, Kansas in Kansas City, and Anaheim.

I don't see Lunardi's revenge-on-Duke bracket happening. You might get 1 possible repeat in weekend 2.

Fify

duke2x
01-02-2019, 11:31 AM
Why would Duke prefer to travel farther? And if they do, they better get the word out to us fans. Because if Duke continues to play great this season, we fans are going to look at Columbia, DC, and Minneapolis for travel plans.

The NYC/CT/NJ area is the only road game we voluntarily schedule, and the other school is likely to be a #4 seed that is not local. We only played 1 game in NYC this year, which I'm sure disappoints some of our Iron Dukes in that area, and Duke fans don't travel as well between Guilford and Fulton Counties. I have no problem with it, but I wouldn't mind Columbia. I bought tickets in the presale. :) DC, at $125/game face value, was too much of a risk.

HereBeforeCoachK
01-02-2019, 02:11 PM
Why would Duke prefer to travel farther? And if they do, they better get the word out to us fans. Because if Duke continues to play great this season, we fans are going to look at Columbia, DC, and Minneapolis for travel plans.

Cola SC is great.....unless NC is also there. Last time we did that in the SC area, didn't work out so well. (no need to play in front of thousands of cheats fans from Charlotte area)

DarkstarWahoo
01-02-2019, 02:16 PM
Apologies if this is the wrong thread for this, but with conference play starting, it's looking more and more likely that there may be almost zero at-large bids from teams outside the P5+Big East.

Using the most recent NET rankings, there appear to be three such teams that are safe: Houston (4), Gonzaga (6) and Nevada (11). Buffalo is at 28, but any MAC loss is going to be a catastrophe for them. They MIGHT be able to survive two league losses and a conference tournament loss, but that's going to leave them sweating, although they have wins over WVU and Syracuse to hang their hat on.

In all, there are 11 teams from non-power leagues in the top 50. Cincinnati (25) will have a shot. North Texas (38) will be helped by the new CUSA scheduling model. The Atlantic Sun has two teams in the top 50 - Lipscomb (39) and Liberty (47) - but let's be real here, no A-Sun team is getting an at-large bid. Utah State (34) probably has to beat Nevada twice to have a shot, and San Francisco (40) is in the same position with Gonzaga. UCF (41) probably needs to win the AAC regular season to have a shot.

Then there's the Pac-12, which really should be a one-bid league. Arizona State (45) is the only team in the top 50, although they've got that Kansas win, which is huge. Will the committee have the stones to leave out the second-place Pac-12 team even though its metrics will be awful?

duke2x
01-02-2019, 04:58 PM
Cola SC is great....unless NC is also there. Last time we did that in the SC area, didn't work out so well. (no need to play in front of thousands of cheats fans from Charlotte area)

The large contingent of SC fans was the problem. Contrary to every other pod placement except Pitt/WI in 2004, they basically got a home game as a #7 seed in 2017. It was apparent at the start of the SC/Marquette game that the atmosphere was much more like a game @Maryland than any of the NCAA pods with Duke/UNC in Charlotte or Greensboro. Add in the fact that teams that play 4 games/4 days will, more often than not, play poorly in the NCAA tournament the following week.

I will take Duke/UNC in Columbia with this team if that is what we get. I don't think it will matter this March.

duke2x
01-02-2019, 05:00 PM
Utah State (34) probably has to beat Nevada twice to have a shot, and San Francisco (40) is in the same position with Gonzaga. UCF (41) probably needs to win the AAC regular season to have a shot.

Then there's the Pac-12, which really should be a one-bid league. Arizona State (45) is the only team in the top 50, although they've got that Kansas win, which is huge. Will the committee have the stones to leave out the second-place Pac-12 team even though its metrics will be awful?

There is a "West Coast" bias to make about 20% of the field from the west every year. If you can justify a MWC, WCC, or P12 team, they are usually in. This year does look like more MWC and WCC teams that P12.

OldPhiKap
01-02-2019, 05:48 PM
The large contingent of SC fans was the problem. Contrary to every other pod placement except Pitt/WI in 2004, they basically got a home game as a #7 seed in 2017. It was apparent at the start of the SC/Marquette game that the atmosphere was much more like a game @Maryland than any of the NCAA pods with Duke/UNC in Charlotte or Greensboro. Add in the fact that teams that play 4 games/4 days will, more often than not, play poorly in the NCAA tournament the following week.

