Indiana takes down TOSU!
- Thread starter Zorro
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2021
- Messages
- 1,605
- Reaction Score
- 8,101
Not a surprise. The Hoosiers are likely the class of the Big Ten, and probably headed for a No. 1 seed.
LSU will only lose one game this year so, unless you think they will be the 1 seed over us, I don't see how this will happen.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,001
- Reaction Score
- 3,029
Yep. Lost to Iowa the other day, when Caitlin Clark got a triple double.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,815
- Reaction Score
- 5,519
No way the weak SEC gets two number one seeds. And unless you think LSU is winning the SEC tournament they are losing more than one game this year.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2021
- Messages
- 745
- Reaction Score
- 3,682
I am assuming that your “year” is equivalent to “regular season”.
correct
That certainly could be the case, but I'm not ready yet to conclude that LSU will be undefeated against everybody in the SEC except for SC. I don't think it is likely, but Tennessee has an underdog chance against LSU, and don't forget in the conference tournament LSU likely faces SC again.
The Indiana victory helps us move clearly ahead of Ohio State in a battle for a number 1 seed, but now makes Indiana a serious threat too. If you assume South Carolina and Stanford get two of those number 1 seeds, the battle for the last two could easily come down to Uconn, LSU and Indiana, particularly with Mabry out for Notre Dame.
For LSU and Uconn a loss to SC is largely forgivable, but a loss to anyone else hurts their chances for a 1 seed. Indiana doesn't have SC to worry about, but their conference has so many top ranked contenders, that Indiana or whoever winds up winning that conference regular season could suffer a couple more losses, and it would not be surprising if the winner of the conference championship was a different team.
If you have a regular season champ and a tournament champ that are different, I doubt if either gets a 1 seed. If Indiana could win out during the regular season and the conference tournament they could pretty much lock up a 1 seed, but that is a difficult road facing many teams that could beat them IMO.
From a rooting standpoint, I hope SC does beat LSU because it helps our seeding prospects, and for the same reason will hope another team or two can knock off Indiana. Of course if we could over-achieve with a shorthanded win against SC, and run the table against the rest of the Big East, we wouldn't need help from others to get a number 1 seed.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,815
- Reaction Score
- 5,519
We already have a better resume than Stanford. Why are they getting an assumed number 1 seed?
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 1,701
- Reaction Score
- 6,644
Agree. Our schedule was tougher than Stanford’s and we have the same number of losses. I think even if we lose to SC and win the rest, we should get a #1 seed just based on our SOS and only 3 losses.
Of course, Villanova and the rest will try to play spoiler. We need to take care of business.
If we can get healthy by Madness month, I like our second shot hopefully at SC.
Because they are Stanford. Just look at the AP poll the last couple of weeks.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2018
- Messages
- 1,269
- Reaction Score
- 6,546
No way LSU only has 1 loss at the end of the SEC Tournament
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,815
- Reaction Score
- 5,519
The AP poll has nothing to do with seeding. If the tournament were to start tomorrow, we would be the second number one seed with the only competition being an undefeated LSU but with their flimsy resume, I find it doubtful. We have the same record as Stanford but more good wins, are number 2 in NET rankings (to their 4), number 1 in RPI (to their 5), and above them in Massey computer rankings.
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2014
- Messages
- 1,094
- Reaction Score
- 4,112
I think Tennessee can beat LSU. Not that they will necessarily, but I was pretty impressed with them last night.
I reposted a Chart from after last weekend that can be used to say Stanford has played a tougher schedule than UConn so far. I wouldn’t be upset if Stanford was the 1st or 2nd #2 seed at this point and they need to show they can finish the PAC12 season with at most one more loss to be a lock as one of the #1 seeds.
Eye test in my opinion is UConn is the #2 and Stanford is the #3 overall seed. But they play the games for a reason.
Ask Stanford in 1997, 1998, 2008, and 2010; Arizona and South Carolina in 2021; and UConn since 2017.
