Andy Katz says UConn is a sleeper pick for the Final Four | The Boneyard

Andy Katz says UConn is a sleeper pick for the Final Four

HooperScooper said:
I just like UConn being mentioned in things like this. It's been a long 5 years.

About the 2:00 mark.

Expand ...

Sleeper pick for final four and yet the bracket experts seem to think we still need to prove ourselves. Show we are a different team with Bouk in the lineup.

If we are as good as we think and as good as experts like Katz think. Then we probably have to be a 6 seed or lower. Anything higher forces a top seed to play us in the first weekend. Great season {insert top team name}, you may lose in the second round.
 
NDakotaHusky said:
Sleeper pick for final four and yet the bracket experts seem to think we still need to prove ourselves. Show we are a different team with Bouk in the lineup.

If we are as good as we think and as good as experts like Katz think. Then we probably have to be a 6 seed or lower. Anything higher forces a top seed to play us in the first weekend. Great season {insert top team name}, you may lose in the second round.
Expand ...
Not sure you understand how seeding works.........
 
If AA can give us 10 minutes a game and polley can avg 6 pts and 4 of anything else combined with JC and BA with some good D minutes. Yes. Yes we can. We MUST keep hitting from the line. The 2014 model is the key.
 
.-.
Like rip van winkle style sleeper. We have one high quality, win over USC. Win the BET and then let's talk.
 
So, I’m assuming he thinks we make the tournament...
 
HeGotGame said:
Not sure you understand how seeding works.........
Expand ...
I’m not sure Katz does in this instance.

We’re 26 in Kenpom (7 seed)
23 in BPI (6 seed), and
32 in NET (8 seed)

So we’re 6-8 by the metrics. Katz has us as a 10 in his bracket for some reason.

It’s a little incoherent for him to personally dock us in the seeding relative to our objective numbers while simultaneously talking us up as a sleeper pick for the Final Four.
 
.-.
HeGotGame said:
He is right
Expand ...
Especially the way our bigs have been playing of late. With Whaley and Sanogo playing they have of late and if Josh is healthy I think we can go far. The team as a whole just seems to be peeking at the right time. The BET will be very telling. If we win the BET then I wonder where we are seeded.
 
VAHuskyFan said:
I’m not sure Katz does in this instance.

We’re 26 in Kenpom (7 seed)
23 in BPI (6 seed), and
32 in NET (8 seed)

So we’re 6-8 by the metrics. Katz has us as a 10 in his bracket for some reason.

It’s a little incoherent for him to personally dock us in the seeding relative to our objective numbers while simultaneously talking us up as a sleeper pick for the Final Four.
Expand ...
The consensus on Bracket Matrix is a 10 seed

 
I dont care if your Gonzaga or any of the other top seeds, if you see Uconn in your bracket it becomes a serious concern. We`ve won two titles in recent memory that we had no business winning. If we win the BET thats going to make them an even bigger concern.
How do i feel about our chances this year? I totally believe we can cut the nets down. The last two titles showed me that this program can make the impossible possible. If Bouk gets hot and Cole continues to play at the level hes playing March has shown time and time again the tourney is about guard play. Kemba/Lamb Bazz/Boat. Why not Bouk/Cole?
 
TheChamps990411 said:
I dont care if your Gonzaga or any of the other top seeds, if you see Uconn in your bracket it becomes a serious concern. We`ve won two titles in recent memory that we had no business winning. If we win the BET thats going to make them an even bigger concern.
How do i feel about our chances this year? I totally believe we can cut the nets down. The last two titles showed me that this program can make the impossible possible. If Bouk gets hot and Cole continues to play at the level hes playing March has shown time and time again the tourney is about guard play. Kemba/Lamb Bazz/Boat. Why not Bouk/Cole?
Expand ...
Going to have to update your already-out-of-date handle.
 
.-.
I see similarities to the Dream Season 1989-90 squad. They both play tough, nothing easy defense, they both seem to be confident going into games and seem to be able to close out games, the scoring can come from anyone. I'd take the Dream Team roster over this year's without any doubt, but still something about this year's team reminds me of them.
 
VAHuskyFan said:
I’m not sure Katz does in this instance.

