Bubble teams | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Bubble teams

Status
Not open for further replies.
2 things.

1) Espn's bubble watch is not conservative about "locking" teams, and will unlock them if a team picks up some bad losses.

3) Lunardi is known for switching in teams from non-major conferences into his final projections, usually without explanation. This enables him to keep stringing along fans of mediocre high major teams while keeping his track record on his final projection.

So just because espn is saying something about a team's tournament chances now doesn't mean their writers even believe it.
 
I'm thinking any team from St. Joe's and higher (using S-curve from Daily Bracket) is not going to fall out at this point. So that should mean 10 spots are still open for debate. IMO, there are 15 teams still competing for those slots.

I think the current bubble more or less breaks down as follows:
Need one win to lock: Nebraska, Gonzaga, Ariz St., Okla St., Stanford, Iowa, Pitt, Cal
Need two wins: Arkansas, SMU, Xavier, BYU, Tenn
Need three wins: Minn, G'Town

If any of the one-win teams loses in 1st round of their tourneys, there's certainly a chance that one of the two-win teams can jump them with only one win.
 
Last edited:
Jerry1714 said:
I reference other people to reiterate the point they are a lock.

The projected RPI is a flawed tool.

The best case for SMU I believe is finishing 1-2. That one potential win being Houston. If so, care to wager if they get in or not?
Expand ...

I'd love to know why you think the projected RPI as "a flawed tool" , especially given that it's:

1) A statistical estimate, that as of right now has:
2) A full data set.

There isn't really that much movement possible in these numbers, given the number of games in play now. The estimate of what will happen is likely spot on, or at most a spot or 2 off.
 
pepband99 said:
I'd love to know why you think the projected RPI as "a flawed tool" , especially given that it's:

1) A statistical estimate, that as of right now has:
2) A full data set.

There isn't really that much movement possible in these numbers, given the number of games in play now. The estimate of what will happen is likely spot on, or at most a spot or 2 off.
Expand ...

If you read the methodology for BPI, it's a better tool than RPI. It takes into account things like star players missing from the lineup among other data points that RPI doesn't account for.
 
.-.
storrsroars said:
I'm thinking any team from St. Joe's and higher is not going to fall out at this point. So that should mean 10 spots are still open for debate. IMO, there are 15 teams still competing for those slots.

I think the current bubble more or less breaks down as follows:
Need one win to lock: Nebraska, Gonzaga, Ariz St., Okla St., Stanford, Iowa, Pitt, Cal
Need two wins: Arkansas, SMU, Xavier, BYU, Tenn
Need three wins: Minn, G'Town

If any of the one-win teams loses in 1st round of their tourneys, there's certainly a chance that one of the two-win teams can jump them with only one win.
Expand ...

Fair assessment for the most part. I do think the bubble is a little smaller than that. Any team with an RPI 40 or better is locked in at this point (BYU, Dayton, Gonzaga), and 41-45 are in excellent shape. Southern Miss and Toledo are exceptions, and the Selection Committee has a track record of keeping teams like them out if they don't at least make their conference final. RPI Rankings of 46 and down have some work and scoreboard watching to do.

The Committee has a long history of leaning very heavily on RPI to put the field together, and when it is really close, the teams with the better RPI's generally get the bids.

Tonight is a big night for the bubble because both Gonzaga and BYU play. If they both win, that saves a bid for an Arkansas or Minnesota.
 
pepband99 said:
Yes, but the BPI isn't what the committee uses.
Expand ...

Which has nothing to do with the assertion that RPI is a flawed tool. Compared to BPI, and maybe even KenPom among other rating methods, RPI does seem incomplete, thus flawed.
 
You're missing the original point. Jerry1714 was claiming the PROJECTED RPI was flawed because (paraphrasing) "there could be upsets, so that number might not be close to right"

It's not about whether or not the metric is right as a measure of teams.
 
Last night's http://www.bracketmatrix.com/ entry has SMU off on one bracket, and down to a 10 seed. And that's before they play Houston.

I still stick to my guess here - win, and they're in. Lose, and they sweat.
 
.-.
the RPI is very flawed. Ex: PC has an RPI of 53 right now; squarely on the bubble. If PC had been able to hold onto a 3 pt lead with 8 seconds left(with the ball) and beat Seton Hall in Providence; PC's RPI jumps to 39; effectively punching their ticket. Beating a team with an RPI of 148 should not make you an NCAA team.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
2 things.

