NET/KenPom/BPI/Sagarin vs Bracketologists

[jsb]

You know what annoys me is when they project the number of teams per conference. There’s been a few that have 8 big 12 teams and 8 big 10 teams. But no one seems to awknowledge that is 80% of one conference and 50% of the other.

 

[Doc]

I love how those guys act like they're so important and busy this time of year....yet their job really means nothing other than clicks for a website.

Hey, as engineers, all we do is give our opinions as well

 

[Cyclones_R_GR8]

Agreed. In the 5 year rankings, Lunardi is 68 and Palm 82.

 

[AuH2O]

Agreed. In the 5 year rankings, Lunardi is 68 and Palm 82.

Palm's problem is not that he ends up doing OK. It's that during the season he is a blatant Big 10 push poller. For years now throughout the season he will have big 10 teams MULTIPLE seed lines higher than the key metrics suggest. Then his last one he'll get in line and get it mostly right in an effort to maintain some credibility.

As mentioned in one of the other threads, the year Royce was here, he did not have ISU in all season. He had ISU as a bubble team leading up to the conf. tourney. ISU lost in the first game to a bad UT team that probably cost them a seed and STILL ended up an 8. For the last 4 weeks or so in that season he was 3-4 seed lines off on ISU. He is repeatedly the extreme outlier on Big 10 teams. And strangely enough he will drop Big 10 teams at the end of the season to get in line, even though their results on the court do not warrant it.

 

[LindenCy]

As long as the committee gets it right, I'm good.

 

[AuH2O]

Ways to be a better bracketologist than Jerry Palm:

Prior to this season:
1. Google "RPI rankings"
2. Google "How do you divide by four?"

This season:
1. Google "NET rankings"
2. Google "How do you divide by four?"

 

[AuH2O]

Playing devils advocate - Maybe the bracketology guys are projecting what they think the seeds will be come selection Sunday and not what they would be today?

The guys like Palm and Lunardi do it as things currently stand without predictions.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Palm's problem is not that he ends up doing OK. It's that during the season he is a blatant Big 10 push poller. For years now throughout the season he will have big 10 teams MULTIPLE seed lines higher than the key metrics suggest. Then his last one he'll get in line and get it mostly right in an effort to maintain some credibility.

As mentioned in one of the other threads, the year Royce was here, he did not have ISU in all season. He had ISU as a bubble team leading up to the conf. tourney. ISU lost in the first game to a bad UT team that probably cost them a seed and STILL ended up an 8. For the last 4 weeks or so in that season he was 3-4 seed lines off on ISU. He is repeatedly the extreme outlier on Big 10 teams. And strangely enough he will drop Big 10 teams at the end of the season to get in line, even though their results on the court do not warrant it.

Palms bracket was completely wrecked when the NCAA released their top 16.

 

[SCyclone]

Texas Tech:

• NET: 10 (3 seed)
• KenPom: 9 (3 seed)
• BPI: 10 (3 seed)
• Sagarin: 11 (3 seed)
  • Average: 10th or solid 3 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 4 seed
  • Palm: 4 seed
  • USAToday: 5 seed

The numbers say Texas Tech is a solid 3 seed. None of the three backetologists have them that high.

Kansas State:

• NET: 29 (8 seed)
• KenPom: 29 (8 seed)
• BPI: 34 (9 seed)
• Sagarin: 24 (6 seed)
  • Average: 29th or 8 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 6 seed
  • Palm: 5 seed
  • USAToday: 5 seed

Surprised by this. Numbers say they are solidly hovering around 30th. Bracketologists say otherwise and put them two to three full seed lines above that average.

Kansas:

• NET: 18 (5 seed)
• KenPom: 15 (4 seed)
• BPI: 16 (4 seed)
• Sagarin: 10 (3 seed)
  • Average: 15th or low 4 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 3 seed
  • Palm: 3 seed
  • USAToday: 3 seed

Not too shocked at this. KU's brand get them a boost by these bracketologists to the 3 line despite all the rankings suggesting they are closer to the 5 line.

Texas:

• NET: 35 (9 seed)
• KenPom: 27 (7 seed)
• BPI: 29 (8 seed)
• Sagarin: 27 (7 seed)
  • Average: 29th or 8 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 9 seed
  • Palm: 10 seed
  • USAToday: 10 seed

Despite the rankings saying Texas is more or less an 8 seed, none of the bracket guys have them above a 9. With an average ranking of 29th, Palm actually has them ranked 40th on his bracket, or nearly three full seed lines below the average. He has them as the last 10 seed team.

Baylor:

• NET: 36 (9 seed)
• KenPom: 37 (10 seed)
• BPI: 38 (10 seed)
• Sagarin: 36 (9 seed)
  • Average: 37th or 10 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 8 seed
  • Palm: 8 seed
  • USAToday: 9 seed

This is a bit of a surprise. But also shows how weak the bubble is. Rankings say Baylor is a 10 seed. Bracket guys have them a full seed line or two above that. I personally think they'll end up a 10 seed when it's all said and done.

TCU:

• NET: 43 (11 seed)
• KenPom: 42 (11 seed)
• BPI: 43 (11 seed)
• Sagarin: 38 (11 seed)
  • Average: 41st or 11 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 10 seed
  • Palm: 8 seed
  • USAToday: 10 seed

Like Baylor, bit surprised here. Showing bubble weakness?

Oklahoma:

• NET: 39 (10 seed)
• KenPom: 36 (9 seed)
• BPI: 36 (9 seed)
• Sagarin: 30 (8 seed)
  • Average: 35th or 9 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 10 seed
  • Palm: 11 seed
  • USAToday: 10 seed

As bad as OU is, their rankings aren't bad. They say they are a 9 seed on average...none of the bracket guys have them that high (not sure i would either) but they have the Sooners a full seed line or two lower than the ranking's average.