I will take Duke/UNC in Columbia with this team if that is what we get. I don't think it will matter this March.

My friends who attended said that it was as much the UNC fans as anything. We had two very large groups against us.

I hate the pod system because we end up with those bastards in our location. And I suspect they would say the same about our fans. Not good for either team, even if it is more convenient for home-state fans to attend (which i$ what it i$ all about).

HereBeforeCoachK
01-02-2019, 09:59 PM
My friends who attended said that it was as much the UNC fans as anything. We had two very large groups against us.

I hate the pod system because we end up with those bastards in our location. And I suspect they would say the same about our fans. Not good for either team, even if it is more convenient for home-state fans to attend (which i$ what it i$ all about).

Yes, it was the NC contingent as much, maybe more, than the SC fans. The NC fans poured into the area and scooped up the tickets after the first round from the losing fans. The Cheats simply have the demographic advantage over us in this situation. Duke should strongly suggest they not share a pod. No one else has to face their major hated rivals fan base in the NCAA, so why should Duke?

JasonEvans
01-03-2019, 09:26 AM
Yes, it was the NC contingent as much, maybe more, than the SC fans. The NC fans poured into the area and scooped up the tickets after the first round from the losing fans. The Cheats simply have the demographic advantage over us in this situation. Duke should strongly suggest they not share a pod. No one else has to face their major hated rivals fan base in the NCAA, so why should Duke?

I don't have time to research it right now, but I would not be surprised to find out that Kentucky and Louisville have shared a pod in the past. It would certainly seem possible that Big Ten teams like Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, or Indiana have shared pods. While none of those rivalries rise to the level of Duke-Carolina, their fans certainly root against the rival.

Take care of business on the floor, don't worry about what is in the stands. I never really bought the excuse that Duke lost to an inferior SC team because it was "like a home game" for them. We lost cause they played out of their minds and we played quite poorly.

ChillinDuke
01-03-2019, 10:04 AM
I don't have time to research it right now, but I would not be surprised to find out that Kentucky and Louisville have shared a pod in the past. It would certainly seem possible that Big Ten teams like Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, or Indiana have shared pods. While none of those rivalries rise to the level of Duke-Carolina, their fans certainly root against the rival.

Take care of business on the floor, don't worry about what is in the stands. I never really bought the excuse that Duke lost to an inferior SC team because it was "like a home game" for them. We lost cause they played out of their minds and we played quite poorly.

While I generally agree with your point (in bold), I think there is a not insignificant advantage from having a favorable crowd. It might not have swung that game, but I can't imagine it helped Duke.

And I'll remind everyone, although most of you probably remember, that we were not supposed to play in SC. Our pod got moved when the NCAA essentially penalized North Carolina as a state for having that HB2 law and disallowed NCAA-sanctioned events in state. We should have been in Charlotte (I think? Or was it Greensboro?).

- Chillin

scottdude8
01-03-2019, 10:19 AM
Winning the ACC regular season is its own prize of course, and a valuable one since we haven't done it in awhile. But this season, we also get to beat out UVA for the DC regional and a pretty sweet NCAAT path of Columbia, SC --> Washington, DC --> Minneapolis. (Any path that includes -apolis is pretty sweet).

I have some bad memories of regionals in South Carolina... but then again, with Frank Martin's squad in an extremely down year, it's unlikely we run into the crazy confluence of events that led to us playing them essentially at home when we were upset. Hopefully with UNCs non-conference struggles as well we can avoid getting stuck in the same locale as those Tar Hole fans too.

scottdude8
01-03-2019, 10:21 AM
I don't have time to research it right now, but I would not be surprised to find out that Kentucky and Louisville have shared a pod in the past. It would certainly seem possible that Big Ten teams like Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, or Indiana have shared pods. While none of those rivalries rise to the level of Duke-Carolina, their fans certainly root against the rival.

Take care of business on the floor, don't worry about what is in the stands. I never really bought the excuse that Duke lost to an inferior SC team because it was "like a home game" for them. We lost cause they played out of their minds and we played quite poorly.

Michigan and MSU have definitely shared a pod in the recent past... I was there in 2013 (on our way to the Final Four!) in suburban Detroit the last time it happened. Last year MSU and Purdue shared a pod in Detroit (not as much of a rivalry, but still two B1G teams)... and I got lucky enough to be there in person to watch the Sparties lose :)

HereBeforeCoachK
01-03-2019, 10:32 AM
Take care of business on the floor, don't worry about what is in the stands. I never really bought the excuse that Duke lost to an inferior SC team because it was "like a home game" for them. We lost cause they played out of their minds and we played quite poorly.