1) Espn's bubble watch is not conservative about "locking" teams, and will unlock them if a team picks up some bad losses.

3) Lunardi is known for switching in teams from non-major conferences into his final projections, usually without explanation. This enables him to keep stringing along fans of mediocre high major teams while keeping his track record on his final projection.

So just because espn is saying something about a team's tournament chances now doesn't mean their writers even believe it.
Expand ...
You think bubble watch is not conservative because you think teams like Iowa are on the bubble.

You are on an island with a lot of your opinions, that is not bubble watches fault.
 
seanmc94 said:
the RPI is very flawed. Ex: PC has an RPI of 53 right now; squarely on the bubble. If PC had been able to hold onto a 3 pt lead with 8 seconds left(with the ball) and beat Seton Hall in Providence; PC's RPI jumps to 39; effectively punching their ticket. Beating a team with an RPI of 148 should not make you an NCAA team.
Expand ...

It should, if you're rating teams against one another. A SH home win, in a vacuum, indeed is not much. When it's your 9th or 10th loss you're talking about, and that tends to be the cut line, it's huge.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
1 top 25 win, 4-8 vs. Top 50, 6-11 vs. Top 100, only 19 wins, 46 rpi. Falling apart down the stretch. Hardly a lock.
Expand ...

...and they go < 60 if they lose their opening round B1G tourney game. Has a team with < 20 wins and an RPI under even 40, much less 50, ever made it?
 
pepband99 said:
...and they go < 60 if they lose their opening round B1G tourney game. Has a team with < 20 wins and an RPI under even 40, much less 50, ever made it?
Expand ...
The lowest rated teams to get at-large bids (ALB): #67 USC, #64 Marquette (2011), #63 NC State (2005), #63 Stanford (2007).

Fewest wins to get an ALB: 17 (Alabama - 2006)

Worst record to get an ALB: 18-14 .563 (Arizona - 2008, Michigan St - 2011)

Iowa has 2 losses outside the Top 50. No chance they do not get in.
 
Jerry1714 said:
The lowest rated teams to get at-large bids (ALB): #67 USC, #64 Marquette (2011), #63 NC State (2005), #63 Stanford (2007).

Fewest wins to get an ALB: 17 (Alabama - 2006)

Worst record to get an ALB: 18-14 .563 (Arizona - 2008, Michigan St - 2011)

Iowa has 2 losses outside the Top 50. No chance they do not get in.
Expand ...

2011:
USC was 19-14, with a SOS around 37
Marquette was 20-15, SOS around 20


So, I missed a few historical outliers. You do realize trying to legitimize your "No chance they do not get it" with the ALL TIME LOWEST AT LARGE BIDS EVER isn't that smart, right?
 
.-.
pepband99 said:
2011:
USC was 19-14, with a SOS around 37
Marquette was 20-15, SOS around 20


So, I missed a few historical outliers. You do realize trying to legitimize your "No chance they do not get it" with the ALL TIME LOWEST AT LARGE BIDS EVER isn't that smart, right?
Expand ...
I do not need to legitimize Iowa, there is no doubt they are in the tournament.

You asked about teams with certain qualifications getting in, I provided you the worst teams to get in. That had nothing to do with Iowa.

SMU is much more debatable than Iowa, while I do not think they are debatable, I can buy it a little more.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
2 things.

1) Espn's bubble watch is not conservative about "locking" teams, and will unlock them if a team picks up some bad losses.

3) Lunardi is known for switching in teams from non-major conferences into his final projections, usually without explanation. This enables him to keep stringing along fans of mediocre high major teams while keeping his track record on his final projection.

So just because espn is saying something about a team's tournament chances now doesn't mean their writers even believe it.
Expand ...

 
Jerry1714 said:
You think bubble watch is not conservative because you think teams like Iowa are on the bubble.

You are on an island with a lot of your opinions, that is not bubble watches fault.
Expand ...

I think the bubble watch is not that conservative because it blatantly favors big conference schools that are on ESPN. Conservative or aggressive have little to do with its classifications. It still has BYU on the bubble, and it's RPI's are not even correct. According to BW, Pitt has a 41 RPI ranking and Nebraska is at 35. Both are way off.

