2024-2025 MBB computer projections thread

[KennyPratt42]

The path to a #1 seed is there should the Cyclones run the table, the Alabama loss yesterday is why I think strongly about this. Just such a strong conference that's going to vulture on even the best teams. I think Auburn could lose 2-3 more and still get a 1 seed and there will be more than likely another from the Florida/Alabama/Tennessee trio that gets the other 1 seed along with Duke so that leaves the 4th between Houston, Iowa State, 3rd SEC team (Missouri might be a dark horse) and ??? not much out there.
Who would get in over a 29-5 Iowa State team with one maybe two wins over Houston, Marquette, at Texas Tech, Arizona, BYU, Kansas, Baylor and other quality Big 12 tournament wins on an 11 game winning streak? Win the rest and I think a 1 seed is likely actually.

A win on Saturday would put us in the 1 seed mix. Auburn and Duke are locks unless something really unexpected happens. That likely leaves Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, and the Houston/Iowa St. winner for 2 spots. Its pretty unlikely somebody outside that group can move up enough to get a 1 seed (Wisconsin is probably the only possibility and they only have one more good win opportunity and 3 games against bottom of the Big 10 teams) and its unlikely the Houston/ISU loser on would be able to play their way into a 1 seed after this weekend.

 

[NYCYFan]

A win on Saturday would put us in the 1 seed mix. Auburn and Duke are locks unless something really unexpected happens. That likely leaves Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, and the Houston/Iowa St. winner for 2 spots. Its pretty unlikely somebody outside that group can move up enough to get a 1 seed (Wisconsin is probably the only possibility and they only have one more good win opportunity and 3 games against bottom of the Big 10 teams) and its unlikely the Houston/ISU loser on would be able to play their way into a 1 seed after this weekend.

Agreed, I think the game on Saturday is a 1 seed elimination game, the loser is almost surely out of that conversation Iowa State in particular. I don't think Wisconsin has a shot, just not enough meant on their resume. Like you said, it's two spots between Florida, Alabama, Tennessee and Houston/Iowa State, I'm adding in Missouri because they have some monster wins.

 

[KennyPratt42]

Agreed, I think the game on Saturday is a 1 seed elimination game, the loser is almost surely out of that conversation Iowa State in particular. I don't think Wisconsin has a shot, just not enough meant on their resume. Like you said, it's two spots between Florida, Alabama, Tennessee and Houston/Iowa State, I'm adding in Missouri because they have some monster wins.

I can't see Missouri making it up to a 1 seed after not being in the top 16 of the committees reveal. They are definitely playing themselves into a 2 seed though.

 

[Kettes]

Why is no one in the media talking about Duke's super-duper soft schedule?

 

[DesertClone1]

Why is no one in the media talking about Duke's super-duper soft schedule?

Because it's Dook

 

[VeloClone]

I'm still in the camp football should have four "pods" of four protected rivals...

Western = Arizona, Arizona St., BYU, Utah
Central = Colorado, Iowa St., Kansas, Kansas St.
Southern = Baylor, Oklahoma St., TCU, Texas Tech
Eastern = Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, West Virginia

Play your own pod (3 games). Play 2/4 of each of the other three pods (6 games).

3 + 6 = 9

For basketball, similar idea.

Own pod (home/home) = 6 games
Everybody else once = 12 games

If you really want 18, then stop there. If you want more, then randomly find two more games.

I like the pod idea but I can't get over the fear that they would find a way to put ISU in a pod with the likes of Cincy, WVU and UCF ("after all, Ames is east of Houston and we should really have an all Texas pod") putting the final dagger in any remaining historical Big 8 rivalries.

 

[8bitnes]

I like the pod idea but I can't get over the fear that they would find a way to put ISU in a pod with the likes of Cincy, WVU and UCF ("after all, Ames is east of Houston and we should really have an all Texas pod") putting the final dagger in any remaining historical Big 8 rivalries.

UCF, Cincy, and Houston all came from the same conference. So if a protected 'rivalry' pod system was created it would make sense to POP them together.
Much like the old big 8 pod of KU, KSU, ISU, Colo

 

[not-the-manager]

I’m going to air some homer grievances since this is, after all, “Cyclone” Fanatic. I hope ISU runs the table and snags a 1 seed; I doubt that will happen. If not, I hope they at least get a 2—it’s interesting they dropped to a 3 in some brackets during their skid, but are back to a 2 in some, despite playing inferior competition—but Bracket Matrix would suggest even that is still up in the air.

But—and I’ve changed my tune on this recently—maybe a 3 isn’t the end of the world. Is this team worse than last year’s (which ended up a 2)? Neither the eye test nor the numbers bear that out, IMHO. It seems to me the seeding issue is that there is just a big logjam from teams ~6 through ~14 on paper (kenpom) this season. Yet I don’t think there are eight teams (or 10, using Torvik) who would—more likely than not—beat Iowa State on a neutral court, despite being projected to get better seeds. Maybe projected results say otherwise, and I'm an idiot—quite possible.

