Bracketology 2024

[NiceMarmot]

Had some time this afternoon to put out an updated bracket after last night's games. Usually, I wait for Thursday games but it's mostly Pac-12 tonight so shouldn't affect things too much.

• I moved ISU up to #7, Baylor up to #8, and Kansas up to #9 over Marquette. Maybe I'm overreacting and perhaps the committee will place less weight on last two Marquette losses without Kolek, but their computer metrics have dipped a bit. 17th in KPI, 9th in SOR. 14th in both BPI and Kenpom.
• ISU rooting interests for the weekend should be Texas Tech to beat Baylor, Villanova to beat Creighton, Xavier to beat Marquette, and then whomever wins Duke/UNC, we want the other one (or someone else entirely) to win the ACC Tourney. If Duke beats UNC and wins ACC Tourney, I could see them passing us. If UNC wins both, no chance of us catching them (I'm not sure there is anyway to be honest). If we had to pick one to win both, it's UNC.
  • I won't tell anyone how to root in KU vs. Houston as far as weighing seeding vs. conference title share. That's a "to each their own" situation.
• Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and TCU are all hovering around that 7-8-9-10 seed line. Might create for some complicated bracketing if Big 12 has one 1-seed in Houston and two 2-seeds.
• Sunday could very well decide if state of Iowa gets 3 teams into the field or just 1 with MVC final and Iowa hosting Illinois. I don't know how Big 10 tournament bracket is looking as far as opening round matchups, but if I'm Iowa, I'd want a challenging first game (think Michigan State, Nebraska, Northwestern). Chance to get a good win or no chance for a bad loss.

Related to some of the chatter in here about NCSOS, I've built a simple little regression model to help me in seeding teams when I build my bracket. So I've looked at one-to-one simple correlation for metrics on the committee teamsheets to what the final seed list was for the 2022 and 2023 tournaments. NCSOS typically doesn't correlate to a team's spot on the seed list. Not saying that couldn't change this year with new committee members, but in the past, I think it has factored in more for deciding who those final at-large spots are moreso than it does for seeding teams safely in the field.

 

[MushroomPinball]

I'm actually interpreting this that Purdue is likely overseeded and more ripe for an "upset", than say Houston, UConn, and that teams like Arizona or Iowa State are more likely to "exceed their seed" and you'd rather not face them.

I interpreted this to mean they rate Houston as correctly seeded and most likely to back it up.

That's how I interpreted it too. I was making a joke that they are always ripe for an upset.

 

[8bitnes]

Had some time this afternoon to put out an updated bracket after last night's games. Usually, I wait for Thursday games but it's mostly Pac-12 tonight so shouldn't affect things too much.

View attachment 125117

• I moved ISU up to #7, Baylor up to #8, and Kansas up to #9 over Marquette. Maybe I'm overreacting and perhaps the committee will place less weight on last two Marquette losses without Kolek, but their computer metrics have dipped a bit. 17th in KPI, 9th in SOR. 14th in both BPI and Kenpom.
• ISU rooting interests for the weekend should be Texas Tech to beat Baylor, Villanova to beat Creighton, Xavier to beat Marquette, and then whomever wins Duke/UNC, we want the other one (or someone else entirely) to win the ACC Tourney. If Duke beats UNC and wins ACC Tourney, I could see them passing us. If UNC wins both, no chance of us catching them (I'm not sure there is anyway to be honest). If we had to pick one to win both, it's UNC.
  • I won't tell anyone how to root in KU vs. Houston as far as weighing seeding vs. conference title share. That's a "to each their own" situation.
• Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and TCU are all hovering around that 7-8-9-10 seed line. Might create for some complicated bracketing if Big 12 has one 1-seed in Houston and two 2-seeds.
• Sunday could very well decide if state of Iowa gets 3 teams into the field or just 1 with MVC final and Iowa hosting Illinois. I don't know how Big 10 tournament bracket is looking as far as opening round matchups, but if I'm Iowa, I'd want a challenging first game (think Michigan State, Nebraska, Northwestern). Chance to get a good win or no chance for a bad loss.

Related to some of the chatter in here about NCSOS, I've built a simple little regression model to help me in seeding teams when I build my bracket. So I've looked at one-to-one simple correlation for metrics on the committee teamsheets to what the final seed list was for the 2022 and 2023 tournaments. NCSOS typically doesn't correlate to a team's spot on the seed list. Not saying that couldn't change this year with new committee members, but in the past, I think it has factored in more for deciding who those final at-large spots are moreso than it does for seeding teams safely in the field.

