2018-2019 computer projections thread
- Thread starter Sigmapolis
- Start date
This thread was more fun a month and a half ago.
Remember when we were picked to win out (on an individual game basis)? Those were good times.
"Picked" is a strong word -- though you are correct the relevant computer projections gave us the highest chance of the contenders to win the Big 12 title.
I am going to wonder what happened to this team between the win in Oklahoma and now for a long time. We gutted out a road game we needed to have in the conference race, Shayok looked like a man among boys who could easily be CPOTY, and we were 18-5 overall (and 7-3 in the conference) and heading to a 25 win season and good shot at the title.
I thought we would end up like 13-5 with at least a share.
Yep. Good times.
"Picked" is a strong word -- though you are correct the relevant computer projections gave us the highest chance of the contenders to win the Big 12 title.
I am going to wonder what happened to this team between the win in Oklahoma and now for a long time. We gutted out a road game we needed to have in the conference race, Shayok looked like a man among boys who could easily be CPOTY, and we were 18-5 overall (and 7-3 in the conference) and heading to a 25 win season and good shot at the title.
I thought we would end up like 13-5 with at least a share.
Yep. Good times.
I thought at WORST we'd be 11-7. Never did I dream we'd be staring at 9-9.
Similar to was Sig and herbicide posted, in that period, it looked like 25 wins was likely (counting postseason games) and that almost was a conservative guess. The thought of going 10-8 in Big 12 seemed almost laughable. (I'm not laughing now, of course).
Man, I'm a serious fan of that 10-8 number now. Come on, Cy, get your act together.
Bracketology in this thread too?
Fwiw, heading into the weekend Lunardi has us as the last 5 seed on his seed list. Hopefully Buffalo and Nevada don't win their conference tournament.
Fwiw, heading into the weekend Lunardi has us as the last 5 seed on his seed list. Hopefully Buffalo and Nevada don't win their conference tournament.
I'll have what Joe is drinking.
But I suppose if we win tomorrow and win one in KC, #5 seed is reasonable. I would take it now.
A 7 or 8 seed really doesn't matter - if the good ISU team shows up they win the first round and that would exceed my expectations.
We need to beat Baylor to avoid that, methinks.
KSU might be vulnerable after that resting so many guys.
I think that win against Baylor removed any lingering doubt that we might drop out of the field somehow if a TON of mid-major teams stole bids or something like that.
I think we have the absolute green checkmark for making the field now.
Looks like our remaining games in the Big 12 tournament are all basically coin flips. The 53.6% win expectation against Kansas State today is somewhat higher than the 45% on Barttorvik. Maybe they are factoring Wade out somehow? Barry Brown is bad news.
They have us on the #8 line, which is a slightly low outlier compared to most numbers on Bracket Matrix. I would much rather avoid the #1 seeds this year, and particularly Virginia, Gonzaga, and Duke, and even the #2 seeds (e.g., Michigan State) are much scarier then the #3 seeds we might face (e.g., Houston or Purdue). I hope we can play up to a #6.
I think we have the absolute green checkmark for making the field now.
Looks like our remaining games in the Big 12 tournament are all basically coin flips. The 53.6% win expectation against Kansas State today is somewhat higher than the 45% on Barttorvik. Maybe they are factoring Wade out somehow? Barry Brown is bad news.
They have us on the #8 line, which is a slightly low outlier compared to most numbers on Bracket Matrix. I would much rather avoid the #1 seeds this year, and particularly Virginia, Gonzaga, and Duke, and even the #2 seeds (e.g., Michigan State) are much scarier then the #3 seeds we might face (e.g., Houston or Purdue). I hope we can play up to a #6.
How does the #18 team in the country work out to an 8? By logic, that's a 5.
We both know comparing raw W-L in college basketball is fraught because of the imbalances in schedules and conferences. On some level, history says they rank you on your winning percentage, not what KenPom says about your net efficiency margin.
We look better in the analytics than we do on raw W-L percentages because we have played a very difficult schedule, we have had some big wins, even on the road, against some great teams, and most of our loses, save for @ WVU and @ UT, were pretty close.
