Committee Reveal. # 2

[visitingcock]

 

[visitingcock]

No Big 12 team in Top 8 seeds is unusual, but not surprising.

Two teams from one conference in the Top 4 is a bit unusual but not shocking. Of course those two will probably play two more games against each other before the final selection, so one could drop down with two losses.

UConn, being NET ranked # 2 and dropping 5 spots to seed #7, seems a rather drastic departure and shows us something to ponder for the future.

Conference tournaments could throw many of these 3 through 8 predictions out the window

A wild and fun 10 days ahead !

 

[JellyBean]

Yeah. Definitely odd not seeing a Big 12 Team among the Top 8 seeds. One of those seasons.

Utah is that surprise team but I am happy to see a fresh team in that Top 10. Same with Indiana. Not a surprise but glad that the Big Ten is well represented. Hopefully the Big Ten team can reach the Final Four and into the NCAA Championship game. Let's go, Big Ten!!

 

[cancontent]

Carter last night was making a case for Maryland to be a number 1 over Utah. I get where she's coming from, but as I haven't seen a lot of Utah, I can't agree with it. Maryland being a #2 when there were many questioning how they would fare after losing Reese, Owusu and Collins is nothing to sneeze at.

Like Jellybean said, the Big 10 is well represented. Possibly the best in quite some time. Looking forward to the Big 10 tourney next week.

 

[Big12wbbFan]

Yeah. Definitely odd not seeing a Big 12 Team among the Top 8 seeds. One of those seasons.

Utah is that surprise team but I am happy to see a fresh team in that Top 10. Same with Indiana. Not a surprise but glad that the Big Ten is well represented. Hopefully the Big Ten team can reach the Final Four and into the NCAA Championship game. Let's go, Big Ten!!

Definitely a down year for the Big 12. Iowa State, Baylor and Kansas State lost top players to season ending injuries. Also, Texas has had some injury issues. Just one of those years.

 

[bballnut90]

I can see a lot of these teams playing themselves up or down the seeding chart. The only safe bets IMO are SC at 1 and Indiana at 2.

Stanford looks safe at 3 IMO. The rest is quite compelling. Utah is well positioned but doesn't look like a top 5 team IMO based on results. So many close games (which they're winning, to their credit) and their best win was early in the year over OU. Maryland has some terrible losses but great wins and is coming on strong, LSU has a near perfect record but hasn't played anyone, UCONN has great wins but is fumbling hard, 8-12 feels like a toss up depending on how it shakes out.

 

[southie]

Last night's reveal was confusing as far as movement from the previous reveal. Both Creme and Carter were right to question things (such as Utah moving up despite a loss to Arizona which wasn't even Top 16 until this reveal).

Seems like the committee is going to overlook LSU's weak non-conference schedule. Both reveals had them as the #5 overall national seed. If they make it to the SEC championship game (probably have to beat unranked Tennessee in the semi-finals), and one team above them (like Indiana or Utah) falter prior to their own conference championship game, LSU will be a #1 seed. Give Mulkey credit for the #92 SOS schedule she came up with as NET apparently rewards margin of victory (even against very bad teams); she knew how to beat the system.

Conversely, teams like UConn and Tennessee being punished for losing tough games while having the #1 and #2 SOS.

NET Ranking - Women's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com

2023 Women's College Basketball NET Ranking: NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET) a ranking of teams based on five factors, team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage, and scoring margin.

www.warrennolan.com

 

[southie]

I like this view of the regions:

 

[southie]

As much progress as I want to believe the committee has made by using NET more than RPI, they still can't get past putting a huge emphasis on the number of losses a team has (without context), and wanting to reward fewer losses whenever possible. And, this reveal was for sure influenced by most recent wins/losses instead of overall body of work, IMO.

Teams that were seeded higher than I think they should simply because they have fewer losses than teams with stronger SOS (but more losses):

#4 Utah (3 losses)
#5 LSU (1 loss)
#8 Virginia Tech (4 losses)


#6 Maryland (5 losses)
#7 UConn (5 losses)

 

[Rowdy831]

As much progress as I want to believe the committee has made by using NET more than RPI, they still can't get past putting a huge emphasis on the number of losses a team has (without context), and wanting to reward fewer losses whenever possible. And, this reveal was for sure influenced by most recent wins/losses instead of overall body of work, IMO.

