3-4 seed???

[Vowelguy]

I would love it if UConn is a 6 seed or lower, and then just dummies everyone in their bracket and makes it to the final 4.

This is a bad take.

 

[JoePgh]

A couple of points:

1. I don't think the NCAA committee is allowed (at least officially) to take injuries or missing players into account -- I believe it is limited to teams' actual records and the quality of their opponents. So the fact that UConn in March may be a lot better than UConn in December or January because of the return of missing players is not something that is (officially) "allowed" to affect its seeding.
2. From a self-interested standpoint, it would be better for UConn to be a #6 seed than a #4 or #5 seed. Either #4 or #5 would have to face a #1-seeded team in the Sweet 16, while a #6 seed would face a #3 seed in the Round of 32 (which I think UConn would win handily with its March roster), then probably face a #2 seed in the Sweet 16 (much better than #1), and then face #1 in the Elite 8.

Of course, i agree that UConn's March roster (if there are no further injuries) will be at least competitive against all #1 seeds. It was more than competitive against South Carolina for 32 minutes, and that was before the emergence of Caroline Ducharme. And I also think Azzi will make a small but significant contribution off the bench by the time March rolls around.

 

[LoboDays]

None of this really matters. We all know that they are a number #1 seed at Full strength and a 2,3,4 when playing with the current lineup. It doesn’t make the polls wrong and it won’t make the seeders wrong. They can’t make assumptions about how good a team would be at full strength. I don’t care about what seed they are or the strength or weakness of a particular bracket. Just go out on the court and beat the opponent. Nothing else matters.

 

[Stymie]

None of this really matters. We all know that they are a number #1 seed at Full strength and a 2,3,4 when playing with the current lineup. It doesn’t make the polls wrong and it won’t make the seeders wrong. They can’t make assumptions about how good a team would be at full strength. I don’t care about what seed they are or the strength or weakness of a particular bracket. Just go out on the court and beat the opponent. Nothing else matters.

I don’t Believe they’re a #2 the way they’re playing now.
OREGON game proved that.
I know the CW was a late scratch.
May have made a difference in the final score, but not the final outcome.
IF they can get Azzi back and work her in for maybe 15-20 a game, and she finds her shot (which was only kinda there before her shutdown), then they start to become a threat to the top dogs.
Her availability will allow the other guards to play more aggressive ( defensively)
and her shot will open up the middle.
Not sure IF, WHEN or how effectively Paige will be upon her return.

 

[CTBballfan243]

I don’t Believe they’re a #2 the way they’re playing now.
OREGON game proved that.
I know the CW was a late scratch.
May have made a difference in the final score, but not the final outcome.
IF they can get Azzi back and work her in for maybe 15-20 a game, and she finds her shot (which was only kinda there before her shutdown), then they start to become a threat to the top dogs.
Her availability will allow the other guards to play more aggressive ( defensively)
and her shot will open up the middle.
Not sure IF, WHEN or how effectively Paige will be upon her return.

I wouldn’t worry about Paige. She could play right now with a leg brace and at 50% and be the best player in WCBB.

 

[VA Huskie]

A couple of points:

1. I don't think the NCAA committee is allowed (at least officially) to take injuries or missing players into account -- I believe it is limited to teams' actual records and the quality of their opponents. So the fact that UConn in March may be a lot better than UConn in December or January because of the return of missing players is not something that is (officially) "allowed" to affect its seeding.
2. From a self-interested standpoint, it would be better for UConn to be a #6 seed than a #4 or #5 seed. Either #4 or #5 would have to face a #1-seeded team in the Sweet 16, while a #6 seed would face a #3 seed in the Round of 32 (which I think UConn would win handily with its March roster), then probably face a #2 seed in the Sweet 16 (much better than #1), and then face #1 in the Elite 8.

Of course, i agree that UConn's March roster (if there are no further injuries) will be at least competitive against all #1 seeds. It was more than competitive against South Carolina for 32 minutes, and that was before the emergence of Caroline Ducharme. And I also think Azzi will make a small but significant contribution off the bench by the time March rolls around.

I’m pretty sure that the committee can, and does, take injuries into account.

 

[PAHuskeyFan]

Perhaps the headline for Charlie's arcticle is a bit of a stretch...something to get people to click on it...

With the CURRENT Team UCONN puts on the floor, they are ranked:
#10 in AP Poll
# 9 in Coaches Poll
# 7 in Massey
#13 in ESPN Power Rankings
and I suspect there are several other ranking services/tools I don't know about, but I suspect UCONN is in similar range.

Given the above rankings, it's hard to believe UCONN won't be in the Top 16 of the Tournament Selection Committee ASSUMING they win Wednesday vs Depaul, and the games they are supposed to win (i.e., BE regular season and tournament games). AND... as pieces of the team return and get blended into the mix, it would not surprise me to see UCONN climb a bit higher.
Regardless of their seed, UCONN should be a very difficult challenge for nearly anyone in the Big Dance.

GO HUSKIES!

 

[Vowelguy]

A couple of points:

1. I don't think the NCAA committee is allowed (at least officially) to take injuries or missing players into account -- I believe it is limited to teams' actual records and the quality of their opponents. So the fact that UConn in March may be a lot better than UConn in December or January because of the return of missing players is not something that is (officially) "allowed" to affect its seeding.

Not true at all.

Major injuries have been accounted for in the past. When Nykesha Sales got injured in 1998, UConn was dropped to a 3 seed. When Stanford players got injured in 1998, critics argued that they delayed getting MRIs so that the committee would not be able to downgrade their seed.

The committee's job is to rank/seed the teams from 1 to 64 to create an even, fair bracket. They have info on records & performance, but they also watch games, and assess teams quality.

A team that loses its first 10 games and then wins its last 20 will almost certainly be seeded better than a team that wins its first 20 and loses its last 10, even if they played the exact same teams. Why? Because the former is considered a much better team right now.

 

[sun]

In answer to questions about whether a recent significant injury (Colorado) is considered when making a selection.
If there's an RPI for a team after the injury.

RON WELLMAN: No, we have not factored that in in terms of the RPI. It is a factor that is considered when we receive the monitors' reports about the individual conferences. In fact, we just did a conference where we went into some depth about the injuries of those teams within that conference. So it is certainly considered to varying degrees by the individual members of the committee.

Some members of the committee probably consider it very strongly and other members less so. It is a subjective factor that the committee members do take into consideration, like I said, to varying degrees.

RON WELLMAN: I would say the injuries generally affect the seeding more than the selection process. We have to be very careful about the amount of emphasis that we put upon an injury. We don't know, for instance, the opponent of that player who is playing for Team A and might be injured. Well, what is the opponent's situation and what factors are impacting their level of play at that particular time. We just have to be very careful about what the injury impact is on any particular team.
But, like I said, I think my experience in the first four years on the committee is that the injuries affect the seeding rather than the selection to a greater degree.

Ron Wellman answers questions about seeding, game sites and more

RON WELLMAN: We're in the middle of the committee's annual selection orientation meeting which is a valuable exercise for all of us whether you're veterans or a rookie like Bruce Rasmussen, who is in his first year with us.This process allows the veterans on the committee to reacquaint...

www.ncaa.com

 

[LwrcasefaN]

As much as folks bemoan the committee for the brackets each year....remember these exchanges attempting to determine if UCONN..a single team... is a 3 or 4. And it can't be any easier of a job with all the cancellations and teams missing players. The healthiest team wins this year.

 

[PAHuskeyFan]

As much as folks bemoan the committee for the brackets each year....remember these exchanges attempting to determine if UCONN..a single team... is a 3 or 4. And it can't be any easier of a job with all the cancellations and teams missing players. The healthiest team wins this year.

But...but...but.... predicting and bemoaning the committee's brackets is an annual tradition, and something we really do well...

 

[LoboDays]

But...but...but.... predicting and bemoaning the committee's brackets is an annual tradition, and something we really do well...

It going to be a special year. Bemoaning is usually limited to the brackets. Now we can add the seedlings. I’m already starting to get aggravated.