We’re 26 in Kenpom (7 seed)
23 in BPI (6 seed), and
32 in NET (8 seed)

So we’re 6-8 by the metrics. Katz has us as a 10 in his bracket for some reason.

It’s a little incoherent for him to personally dock us in the seeding relative to our objective numbers while simultaneously talking us up as a sleeper pick for the Final Four.
Expand ...
Most people seemed to be confused how these metrics are used. I'm posting this Q&A from Jerry Palm again for reference.

Q: "Why is [insert your team here] seeded in your bracket much lower than its metrics?"

Talk to the Palm: Because metrics aren't that important. To see what is important, read this link here.

But here is a relatively recent example. In 2017, Wichita State fans were killing me because I had them squarely on the bubble while it was in the top 10 in KenPom. The Shockers won the MVC Tournament, ended up 8th in KenPom's rankings and earned a 10-seed in the bracket. If all you have is metrics, you have nothing. The resume has to back it up.

Even Ken Pomeroy thinks using his metrics in the selection process is a bad idea. At a meeting we attended when the NCAA was exploring replacing the RPI, he told the NCAA folks that they should not use his ratings because he is not measuring what they are trying to reward.

www.cbssports.com

Talk to the Palm: Bracketology mailbag explores the race to No. 1 seeds in 2021 NCAA Tournament

Bracketology Expert Jerry Palm answers your questions about the top seeds in March Madness
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
 
I get that the metrics aren’t everything. But let’s say you look at the metrics + “eye test” + special circumstances.

(1) Metrics: 6-8 seed.
(2) Eye test: “Good enough to make the Final Four!” -Katz
(3) Special Circumstances: (A) Best player out with injury for 8 games (9-2 when playing); (B) Won 5 of last 6 down the stretch (all games against Top 100 opponents; ave. margin of victory > 10 points).

Factors 2 and 3 both say UConn is a BETTER team than the metrics indicate. (Colgate is another story.)

I’s not that there’s never a reason to seed a team up or down from the metrics. It’s that there’s no reason to seed UConn worse than the metrics.

I think what’s happening with Lunardi/Katz/etc. is just lock-in bias. UConn was in the 50s/60s in the metrics a month ago and has shot up to where we are today. Computers have no problem jumping us ahead of other teams. But “bracketologists” are wary of bumping an existing team down unless they lose. So a team like UConn that rises rapidly in the metrics gets stuck behind other, lesser teams (because those teams were previously ahead of us and haven’t done anything to “deserve” being downgraded).

We’re 10 on Katz’s bracket because we were 11 last week. Not because he has any particularly good reason to dock us 2-4 seeds from what the metrics say.
 
.-.
We should have the best player going into most games, up to the supporting cast to show up for bouk.
 
Huskyforlife said:
We should have the best player going into most games, up to the supporting cast to show up for bouk.
Expand ...
And our best player needs to trust his supporting cast and not try to do it all himself just like other UConn alpha guards have done in the past for the team to be successful.
 
Last edited:
VAHuskyFan said:
I’m not sure Katz does in this instance.

We’re 26 in Kenpom (7 seed)
23 in BPI (6 seed), and
32 in NET (8 seed)

So we’re 6-8 by the metrics. Katz has us as a 10 in his bracket for some reason.

It’s a little incoherent for him to personally dock us in the seeding relative to our objective numbers while simultaneously talking us up as a sleeper pick for the Final Four.
Expand ...
He's going by the eye test, not the numbers
 
UconnFanDC said:
He's going by the eye test, not the numbers
Expand ...
The eye test either has to say we’re better or worse than the metrics (6-8 seed).

Katz is going with “both.”

Saying we look strong enough to make the Final Four suggests “better.” Giving us a 10-seed definitely suggests “worse.” Katz is a little confused at the moment.
 
Wouldn't the numbers and seeding be based
VAHuskyFan said:
The eye test either has to say we’re better or worse than the metrics (6-8 seed).

Katz is going with “both.”

Saying we look strong enough to make the Final Four suggests “better.” Giving us a 10-seed definitely suggests “worse.” Katz is a little confused at the moment.
Expand ...
Lol I don't agree but ok. As long as we our in and play well are my hopes.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,535
Messages
4,581,091
Members
10,491
Latest member
7774Forever


Top Bottom