2022-23 NET/Bracketology Discussion

[arnie]

I disagree. Players want to win every time they step on the court. That's why they get to this level in the first place.

And I disagree with this take. The NIT is a downer for many teams, players aren’t that motivated.

[CDu]

I think Ace Baldwin’s injury had almost everything to do with this.

St. Mary's was ahead 38-34 with about 15 minutes to go (so on pace for a 7-8 point win) when Baldwin got hurt. They were only expected to win by 5-6.

Baldwin going out certainly didn't help. But it's not the reason that St Mary's outperformed their expectation. It just contributes to how much St Mary's outperformed their expectation.

[CDu]

And I disagree with this take. The NIT is a downer for many teams, players aren’t that motivated.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think it's a downer for the fans. But players want to win, regardless of the environment.

[OldPhiKap]

There is a difference between a competitor’s desire to win, and a team’s refusal to lose. It’s a continuum, not a binary state of being.

[AGDukesky]

There is a difference between a competitor’s desire to win, and a team’s refusal to lose. It’s a continuum, not a binary state of being.

Yeah, well you know that’s just, like, your opinion, man

[OldPhiKap]

Yeah, well you know that’s just, like, your opinion, man

I can get you a toe, Dude.

[kidA]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think it's a downer for the fans. But players want to win, regardless of the environment.

It’s a downer for the team as well. As many of you have heard, I continue to play competitive sports. Ultimate (frisbee). Our weekend tournaments work so that we play Saturday for seeding in an elimination tournament on Sunday. Yes, it sucks when you are in the chumpionship bracket on Sunday, meaning the consolation bracket /lower half of teams playing to finish 9 through 16. But whatever, when you’re in those games you play to win them, because you’re a competitor. The NIT is like our consolation bracket. You just have to show up and play. Otherwise you’re a loser, regardless of where you finish

[CDu]

It’s a downer for the team as well. As many of you have heard, I continue to play competitive sports. Ultimate (frisbee). Our weekend tournaments work so that we play Saturday for seeding in an elimination tournament on Sunday. Yes, it sucks when you are in the chumpionship bracket on Sunday, meaning the consolation brat/lower half of teams playing for nine through 16. But whatever, when you’re in those games you play to win them, because you’re a competitor. The NIT is like our consolation bracket. You just have to show up and play. Otherwise you’re a loser, regardless of where you finish

Oh sure, it's a downer for players too. But I think it's a much bigger downer (and much bigger deflator of the "care meter") for fans. Like you said, competitors compete. Even if they're disappointed in not being in the bigger tournament.

These guys don't get to where they are by not wanting to compete at all times. Fans' investment declines, but the players are still competing out there.

[OldPhiKap]

It’s a downer for the team as well. As many of you have heard, I continue to play competitive sports. Ultimate (frisbee). Our weekend tournaments work so that we play Saturday for seeding in an elimination tournament on Sunday. Yes, it sucks when you are in the chumpionship bracket on Sunday, meaning the consolation bracket /lower half of teams playing to finish 9 through 16. But whatever, when you’re in those games you play to win them, because you’re a competitor. The NIT is like our consolation bracket. You just have to show up and play. Otherwise you’re a loser, regardless of where you finish

kidA was also quite the tennis player back in the day as well, IIRC.

Oh sure, it's a downer for players too. But I think it's a much bigger downer (and much bigger deflator of the "care meter") for fans. Like you said, competitors compete. Even if they're disappointed in not being in the bigger tournament.

These guys don't get to where they are by not wanting to compete at all times. Fans' investment declines, but the players are still competing out there.

Part of it, too, is what are they competing for. If you are a senior, or a player thinking of going pro, or a player thinking of hitting the portal, are you using the NIT to compete for a team championship of the runner-up bracket? Or are you competing to show off your individual skills and pad your stats through some hero ball in order to improve your individual competition goals?