I don't really give a s about Iowa. They are one of several schools that are in a lot of trouble right now, and have some work to do to get in. A win over Northwestern probably does the trick, but that depends on what everyone else does. You think they can lose to Northwestern and still get in. We disagree.

Another school in trouble that no one is paying attention to is Kansas State. 7 Top 50 wins, but 2-7 on the road, and one of the "neutral court" wins was in Wichita. Their best road win is over 114 Texas Tech, and they are probably going down in their next game. I can't remember ever seeing an at-large team with a resume like this one.
 
I think the tournament field will almost all set by Thursday night.
 
Bubble per Lunardi

The Bubble (23 teams for 10 spots)

IN (10, in S-Curve order): 38. Colorado, 39. Pittsburgh, 40. Stanford, 41. Nebraska, 42. Tennessee, 43. Xavier, 44. Saint Joseph's, 45. Dayton, 46. Brigham Young, 47. Arkansas
OUT (13, in S-Curve order): 69. California, 70. Minnesota, 71, St. John's, 72. Providence, 73. Southern Miss, 74. Florida State, 75. Missouri, 76. Georgetown, 77. Green Bay, 78. West Virginia, 79. Utah, 80. Georgia, 81. Maryland
 
Jerry1714 said:
You think bubble watch is not conservative because you think teams like Iowa are on the bubble.

You are on an island with a lot of your opinions, that is not bubble watches fault.
Expand ...
Beat the johnnies tomorrow and you're in. It won't be easy in the Garden, however.
 
.-.
Jerry1714 said:
Bubble per Lunardi

The Bubble (23 teams for 10 spots)

IN (10, in S-Curve order): 38. Colorado, 39. Pittsburgh, 40. Stanford, 41. Nebraska, 42. Tennessee, 43. Xavier, 44. Saint Joseph's, 45. Dayton, 46. Brigham Young, 47. Arkansas
OUT (13, in S-Curve order): 69. California, 70. Minnesota, 71, St. John's, 72. Providence, 73. Southern Miss, 74. Florida State, 75. Missouri, 76. Georgetown, 77. Green Bay, 78. West Virginia, 79. Utah, 80. Georgia, 81. Maryland
Expand ...
So nice seeing SJU, Providence, Georgetown, WVU and Maryland on the outside looking in.
 
Jerry1714 said:
I am not a player for PC or a fan of theirs......
Expand ...
Sorry about that, Jerry, I meant to reply to Sean, and inadvertently hit your post.
Wouldn't want to wish the PC rooting interest on anybody but Sean.
 
seanmc94 said:
Gtown is cooked unless they win out; same with minny
Expand ...

Gtown has real wins that PC doesn't. As usual you guys have a pathetic OOC schedule and lost to the only semi decent teams on it - UMass and MD. The C7 is a 3 bid league.
 
Georgetown just lost to DePaul, so you can pretty much eliminate them from tournament consideration. It'd be easy to say PC gets in if they beat St. John's tomorrow, but I'm not so sure. They've got four teams to jump, and I'm not sure if a win over #59 St. John's does the trick.
 
Jerry1714 said:
Bubble per Lunardi

The Bubble (23 teams for 10 spots)

IN (10, in S-Curve order): 38. Colorado, 39. Pittsburgh, 40. Stanford, 41. Nebraska, 42. Tennessee, 43. Xavier, 44. Saint Joseph's, 45. Dayton, 46. Brigham Young, 47. Arkansas
OUT (13, in S-Curve order): 69. California, 70. Minnesota, 71, St. John's, 72. Providence, 73. Southern Miss, 74. Florida State, 75. Missouri, 76. Georgetown, 77. Green Bay, 78. West Virginia, 79. Utah, 80. Georgia, 81. Maryland
Expand ...

In terms of in or out, my only disagreement is Arkansas, who I think is out without a trip to the SEC finals, and I think the winner of SJU/PC is probably going, although not quite guaranteed. Cal could slip in ahead of them.

In terms of the ranking, Lunardi is way, way, way off. Dayton and Brigham Young are completely safe right now. Pitt and Iowa are near the bottom of the "In" category.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,205
Messages
4,556,825
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom