Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

*** Official Selection Sunday Thread ***

A few notes about my predictions:
  1. The committee has never said conference tournaments don't matter. Just that they don't matter more than any other game.
  2. The committee has said WAB is important, especially to determine the field. That last comments lead me to believe that it is not as important for seeding. Also, ISU over UConn for the #1 seed tells me predictive metrics are more important for seeding. I don't know if that means Kenpom, BPI or Torvik.
  3. I leaned WAB for bubble and predictive/Q1 for seeding. If there was a massive difference between predictive and results, that also hurt (see Illinois, Tennesee, Louisville). For example, if Team A had lower predictive metrix but was 9-5 in Q1 and Team 2 was 8-9, I might put Team A ahead. Additionally, looking at average Net Win and average Net Loss can be useful.
  4. None of us know what the S-curve looked like before conference tourneys. We assume Bracket Matrix is close, but it wouldn't be perfect. For example, Vandy had a much better resume before the tournament than Bracket Matrix showed, in my opinion. Bracket Matrix had Purdue as the last 3, but I think their resume was much closer to the best 3.
1773593824392.png


  • Purdue probably has a better resume than Iowa State, especially with a win, but I can't ignore the head to head.
  • I couldn't justify Illinois Predictive metrics jumping UConn and MSU. Their Q1 record trumps it.
  • Gonzaga was tough. I decided Vandy and Virginia's Q1 was good enough to trump Gonzaga's predictive metrics. That wasn't true for Alabama.
  • A Vandy win might let them jump Illinois. An Arkansas win probably gets them to the last 4 seed.
 
xboxfever said:
Agree. I’m really hoping ISU gets a 2 seed with Nebraska being the 3. The committee has always made some matchups for story reasons, and ISU playing a Hoiberg team is a perfect story if both make the sweet 16.
Click to expand...
Not only the story but matchupwise that's an ideal bracket for Iowa State.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xboxfever
clone52 said:
A few notes about my predictions:
  1. The committee has never said conference tournaments don't matter. Just that they don't matter more than any other game.
  2. The committee has said WAB is important, especially to determine the field. That last comments lead me to believe that it is not as important for seeding. Also, ISU over UConn for the #1 seed tells me predictive metrics are more important for seeding. I don't know if that means Kenpom, BPI or Torvik.
  3. I leaned WAB for bubble and predictive/Q1 for seeding. If there was a massive difference between predictive and results, that also hurt (see Illinois, Tennesee, Louisville). For example, if Team A had lower predictive metrix but was 9-5 in Q1 and Team 2 was 8-9, I might put Team A ahead. Additionally, looking at average Net Win and average Net Loss can be useful.
  4. None of us know what the S-curve looked like before conference tourneys. We assume Bracket Matrix is close, but it wouldn't be perfect. For example, Vandy had a much better resume before the tournament than Bracket Matrix showed, in my opinion. Bracket Matrix had Purdue as the last 3, but I think their resume was much closer to the best 3.
View attachment 169032


  • Purdue probably has a better resume than Iowa State, especially with a win, but I can't ignore the head to head.
  • I couldn't justify Illinois Predictive metrics jumping UConn and MSU. Their Q1 record trumps it.
  • Gonzaga was tough. I decided Vandy and Virginia's Q1 was good enough to trump Gonzaga's predictive metrics. That wasn't true for Alabama.
  • A Vandy win might let them jump Illinois. An Arkansas win probably gets them to the last 4 seed.
Click to expand...
Just checked Torvik and was pretty excited to see that based off postseason alone, we are #1…according to his metrics. Vandy is #2. That FT% stand out as very concerning though…
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: ChickenNuggetMan, Acer88 and clone52
clone52 said:
A few notes about my predictions:
  1. The committee has never said conference tournaments don't matter. Just that they don't matter more than any other game.
  2. The committee has said WAB is important, especially to determine the field. That last comments lead me to believe that it is not as important for seeding. Also, ISU over UConn for the #1 seed tells me predictive metrics are more important for seeding. I don't know if that means Kenpom, BPI or Torvik.
  3. I leaned WAB for bubble and predictive/Q1 for seeding. If there was a massive difference between predictive and results, that also hurt (see Illinois, Tennesee, Louisville). For example, if Team A had lower predictive metrix but was 9-5 in Q1 and Team 2 was 8-9, I might put Team A ahead. Additionally, looking at average Net Win and average Net Loss can be useful.
  4. None of us know what the S-curve looked like before conference tourneys. We assume Bracket Matrix is close, but it wouldn't be perfect. For example, Vandy had a much better resume before the tournament than Bracket Matrix showed, in my opinion. Bracket Matrix had Purdue as the last 3, but I think their resume was much closer to the best 3.
View attachment 169032


  • Purdue probably has a better resume than Iowa State, especially with a win, but I can't ignore the head to head.
  • I couldn't justify Illinois Predictive metrics jumping UConn and MSU. Their Q1 record trumps it.
  • Gonzaga was tough. I decided Vandy and Virginia's Q1 was good enough to trump Gonzaga's predictive metrics. That wasn't true for Alabama.
  • A Vandy win might let them jump Illinois. An Arkansas win probably gets them to the last 4 seed.
Click to expand...

Do you really think Nebraska drops out of the top 16? I know there’ve been seed decisions in the past that really surprise people, but I don’t see that happening
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bob f
cycub51 said:
I had feared Michigan but after watching them recently I don’t think they are near as good as Houston or Arizona. They are long but not as athletic as either of those teams.
Click to expand...
Their bigs are scary but Cadeau is also a turnover machine and Toure/Lipsey would give him fits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinch
not-the-manager said:
Do you really think Nebraska drops out of the top 16? I know there’ve been seed decisions in the past that really surprise people, but I don’t really see that
Click to expand...
I may change my mind. Their BPI and Torvik are 5 seed worthy. Good Quad 1 record but only 5 wins against tourney teams. Tech only has 4, but they have wins of Duke, Houston and Arizona. Arkansas might have 10, plus a win over Tech head to head. I might have to move them up even if they lose today. Kansas also has 10. I hadn't looked that close at wins against teams in the field but might have to adjust.
 
  • Like
Reactions: not-the-manager
theyork said:
uconn and msu were already ahead of isu. how does isu jump them by also not winning their conference tourney?
Click to expand...
We won two games in the tournament convincingly, while neither of those teams did. We also played Arizona to a one score game, which has to help our seeding. ISU also has a higher NET ranking at 7 to UCONN at 10 and MSU at 11.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tailg8er and Jdk
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom