Creme said that Baylor at number nine was the biggest shock. My minor quibble is that I don't know how you can use the word "shock" for something that was completely predictable.
It may have been a shock last year when Maryland got lower seed than they and many others thought but when the committee explained the rationale it made complete sense.
However, while I understand the rationale I want to push back a bit.
If the committee places a lot of emphasis on RPI which appears to be the case, Baylor is ranked 16th so the question isn't whether they get the fourth number one seed but whether they are in the top 16 and may have just squeaked in. The committee made it clear that strength of schedule is important, and according to Nolan site their strength of schedule is 99th which puts them way outside any of the other teams in the top 16.
It is well-known that the RPI is a deficient metric. I understand why they use it, and I think the NCAA knows the limitations but hasn't bothered to consider reforms because while the RPI is horrendous at the beginning of the season it gets better and better throughout the season, and by the time the selections are made it's not great but it's not horrible.
However, we aren't close to the end of the season, so while it's better than horrendous, it still far worse than it will be later in the season. One might argue this is no big deal, as the initial reveals are not binding. However, remember that Maryland was incensed about their low initial rating, and even though they went on to win their conference regular-season and conference tournament, with a record of 30 and 2 At the time of the selection they were still a three seed, so it doesn't seem they moved up much.
Will that happen with Baylor?
One can argue that a coach with a lot of freshmen, and in a fairly strong conference, might make the rational decision to play a relatively weak nonconference schedule. The expectation is that the freshman will get more playing time and while the RPI rating will be on the low side is the conference season starts it will pick up as the conference season progresses.
However, there is something called the anchor effect, and it's possible that Baylor might struggle to move up even if it plays well against the tougher conference schedule.
A second, but very related question is how tough is their schedule?
The RPI says the strength of schedule is ranked number 99 which is pretty poor for a team that wants to consider itself among the elite.
However, Massey has there strength of schedule at 19.
Sagarin says #44
That's quite a range and while 44 is not exactly something to be proud of its far better than 99.
Sagarin has Baylor rated overall the number two team, as does Massey.
I'm not pretending for a second that Baylor's schedule is something to be admired but what if the RPI strength of schedule is not a good metric and there schedule will not exactly stellar is far better than the NCAA measure. Maybe they're getting dinged down to a three seed for unfair reasons.