I do think Auburn, Duke, and Houston have set themselves apart. I know Duke’s schedule was pretty soft, but from what I’ve seen they play legit defense, and while teams have guarded Flagg better as the season has progressed, Duke has other weapons virtually everywhere, and those other guys are making opponents pay for focusing on Flagg.

But what percentage of people who fill out brackets is going to trust Tennessee and Alabama? Throw out “Rick Barnes in March”—even still, Tennessee on paper is just Iowa State last year. Yeah yeah, coulda shoulda woulda, but that didn’t work out too well (yes, a Sweet Sixteen would be great for a lot of teams, but expectations for Tennessee and Alabama are higher than that). Speaking of, bama playing no defense has repeatedly been its undoing,,,and would you look at that, they’re still no good at it. I’ve watched A&M—they can’t put the ball in the hoop. As long as you don't let Taylor get 35 you’ll probably win. Purdue is a formidable two-headed monster, but also can’t defend. Wisconsin is a wild card to me, I’ve not watched much of them but they seem to be peaking. We’ll see if they keep it up. Iowa State has already beaten Tech, and gets another crack at Arizona.

In the back of my mind I know Final Four and championship odds are not in 3 seeds' favor, so I haven't fully donned my rose-colored glasses. But I'm starting to focus more on location than seed.

 

[LLCoolCY]

Not really metrics but interesting to me ISU is a clear #2 to win the Big 12 in Vegas.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Not really metrics but interesting to me ISU is a clear #2 to win the Big 12 in Vegas.

Could happen but we're pretty far back.

 

[bawbie]

I’m going to air some homer grievances since this is, after all, “Cyclone” Fanatic. I hope ISU runs the table and snags a 1 seed; I doubt that will happen. If not, I hope they at least get a 2—it’s interesting they dropped to a 3 in some brackets during their skid, but are back to a 2 in some, despite playing inferior competition—but Bracket Matrix would suggest even that is still up in the air.

But—and I’ve changed my tune on this recently—maybe a 3 isn’t the end of the world. Is this team worse than last year’s (which ended up a 2)? Neither the eye test nor the numbers bear that out, IMHO. It seems to me the seeding issue is that there is just a big logjam from teams ~6 through ~14 on paper (kenpom) this season. Yet I don’t think there are eight teams (or 10, using Torvik) who would—more likely than not—beat Iowa State on a neutral court, despite being projected to get better seeds. Maybe projected results say otherwise, and I'm an idiot—quite possible.

I do think Auburn, Duke, and Houston have set themselves apart. I know Duke’s schedule was pretty soft, but from what I’ve seen they play legit defense, and while teams have guarded Flagg better as the season has progressed, Duke has other weapons virtually everywhere, and those other guys are making opponents pay for focusing on Flagg.

But what percentage of people who fill out brackets is going to trust Tennessee and Alabama? Throw out “Rick Barnes in March”—even still, Tennessee on paper is just Iowa State last year. Yeah yeah, coulda shoulda woulda, but that didn’t work out too well (yes, a Sweet Sixteen would be great for a lot of teams, but expectations for Tennessee and Alabama are higher than that). Speaking of, bama playing no defense has repeatedly been its undoing,,,and would you look at that, they’re still no good at it. I’ve watched A&M—they can’t put the ball in the hoop. As long as you don't let Taylor get 35 you’ll probably win. Purdue is a formidable two-headed monster, but also can’t defend. Wisconsin is a wild card to me, I’ve not watched much of them but they seem to be peaking. We’ll see if they keep it up. Iowa State has already beaten Tech, and gets another crack at Arizona.

In the back of my mind I know Final Four and championship odds are not in 3 seeds' favor, so I haven't fully donned my rose-colored glasses. But I'm starting to focus more on location than seed.

Is there really that much of a difference between a 2 and a 3? They still have to play each other (if seeding holds) to reach the Elite 8 - and probably have to play a 1 at that point.

the currently projected 6-seeds don't scare me at all. Clemson? UCLA? St Mary's is the 7-seed in the current ESPN Projection facing us in the second round, and they are higher on kenpom than either Clemson or UCLA.

Obviously Lunardi is an idiot - but I don't think 2 vs 3 really matters much

 

[LLCoolCY]

Could happen but we're pretty far back.

View attachment 143653

exactly... Vegas must think we have real chance of beating both Houston and Arizona to have ISU a clear #2 favorite in the market. Going further the game vs the Cougars tomorrow is basically for the B12 reg season championship in if the odds are right.

 

[NoCreativity]

Is there really that much of a difference between a 2 and a 3? They still have to play each other (if seeding holds) to reach the Elite 8 - and probably have to play a 1 at that point.

the currently projected 6-seeds don't scare me at all. Clemson? UCLA? St Mary's is the 7-seed in the current ESPN Projection facing us in the second round, and they are higher on kenpom than either Clemson or UCLA.

Obviously Lunardi is an idiot - but I don't think 2 vs 3 really matters much

As long as we don't fall to the 4-5 line I think we'll be in a good position.