AP Rank Team (Top 25 teams defeated)
1 South Carolina (3,8,10)
2 Ohio State (13, 22)
3 Stanford (8,9,17,19,25)
4 LSU (none)
5 UConn (10,16,20,24)
6 Indiana (10,15,22 twice)
7 Notre Dame (5,12)
8 UCLA (none)
9 Utah (14,25)
T-10 Iowa (13,18)
T-10 Maryland (5,7)
Eye test in my opinion is UConn is the #2 and Stanford is the #3 overall seed. But they play the games for a reason.
Ask Stanford in 1997, 1998, 2008, and 2010; Arizona and South Carolina in 2021; and UConn since 2017.
AP Rank Team (Top 25 teams defeated)
1 South Carolina (3,8,10)
2 Ohio State (13, 22)
3 Stanford (8,9,17,19,25)
4 LSU (none)
5 UConn (10,16,20,24)
6 Indiana (10,15,22 twice)
7 Notre Dame (5,12)
8 UCLA (none)
9 Utah (14,25)
T-10 Iowa (13,18)
T-10 Maryland (5,7)
Dillon77
WBB Enthusiast; ND Alum, Fan
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2015
- Messages
- 5,778
- Reaction Score
- 20,197
Massey has UConn's SoS at #1, Maryland #2 and Stanford #8. I think SoS can, obviously, go up and down as teams navigate their schedule.
Still, you pulling out top-rated competition offers another somewhat parallel take.
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2017
- Messages
- 1,243
- Reaction Score
- 5,240
It is? By what metric? The Pac-12 has eithr avoided other top 25 teams or has lost to them by a large margin. The SEC has also been horrible as a group vs top 25. I'll give you that the Big 10 has played well in those cases but I keep hearing how the Big East is terrible but the metrics don't show that. It has 2 terrible teams but the rest play competitively against teams not named UConn. To me the Pac 12 always seems to have their best games against each other which proves nothing. I'll be hiding under my desk waiting for the people who will blast my opinion.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,815
- Reaction Score
- 5,519
I can put up a bunch of statistics proving the PAC-12 has been a pretty strong league since 2016. They had two teams not named Stanford in the 2016 final four and in 2021 had two teams in the championship game. In 2018 3 teams not named Stanford made it to the Elite 8 (2,3 and 6 seeds). Cal made the final four in 2013. Stanford made it in 2014, 2017, 2021, and 2022. Oregon was considered at worst the 2nd best team in the country in 2020 and made the Final Four in 2019. Massey has the PAC12 as the #1 ranked conference right now and the projected #1 SOS.
But as the guy who lived in Hartford from 1874 to 1891 said, "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics".
My measure of a conference is how many teams win their first-round tournament game and how many at least play to seed.
PS Today's Bracketology has UConn as a 1 seed.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2017
- Messages
- 1,243
- Reaction Score
- 5,240
@dabears17 my view:
I looked at last years results as it was closest to now. Big East had 4 in tourney and Pac12 had 5.
UConn lost to South Carolina in Championship (w5) Stanford lost to UConn in semi (w4)
Creighton lost to South Carolina in Elite 8(w3) Utah and Arizona each won 1 as favorite
Villanova won 1g as the 11 vs 5 BYU Washington St. and Oregon were both favorites but lost first round
DePaul won 0 as a play in
Pac 12 generally considered a strong conference with 5 teams in NCAA won a total of 6 games (4 by Stanford)
Big East that many seem to think sucks had 4 teams winning 9 games (UConn had 5, Creighton had 3, and Villanova had 1)
Big East won only game between the 2 conferences, had 2 teams winning multiple games to Pac12's 1.
This is how I arrived at my opinion that the big east was at least as good (and in my biased opinion better) as the Pac 12 so the even win your measures of the conferences. And you are correct we both know statistics can be made to prove anything
I looked at last years results as it was closest to now. Big East had 4 in tourney and Pac12 had 5.