It's true that SC played out of their minds, and that Duke played poorly (in both games frankly).
I think another factor is Duke "shot their wad" so to speak by winning 4 games in the ACCT. I think mental and physical fatigue was a factor, and why I don't really like the ACCT any more. (With more depth this season, not so much a factor.)

But let's address the SC team that played lights out. They felt bullet proof in that arena with that crowd. I also think the crowd "knocked Duke back" a bit as K likes to say. Sure, if you TCB on the court, the crowd may not matter. But taking care of business is not a totally separate issue from the crowd. TCB is easier with the home advantage, tougher with a hostile crowd (unless you are cold blooded like Laettner). That Duke team didn't have cold blooded killers like Laettner or Hurley or Brian Davis.

Again, not an excuse....because there are none....but yes, a factor. No other team in the field had a road game that hostile in the NCAAT, and certainly not a higher seed. That rarely happens.

Troublemaker
01-03-2019, 10:45 AM
I have some bad memories of regionals in South Carolina... but then again, with Frank Martin's squad in an extremely down year, it's unlikely we run into the crazy confluence of events that led to us playing them essentially at home when we were upset. Hopefully with UNCs non-conference struggles as well we can avoid getting stuck in the same locale as those Tar Heel fans too.

South Carolina wouldn't be allowed to play in the Columbia pod anyway as that arena is their home arena and they're the host school for the pod. In 2017, Furman was the host school for Greenville and therefore South Carolina was allowed to play there.

As for the game in 2017, I agree that the home crowd energized South Carolina and was a factor in the loss.

UrinalCake
01-03-2019, 10:51 AM
That SC team made it all the way to the final four and was within a possession in the final minute of making it to the Final. It’s not like in previous years where a team goes crazy and upsets us and then gets destroyed in their next game. SC was legit, or at least they played like it for that tournament.

Now, maybe you can say that beating us gave them confidence and they simply rode the momentum into a couple more wins. Who knows. It was a tough matchup and it happens. Last year we caught some breaks - Two really bad teams in the opening weekend, then Syracuse upset MSU so we got to face a double digit seed in the S16, then a beatable Kansas team.

Also I don’t believe that winning the ACCT was a bad thing, but that’s just me. They had 4 or 5 days to recover before their opening round game.

ndkjr70
01-03-2019, 11:06 AM
Will they keep Nevada out west even though they’re the weakest #2? Seems like, early on, that’s the best draw possible for a 1 seed. I’ve watched 3 of their games so far and they strike me as a less offensively-talented TTU (and that’s saying something).

They’re sick defensively but nowhere near as talented as the other 2s will be.

ChillinDuke
01-03-2019, 11:50 AM
Will they keep Nevada out west even though they’re the weakest #2? Seems like, early on, that’s the best draw possible for a 1 seed. I’ve watched 3 of their games so far and they strike me as a less offensively-talented TTU (and that’s saying something).

They’re sick defensively but nowhere near as talented as the other 2s will be.

Interesting perspective given KP thinks they are considerably better than TTU on offense and considerably worse than TTU on defense. Net, net, Nevada is KP #9 while TTU is KP #10.

- Chillin

ETA - Nvm. Nevada is #6 now and TTU still #10. I didn't refresh KP this morning, so that data is from yesterday.

BigWayne
01-03-2019, 01:30 PM
Will they keep Nevada out west even though they’re the weakest #2? Seems like, early on, that’s the best draw possible for a 1 seed. I’ve watched 3 of their games so far and they strike me as a less offensively-talented TTU (and that’s saying something).

They’re sick defensively but nowhere near as talented as the other 2s will be.

Even if they are a #3 or #4, Nevada will probably be in San Jose or Salt Lake. The concept of sending a team away is not really a thing. It only seems that way if you are in the concentrated areas. Teams get sent away because higher ranked teams take the local spots. There are no high ranked teams from the west to use up the spots so Gonzaga and Nevada will stay west.

scottdude8
01-03-2019, 02:03 PM
Even if they are a #3 or #4, Nevada will probably be in San Jose or Salt Lake. The concept of sending a team away is not really a thing. It only seems that way if you are in the concentrated areas. Teams get sent away because higher ranked teams take the local spots. There are no high ranked teams from the west to use up the spots so Gonzaga and Nevada will stay west.