 

[not-the-manager]

Is there really that much of a difference between a 2 and a 3? They still have to play each other (if seeding holds) to reach the Elite 8 - and probably have to play a 1 at that point.

the currently projected 6-seeds don't scare me at all. Clemson? UCLA? St Mary's is the 7-seed in the current ESPN Projection facing us in the second round, and they are higher on kenpom than either Clemson or UCLA.

Obviously Lunardi is an idiot - but I don't think 2 vs 3 really matters much

~20% of 2 seeds make the Final Four, while only ~11% of 3 seeds do. *This is not predictive*. But I do think it matters.

My argument is it seems that, this season, there are more teams than usual who will be “worthy” of a 2 or a 3—and who may well end up with better résumés than ISU—but who I just don’t believe would have a 55+% chance of beating them on a neutral. The committee will likely look at Kansas State and Kansas and say, “Well, that’s their floor, and it’s pretty low.” But I really don’t think it’s homer-ism to say that “team” is not the one we’ve seen most of the season. I think their floor is more like the West Virginia or Cincinnati games.

It’s really odd, you can say Iowa State’s signature wins have only diminished over time, yet it’s an objective fact that Kansas State was playing incredible basketball at the time. And Kansas was still top 10 or 12 in kenpom I believe. Colorado had beaten UConn in Maui, and I think Dayton’s metrics were pretty good at that time. So it’s the age-old question of whether your “power ratings” (whatever metrics we want to use) should reflect that some of your marquee wins “aged poorly,” or whether you should take into account the fact that all teams change as seasons progress. I’m a pretty firm believer in the Parcells gauge—You are what your record says you are. That’s why I think seeding may end up being deceiving to casuals

 

[Cyclonepride]

Curious so I looked it up. NCAA tournament champions by seed.

NCAA Tournament Championships by Seed

www.printyourbrackets.com

Huge drop from 1 to 2, very small drop from 2 to 3, another big drop from 3 to 4.

 

[dahliaclone]

I'm gonna go in the weeds a bit here. Bear with me.

We are hovering in the 6-10 overall seed right now. I know being a 2 (or a 1 but for this post let's say that's not attainable) would be ideal but what are the chances of being the last 2 seed and do we actually want that? If we are the overall 8 seed we're gonna be put in Auburn's region if they're the overall 1 seed because of the S curve and the overall #1 facing the lowest 2 seed right? To avoid Auburn as long as possible shouldn't we want to either work our way up to a 5-7 overall seed or be the 10-11 overall seed?

I get it, it's a stupid thought but I'm bored.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Is there really that much of a difference between a 2 and a 3? They still have to play each other (if seeding holds) to reach the Elite 8 - and probably have to play a 1 at that point.

the currently projected 6-seeds don't scare me at all. Clemson? UCLA? St Mary's is the 7-seed in the current ESPN Projection facing us in the second round, and they are higher on kenpom than either Clemson or UCLA.

Obviously Lunardi is an idiot - but I don't think 2 vs 3 really matters much

I don't think the issue with 2/3 is the difficulty of the opponents in the first weekend.

I think it is (1.) #2s are ahead of #3s on the "location draft."

And (2.) which pool would you choose from for your Sweet Sixteen opponent?

POOL A = Houston, Tennessee, Kentucky, Wisconsin

POOL B = Michigan St., Arizona, Missouri, Texas A&M

Pool A is the likely #2 seeds right now on Torvik. Pool B is the likely #3 seeds. I would say Pool A is much scarier than Pool B. Lot easier to see flaws in the metrics for the second set.

(Iowa St. is projected as a #3 seed, so I brought Texas A&M up from the #4 line.)

I think Dayton’s metrics were pretty good at that time.

Your "metrics" that early in the season are mostly projections -- either something "systematic" like the Torvik preseason predictions or putting together an obviously flawed human poll.

Everybody had high expectations for Dayton. The win "looked good at the time." But they've been mediocre and are going to finish way back of George Mason and VCU for the A10 title.

Win quality should be adjusted over time as more data comes. And the unfortunate truth for Iowa State is wins like Dayton, Marquette, and Iowa have aged poorly and so has the WVU loss.

 

[Cyballz]

I'm gonna go in the weeds a bit here. Bear with me.

We are hovering in the 6-10 overall seed right now. I know being a 2 (or a 1 but for this post let's say that's not attainable) would be ideal but what are the chances of being the last 2 seed and do we actually want that? If we are the overall 8 seed we're gonna be put in Auburn's region if they're the overall 1 seed because of the S curve and the overall #1 facing the lowest 2 seed right? To avoid Auburn as long as possible shouldn't we want to either work our way up to a 5-7 overall seed or be the 10-11 overall seed?

I get it, it's a stupid thought but I'm bored.

The S curve isn't a thing any more

 

[dahliaclone]

The S curve isn't a thing any more

See. I’m just simple. lol

 

[Malone]

Playing for a 2 seed tomorrow. TJ will have the guys amped and focused, of which I have no doubt.