Michigan State:

• NET: 7 (2 seed)
• KenPom: 4 (1 seed)
• BPI: 4 (1 seed)
• Sagarin: 4 (1 seed)
  • Average: 4th or 1 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 2 seed
  • Palm: 2 seed
  • USAToday: 2 seed

Michigan:

• NET: 8 (2 seed)
• KenPom: 6 (2 seed)
• BPI: 9 (3 seed)
• Sagarin: 8 (2 seed)
  • Average: 7th or 2 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 2 seed
  • Palm: 2 seed
  • USAToday: 2 seed

Purdue:

• NET: 12 (3 seed)
• KenPom: 10 (3 seed)
• BPI: 11 (3 seed)
• Sagarin: 9 (3 seed)
  • Average: 10th or solid 3 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 3 seed
  • Palm: 4 seed
  • USAToday: 4 seed

Wisconsin:

• NET: 15 (4 seed)
• KenPom: 11 (3 seed)
• BPI: 14 (4 seed)
• Sagarin: 15 (4 seed)
  • Average: 14th or 4 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 5 seed
  • Palm: 4 seed
  • USAToday: 5 seed

Maryland:

• NET: 23 (6 seed)
• KenPom: 19 (5 seed)
• BPI: 23 (6 seed)
• Sagarin: 23 (6 seed)
  • Average: 22nd or 6 eed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 6 seed
  • Palm: 6 seed
  • USAToday: 6 seed

Minnesota:

• NET: 51 (13 seed)
• KenPom: 46 (12 seed)
• BPI: 62 (16 seed)
• Sagarin: 48 (12 seed)
  • Average: 52nd or 13th seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 11 seed
  • Palm: 9 seed
  • USAToday: 10 seed

It appears the bracket guys are pushing the Big 10 low-hangers pretty hard when the rankings say they shouldn't be close. Also part of the crap bubble? But Minnesota's average ranking is 52nd! And Palm has them as a NINE seed?! That is FOUR full seed lines above their average ranking.

Ohio State:

• NET: 45 (12 seed)
• KenPom: 38 (10 seed)
• BPI: 35 (9 seed)
• Sagarin: 35 (10 seed)
  • Average: 38th or 10 seed
• Bracketology:
  • Lunardi: 9 seed
  • Palm: 9 seed
  • USAToday: 9 seed

Numbers say Buckeyes are a 10 seed. All the bracket guys have them a full seed above that average.

Overall not as bad as I was expecting...but Palm is heads and shoulders worse than the others. The outliers for the Big 12 are hands down Iowa State and for the Big Ten, Iowa.

Rankings suggest Big Ten really should only get 7 teams in but the Big 12 should get 8.

Will be interesting to see where Kansas ends up, if they continue to struggle. As you said, their brand helps them immensely.

Conversely, I think Beard should get strong consideration for Big XII Coach of the Year. The only real star he has is Culver, and yet they continue to win. We all remember Odiase (their Jess Settles LOL), but I would be hard-pressed to name any of their other players.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Will be interesting to see where Kansas ends up, if they continue to struggle. As you said, their brand helps them immensely.

Conversely, I think Beard should get strong consideration for Big XII Coach of the Year. The only real star he has is Culver, and yet they continue to win. We all remember Odiase (their Jess Settles LOL), but I would be hard-pressed to name any of their other players.

If Iowa State completes the sweep of Tech I think Prohm would have a leg up. Our fan base doesn't give CSP enough credit for taking last season on the chin and turning it around this year.

 

[WalkingCY]

Ways to be a better bracketologist than Jerry Palm:

Prior to this season:
1. Google "RPI rankings"
2. Google "How do you divide by four?"

This season:
1. Google "NET rankings"
2. Google "How do you divide by four?"

 

[SCyclone]

If Iowa State completes the sweep of Tech I think Prohm would have a leg up. Our fan base doesn't give CSP enough credit for taking last season on the chin and turning it around this year.

Trust me, I'm not denigrating CSP one bit - I love the guy, hope he's here for years. Just thinking Beard has done more with less. And I like his style, too.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Trust me, I'm not denigrating CSP one bit - I love the guy, hope he's here for years. Just thinking Beard has done more with less. And I like his style, too.

Tech didn't exactly come out of nowhere, they were a 3 seed last year.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Tech didn't exactly come out of nowhere, they were a 3 seed last year.

And was picked higher in the preseason voting

 

[jsb]

Trust me, I'm not denigrating CSP one bit - I love the guy, hope he's here for years. Just thinking Beard has done more with less. And I like his style, too.

Prohm seems to do very well against beard. We beat them badly last year at home when they were very good.

 

[HFCS]

Palm may be on the Big Ten payroll. He always does this.

The guy sucks at his job and his job is a nonsense job.

It's crazy someone gets paid money to do what he does.

 

[HFCS]

Playing devils advocate - Maybe the bracketology guys are projecting what they think the seeds will be come selection Sunday and not what they would be today?

If that's the case ISU's recent B12 tournament history suggests you should move them up 5-8 spots.

We win the tournament most years lately.

 

[rhoho]

ISU dropped from 13th to 18th in the NET rankings after last night's loss

 

[CyTwins]

ISU dropped from 13th to 18th in the NET rankings after last night's loss

#FtheNET

 

[Deleted member 8507]

My unique, proprietary rating system has ISU a 5 seed and Iowa an 8 seed (at this moment, not projected for selection Sunday)