That's my understanding as well. Take what happened in Detroit last year: despite both in-state teams being No. 3 seeds, No. 2 seeded Purdue gets preference over either in terms of playing location, and Detroit was the nearest site. So Purdue got one spot, and MSU (which was somehow seeded over Michigan despite us beating them twice, on the road and at a neutral site... but I digress) got the other, while Michigan was sent away.

So if things shake out the way they appear and there really are no other top seeded teams out West, it'd be extremely unlikely for Nevada to not get some sort of location preference.

Troublemaker
01-22-2019, 10:21 AM
After Duke's win against UVA, it looks like we're still currently one of the top 2 overall seeds, according to the wisdom of crowds of Bracket Matrix: http://www.bracketmatrix.com/

Also, the difference in "average seed" between overall #1 UVA and overall #2 Duke -- 1.03 to 1.05 -- is probably within the margin of error. If Selection Sunday were today, we might very well be the overall #1 seed still.

uh_no
01-22-2019, 10:30 AM
If Selection Sunday were today, we might very well be the overall #1 seed still.

I'd put a lot of confidence on that. We have the best slate of wins in the country, a head-to-head win over one of the other strong contenders for a 1, one of our losses came with injuries, and we've largely demonstrated we're better without missing both cam and tre. If we could guarantee tre was back, we'd be #1 hands down.

Rich
01-22-2019, 10:34 AM
If the #1 overall seed gets to choose its path to the Final 4 again, Duke will probably choose Hartford over Columbia for the 1st 2 rounds. It has nothing to do with 2017. If Duke is not the #1 overall seed, then I see us in Columbia. I would agree with DC for the 2nd 2 rounds is the goal. MI, UVA, KS, TN, etc. would all be in the other brackets. The fans in DC in 2008 were the worst I've experienced in a NCAA venue, much worse than any venue in NC and SC. It's still the best option, however, over Louisville, Kansas in Kansas City, and San Jose.

I don't see Lunardi's revenge-on-Duke bracket happening. You might get 1 possible repeat in weekend 2.

Sigh, year after year. I just don't see how this is considered fair when everyone else has to play away games.

Nugget
01-22-2019, 04:38 PM
Sigh, year after year. I just don't see how this is considered fair when everyone else has to play away games.

Worth noting that both Lunardi's and Palm's most recent brackets have Kansas (as a #2 seed) being moved out of the Midwest region and away from its favored Kansas City regional venue to the South region in Louisville. So, perhaps suggestive of an indication that the Committee would not want to reward KC with essentially home games in the regionals unless it lands a #1 seed.

And, both have Kentucky as a #2 seed but away from the South region (where playing in Louisville would also be a distinct advantage), though my guess is that placement from those two is more a result of following other bracket rules than deliberately moving #2 UK away from Louisville.

Lunardi also has Duke (albeit as #1 seed in the East) continuing to get a combination revenge tour plus my Sweet 16 of horrors, with this path

1st round: #16 Prairie View A&M or Sam Houston St.
2nd round: #8 TCU or #9 Washington
Sweet 16: #4 Maryland or #5 LSU
Elite 8: #2 Kentucky or #3 Texas Tech

HereBeforeCoachK
01-22-2019, 05:49 PM
Sigh, year after year. I just don't see how this is considered fair when everyone else has to play away games.

It is getting old, and nauseating....

Rich
01-22-2019, 06:18 PM
Worth noting that both Lunardi's and Palm's most recent brackets have Kansas (as a #2 seed) being moved out of the Midwest region and away from its favored Kansas City regional venue to the South region in Louisville. So, perhaps suggestive of an indication that the Committee would not want to reward KC with essentially home games in the regionals unless it lands a #1 seed.

And, both have Kentucky as a #2 seed but away from the South region (where playing in Louisville would also be a distinct advantage), though my guess is that placement from those two is more a result of following other bracket rules than deliberately moving #2 UK away from Louisville.

Lunardi also has Duke (albeit as #1 seed in the East) continuing to get a combination revenge tour plus my Sweet 16 of horrors, with this path

1st round: #16 Prairie View A&M or Sam Houston St.
2nd round: #8 TCU or #9 Washington
Sweet 16: #4 Maryland or #5 LSU
Elite 8: #2 Kentucky or #3 Texas Tech

I get that Lunardi and Palm are pretty good at picking who gets in, who’s on the bubble, and who’s out, but the mock brackets have been completely unreliable in years past as far as I can recall. The former is based on advanced metrics while the latter is complete guessing, as far as I’m concerned.

uh_no
01-22-2019, 06:26 PM
I get that Lunardi and Palm are pretty good at picking who gets in, who’s on the bubble, and who’s out, but the mock brackets have been completely unreliable in years past as far as I can recall. The former is based on advanced metrics while the latter is complete guessing, as far as I’m concerned.

Not really. there are what, 40 at large bids? probably 32-33 of them are pretty solid....so he's really only having to pick 8 teams....and of those 8, he is probably 50/50. So saying he got 36/40 LOOKS good, but most of those are easy. It's the same logic with MLB umps. They get 98% of calls right, or whatever....but 96% of calls are "he was out by 15 feet" or "oh he caught the ball"...so they're really only 50/50 on close calls.

I'm guessing most of us could do about as good on who gets in or not, given that the bubble is pretty much whims of the committee anyway...whatever they happen to think is particularly important given the phase of the moon or day of the week.

I don't doubt most of us wouldn't be as accurate as MLB umps, but bracketology doesn't involve the physical or real-time aspects that umping do.

Nugget
01-22-2019, 06:51 PM
Not really. there are what, 40 at large bids? probably 32-33 of them are pretty solid...so he's really only having to pick 8 teams...and of those 8, he is probably 50/50.

Indeed, it appears that Lunardi and Palm aren't much more "accurate" at picking brackets than any reasonably well-informed college hoops follower would be - they just got to the job first (or, second, after Bill Brill) and were very effective at marketing themselves.


According to the Bracket Matrix, out of the 127 bracket makers who have been doing it for aggregation on their site for at least 3 of the past 5 years, Lunardi (68th) and Palm (82nd) are both below the 50th percentile in the accuracy rankings. http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html

Frankly, I just used them as good exemplars of the conventional wisdom on how these things might go to highlight that others are attuned to Rich's point about the advantage KU would get from being in the regional that feeds into Kansas City, especially if it's not a 1 seed.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
01-23-2019, 05:58 AM
Not really. there are what, 40 at large bids? probably 32-33 of them are pretty solid...so he's really only having to pick 8 teams...and of those 8, he is probably 50/50. So saying he got 36/40 LOOKS good, but most of those are easy. It's the same logic with MLB umps. They get 98% of calls right, or whatever...but 96% of calls are "he was out by 15 feet" or "oh he caught the ball"...so they're really only 50/50 on close calls.

I'm guessing most of us could do about as good on who gets in or not, given that the bubble is pretty much whims of the committee anyway...whatever they happen to think is particularly important given the phase of the moon or day of the week.

I don't doubt most of us wouldn't be as accurate as MLB umps, but bracketology doesn't involve the physical or real-time aspects that umping do.

Thanks for saving my breath.

Given the same information 30 minutes before the brackets are released, I am confident most upright citizens of this board could do comparable work.

Nugget
02-05-2019, 07:17 PM
With today's 1st release of the ESPN "bubble watch," it seemed like a good time to consider whether there are any prospects for the traditional one bid leagues to maybe get a second team in.

Obviously, Buffalo is well-positioned even if doesn't win the MAC, currently at 19-3, 7-2 and in the 6-7 seed range even with its two recent losses (#23 Net ranking, #21 Ken Pom, #24 Massey composite, #7 seed Bracket Matrix). Looking at the rest of Buffalo's schedule, they would be expected to finish 8-1 (losing at Toledo), maybe 7-2 if they lose to Bowling Green again. That gets them to 27-4, 15-3 or 26-5, 14-4. With the work they did non-con. and the fact that this kind of finish would likely keep them in the AP rankings the rest of the way, they would probably be safe for an at-large.

Next is Wofford, currently 19-4, 11-0 in the So. Con, and projected off the various metrics to be an at-large pick as of today (#27 Net, #31 Ken Pom, #37 Massey, #11 seed Bracket Matrix). If the Terriers can take care of business -- which, given the quality of their league this year, I would consider finishing 6-1, with a loss at ETSU, but beating UNCG and winning at Furman -- they would end up 25-5, 17-1 (with the four non-con losses being to N. Carolina, @ Kansas, @ Miss. St. and @ Oklahoma) and I think the quality of their finishing stretch with solid games in the So. Con would keep their Net ranking and other metrics up high enough to warrant an at-large. UNCG (20-3, 9-1), ETSU, Furman are all quality teams, but it seems clear none of them will have metrics that could support at-larges. So, we really want Wofford to finish the regular season strong and then drop one to, say, UNCG in the So. Con finals.