View attachment 125119

Love the table/graphic, something to nerd out over.

Being a 2 seed is great but not much difference as a 3-seed. The 3 plays a 14 and then a 6 or an 11 that could be on game three in 5 days. The 2 plays a 15 and a 7/10. They play each other at sweet 16 if the bracket goes to form and avoid a 1 seed until regional finals.

Could we still get Omaha as a 3 would be the important question. Otherwise, I could not care less between the 2/3

 

[CascadeClone]

Most overrated conference is Big East.

Creighton & Marquette have a lot of Quad 1 wins, but most of those teams are barely Quad 1 quality.

View attachment 125115

I've been thinking/wondering about this lately too. UConn is great, but Creighton looks basically same as BYU to me, both in style and overall "goodness". Well there's 4 teams better than that in the Big12.

KP has Nova and STJ right wedged in between Texas, TCU, and Tech. Seton Hall, Xavier, Providence, Butler are all between Cincy and UCF - they're .500 in BE but would be 6-12 in the Big12.

I don't watch BE ball to really feel confident about it. So I think those top 3 are legit good, but at same time think the Q1 wins thing is overstated.

 

[CascadeClone]

ed to some of the chatter in here about NCSOS, I've built a simple little regression model to help me in seeding teams when I build my bracket. So I've looked at one-to-one simple correlation for metrics on the committee teamsheets to what the final seed list was for the 2022 and 2023 tournaments. NCSOS typically doesn't correlate to a team's spot on the seed list. Not saying that couldn't change this year with new committee members, but in the past, I think it has factored in more for deciding who those final at-large spots are moreso than it does for seeding teams safely in the field.

View attachment 125119

THANK YOU for the correlation data! I have been trying to find it for SOR, and to see it ALL up there is fantastic.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Love the table/graphic, something to nerd out over.

Being a 2 seed is great but not much difference as a 3-seed. The 3 plays a 14 and then a 6 or an 11 that could be on game three in 5 days. The 2 plays a 15 and a 7/10. They play each other at sweet 16 if the bracket goes to form and avoid a 1 seed until regional finals.

Could we still get Omaha as a 3 would be the important question. Otherwise, I could not care less between the 2/3

Yes, we can still get Omaha as a 3 seed. Omaha is likely now.

Agreed on the 2/3 differentiation. Honestly, it would be better to be the 3-seed in the West or Midwest rather than the 2 in the East in my opinion.

 

[Daserop]

Not all Quad 1 wins are created equal. Teams ISU is "fighting against" for a 2 seed.

• Iowa State
  • Quad 1: 7-5
    • 1 Q1 win against team whose NET rank is in 60s.
    • 1 Q1 win against a team whose NET rank is in 40s.
• Marquette
  • Quad 1: 8-7
    • 3 Q1 wins against teams whose NET rank is in 60s.
• Creighton
  • Quad 1: 7-6
    • 4 Q1 wins against teams whose NET rank is in 60s.
    • 1 Q1 win against a team whose NET rank is in 40s.
• North Carolina
  • Quad 1: 6-4
    • 1 Q1 win against a team whose NET rank is in 50s.
    • 2 Q1 wins against teams whose NET rank is in 40s.
• Duke
  • Quad 1: 5-3
    • 1 Q1 win against a team whose NET rank is in 50s.
    • 1 Q1 win against a team whose NET rank is in 40s.
• Baylor
  • Quad 1: 8-6
    • 1 Q1 win against a team whose NET rank is in 60s.

 

[CoachHines3]

Had some time this afternoon to put out an updated bracket after last night's games. Usually, I wait for Thursday games but it's mostly Pac-12 tonight so shouldn't affect things too much.

View attachment 125117

• I moved ISU up to #7, Baylor up to #8, and Kansas up to #9 over Marquette. Maybe I'm overreacting and perhaps the committee will place less weight on last two Marquette losses without Kolek, but their computer metrics have dipped a bit. 17th in KPI, 9th in SOR. 14th in both BPI and Kenpom.
• ISU rooting interests for the weekend should be Texas Tech to beat Baylor, Villanova to beat Creighton, Xavier to beat Marquette, and then whomever wins Duke/UNC, we want the other one (or someone else entirely) to win the ACC Tourney. If Duke beats UNC and wins ACC Tourney, I could see them passing us. If UNC wins both, no chance of us catching them (I'm not sure there is anyway to be honest). If we had to pick one to win both, it's UNC.
  • I won't tell anyone how to root in KU vs. Houston as far as weighing seeding vs. conference title share. That's a "to each their own" situation.
• Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and TCU are all hovering around that 7-8-9-10 seed line. Might create for some complicated bracketing if Big 12 has one 1-seed in Houston and two 2-seeds.
• Sunday could very well decide if state of Iowa gets 3 teams into the field or just 1 with MVC final and Iowa hosting Illinois. I don't know how Big 10 tournament bracket is looking as far as opening round matchups, but if I'm Iowa, I'd want a challenging first game (think Michigan State, Nebraska, Northwestern). Chance to get a good win or no chance for a bad loss.

