2022-2023 MBB computer projections thread

[NoCreativity]

Well the committee disagrees with your expert opinion.

Luckily the committee doesn't just look at the wins and losses number they actually dive in and see the power of the teams we've played. The committee made it blatantly obvious they value the strength of schedule over inflated win/loss numbers.

So last year Tech had 9 losses entering the tourney, Tennessee had 7 losses, Purdue had 7 and Wisconsin had 7. Those were all the #3 seeds in the tourney.

2019 was the last legitimate year to compare because of Covid. Tech had 6 losses, Purdue had 9, LSU had 6, and Houston had 3.

We already have 9 with 3 potential losses left before the tourney, you think that's going to get it done as a 3?

The most likely scenario is we end up on the 5 line. To hold that 3 now will require some major improvement and is a monumental task.

 

[CyPunch]

I filtered for the last month, and we're 25th.

I filtered for the week we played Iowa and we are 214th.

I filtered for the first week of the Big 12 season and we are 5th.

It's almost like you can change the filter to include/exclude good and bad performances to fit whatever narrative you want.

 

[isufbcurt]

So last year Tech had 9 losses entering the tourney, Tennessee had 7 losses, Purdue had 7 and Wisconsin had 7. Those were all the #3 seeds in the tourney.

2019 was the last legitimate year to compare because of Covid. Tech had 6 losses, Purdue had 9, LSU had 6, and Houston had 3.

We already have 9 with 3 potential losses left before the tourney, you think that's going to get it done as a 3?

The most likely scenario is we end up on the 5 line. To hold that 3 now will require some major improvement and is a monumental task.

I am not guaranteeing a 3 seed, but I don't think the committee is going to penalize us for losing to top ranked teams in the road. They made it clear on Saturday that they value the strength of schedule over win/loss numbers.

 

[4theCYcle]

We are quite clearly a top 25 team. The only reason why it seems like we aren’t is because we play a legitimate team every single game. So sorry we don’t have any cupcakes scheduled during the middle of conference season.

I had to spell this out to a hawk fan on twitter. Didn't someone combine the big 10 and big 12 conference and I think the result was Purdue was on top, then like 6-7 of the top big 12 teams were next, sprinkle in a few big 10 teams, remaining 12, and then like 3-5 of the remaining big 10 teams. I told him yeah, sorry ISU doesn't have Ohio State, Minnesota and nebraska to beat up on.

 

[NoCreativity]

I am not guaranteeing a 3 seed, but I don't think the committee is going to penalize us for losing to top ranked teams in the road. They made it clear on Saturday that they value the strength of schedule over win/loss numbers.

So technically if that's the case the Baylor and Texas games won't matter.

I say if we go 3-1 in the last 4 and win 1 in KC that will hold a 3. Anything below that and I think we will be a 4 or 5. Lose to either Oklahoma or West Virginia and our first game in KC I think its a 6.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I had to spell this out to a hawk fan on twitter. Didn't someone combine the big 10 and big 12 conference and I think the result was Purdue was on top, then like 6-7 of the top big 12 teams were next, sprinkle in a few big 10 teams, remaining 12, and then like 3-5 of the remaining big 10 teams. I told him yeah, sorry ISU doesn't have Ohio State, Minnesota and nebraska to beat up on.

You're incorrigible. There are plenty of other threads for your negativity.

TJ could make a Final Four and you'd complain they didn't win the natty.

It hasn't been great but going 3-5 against the Big 12 since then but that's not *that* shameful against this absolute ***** of a conference with most of those being road games.

The Big Ten is generally accepted as the second-best conference...

View attachment 109861

If you co-rank the Big 12 and the Big Ten based on their Torvik rankings you get this...

1. Purdue
2. Kansas
3. Baylor
4. Iowa State
5. Texas
6. TCU
7. K-State
8. West Virginia
9. Oklahoma State
10. Rutgers
11. Indiana
12. Michigan State
13. Maryland
14. Illinois
15. Iowa
16. Northwestern
17. Texas Tech
18. Michigan
19. Oklahoma
20. Penn State
21. Ohio State
22. Wisconsin
23. Nebraska
24. Minnesota

Notice anything about that list? There aren't many (if any) bad losses in this conference.

 

[CyPunch]

What a moron. They aren't sending an 8 seed for home court advantage. The guy is so bad at his job.

Or he's great at his job by getting you to click and react. Just like when he matched us with Drake last week.

 

[CyPunch]

Alabama is rated #178 the week they got blasted by Oklahoma.

1 Seed? They should be on the NIT bubble.

 

[NoCreativity]

@Sigmapolis

There's no way West Virginia and Oklahoma State are better than Indiana and Illinois.

Your computer rankings also think St Mary's and Uconn should be a 2 seeds so I'll use my eye test on that one.

I'd you are going by Torvick also go back and look at previous years, his rankings compared to where the committee eventually seeds teams is way off on many occasions.

 

[Halincandenza]

So last year Tech had 9 losses entering the tourney, Tennessee had 7 losses, Purdue had 7 and Wisconsin had 7. Those were all the #3 seeds in the tourney.

2019 was the last legitimate year to compare because of Covid. Tech had 6 losses, Purdue had 9, LSU had 6, and Houston had 3.

We already have 9 with 3 potential losses left before the tourney, you think that's going to get it done as a 3?

The most likely scenario is we end up on the 5 line. To hold that 3 now will require some major improvement and is a monumental task.

You can't just look at losses though, you have to look at the quality of losses and also how many quality wins a team has. There have been teams with 11 losses and they are a 2 seed or 8 losses and a 1 seed.

 

[Statefan10]

@Sigmapolis

There's no way West Virginia and Oklahoma State are better than Indiana and Illinois.

Your computer rankings also think St Mary's and Uconn should be a 2 seeds so I'll use my eye test on that one.

I'd you are going by Torvick also go back and look at previous years, his rankings compared to where the committee eventually seeds teams is way off on many occasions.

I think WVU right now is better than both Indiana and Illinois. Oklahoma State is probably just as good as Illinois.

 

[CyPunch]

There's no way West Virginia and Oklahoma State are better than Indiana and Illinois.

Your computer rankings also think St Mary's should be a 2 seed so I'll use my eye test on that one.

I'd you are going by Torvick also go back and look at previous years, his rankings compared to where the committee eventually seeds teams is way off on many occasions.

It doesn't take a computer to tell you that 7 ranked wins, 4 top 10 wins = good. Also, the quality of the losses is important. We only have 1 non-Quad 1 loss (Before Ok State got smoked last night we had 0).

The overall point is we have earned ourselves a good spot in both PREDICTIVE and RESUME metrics.

 

[NoCreativity]

It doesn't take a computer to tell you that 7 ranked wins, 4 top 10 wins = good. Also, the quality of the losses is important. We only have 1 non-Quad 1 loss (Before Ok State got smoked last night we had 0).

The overall point is we have earned ourselves a good spot in both PREDICTIVE and RESUME metrics.

I get it, we have solid wins and metrics. The point I'm making is that doesn't always align with what the committee ends up doing. The computer rankings are sometimes way off on what the corresponding seeds are.

Plus, they always do something crazy every year nobody really predicted, like putting some team ranked in the 60s in the play in game that had a better record than some team from a power conference in the 40s that has 13 or 14 losses.

 

[madguy30]

@Sigmapolis

There's no way West Virginia and Oklahoma State are better than Indiana and Illinois.

Your computer rankings also think St Mary's and Uconn should be a 2 seeds so I'll use my eye test on that one.

I'd you are going by Torvick also go back and look at previous years, his rankings compared to where the committee eventually seeds teams is way off on many occasions.

I would take WV and OSU over those teams. It's not that they're good; Illinois and Ind aren't really either.

 

[fsanford]

What a moron. They aren't sending an 8 seed for home court advantage. The guy is so bad at his job.

Davidson as a 10 seed played in Greenville last year, its a 2 hour drive
In 2019 a 7 seed Cincinnati played in Columbus 90 minute drive

There are other examples as well.

If there are 9 teams out of Big 12, they are going to need to put them somewhere.

 

[fsanford]

I get it, we have solid wins and metrics. The point I'm making is that doesn't always align with what the committee ends up doing. The computer rankings are sometimes way off on what the corresponding seeds are.

Plus, they always do something crazy every year nobody really predicted, like putting some team ranked in the 60s in the play in game that had a better record than some team from a power conference in the 40s that has 13 or 14 losses.

Not always, but normally it does... The Big 12 numbers this year could be historic in terms of being so far ahead of all other leagues in data they use to seed teams.

And now just like with the football playoffs the people making the decision give us a view of where things stand today so there is less questioning about seeding. To me that is the difference now. You are right though before they did this there were more surprises

 

[CyPunch]

I get it, we have solid wins and metrics. The point I'm making is that doesn't always align with what the committee ends up doing. The computer rankings are sometimes way off on what the corresponding seeds are.

Plus, they always do something crazy every year nobody really predicted, like putting some team ranked in the 60s in the play in game that had a better record than some team from a power conference in the 40s that has 13 or 14 losses.

But we literally already know what the committee thinks of us. We know what they think of over 80% of our season. You don't get penalized for losing to top teams on the road. Tonight we are expected to lose by 7 or 8 points! Again, if we finish the regular season 2-2 as expected, the 4/5 game in KC is likely a play-in game for a 3 seed in the tourney.

I see you were also arguing about other teams like West Virginia and Oklahoma State so the above doesn't directly apply to them since they are well out of the top 16. However, on Saturday the committee showed a very favorable viewpoint of the Big 12. Just ask Mick Cronin.

 

[Statefan10]

I get it, we have solid wins and metrics. The point I'm making is that doesn't always align with what the committee ends up doing. The computer rankings are sometimes way off on what the corresponding seeds are.

Plus, they always do something crazy every year nobody really predicted, like putting some team ranked in the 60s in the play in game that had a better record than some team from a power conference in the 40s that has 13 or 14 losses.

The committee is currently giving us respect in that last Saturday they ranked us at #11 and a 3 seed.

 

[NoCreativity]

Not always, but normally it does... The Big 12 numbers this year could be historic in terms of being so far ahead of all other leagues in data they use to seed teams.

And now just like with the football playoffs the people making the decision give us a view of where things stand today so there is less questioning about seeding. To me that is the difference now. You are right though before they did this there were more surprises

Virginia Tech was ranked 18th on the computers last year with 12 losses and ended up as an 11 seed.

I guess I'll believe it when I see it. I still have ptsd from the year we went 30-4, won a regular season and Big 12 tourney and still wasn't good enough for a 1 seed.

 

[Cyballzz]

So technically if that's the case the Baylor and Texas games won't matter.

I say if we go 3-1 in the last 4 and win 1 in KC that will hold a 3. Anything below that and I think we will be a 4 or 5. Lose to either Oklahoma or West Virginia and our first game in KC I think its a 6.

If we go 4-2 down the stretch we would be borderline 2 seed. You don't have to agree and I do not believe we are a 2 seed but the computers that the committee rely on will show us as such.

That would be home wins vs OU and WVU, a road win at either Texas or Baylor and a 3rd win over TCU. Losses to Kansas and either Texas or Baylor would have zero effect on our rank.

If I were betting I would bet we go 2-2 in our last 4 and round 3 vs Kansas State. That is going to be a 3 seed based on what the committee has shown us.