Lipscomb (currently 18-4, 9-0 in the Atlantic Sun) has computer numbers right around where in the RPI days mid-majors would start to be passed over for lower-rated majors (#32 Net, #36 Ken Pom, #42 Massey). Frankly, I'm a bit surprised their computer numbers have held up given how weak the A. Sun is -- Liberty's strong performance has really given Lipscomb a boost. If Lipscomb could win out to finish 25-4, 16-0, they might well have a shot, as it doesn't seem like their metrics would fall much as long as they keep winning. The real tester would be if they drop 1 conference game -- I suspect at 24-5, 15-1, they'd be out. But, it would be interesting to see where their numbers end up in that situation.

A few teams I would argue ought to also be getting consideration even though their metrics fall in a range where historically they would have no shot at an at-large are Hofstra, Belmont and Murray St.
Hofstra is 19-4, 9-1 in the CAA (#56 Net, #70 Ken Pom, #66 Massey), and Murray St. and Belmont are both 17-4, 8-2 in the OVC, with similar metrics (Belmont is #61 Net, #67 Ken Pom, #66 Massey, and Murray St. is #68 Net, #61 Ken Pom and #71 Massey). Hofstra could reasonably be expected to finish 7-1 (losing at Charleston) to come in at 26-5, 16-2, and both Belmont and Murray St. would need to go undefeated the rest of the way (to finish 25-4, 16-2 each) to even have a shot, given that they will both be playing the dreck of the OVC going forward (though Belmont has 6 of its last 8 on the road). My bet is that none of Hofstra, Belmont or Murray St. will be able to avoid stumbles down the stretch, so (along with their computer numbers) that will make it easy to take them out of consideration for at-larges. But, if Murray St can win out and then lose to Belmont in the OVC finals to finish 27-5, maybe that plus Ja Morant could entice the Committee? I know, wishful thinking.

We will also have to watch what happens to the mid-major/low-power conference leagues that traditionally have put multiple teams in, but this year look more like one bid leagues -- namely, the A-10, Mountain West and WCC. The second potential teams from these leagues right now have computer numbers that have tended to result in being left out.

Utah St. (Net #37) will need to beat Nevada at home and probably have to win out (including winning at Fresno St. tonight) to be a viable contender.

San Francisco (Net #48) really hurt itself by losing to St. Mary's on top of failing to knock off Gonzaga at home.

And neither VCU (Net #49) nor Davidson (Net #63) appear to have chance to rack up the kinds of wins that would help their resumes -- the only Top 100 Net team they play going forward is that each has a game with Dayton; maybe if VCU could win out, including at Dayton, and drop just one other road game, they could sneak in an at-large by finishing 24-7, 15-3.

freshmanjs
03-13-2019, 02:37 PM
What do the red and blue font mean in the bracketmatrix seed grid?

Troublemaker
03-13-2019, 02:50 PM
What do the red and blue font mean in the bracketmatrix seed grid?

For an individual team, it looks like blue represents the highest seed predicted for a team and red represents the lowest. It's more useful for seeds in the middle where outliers are more common. At the top, UVA is going to be 1s across the board.

Nugget
03-13-2019, 02:53 PM
What do the red and blue font mean in the bracketmatrix seed grid?

My guess would be that red means the team was moved down from a given bracketer's prior bracket and blue means it was moved up. Although, that doesn't explain why substantially all the 1 seeds in the current view of the matrix shown in blue. It does, however, on first glance jibe with the numbers for all the seeds below that and the 1s are just a formatting error?

Nugget
03-13-2019, 02:55 PM
For an individual team, it looks like blue represents the highest seed predicted for a team and red represents the lowest. It's more useful for seeds in the middle where outliers are more common. At the top, UVA is going to be 1s across the board.

Yes, that does seem to be a more sensible explanation than mine.

WVDUKEFAN
03-13-2019, 02:57 PM
Other than correctly determining who the No. 1 seeds will be, how close do Lunardi and the others (ESPN, CBS) come with determining who is going to be in a particular bracket. I think the committee always puts out a bracket and then says: "BAZINGA!!"