Teams that were seeded higher than I think they should simply because they have fewer losses than teams with stronger SOS (but more losses):

#4 Utah (3 losses)
#5 LSU (1 loss)
#8 Virginia Tech (4 losses)


#6 Maryland (5 losses)
#7 UConn (5 losses)

I agree with your thinking but UCONN has lost to a couple of pretty week teams. They have played a difficult schedule for sure but they didn't develop and depth and they simply have no way to sit players when they are struggling. Maryland though has been playing good ball once they got going. I agree wholly with LSU and Utah, they might have difficulty when they get into the second weekend of the Tournament.

 

[GoChips20]

To me the four best teams are pretty clearly SC, Indiana, Stanford, and UConn (in that order). I’d be surprised if they aren’t the four 1-seeds.

 

[TheFarmFan]

To me the four best teams are pretty clearly SC, Indiana, Stanford, and UConn (in that order). I’d be surprised if they aren’t the four 1-seeds.

I think UConn with Fudd clearly is, without her, I'm pretty skeptical. IIRC, the committee does its reveals premised on the personnel available at the time of the reveal. If so, I think UConn at #7 is about right. But if Fudd can come back, they will be the most dangerous team in the country come late March.

 

[bballnut90]

As much progress as I want to believe the committee has made by using NET more than RPI, they still can't get past putting a huge emphasis on the number of losses a team has (without context), and wanting to reward fewer losses whenever possible. And, this reveal was for sure influenced by most recent wins/losses instead of overall body of work, IMO.

Teams that were seeded higher than I think they should simply because they have fewer losses than teams with stronger SOS (but more losses):

#4 Utah (3 losses)
#5 LSU (1 loss)
#8 Virginia Tech (4 losses)


#6 Maryland (5 losses)
#7 UConn (5 losses)

I do think how a team finishes the season should have bearing on their tournament seeding. Games in November aren't indicative of a team's level of play compared to games played in February. UCONN is in an interesting predicament IMO. On one hand, they have some strong wins (Texas, Duke, Iowa), but those were largely anchored by massive performances from Azzi Fudd who hasn't really played in 3 months. The UCONN team as of late is a borderline top 25 squad. They've lost to 2 unranked foes and nearly lost to 2 others in their past 6 games. If I'm on the committee, I think it's hard to justify them as a 2 seed when their only top 25 win without Fudd is vs. Villanova and they're stumbling as the regular season is finishing up.

 

[GamecockFam]

To me the four best teams are pretty clearly SC, Indiana, Stanford, and UConn (in that order). I’d be surprised if they aren’t the four 1-seeds.

I disagree. I think UConn and Stanford pass the eye test but there is a lot of room for doubt due to some questionable losses. South Carolina and Indiana have separated themselves from the pack and deserve the 1-seed status. There's like 6 or so teams in that second group that just can't seem to separate themselves to guarantee a 1-seed at this point of the season. It may very well come down to the conference tournament results determining the remaining 1 seeds.

 

[southie]

I do think how a team finishes the season should have bearing on their tournament seeding. Games in November aren't indicative of a team's level of play compared to games played in February. UCONN is in an interesting predicament IMO. On one hand, they have some strong wins (Texas, Duke, Iowa), but those were largely anchored by massive performances from Azzi Fudd who hasn't really played in 3 months. The UCONN team as of late is a borderline top 25 squad. They've lost to 2 unranked foes and nearly lost to 2 others in their past 6 games. If I'm on the committee, I think it's hard to justify them as a 2 seed when their only top 25 win without Fudd is vs. Villanova and they're stumbling as the regular season is finishing up.

That's not really what I was saying, as I agree with your statement. Charlie Creme pointed out during the reveal announcement that it seemed like the committee put too much weight on recent outcomes which occurred just a handful of days prior to the reveal. He specifically mentioned Ohio State's win at Michigan, and Arizona's wins over Utah. Now, those wins should matter; but, I don't think they should get that much more weight than other games played within the last 7 days. Regardless, those seedings will change again (and the committee's logic will probably change, as well).

 

[GCKSFN4L]

I feel as though at this point in the season. There are only two locks for the #1 seed, SC and Indiana. After that things get interesting.

Before today Stanford would have been a lock but I think Stanford, Maryland, Utah are the top current candidates to contend for the others two spots. The conference tournaments will have huge implications on who ends up where.

Unlike most years we really don't really have a universal top 4 teams. I would not be surprised if multiple #1 seeds don't make it to Dallas this year.

 

[southie]

I feel as though at this point in the season. There are only two locks for the #1 seed, SC and Indiana. After that things get interesting.

Before today Stanford would have been a lock but I think Stanford, Maryland, Utah are the top current candidates to contend for the others two spots. The conference tournaments will have huge implications on who ends up where.

Unlike most years we really don't really have a universal top 4 teams. I would not be surprised if multiple #1 seeds don't make it to Dallas this year.

I'm sure we can dissect each team as to why they shouldn't be a Top 4 national seed; with Maryland, a 25-point home loss to #1 South Carolina might get a pass; but, a 9-point loss to DePaul and 23-point loss at Nebraska both of whom won't make the NCAA tournament and could finish with losing records should not be ignored.

In their favor would be a head-to-head win over UConn.

 

[GCKSFN4L]

I'm sure we can dissect each team as to why they shouldn't be a Top 4 national seed; with Maryland, a 25-point home loss to #1 South Carolina might get a pass; but, a 9-point loss to DePaul and 23-point loss at Nebraska both of whom won't make the NCAA tournament and could finish with losing records should not be ignored.

In their favor would be a head-to-head win over UConn.

I personally think the SC loss won't hurt them at all especially without Miller playing. Their "bad* losses all occurred in the first month of the season. Maryland looks like a completely different team now and is playing well in conference play with a strong SOS. Maryland's resume appears to be #1 seed worthy this season.

 

[southie]

I personally think the SC loss won't hurt them at all especially without Miller playing. Their "bad* losses all occurred in the first month of the season. Maryland looks like a completely different team now and is playing well in conference play with a strong SOS. Maryland's resume appears to be #1 seed worthy this season.

You might be right. Losses to DePaul and Nebraska (both of whom could end up with losing records) should be considered "bad" losses even if they occurred in November and December. Otherwise, let's just start the season in January. No way the committee can put an asterisk on every loss a team played where they missed a player due to illness or injury, or hadn't jelled yet.

 

[GCKSFN4L]

You might be right. Losses to DePaul and Nebraska (both of whom could end up with losing records) should be considered "bad" losses even if they occurred in November and December. Otherwise, let's just start the season in January. No way the committee can put an asterisk on every loss a team played where they missed a player due to illness or injury, or hadn't jelled yet.

I never said they didn't count, but it's impact will likely be less influential due to how they improved in the latter 2/3 of the season. Momentum in how you play leading up to the postseason has always played a part when it comes to rankings.

 

[southie]

I never said they didn't count, but it's impact will likely be less influential due to how they improved in the latter 2/3 of the season. Momentum in how you play leading up to the postseason has always played a part when it comes to rankings.

That's an opinion and "how they improved" isn't really tangible; it's not like the other 3-5 teams vying for the last #1 seed haven't "improved" over the last 2/3 of the season.

Those losses to DePaul and Nebraska could be the specific reason why Maryland doesn't get a #1 seed (unless Stanford, Indiana, and Utah have comparable bad losses). When it comes to the committee finding separation between the top teams, bad losses will be scrutinized, IMO, regardless of when they occurred.

 

[GoChips20]

Stanford’s loss probably nails home Indiana as a 1-seed. Either Utah or Stanford (if not both) have to pick up another loss in the PAC-12 tournament.

 

[visitingcock]

Stanford’s loss probably nails home Indiana as a 1-seed. Either Utah or Stanford (if not both) have to pick up another loss in the PAC-12 tournament.

You are probably correct.

If Indiana loses today it shouldn’t matter. If they loses today AND lose again in the Big 10 tournament, it could drop them from 2 but probably not out of the top 4/5.

In the interesting but unimportant trivia category is this: Indiana gave South Carolina it’s last “ unavenged” loss ( in 2019).

 

[LowkeyX]

I'm sure we can dissect each team as to why they shouldn't be a Top 4 national seed; with Maryland, a 25-point home loss to #1 South Carolina might get a pass; but, a 9-point loss to DePaul and 23-point loss at Nebraska both of whom won't make the NCAA tournament and could finish with losing records should not be ignored.

In their favor would be a head-to-head win over UConn.

Well you could easily say the same thing about Indiana losing to (15-13) Michigan St. and Stanford losing to (15-13) Washington. Both of those teams lost to teams that most likely won’t make the NCAA’s and even though Indiana’s was without Berger, MD’s 25 point loss to SC was without Miller and it was their 2nd game of the season with a relatively new squad.

If MD wins the Big10 tourney, they are definitely one of the teams deserving of the last 1 seed… unless Utah wins the Pac10 tourney. VA Tech beating multiple ranked teams and winning the ACC tourney would be interesting too.

 

[Darwin]

Definitely a down year for the Big 12. Iowa State, Baylor and Kansas State lost top players to season ending injuries. Also, Texas has had some injury issues. Just one of those years.

Texas is firing on all cylinders right now, watch out for that team, bracket buster type team that will probably make a run in the tourney.