[CDu]

Part of it, too, is what are they competing for. If you are a senior, or a player thinking of going pro, or a player thinking of hitting the portal, are you using the NIT to compete for a team championship of the runner-up bracket? Or are you competing to show off your individual skills and pad your stats through some hero ball in order to improve your individual competition goals?

I suspect the former is much more common. Because most seniors don't have a pro future anyway, and those that do aren't going to change their future by balling out individually in a single game. So they are competing for their last opportunity for any sort of team glory, and to extend their careers as long as possible. More games also means more chances to show their worth.

[OldPhiKap]

I suspect the former is much more common. Because most seniors don't have a pro future anyway, and those that do aren't going to change their future by balling out individually in a single game. So they are competing for their last opportunity for any sort of team glory, and to extend their careers as long as possible. More games also means more chances to show their worth.

And this is why I find the lack of information about UNC senior Leaky Black’s desire vis-a-vis the NIT so puzzling/frustrating.

[Southgate0809]

And yet they are currently winning by more than they were expected to win…

If you are referring to the spread, that's based on the public's perception of who is going to win, not the rankings or metrics. They did better than the public expected them to do because the public overestimated a VCU team's abilities just because they went to the final four one year.

[CDu]

If you are referring to the spread, that's based on the public's perception of who is going to win, not the rankings or metrics. They did better than the public expected them to do because the public overestimated a VCU team's abilities just because they went to the final four one year.

I was not referring to the spread. I was referring to the metrics. Specifically Torvik's metrics. I don't have access to KenPom, but those two have very similar conclusions so I suspect the same is true with KenPom.

[Southgate0809]

I was not referring to the spread. I was referring to the metrics. Specifically Torvik's metrics. I don't have access to KenPom, but those two have very similar conclusions so I suspect the same is true with KenPom.

So the conclusion is that St. Mary's is even better than the metrics suggest? Maybe they should have had Purdue's #1 seed.

[CDu]

So the conclusion is that St. Mary's is even better than the metrics suggest? Maybe they should have had Purdue's #1 seed.

No, but the conclusion is that your assessment of them being terrible is probably wrong.

[Nugget]

CBS's Jerry Palm has a piece up that raises a point to keep in mind for next year, especially when filling out brackets: while there may not be true "parity" in college basketball, the first weekend of the tournament is seeing an increase in the number of "by seed" upsets, with a record 13 this year, and the last three years having the three highest numbers of first weekend upsets since 1980:

"This year's NCAA Tournament set a new record for the number of wins by lower seeded teams in the first two rounds with 13. The previous record was 12 in 2021. There were also 11 upsets in the first two rounds of the 2022 tournament, so if you are detecting a trend, you are correct. Those are the three highest total number of upsets through two rounds in the 43 tournaments since seeding began in 1980. There have been only 12 tournaments with double-digit upsets in the first two rounds. Seven of those have come in the last nine tournaments."

https://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...teams-winning/


I'm guessing this is largely a function of the combination of one and done (and relatively "down" high school classes the last few years) weakening the "top" teams a bit and the extra covid year strengthening the lower seeded teams -- even though the phenomenon of the free transfers and its effect of enabling the best mid-major players to transfer up would be expected to hurt the prospects of the lower seeded teams.

[Bluedog]

even though the phenomenon of the free transfers and its effect of enabling the best mid-major players to transfer up would be expected to hurt the prospects of the lower seeded teams.

The inverse is also likely true though that the non-starters of top teams can transfer "down" where they'll play more. I certainly don't know which is more common though.

But very interesting stats/article. Thank you for pointing it out.

[gep]

The inverse is also likely true though that the non-starters of top teams can transfer "down" where they'll play more. I certainly don't know which is more common though.

But very interesting stats/article. Thank you for pointing it out.

At least for Duke, isn't this true for the recent transfers-out? They went "down" to get more playing time. But they were good enough to be recruited by Duke, so moving "down" made them more useable.