2022-23 NET/Bracketology Discussion

[arnie]

You don't say!
Wow, that must be really disappointing for the fine folks in chapel hill.
I'm sure they're having some feelings about missing out on March Madness. I hope they're ok over there.

I'm not sure, the UNCheat people I know think the 2023 NCAA b-ball tournament is overrated. They're all into women's field hockey now and football recruiting.

[CDu]

Ironically, most people seem to ignore NIT results as they don't pay attention, so only use NCAA datapoints as input to "conference strength." But yeah, sheesh Clemson...

I think what last night's results illustrate is that the conference has some wildly inconsistent teams. Clemson lost 4 games against teams outside the top-200 this season: one in November, one in December, one in February, and one in March. They lost a 5th game against a team outside the top-150 in January. So did Clemson get better this year? Doesn't look like it. It looks like they just oscillated between excellent (like when they throttled State three times) and awful (5 Q3/Q4 losses spread throughout the season).

Pitt is a somewhat similar story: they had two clunkers in November, then a clunker in January, a clunker in February, and a clunker in March. They had an awesome win over Northwestern in December, but otherwise have hovered in the mediocre range in terms of performance. It's hard to say they have gotten notably better over the course of the season.

[wilson]

I think what last night's results illustrate is that the conference has some wildly inconsistent teams. Clemson lost 4 games against teams outside the top-200 this season: one in November, one in December, one in February, and one in March. They lost a 5th game against a team outside the top-150 in January. So did Clemson get better this year? Doesn't look like it. It looks like they just oscillated between excellent (like when they throttled State three times) and awful (5 Q3/Q4 losses spread throughout the season).

Pitt is a somewhat similar story: they had two clunkers in November, then a clunker in January, a clunker in February, and a clunker in March. They had an awesome win over Northwestern in December, but otherwise have hovered in the mediocre range in terms of performance. It's hard to say they have gotten notably better over the course of the season.

Inconsistency, yes, and let's all be honest: The significant majority of people, players included, just don't much care about the NIT. Littlejohn was at like 30% capacity last night. And let's also not forget that Morehead State has a little bit of recent hoops tradition themselves...it's not at all hard to imagine a mid-major team being far more motivated for that game than a disappointed power conference team whose home court advantage has been denuded by the swaths of empty purple seats.
I have rarely placed much stock in those kinds of results insofar as they supposedly reveal anything about NCAAT snubs, overall conference strength, etc.

[CDu]

Inconsistency, yes, and let's all be honest: The significant majority of people, players included, just don't much care about the NIT. I have rarely placed much stock in those results insofar as they supposedly reveal anything about NCAAT snubs, overall conference strength, etc.

I wouldn't consider them any less meaningful a data point for assessing overall conference strength than an NCAA tournament game. Especially for a team like Clemson, who should have been itching to prove the committee wrong.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I wouldn't consider them any less meaningful a data point for assessing overall conference strength than an NCAA tournament game. Especially for a team like Clemson, who should have been itching to prove the committee wrong.

How about UVA losing to Furman? Is that a meaningful data point?

Mostly joking.

I find that as a community (as a society?) we all tend to overreact to March Ws and Ls.

[CDu]

How about UVA losing to Furman? Is that a meaningful data point?

Mostly joking.

I find that as a community (as a society?) we all tend to overreact to March Ws and Ls.

Yep, just as meaningful a data point as Clemson losing to Morehead State and Pitt eeking out a win over Miss St.

Not a "be all end all", just like the conference having surprisingly good fortune in close games last NCAAT wasn't the be all end all proof that the conference was underrated last year.

[wavedukefan70s]

Virginia gone.my bracket may be garbage
After today. 250 down the drain.smh

[Luke102452]

How is the Mountain West rated the 4th best conference in the country? No tournament wins since 2018 and already 0-2 this year, after going 0-4 in last year’s tournament.

[wilson]

On top of it all, today is the 5th anniversary of the UMBC game.
Maybe the Hoos should just lobby to never play on March 16.

[CameronBornAndBred]

On top of it all, today is the 5th anniversary of the UMBC game.
Maybe the Hoos should just lobby to never play on March 16.

Beware the After Ides of March

[uh_no]

I think what last night's results illustrate is that the conference has some wildly inconsistent teams. Clemson lost 4 games against teams outside the top-200 this season: one in November, one in December, one in February, and one in March. They lost a 5th game against a team outside the top-150 in January. So did Clemson get better this year? Doesn't look like it. It looks like they just oscillated between excellent (like when they throttled State three times) and awful (5 Q3/Q4 losses spread throughout the season).

Pitt is a somewhat similar story: they had two clunkers in November, then a clunker in January, a clunker in February, and a clunker in March. They had an awesome win over Northwestern in December, but otherwise have hovered in the mediocre range in terms of performance. It's hard to say they have gotten notably better over the course of the season.

Or...the conference as a whole just wasn't that good.

Hopefully we can buck that trend...give it the proverbial...punch in the "mouth"

(I won't say I didn't make this post solely to have make that pun)

[CDu]

Or...the conference as a whole just wasn't that good.

Oh, I completely agree. I was just - perhaps inarticulately - making the counterpoint to those saying "but Clemson got so much better over the season and the models aren't capturing that, so the ACC is underrated." Most likely, the real answer is that Clemson was highly inconsistent all season, and didn't get discernibly better once conference play started. But they got an easy ACC schedule in a weak year for the ACC overall, and were able to generate a decent ACC record despite being a mediocre team.

Hopefully we can buck that trend...

Total agreement. As long as Duke does well, the mediocrity of the conference doesn't bother me too much.

[Southgate0809]

This is the first time I'm watching st. Mary's. They are slow and not very talented. Their ranking is bogus.

[duke2x]

I wouldn't consider them any less meaningful a data point for assessing overall conference strength than an NCAA tournament game. Especially for a team like Clemson, who should have been itching to prove the committee wrong.

It's common for the First 4 Out to check out mentally for the NIT. The NIT champion is often a team more like VT or Wake that is resigned to the fact the NCAA isn't happening but is motivated to play. I know VT is a bad example with the loss, but UC was in a similar boat.

[CDu]

This is the first time I'm watching st. Mary's. They are slow and not very talented. Their ranking is bogus.

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

[arnie]

It's common for the First 4 Out to check out mentally for the NIT. The NIT champion is often a team more like VT or Wake that is resigned to the fact the NCAA isn't happening but is motivated to play. I know VT is a bad example with the loss, but UC was in a similar boat.

Yeah, I think NCAA tourney games provide a lot more data on a team’s strength than NIT games. Many players just don’t care - ask the Cheats.

[CDu]

Yeah, I think NCAA tourney games provide a lot more data on a team’s strength than NIT games. Many players just don’t care - ask the Cheats.

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.

[MartyClark]

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.

Yeah but . . . if a team with greater aspirations and rankings go to the NIT, it would not be unusual for the players to have a let down and lose their fire.

[CDu]

Yeah but . . . if a team with greater aspirations and rankings go to the NIT, it would not be unusual for the players to have a let down and lose their fire.

I suspect this isn't nearly as common as fans make think it is. Players are extremely competitive. They want to win every time they step on the court.

[KandG]

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

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