UConn lost to South Carolina in Championship (w5) Stanford lost to UConn in semi (w4)
Creighton lost to South Carolina in Elite 8(w3) Utah and Arizona each won 1 as favorite
Villanova won 1g as the 11 vs 5 BYU Washington St. and Oregon were both favorites but lost first round
DePaul won 0 as a play in
Pac 12 generally considered a strong conference with 5 teams in NCAA won a total of 6 games (4 by Stanford)
Big East that many seem to think sucks had 4 teams winning 9 games (UConn had 5, Creighton had 3, and Villanova had 1)
Big East won only game between the 2 conferences, had 2 teams winning multiple games to Pac12's 1.
This is how I arrived at my opinion that the big east was at least as good (and in my biased opinion better) as the Pac 12 so the even win your measures of the conferences. And you are correct we both know statistics can be made to prove anything
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2022
- Messages
- 5,431
- Reaction Score
- 32,082
I watched Megan Gauer's vlog (HerHoopStats) a couple days back -- typically a mistake early in the season, but as the tournament approaches her exclusive focus on NET and seedings means she starts to make more sense. This was before tOSU lost their second game, and even then she had UConn as a #1 seed, i.e. on the top line of the S curve. As I've observed before, NET is an imperfect tool, because it includes no independent SoS factor, but becomes more meaningful in February. What I mean is, it calculates something like SoS solely in terms of the NET rankings of opponents (and a couple other factors), so that early in the season it's SoS factor is as inaccurate as the NET itself is. But later on (i.e. by early February), once the NET has more data to work with, it becomes more incisive in both ways.
Sorry, that's a lot of noise to say, NET is the primary focus of the NCAA Seeding committee and we shouldn't get distracted by AP or Coaches surveys. The rules say the committee can consider other ranking tools, too, but the NET is main thing they use. According to the NET right now (Sunday morning before the Villanova game) the top 8 teams are SC, UConn, LSU, Stanford, and IU, ND, Utah, Duke (see pic below).
What caught my attention in Megan's recent bracket prediction is that she dropped LSU much lower than the NET ranking, perhaps not even in the top 8 seeds. Of course, tOSU dropped because of the loss to Iowa, and they'll drop even lower once the IU loss is factored in. What she said then was that of the 5 teams that could be #1 seeds (including tOSU) she picked UConn over tOSU. Her top line of the S curve read SC, IU, Stanford, UConn, though she thinks UConn is precarious in that position, and that's not unreasonable. It's even remarkable given the anti-UConn bias they have often exhibited over the past couple years.
The NET still includes LSU at #3 (because of its inadequate SoS factor) but this won't last. They'll take a loss to SC soon, maybe more than one counting the SEC tournament, and if the point differential is high, they'll drop pretty far. And if they lose to Tenn, which seems like a real possibility to me, they'll fall even farther, perhaps even out of the top 2 or 3 lines of the S curve. Of course, LSU might actually beat SC, twice, which would solidify their current ranking, even increase it. But this seems like a remote possibility to me.
Sorry, that's a lot of noise to say, NET is the primary focus of the NCAA Seeding committee and we shouldn't get distracted by AP or Coaches surveys. The rules say the committee can consider other ranking tools, too, but the NET is main thing they use. According to the NET right now (Sunday morning before the Villanova game) the top 8 teams are SC, UConn, LSU, Stanford, and IU, ND, Utah, Duke (see pic below).
What caught my attention in Megan's recent bracket prediction is that she dropped LSU much lower than the NET ranking, perhaps not even in the top 8 seeds. Of course, tOSU dropped because of the loss to Iowa, and they'll drop even lower once the IU loss is factored in. What she said then was that of the 5 teams that could be #1 seeds (including tOSU) she picked UConn over tOSU. Her top line of the S curve read SC, IU, Stanford, UConn, though she thinks UConn is precarious in that position, and that's not unreasonable. It's even remarkable given the anti-UConn bias they have often exhibited over the past couple years.
The NET still includes LSU at #3 (because of its inadequate SoS factor) but this won't last. They'll take a loss to SC soon, maybe more than one counting the SEC tournament, and if the point differential is high, they'll drop pretty far. And if they lose to Tenn, which seems like a real possibility to me, they'll fall even farther, perhaps even out of the top 2 or 3 lines of the S curve. Of course, LSU might actually beat SC, twice, which would solidify their current ranking, even increase it. But this seems like a remote possibility to me.