Related to some of the chatter in here about NCSOS, I've built a simple little regression model to help me in seeding teams when I build my bracket. So I've looked at one-to-one simple correlation for metrics on the committee teamsheets to what the final seed list was for the 2022 and 2023 tournaments. NCSOS typically doesn't correlate to a team's spot on the seed list. Not saying that couldn't change this year with new committee members, but in the past, I think it has factored in more for deciding who those final at-large spots are moreso than it does for seeding teams safely in the field.

View attachment 125119

Iowa may have to wait until their 2nd game to get an inferior opponent. Looks like they could play a mix of Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan, Penn State depending on how the last weekend of games shakes out.

 

[RIPVEISHEA]

What's the probability we land in Omaha?

 

[cayin]

are we for sure the two seed in Kansas City?

 

[houjix]

are we for sure the two seed in Kansas City?

One game left with a 2 game lead on Baylor, so yes. Or I guess there might be some outside chance of a 1 seed, but not sure about that.

 

[Jer]

Yes, we are guaranteed no worse than 2nd in the league with a chance at a share of 1st.

 

[Cyowa 14]

are we for sure the two seed in Kansas City?

I don't think so. It all depends on who finishes 3rd in the conference. If Kansas beats Houston and Texas Tech beats Baylor...Kansas, Baylor and Tech would all be 11-7 and in 3rd. We are 1-0 vs Kansas, 1-0 vs Tech and 0-1 vs Baylor. Houston would be 0-2 vs Kansas, 1-0 vs Baylor and 1-0 vs Tech. Not sure how to sort that out

 

[MattCampbell]

Hoping for Omaha as I just bought 2 all session passes

 

[NorthCyd]

That's how I interpreted it too. I was making a joke that they are always ripe for an upset.

Sure, Purdue is above the line, but they are still ranked 3rd in team strength which means they are still really good and deserving of a one seed, just not the number 1 overall team as their resume may indicate. Not what I would describe as super overrated, at least by this analysis.

 

[Bader]

are we for sure the two seed in Kansas City?

No worse than the 2 seed. ISU would be the 1 seed if:

• ISU beats KState
• KU beats Houston (means ISU splits regular season title with the Coogs as well)
• Tech wins the BUTT bowl

If Houston or Baylor win ISU is the 2 seed

 

[Cyowa 14]

No worse than the 2 seed. ISU would be the 1 seed if:

• ISU beats KState
• KU beats Houston (means ISU splits regular season title with the Coogs as well)
• Tech wins the BUTT bowl

If Houston or Baylor win ISU is the 2 seed

So KU would win the tie breakers over Baylor and Tech then? I'm assuming that's the only way we get the 1 seed since we are 1-0 vs Kansas and Houston would be 0-2

 

[Bader]

So KU would win the tie breakers over Baylor and Tech then? I'm assuming that's the only way we get the 1 seed since we are 1-0 vs Kansas and Houston would be 0-2

If Tech and KU win you have all 3 of them (TT, KU, BU) at 11-7 in conference. The tie-breaker goes first to head-to-head (ISU and UH split) then winning % against the highest team(s) in the standings. ISU is 2-1 against the jumble, Houston would be 2-2 against the jumble.

 

[alarson]

No worse than the 2 seed. ISU would be the 1 seed if:

• ISU beats KState
• KU beats Houston (means ISU splits regular season title with the Coogs as well)
• Tech wins the BUTT bowl

If Houston or Baylor win ISU is the 2 seed

The scheduling plays out well for pulling for this:

First we have to win at 1.

Then Kansas needs to win at 3 at houston.

Then Tech needs to beat Baylor at 5 to give us the 1 seed.

 

[ClonerJams]

As of today, the matrix has us as the last 2. Just for fun looking at what our matchups would be based off what they have, we would play the first 15 seed Oakland. Committee probably doesn't do it this way, but the first 7 seed is Florida and the last 10 is Villanova. The 7's are Florida, St Marys, Texas Tech, and Gonzaga while the 6's are South Carolina, Wisconsin, Utah State and Dayton. I think I'd actually prefer the 6's over the 7's.